POR Question

[mbrownkc7]

Our troop has a boy where there is a discussion of whether or not he has completed the requirement of Position of Responisibility.

 

This boy was a den chief for our pack and by all reports did a good job. The problem is he started in late January and the pack quit meeting at the end of May and took the summer off. Now troop master ok's the requirement but others will say even though he has held the position for more than six months, the den only met for a little over 4 months. The boy and his parents also claim he started off as a quarter master before that but it didn't work out and he was asked to find another position. Based on conversations with our advancement chair, the quarter master is not going to work because the boy didn't go on any camp outs during this time.

 

I have argured that he should be signed off because even when the pack is not meeting he is still den chief as is any other P.O.R. when the troop isn't meeting. I also said he worked harder when they were meeting than most other P.O.R.'s. An example is a quarter master that may go on six camp outs and helps pack the the trailer and what ever else is involved. Where a den chief meets on a weekly basis and helps younger boys. Or how about a librarian who doesn't seem to be that hard of a job. There may be month that goes by where a boy may not ask for a merit badge book. I am not here to bash on certain P.O.R.'s, I am just comparing.

 

Another point I made was is a Senator still a Senator when they are not in session or on vacation. You could use this example in a number of examples.

 

Please give some opinions here and I will take them into consideration and also show them to our committee.

 

Thanks a bunch for the help. You guys have set me straight before and I may need it again.

 

 

[kbandit]

"Based on conversations with our advancement chair, the quarter master is not going to work because the boy didn't go on any camp outs during this time."

 

So he did not perform any quartermaster duties? Is there a reason he did not camp? (just curious)

 

Did he attend Den Chief training through his district or council?

 

Can he do the den chief job for another few months to satisfy those that deny?

[Mafaking]

 

These are leadership training requirements within the program to aid in the scout's personal development. They are not jobs.

 

Would a doctor still be a doctor if he didn't finish his internship?

 

He needs two more months.

 

 

 

 

[shortridge]

First, I assume we're talking about a Star Scout going for Life or Life Scout going for Eagle. If this is a First Class Scout going for Star, the four month POR requirement has been met by his service as a den chief, and the whole thing is null and void.

 

"The boy and his parents also claim he started off as a quarter master before that but it didn't work out and he was asked to find another position."

 

Forget what they claim - what do the SM and SPL say? Was the boy informed that he was not fulfilling the duties of quartermaster and removed from the position by the SM or SPL, or was the job just not a good fit? It doesn't matter what your advancement chairman says, but what the SM and SPL say.

 

For the den chief length of service period, six months is six months. It's up to your SM how to interpret that. Just because a computer program such as Troopmaster accepts it doesn't make it OK.

 

Looking at this from another perspective, however, will two months make a huge difference in this boy's advancement to Eagle? It's September right now, so the pack and den should be starting up again soon. Can the boy just put in another two months to settle this whole thing? Or, better yet, can he commit to serving the entire school year with the den, giving them a mentor, guide and good role model for the whole program year? (If he's Star going for Life, that would also give him the time in position necessary from Life for Eagle, knocking that off the checklist.)

[wolfmama500]

This is interesting.... What about a scribe that is hardly at the meetings, never do anything, SM is doing his job and it's credited! Or the same for a quartermaster that wasn't available for real circumstances(he's Dad was sick and die) should he get credit or what?

[mbrownkc7]

This is a life scout going for Eagle. The Eagle board is in November and he was passed during the review of his records by the advancement chair but a committee member objected and made his point about the time involved with the den chief position.

 

About quarter master duties, the boy is in his 6th year of scouting and also invloved in some varsity sports at his high school. He wasn't performing any duties for the position so it was suggested he find another position. Our pack was in a pinch with a huge Bear den, 19 boys, so he volunteered to get involved. Currently he can't come to meetings because of Football but when it ends in November he comes to most of the meetings. He doesn't attend all of the campouts but in the previous 5 years he attended more than half.

 

Shortridge, thanks very much for your input. I agree that it should be the SM or SPL decision on this. Yes the extra 2 months are a big deal somewhat. The boy has 3 of his friends taking part in an Eagle Court in November and because of his sports and now the 2 months needed to complete the POR Requirements he won't be able to make it.

 

I will going to ask to meet with our CC, SM, and advancement chair and suggest the SM and SPL get together and make the decision.

 

 

[artjrk]

When a Troop doesn't meet during winter or Spring break, do you subtract that time from a boy's term of service? No, of course not. Don't penalize the Scout for the actions of others. He was there if the den needed him.

 

When at work and you find yourself lacking any immediate work to do so you browse this forum. Do you tell your boss to deduct that time from your pay?

[Eagle92]

I got 2 questions.

 

1) Did the troop do any summertime activities, i.e. pool party, sakte nite, etc, or promote district/council activities, i.e. family camp, resident camp, or day camp?

 

2) Did he work in a leadership role in any of these activities IF they did occur?

 

I ask these b/c I know that some packs do remain active over the summer. And if they do things over the summer and he continues in his role as DC, then the requirements are met.

 

As it is described now, he's only got 4 months in as his duties ended in may. Doesn't matter how hard he worked, it matters that the requirement was not met.

 

Again did the pack do things over the summer?

[Beavah]

Yah mbrownkc7, an interestin' question.

 

I'd ask yeh this - what do you want to teach? That is to say, what do yeh want to teach the lads about responsibility and the Oath and Law and all that stuff?

 

I personally think the lad has to do another 2 months as an active den chief. But then a really good den chief might be meetin' with the pack adults over the summer, helpin' to lay out the pack and den calendar for next year, showing up to contribute to Cub resident camp and all that. I'd say if he was doin' those things, then by all means give him credit. If not, he's got more time to serve and learn from. Six months, remember, is da minimum. That's the least that we think is needed for a lad to learn the things he needs to learn about commitment and responsibility. Bein' short on your commitment by 1/3 ain't usually what we want to teach.

 

I think if the boy did no work for da quartermaster position, then tryin' to count that as being responsible is just silly. In good youth-run units, da quartermaster job is one of the hardest and most thankless jobs. It's a load of work, and the work is really important to the troop. If he wasn't there to do the work, that really hurts the group. Not the sort of thing to give credit for bein' "responsible."

 

Troopmaster is a record-keepin' program. It doesn't have any "authority". It's not even a BSA product, eh? The authority yeh want is your SM and SPL/ASPL. They should be decidin'. (in da BSA model, support PORs report to da ASPL, eh?).

 

As for other positions, I think if yeh have a position like librarian or scribe or whatnot that is "not that hard of a job" (in other words, you're not really usin' it as a true position of responsibility in your troop), then your SM/SPL/ASPL should abolish the position . Nothing says da troop has to have a Librarian if it doesn't really maintain and use an active library. Handing out an occasional book can be part of the Quartermaster's job. Lots of troops don't have Scribes anymore in favor of Webmasters; very few troops have Buglers.

 

The point of a position of responsibility is for a boy to engage in service learning, eh? To learn responsibility and skills by actively providin' service to others.

 

You're subtracting from the requirements if you're signing off when a lad hasn't been responsible or provided any meaningful service. Doin' it so a lad can make some schedule for an Eagle party? Not what I think we're about.

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[eisely]

When is this scout's 18th birthday? I can't see fudging on the requirements just so he can meet an arbitrary deadline for a particular eagle court of honor. If he really was active over the summer in his den chief role, then fine, but I have not seen that stated as a fact here. If he, as of this moment, still has several months to run till his 18th birthday, then let him do it right.

[mbrownkc7]

I like ARTJRK's response, he was there if needed but the pack isn't active during the summer. The pack didn't attend a day camp also. They did do a pool party one night but I don't know if he was there. They had a welcome back ice cream social 10 days ago but he was not able to attend because of Football.

 

What I want to teach is for boys not to shy away from a position because you may be treated differently than others. Example is that the boys choose their positions in January and July for six month periods and based on what I am hearing you would have to be a den chief or an entire year to get your six months in. I couldn't expect a boy to Jan to May then come back and only do Sept. How fair would that be to the new cubs in Sept. "hey man I only here for a month to complete my six months, nice knowing you". Some boys who may make good den chiefs may shy away thinking I need to do a year when I can be a patrol leader and only do six months.

 

Birthday is not any issue. I honestly feel that some people are held to different standards and I don't like it. I see some boys skate through with weak P.O.R.'s and everyone signs off on them because they are well liked or their dad is really involved. And then other boys are held to more strict rules because someone doesn't like them or their parents. I beleive in treating everyone equal and I tend to stand up for the boys being treated differntly.

 

I appreciate everyone's input and I am leaning towards asking the boy to complete the two extra months but it will be ultimately up to the SM and SPL. I am also planning on printing our blog here and showing that there is pretty good aggreement to this.

[John-in-KC]

Since we are both in the Heart of America Council, what does your DAC say?

 

If you don't know, then I recommend your SM (or you, if you are the CC) contact the DAC for a friendly cup of coffee. He and the NESA chair are the keeper of the EBOR District Guest or Member rosters (somehow I think you're in Beautiful Blue Elk, but I also have suspicion you're in Pelathe).

 

I have a good suspicion what the DAC, when sitting as a Guest, or the other Guests of the Internationally Famous North Star District would say, it wouldn't be kind, and Mr SM would be asked a tough question in executive session by the District Guest: "Why did the SM sign off on EAGLE REQUIREMENT 4 (PORs) if the Scout hadn't done the job for the indicated time?"

[mbrownkc7]

HOAC - Thunderbird District

[OldGreyEagle]

When the youth took on the responsibility of the Den Chief, what materials were given to him? Was he told to be sure he was active for 6 months and if the pack was not going to be active for all six months he would have to find another position? I can agree with the thought that a POR is 6 months, but to sping on the scout in September something He should have done in May seems a bit strange. How have other Den Chiefs been judged? Is this the first time the PAck stopped meeting before the POR time was completed? If he owes the Troop 2 more months, what will be done to assure this doesnt happen again? Are all PORs judged the same? When was the last time any other scout in a POR was judged to have not done his time correctly? When he was Den Chief, was his work checked? Was he givebn feedback on his behavior? How was he informed if he was doing a good job or what to improve upon?

[John-in-KC]

I know some people in Thunderbird.

 

The Scout had best have six months of WORK behind him.

 

IIRC Britt Davis is the Professional staffer for advancement, you can ask him, or Ross Pfannensteil your DD is good people as well. I suspect though "hiatus" won't fly.

 

I assume the Scout in question is a Hardway Warrior or Firebuilder. If he were to talk about this with a member of the Tribal Council, I suspect the question he'd get back is: "Are you really serving your Fourth Heart's Resolution with less than six months of actual work?"