Scoutmasters hands are tied.

[theysawyoucomin']

John you are so wrong about this.

 

Here is a quiz:

 

Who determines if a boy can be a den chief for all of his POR's?

 

 

Does a boy ever have to do Troop leadership? Where does it say he canot be a den chief for his POR for star life and eagle?

 

If the boy goes AWOL for 6 month prior to getting Eagle

whose responsibility is it to maintain regular contact with the SM?

 

The boy?

 

The SM?

 

 

 

 

If you do not fire the boy from his POr does that mean he did it good enough to be advanced?

 

 

Tell me whachyall think.

 

 

 

 

[Oak Tree]

Who determines if a boy can be a den chief for all of his POR's?

 

The Scoutmaster has to agree with all position appointments.

 

From scouting.org:

Cub Scout Den Chief: Selected by the senior patrol leader and Scoutmaster, Varsity Scout Coach, or Venturing Advisor at the request of the Cubmaster. Approved by the Cubmaster and pack committee for recommendation to the den leader.

 

If he serves in the position, it has to count.

 

The requirement is (scouting.org)

4.While a Life Scout, serve actively for a period of 6 months in one or more of the following positions of responsibility: Boy Scout Troop [...] den chief [...]

 

I don't see how you could possibly argue that the boy is not fulfilling the requirement if he is, in fact, a den chief.

 

Does a boy ever have to do Troop leadership? Where does it say he cannot be a den chief for his POR for star life and eagle?

 

The simple answer is "no" and "nowhere". But den chief is in fact a troop leadership position, so you could say that yes, he has to do troop leadership, and den chief is one way to do it.

 

If the boy goes AWOL for 6 month prior to getting Eagle whose responsibility is it to maintain regular contact with the SM? The boy? The SM?

 

The SM. From scouting.org: The unit leaders are responsible for maintaining contact with the Scout on a regular basis.

 

If you do not fire the boy from his POR does that mean he did it good enough to be advanced?

 

Officially, yes. Again, from scouting.org: unit leaders must ensure that he is fulfilling the obligations of his assigned leadership position. If he is not, then they should remove the Scout from that position.

 

You might argue that there's a wee bit of wiggle room in that last phrasing, but everyone seems to agree that it will be interpreted such that the Scout gets credit unless he has been removed from office.

 

Still, you don't have to sign the form. You can tell him he didn't do it well enough in your opinion and you expect more. You can even ask him if he thought he did it well enough - but you should have a clear set of expectations that were given to him up front and were reiterated to him on occasion. If he and/or his parents appeal, they can win. But you do control what you do, and they can't force you to sign.

 

I personally have decided to think of it like work. If you do your job, they pay you. If you do it badly, they still pay you. Only if they fire you do they stop paying you. They never come to you and say, "John, you didn't do the job well enough for the past two weeks, so I'm not going to sign your paycheck."

[eghiglie]

Den Chief is a great job and for many boys teaches them how to teach. Currently we have one boy doing this, who is also the ASPL and he loves it. Its also a bit of work as the Den work can be as complex as the Troop work.

 

We have a rule where a boy can't hold the same PoR for two terms in a row. This was to prevent the boy who stays bugler forever.

 

The only exception is an Eagle Scout. We usually make them a Troop Guide but give them a second job like Asst PL or Quartermaster.

[evmori]

Who determines if a boy can be a den chief for all of his POR's?

 

His Scoutmaster

 

 

Does a boy ever have to do Troop leadership? Where does it say he canot be a den chief for his POR for star life and eagle?

 

This is stated nowhere.

 

If the boy goes AWOL for 6 month prior to getting Eagle

whose responsibility is it to maintain regular contact with the SM?

 

The boy?

 

The SM?

 

The SM is responsible. If this Scout holds a POR, the Scout should be notified by his SM that the time he is absent doesn't count as time for his POR.

 

 

 

 

If you do not fire the boy from his POr does that mean he did it good enough to be advanced?

 

No it doesn't. As long as the expectations were laid out when the Scout accepted the POR then if he doesn't meet those expectations, he might be turned down for his rank based on poor performance in his POR.

[theysawyoucomin']

Actually Ev,

Oak has it correct.

 

According to the National site you do have to relieve/fire/take his position away or you have to have the position count.

 

On to the different POR topic.

If my Scoutmaster had ever said to me "I want you to do a different POR for Eagle than you did for Life".

 

 

There would not have ever been a question. This boy did not show for the elections in Sept.

 

If I cried to my mommy, she would have said, "Do what you are told."

 

Right now I've got a kid whose parent does not believe the Scoutmaster appoints the DC. Boy is currently 14 and 4 months.

 

I helped the boy find the position last year. In August I told the fahter I expect some other POR. I feel this is within my area as far as being the SM. WHAT SAY YOU?

 

The positions allow for command and staff type duty, the DC may lead but it sure isn't the same as a PL. We are a Troop with 15 boys split into 2 patrols plus "HQ"

 

We have a history of our DC's going on to do good things like

 

SPL

ASPL

a third boy boy PL and ASPL and still two years from Eagle (by his choice)

 

I think DC is a great position my son was one, I had one for two years when I DL'ed. One of my five wood Badge goals included writing/compiling a 200 page book about being a DC and a bunch of just for fun activities. Every den in America needs one.

 

 

 

 

This Microwave Eagle stuff has to stop.

 

 

Make the kid lead kids his age. It is easier to lead kids 6 years your junior than your peers.

 

 

 

EGHIG,

 

Would this rule hold up in an appeal to your council? I feel it would for the same reason the SM approves the PORs

[John-in-KC]

Actually,

 

I think this is a time where you bring in your "bad cop" ... your unit commissioner and COR, and have a businesslike cup of coffee with Momma.

 

Den Chief is a wonderful job. I was one as a Boy Scout, I loved it. A Den Chief is a salesman ... he helps sell his troop ... he's a leader ... he has the age and hopefully maturity to guide his Cub charges through their tasks ... he helps make Cubbing FUN ... and, he's working alongside (as opposed to FOR) adults several years ahead of the rest.

 

A good Den Chief recruits Cubs to your Troop, and is part of the lifeblood of your Troop.

 

Now, all that said, get out your Scoutmaster Handbook. Go to Scout Source and get the info on Den Chiefs. Momma is just off the reservation in terms of saying you don't have control over PORs. You have control in final approval of a boy to embark on one, especially Den Chief. You have control in accepting the quality of his work.

 

That said, you don't have control over what PORs the National Council considers suitable. There is nothing in Requirements #33215 nor ACP&P #33088 which allows only 1 use of a POR in the upper ranks. Indeed, Den Chief is explicitly accepted for Eagle Requirement 4, for Boy Scouts in Troops or Varsity Teams:

 

While a Life Scout, serve actively for a period of six months in one or more of the following positions of responsibility:

Boy Scout troop. Patrol leader, assistant senior patrol leader, senior patrol leader, troop guide, Order of the Arrow troop representative, (emphasis added) den chief, scribe, librarian, historian, quartermaster, junior assistant Scoutmaster, chaplain aide, or instructor.

 

If you let him embark on Den Chief at all 3 ranks, you or your predecessors had a vote/veto. It's neither the Scouts' nor my problem if you didn't exercise it.

 

The Scoutmaster has a charge to mentor and oversee his youth leadership. That's the "removal from POR" clause. If performance was unacceptable, who did/did not pull him out of the POR?

 

Eagledad (Barry) says it so well when he talks about the Scoutmaster being the keeper of the flame. One thing I've noticed is Scouting works really well when we all do our very best to follow the program as designed. There's room for ad-hocracy, but in doing so one has to pick and choose where to use that tool, too.

[theysawyoucomin']

Thank you all for your opinions and references.

 

 

This boy will be an Eagle someday and I will proudly stand with him.

 

But folks the cake isn't quite done yet.

 

A week at NYLT and a year of PL or SPL would lead to a life change for this boy

[evmori]

So if a Scout has a POR the time in position and does nothing, it counts? Not in my unit!

[John-in-KC]

Two comments....

 

uzz ... That's where the ongoing mentorship of being a Scoutmaster kicks in. Send him, encourage him, and work his parents.

 

Ed ... The POR wouldn't count in your Troop because you're being an active and caring SM, and if performance was substandard, you'd have been taking action back in months 2 and 3. Good on you.

[Stosh]

If a boy is a DC throughout his scouting career, he fulfills his POR responsibilities. Are we adding to the requirements to have him have to take on a second POR or different POR? If this is how the boy wishes to express his leadership and WE feel he should be doing something else, we are possibly setting him up for a failure.

 

So what if this DC deals with people younger than him. Why should he have to deal with his peers? Teachers don't normally teach their peers, pastors don't either. Bosses don't teach their peers. So why would be want our DC's to split their duties and undermine their obligations to the den by having the boy do double duty elsewhere?

 

This is just another example of how we go about killing off the interest of our older boys by having them jump through worthless hoops. After 4 years of scouting as a youth I attained 1 merit badge and 2nd Class rank. It was time to move on.... Was I ever going to make Eagle? I was hoping for FC, that would have been nice.

 

If a boy enjoys DC, leave him there until HE decides differently. Otherwise, don't complain when the Peter Principle hits you square between the eyes.

 

Stosh

 

 

[OldGreyEagle]

This may or may not to gently remind the forum its abbreviated POR because its a Position of Responsibility, not Position of Leadership. If it was a POL, that would be different.

 

If you have a scout in a POR for 6 months and that scout hasn't done anything, the scout has technically fulfilled requirements of the POR. The larger quesiton is how could the scout be in a POR for 6 months and not do anything? Has not the SPL (unless it is the SPL) communciated the expectations of the position and has kept the Scoutmaster abreast of the issue? Has not the scoutmaster had conferences with the individual scout explaining what needs to be done and the consequence of not doing it?

 

I can see an individual scout not performing his POR and slipping through the cracks once. But if it happens once, and then if the unit does not take steps to assure it doesnt happen again, I would like to know why? Could be lots of reasons, I would like to hear some.

 

The scoutmasters hands were not tied for 6 months, why are his hands an issue now?

[evmori]

Wait Wait Wait! How does a Scout "actively serve" if he does nothing?

[Stosh]

By definition responsibility is the ability to respond to things. If the scout does nothing they have not responded and has shown no ability to respond therefore does not fulfill his responsibility.

 

Unless the boy says to the BOR he did something besides sew a patch on and sat around for 6 months, he has not fulfilled the requirement.

 

Stosh

[NJCubScouter]

I realize there are several issues here, I will pick one.

 

Should a boy be Den Chief for all of his POR's through Eagle? Of course the easy answer is, if the Scout and his Scoutmaster (and I believe, either the Cubmaster or Den Leader, but I forget which) all agree, sure. It meets the requirements. The tougher question is, is it the best thing for the Scout? I, personally, doubt it. I think a variety of POR's, including at least one that either has the Scout in a true leadership position (SPL, ASPL, or PL) or working with younger Boy Scouts (not just Cub Scouts; in other words Instructor or Troop Guide), is good for a young man's growth and development. I remember that after my son's Star BOR, he said the board members strongly suggested to him that after a year as Den Chief, he move on to a different position (such as one of the above) for his next rank. (I believe "his" Den had graduated anyway, but there was always the possibility of switching to a younger den.) The suggestion made sense to him, and to me, and he followed it. I think it was good for him. Now, if my son had disagreed and insisted on staying Den Chief, what would have happened? What should have happened? I don't know. Fortunately the issue did not come up.

[theysawyoucomin']

Stosh,

 

This is not an older boy. Last June he was still 13.

 

He became a Boy Scout at 10 years seven months. Today he is 14 and 4 months

 

 

 

 

 

Your quote:

So what if this DC deals with people younger than him. Why should he have to deal with his peers? Teachers don't normally teach their peers, pastors don't either. Bosses don't teach their peers. So why would be want our DC's to split their duties and undermine their obligations to the den by having the boy do double duty elsewhere?

 

 

 

First I would say DC is not a lifelong commitment from Wolf to WEEB2. I know boys that do it but they also go on to other things, and hold other positions. So the Double duty thing is moot. Some Cubs are sorry to lose the DC. As a DL I reminded the Cubs, "Chucky is in the Troop, we will see him again".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you promote from within you will probably lead your peers. Serve as president of the debate team in college you lead your peers. Mentor a younger teacher after being there for two years---peer.

I could go on.

I thought you said you were in the military. Your are an E3 one day the next you are an NCO. Monday you're buddies,

Friday your buddies need to sweep the floor because you said so.

If you never go in the military you may still meet up with this situation.

 

The Cub Scout motto has a place here. Is the best the boy can do leading kids 6 years his junior? Could he profit from NYLT and being an SPL, aspl or pl?

 

Why be an Eagle at 14? I've got a Dad who tells his son, "don't go on the 50 miler now(at 14), you will like it that much better when you are ready at 16 years old."

 

Both Liberals and Conservatives can agree on something; our young adults could possibly face a world that is tougher in many ways than their parents world. Global warming, drinking water supply, hunger, mounting national debt,world population,yadda yadda yadda.

 

 

If so, why are we making the safe hurdles ankle high only to later smash into a brick wall?

 

Again I maintain 30 years ago the non helicopter parent would have said "stop your whining do what he says"

 

Is it possible the extra year could later be to the boy's benefit?

 

I believe that is under the umbrella of the Scoutmaster.

 

If I didn't care I would have blown him through the process like teachers used to advance the kid who never learned to read. The teach that says wait a minute this kid needs more is hated by the parents for picking on the son.

 

Times like this tell me I've got no business being the SM.