New Uniform Ideas

[SR540Beaver 116]

temp,

 

The fact that not even the adults will set an example by wearing the pants should send up a huge red flag to national. Plain and simple, people don't like them. The color isn't the problem, it is the fit and style that people don't like. I'm proud to wear my scout shirt, but so far have resisted wearing the pants. I'm going to WB this September and know that I will be forced to buy them and wear them in order to attend. I won't like it, but I'll do it. I can live with the shirt, the belt and the socks.....but I really have a problem with the pants. I'm guessing that 6 or 7 out of 10 will tell you they don't like them either.

[Bob White 20]

I am always amused by the number of leaders who do not set the example by wearing a full, uniform when they complain about the fit. When I ask them when did they last wear a pair of uniform pants, answer "oh, I've never worn them".

 

Bob White

[OldGreyEagle 5]

I dont like wearing a dark suit with a white shirt and tie to business meetings, but I do because I know as a consultant, when I dress that way, I establish credibility with my clients. At times I may be the only one wearing a suit jacket or tie, but then everyone knows who the "expert" is.

 

I cant think of a more awful sight than adult leaders in uniform shirts and an endless array of shades of blue jeans.

 

At summer camp on sunday night, the troops stand in formation for the first time. Looking across the parade field, you see a definte motley mix of what is considered a dress uniform. The shirt is always present, but its the pants and short colors that really add a rag tag appearance. Of course there is always the one unit who is in full dress uniform and they stand straight and proud. The other scouts are always impressed with them, but never quite enough to emulate them, that I dont understand.

 

So, I dont like the uniform pants or shorts much,(but there are plenty of things I dont like to do, but I do them because they are the right thing to do)

 

but I beleive enough in the methods of scouting to be in uniform, full dress uniform (includes pants)when ever the occassion warrants.

 

 

 

 

[SR540Beaver 116]

BW,

 

"oh, I've never worn them" does not mean that they never tried them on in the shop and found them too uncomfortable to wear.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think a troop in full uniform looks sharp too and I'd prefer that everyone wear one. Our worst offender is the Den Leaders son. He comes to meetings right after soccer practice and basically throws his uniform shirt on over his sweaty tee shirt. Unbuttoned, no neckerchief and untucked. It unnerved me at Webelos Resident Camp last week to see boys in swimsuits, soccor shorts, jeans and camo pants of every shade and material known to man. The least they could do is all agree on the same unofficial item to wear so they at least resemble some sort of unified group.

 

I said I don't like the pants, I didn't say I won't wear them. Think of it this way, if the BSA added lacy pink garters to be worn on the outside of the pants, most scouts and scouters would resist. I'm sure Bob would wear them because it was part of the uniform!

 

All I'm saying is that most scouts have no problem with the other elements of the uniform except the pants. It is apparent wherever you go. National is aware of the problem, but so far have not done much to address the problem.

 

Just like the pink garters, are we asking scouts to wear something they don't like to test their committment to the movement? Would providing a more acceptable pant assist in getting more boys to voluntarily comply with uniformity?

[Bob White 20]

Honestly I think the problem is two fold. First most adult leaders do not understand the purpose and use of the uniform. The second problem is good uniforming is not practiced by Cub Scout units and so by the time they reach the troop program they think the uniform is only a shirt and belt. That leaves the troop trying to break a nearly 4 year habit.

 

The problem is not the pants, thousands and thousands of adults wear the full uniform. The problem is sufficient motivation brought about by an acceptance of the purpose of a full uniform. If more leaders understood the methods of scouting more scouts and leaders would wwear a complete uniform.

 

Bob White

 

 

[Rooster7 11]

Of course there is always the one unit who is in full dress uniform and they stand straight and proud. The other scouts are always impressed with them, but never quite enough to emulate them, that I dont understand.

 

OGE,

 

I agree completely. However, at the risk of incurring the wrath of Bob White and other Scouters who believe the BSA "methods and means" do not allow adult leaders to edict - I'd like to present a theory that goes against that thinking. The boys are waiting for the adults to put their foot down and make it happen. From my experience, most boys, in particular the younger boys like their uniform. They want their troop to look like those guys standing across the field. Unfortunately, when some older boys loose their enthusiasm to wear the uniform - usually because they're too lazy or too busy to keep track of their uniform or change into it, it affects the whole troop. It only takes a few older boys. If theyre not particularly excited or concerned about itIf they start showing up to meetings in the blue jeans or whatever they happen to be wearing that day, then other boys even the ones who want the troop to look sharp, start to lose their desire to be in uniform. After all, if half the boys look sharp and the other half looks as if they dont care, then the troop is going to lose some luster. This fact is NOT lost upon these boys; they know that the purpose of a uniform is to present an image of uniformity to look like one cohesive unit. If a boy doesnt wear his complete uniform, then its going to mare the units image. If several decide not to wear their complete uniform, then that image is really going to get trashed. After a while, the boys who used to care about being in a complete uniform - stop caring. As a dad of three Scouts, and someone who likes to analyze things a lot (its kind of a sickness) this has been my observation. So, why do I feel adults (i.e., Scouters) have to present an edict to the Scouts? Because, if (and this is a big if) there is no one among the boys in leadership who particularly cares, then this cycle will never end. So long as older boys set the bad example in attitude and appearance. The younger boys will lose their enthusiasm and eventually become the older boys with the same bad attitude and appearance. Now, I realize there are many wise Scouters out there who probably have some method or means that can change that attitude around. I am not oblivious to the fact that the best way to correct this problem is to change the attitude of those older boys. However, I have yet to see this happen. Nor have I heard of any creditable means to make it happen. Furthermore, unless you have some magic formula that can make it happen quickly, say within six months - by the time youve convinced that older group of boys to change, youre likely to have another wave of disenchanted boys coming into leadership roles just behind the first group, who need the same attitude adjustment. So, you might ask Why not work on the younger boys too? Because, for the most part, theyre not going to be affected by what the adult leaders say should happen, as much as they will be by what the older boys do. I think the quickest and best method to break out of this cycle is for the Scoutmaster to apply direct pressure on his older Scouts (i.e., the SPL and others in the leadership corps). In fact, if I were the SM and felt the SPL or some of the Patrol Leaders were not taking their responsibility seriously (setting example in attitude and appearance), I would not let them run for office the next term. Once the older boys start setting the example, I believe the younger boys would embrace their uniforms unashamedly. Eventually, the troop would look sharp, just like that other troop across the field, and everyone (not just the younger boys) would appreciate being in full uniform and being a part of a cohesive unit. Furthermore, by the time the younger boys are old enough/seasoned enough to be in leadership roles, they would carry that enthusiasm with them. This is my theory. Now, so I might be spared lectures on how this goes against the method and means of Scouting Id like to remind some of you that I have no direct control of my sons troop I am merely an ASM with an opinion ;-) We all have one. Some of you will catch that later and appreciate it - or not.

 

That was much more long winded than I intended. Hope you all didn't fall asleep in the middle.

(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

[Bob White 20]

Rooster, I agree completely that the actions of the older scouts affect the actions of the others. Where I see things differently is why the older scoutsdo not wear the uniform.

 

It is not because the scouts are lazy (I have never met a lazy teenager, just uninspired ones), It is not because they are too busy (they don't show up for football out of uniform because they are too busy), They don't require a Scoutmaster to demand it of them (no where in scouting is that required or suggested behavirfor a SM)

 

The problem is they were not trained to be leaders, which happens to be the #1 responsibility of the Scoutmaster. If a unit lacks leadership it is from a lack of leadership development. Training takes time and a SM who busies themselves by always being "in charge" will never have the time or the inclination to teach boys to lead themselves. Setting the example is a leadership skill and must be taught and developed as with any skill.

 

Bob White

[Rooster7 11]

The problem is they were not trained to be leaders, which happens to be the #1 responsibility of the Scoutmaster. If a unit lacks leadership it is from a lack of leadership development.

 

Well, as I've already noted, I'm not the SM. However, I know the SM agrees with you and has done everything in his power to provide leadership development. He's an officer in the Coast Guard and knows a thing or two about the subject. Nevertheless, despite efforts by him and others over the last two years, I see a lot of areas - including uniforming, whereas the older boys have not embraced their training. In a perfect world, the SM can always inspire the older boys to do the right thing. I think our SM does his best and is more than adequately trained for the task. Unfortunately, I don't think every Scout is going to respond as we hope. Laziness and busyness may not always be the root cause for bad leadership, but I've seen their ugly heads appear in our troop on a number of occasions.(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

[fotoscout 15]

< The problem is sufficient motivation brought about by an acceptance of the purpose of a full uniform. If more leaders understood the methods of scouting more scouts and leaders would wwear a complete uniform. >

 

 

Bob,

That might be so, but its only the tip of the iceberg, and I think a very small part of the reason why uniforming is inconsistent. First and foremost, without a national policy that mandates that the uniform be worn, we will never have everyone in uniform.

 

Then there is the do you or dont you mentality. Personally I think that this is the main reason why many people wont wear the uniform. They simply dont want to be too closely associated with BSA, and by not wearing the pants they feel that they are displaying some sense of insurgency, a personal statement if you may. The adults make the statement for themselves; the parent manipulates the child to do the same. I think that I can safely say that no young CS ever said to his mom or dad, I dont want to wear the uniform pants. He may argue that he doesnt want to wear the shirt, but if he wears the shirt you can be assured that he wants to wear the pants. As further support for this thought, I find that the boys who are in full uniform are also the boys who attend virtually all of our functions. There is a direct correlation between uniform and commitment to the program.

 

Style, material, and fit! They are all excuses. National still has some of the old style pants available, and there are plenty available on ebay. The new style has elastic, and cargo pockets, thats very different than the old style. I believe that there are even different materials available, if you do some searching.

 

We talk a lot about the cost of uniforms, but I know of no one who wanted a uniform and could not get one. Packs, Troops, Districts, and Councils all have uniform banks. There are always uniforms available at little or no cost.

 

Granted, a Leader out of uniform is a bad example. But to think that, failure on the part of the leaders, is a cause for poor uniforming is just too shallow for me.

 

 

 

 

[Bob White 20]

I think you raise some real valid points foto with one exception. I believe from my experience that most parents, and scouts for that matter, do not understand the uniform as a method of teaching character and citizenship. They see it only as an awards display. How are they supposed to know any difference unless someone teaches them. Who is responsible for that? The unit leader.

 

If the unit leader is not trained, and if they don't wear the full uniform, neither will others in the unit.

 

I agree completely that there is a direct relationship between uniforming and attendance, advancement, behavior, personal growth, and effective leadership. We see it all the time as leaders.

 

Bob White

[fotoscout 15]

We have recently gone through a great national debate (and maybe we still are), about uniforms in schools. I believe that the public is well informed as to the character issues relative to uniforms. In fact as Ive had this discussion with the parents of my kids, the school uniform issue always comes up.

 

We do have a responsibility to bring that message, in BSA terms, to the parents. But without a policy, it will never happen.

(This message has been edited by fotoscout)

[SR540Beaver 116]

I do understand how the uniform is part of the method of scouting. I do understand that we want the boys to make the decision to wear a full uniform voluntarily. However, I remember when my son was playing little league baseball. Obviously the uniform was manditory, but we had several different peices that could be rearranged into 3 or 4 different uniforms. Two pairs of pants, a jersey, a vest, two tee shirts and two hats. It was announced in advance of a game which uniform we would be wearing. If you showed up "out" of uniform, you sit on the bench. If you showed up without a hat or a belt, you sit on the bench. How often did this horrible punishment happen? Usually one time a season. The boys were made responsible for knowing what to wear, keeping up with the part of their uniform and ended up taking pride in being part of the team. They also were not allowed to remove parts of their uniform, wear the tails out or turn their hats backwards as long as they were at the ballpark. They were taught they were representatives of the total team and would show their ppride when they had them on. Two different approaches to stressing the importance of a uniform, but ending with the same result. I prefer the scout approach, but know in my heart that being out of uniform will be an eternal problem unless it is made manditory by national.

 

Why can we require a full uniform of scouters at WB, but not the boys at their functions?

[Bob White 20]

Because scouting owns the image of scouting (the uniform) but the charter organization owns the unit. If a unit wants a policy that to be a member you must wear a full uniform that's fine.

 

But the BSA cannot force a unit member to wear the uniform, only to use the image properly.

 

Because the unit owns the image, the BSA cannot make a volunteer get trained, they must choose to.

 

They cannot make a scout wear a uniform, they must choose to.

 

They cannot make you sell popcorn, hold an FOS presentation, hold 4 Courts of Honor a year, Do a good turn, have patrols. They can control your indurance benefits, membership (to a degree), your charter, use of the scouting name and image, and advancement. Everything else is left to the CO and volunteer to do the responsible thing. When we registered we each agreed to follow the program. The BSA trusts us to what we said we would do. The integrity of the program continues to depend on the integrity of our leaders.

 

The reason your council can require you to wear a complete uniform to WB is that it is a voluntary course to take. That is true of any council District or National event. WB is not the only place that correct uniforming is required. Since it is outside of the Charter organization program they can require whatever they want. You don't have to go if you don't want to participate according to the preset rules.

 

Bob White

[SR540Beaver 116]

BW,

 

Can't or won't? Just for the sake of argument and not suggesting that they do, but National COULD make it a requirement if they chose to, couldn't they? There is nothing to prevent them from making it a requirement other than it currently isn't part of their philosophy, correct?

[Bob White 20]

No other method of scouting is mandatory. it is a volunteer program and I do not expect that to change. I don't know if it is can't or won't. I see it more as shouldn't and won't.

 

We could not teach the same lessons if it were a rule. Do you only drive safely because of the laws that govern driving or do you drive safely to protect yourself and others?

 

Bob white