How to remove a committee chair?

[Scoutfish 16]

Nah, what I am saying is a committee cannot vote anybody out. They cannot fire or replace without the COR or IH ap[proval.

 

Now, I'm not saying that COR's don't just go along with the committee. Ours does as a matter of fact, unless he has a very good reason ( that we may not be aware of ) to do other wise.

 

But even if our COR acted like a puppet on a string as far as the committee is concerned, it is his signature, that says a pareson can serve in any committee or leadershiop role or who is getting their walking papers.

 

A committee cannot vote a person out. They can however , vote and get a "show of hands" for the COR's or IH's benefit as to wether the rest of the leadership has any confidence in the person in question.

 

Now, as far as decisions, my job as CM is to make program decisions all the time. Leaders will come to me and ask me various questions and ask for guidance. Sometimes, they run things by me just to make sure they are on the right page or to make sure they are seeing things in the right light. Sometimes they want to confirm wether something is allowable or not.

 

But if I have a rouge den leader who needs to be out pronto, I cannot fire them, I have to bring it up to committee who does the whole show of hands thing for the COR, or I can approach the COR directly with my concerns.

 

Imagine if you will, it's like being a shift manager at a convience store. You can deal with product vendors, you handle customers, you set the schedule of the employees who work the shift you manage. But the hiring and firing are left to the store manager( COR) or the regional manager (the IH).

 

 

In my pack, the CC and myself CM) are given alot of leeway in what we can do.

 

I could say that it is the two of us who run things, but the truth is different. The truth is, the CC and myself are just running a program in the same manner as the COR would run it. We just happen to be on the same page 99% of the time. And for the other 1% ....well, the COr realizes that as long as the unit doesn't collapse, thenm having a different veiw of some things isn't gonna kill anybody.

 

But make no mistake: no matter if the entire committe and leadership approves of a new leader ort that an existing one needs to go...it doesn't happen until that very moment that the COR gives his consent or signs the papers.

 

As a commitee of about 15 people, we can hold a unanymous vote, but it means nothing at all untiul the COR accepts our vote .

 

And again, or COR may not always agree with us 100%, but he understands the implications of a committee and leaders having 100% agreement.

[MoosetheItalianBlacksmith 13]

Everybody is in agreement that nothing happens until the COR Signs the papers. There is nobody arguing about that.

 

Whats at question are the steps to get to that signature.

 

I know in our troop it is a committee decision because our old COR once needed to fire a CC so she called an emergency committee meeting and had the committee vote on it. She had the committee decide what was gonna happen.....she gave her reasoning as to why he needed to be fired and everything but then left the decision to the committee.

 

A lot of people my thing that this is because she didnt have the backbone to fire the person herself......and that is far from the truth....this lady was in our area was pretty much the godmother of scouting....you could go to any troop or the highest people in council and mention her name and they knew exactly who she was and had the utmost respect for her. If she asked for something to be done whether it was on council, district or troop level.it was done. She said jump any scouter in our area would say how high. She was a stickler for the rules and making sure everything was done correctly and fairly. If you pissed her off you stayed out of her way for awhile but she was the nicest lady in the world. She was highly trained and recognized if there was any questions about scouting she knew it....we had DE's come to her to ask questions.

 

But I also remember the Training Videos that MOOSETRACKER was talking about saying that committee has hire and fire power upon approval of the COR.

 

In most cases what Beavah is saying is correct as well....a lot of COR's at least in my area do rubber stamp everything and a lot arent even involved until it somebody needs them for a signature.

 

But this is all based off of my area and my chats with people from out of my area.

[moosetracker 132]

Scoutfish to redifine your convience store.. equating the shift manager to the CC/committee, and the Store Manager to the COR

 

The shift manager at a convience store would need added to his job description the ability to find people to hire on his shift so he collects the resumes, does the interviewing, and chooses an employee to take to the store manager for him to sign the paperwork. Now unless the Store manager looks at the name, and says "That's my idot cousin Tony, no way is he working here.." He will most likely accept the shift managers recomendations and sign the paperwork.. Now if the new employee doesn't show up on time for work, and mouths off at the customers and is not working out, the shift manager should point out what he is doing wrong, give the employee 3 notifications (probably keeping the Store Manager informed of the problems).. And after 3 notifications go to the store manager and tell him the employee is not working out and needs to be fired.. And the store manager who has not been personally involved in the problems because he is working a different shift, will most likely approve the dismissal of the employee unless the store manager does not have 3 good notifications, or it is the Store Manager's idiot cousin and firing him would cause family problems..

 

The CC is normally the one the parents would go to with compliants (Maybe SM or CM for problems with ASM's or DL's) and the CC would be the one to go and talk with the adult leader to get their side of the story, and try to help them improve.. The committee normally are parents with kids in the program, and they too will have run ins with problem leaders or hear about them from fellow parents in the program.. Normally the COR will have no children in the program and are not around the day to day operations, or had the responsibility to listen to the complaints or try to guide the Adult leaders..

 

So who has the knowledge of when enough is enough and it is time to remove a disruptive force? The CC/SM/CM and the committee are the ones.. The COR should make sure the adult leader was given fair guidence to improve, that the problems are severe and honest enough to warrent the removal and if all protocal was followed then should accept the recommendation of the committee.. (Unless it is his wife being removed)..

 

The COR basically leaves the running of the troop including putting people in positions, moving them around to different positions and removing people from positions, to the people who are in the trenchs and are working with these people day to day.. They may take more interest in the two main positions of CC & SM/CM because those are the two people they will most likely be working closely with, (consider those the convience store's shift managers).. But the other Adult Leaders for the most part they are fine to have the CC & CM/SM work with, guide, and make the determination if they are not cut out for the job..

 

The only other time they should be more involved in the hiring & firing is when the unit is in trouble of collapsing due to not enough adult leadership, or youth or both to have it run smoothly.

 

If not then the unit is being micro-managed by one person, and it is not how BSA recommends the organization to be..

 

COR trumps all but IH, IH trumps all.. But they are not the ones in the day to day trenches, so if they are running their units correctly they should be taking the recommendations of the people who are..

 

I think we are all running around the mulberry bush and saying things in slightly different ways, but are really in basic agreement with slight variations and that is ok.. all units have slight variations..

 

 

 

[moosetracker 132]

MIB - I think our COR knew she could just fire the CC, but her position was to make sure the committee would support the decision, and she was not going to cause a civil war within the unit as people split on one side of the issue or the other.. It was an easy decision of support for her and the SM, but my guess had it not been, she had every intention to hold us hostage in that room until we were all in agreement (with her)...

 

If our COR was not active, this may have been a time the committee would have had to have taken a vote and then gone to the COR, but because we had an active COR, she was on top of the need to remove while all the committee was still watching the fireworks between the SM and CC and expecting the CC to calm down and be rational.. At least the committee hadn't yet come to the point where we figured out we needed to unite against the CC and remove him before the unit was chewed up and spit out by the CC...(This message has been edited by moosetracker)

[Scoutfish 16]

"I think we are all running around the mulberry bush and saying things in slightly different ways, but are really in basic agreement with slight variations and that is ok.. all units have slight variations "

 

Nah, it's not a mulberry bush, it's more like a raspberry plant!

[COR214 10]

Being a 'retired' COR and Pack Committee Chair, I wish to chime in on this one.

Your COR, if he or she is active, should already be aware of any problems between the CC and the Den Leaders. If not, this person needs to be IMMEDIATELY contacted, and a meeting set up so they can hear the concerns.

As far as 'removing at the stroke of a pen' yes, the COR has this "power" but you don't want to just replace a committee chair, or cubmaster without very good reason, and your COR best have someone ready (TRAINED)to step in, and take over if they're not willing to take the 'seat' themselves. I had to remove a troop CC for 'lack of performance' and disgruntlement of ASM's, and it took a while for the hard feelings to die down.

There are many times when the committee's vision is not consistant with the cubmaster and den leaders program, this should be discussed loooong before it comes to the point where there is a "mutiny", all this does is upset the program, and believe it or not, your CUBS will sense that something is wrong.

Be careful wwhat you wish for...

[sheilab 10]

We had this issue in the prior troop where the committee wanted to remove the CC from her position and from the troop. The CC was coming off like a dictator, constantly quoting policy and procedures. CC had a hard time running the meeting and keeping everyone on task mainly because of the CC constant input to everything. Any committee meeting I have been in the CC, runs the meeting with no input except if we truly are going against policy and procedures. I don't know if that is correct or not, but that is how is has been for me. As far the committee knew the only policies and procedures BSA has is The Guide to Safe Scouting, Advancement and anything from National. In the CC eyes the Troop Committee Guidebook and anyone that the CC talked to at council was a policy and procedure. Most of the committee spent one year trying to work with the CC and it got too frustrating and we were all about to leave so we called upon the commissioner. The commissioner spend 6 months having talks with the CC and nothing changed so we decided to form our own troop. Yesterday I had someone call me from that troop and ask me last week what is the policy and process on how to remove a CC. I have not been successful on find the actual process written anywhere and the only policy I found is the troop is owned by the CO and the CO/COR can hire/fire etc.

 

From what I am reading and I don't totally understand everything so i could be inaccurate, there are two way to remove a CC.

1. The committee can call an emergency meeting and have a vote.

2. The CO or COR can remove the CC.

 

I am not totally clear on the process for both.

For #1 is this discussed with the CO/COR first and then have an emergency meeting. If more than 1/2 the committee decides to remove the CC who would tell the CC and are they just out of their position or are they out of the troop as well.

 

For #2 if the COR has had complaints from atleast 1/2 the committee he can have a chat with the CC and decided to remove or decide to see if it gets better. I saw someone said something about paperwork. Is there paperwork that needs to be filled out.

 

[moosetracker 132]

Yes, to have the committee vote, you need to have an IH of CO/COR that will support it, because if the CC goes crying to them, they can revoke the vote and put them back in the position.. COR/IH of the CO will trump all.

 

But, with many units, where the COR & IH are silent partners, and really don't get involved in BSA issues, don't know the people or the problems, a heads up is a good idea, but they will usually bow to those who are dealing with the issues and problems, and do little more then support a majority vote of the unit.

[fred8033 1591]

The committee can't vote the CC out. The CC appoints the committee. It's a top down organization.

 

Only the CO (executive) or COR can do this. No formal process. Once the CO or COR decides it needs to be done, it can be just done. A short talk or letter saying: "thank you but your services are not needed anymore. " No explaination even needed. But best to smooth the water as best you can.

 

The decision process and communication is fully at the discretion of the CO and/or COR. It's their choice.

 

It is best to immediately go to the scout office and have the CC removed from the unit membership roster. Until that is done, the CC administers the unit.

 

It is best to have a new CC ready to step in.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

[moosetracker 132]

It is top down as far as the COR & IH can trump a committee vote..

 

But committees have been known in the past to vote out CEO's & Committe chairs in many organizations.. There is nothing stating the BSA committee works any differently then any other committee.

 

If you COR/IH is hands off or supports the majority vote of their committee, it can and has been done in BSA history, many, many times.. And will continue to be done.

[fred8033 1591]

I agree in that the decision process can be whatever the CO/COR wants. And yes, the CO/COR can delegate the decision.

 

But as far as BSA is concerned it's only the CO/COR (or the CC himself) who can remove a CC based on that delegated decision. Check the BSA registration forms: signature of the CC and signature of the COR. There is no place for the whole committee to sign.

[moosetracker 132]

Ahhh.. but there is nothing that officially writes a CC out, you just vote in a new CC and the COR signs the papers to replace the old CC with the new one.. OR as you state, if the COR is more hands on, they can choose their own CC..

 

Our old COR chose the CC & SM, and allowed all other people to be voted on.. But when she had to remove a CC, she chose to hold a committee vote, making sure she strongly stated her case for removal..

 

Our new COR holds the election for new CC & SM, yearly and the unit and choose to replace either position yearly by vote.

[fred8033 1591]

moosetracker - You said it all earlier. "COR/IH of the CO will trump all". All the voting you talk about is an okay idea, but not BSA procedures or forms based. It's how your CO does it. It's fine. It builds consensus and support. But it's the CO/COR that is 100% responsible, not the committee. If the CO/COR wants to get rid of the CC without talking to anyone first or holding a vote, BSA is just fine with that.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

[moosetracker 132]

Ahh.. but with the hands off COR/IH then it is the committee that needs to know that they have the right to approach the COR/IH with the suggestion that this be the way the committee functions.. A hands off is a hands off, and they will never go to them with ideas on how the committee should function in their absentee, non-interested capacity.. They just do not care to take the lead in the matter.

[Scoutfish 16]

WEll, there is a difference between what is allowed, what is proper, and what happens.

 

Officially, only the COR, IH, CEO...whatever you want to call them can fire the CC or CM.

 

But maybe your CO doesn'r have a COR per se. Maybe they have a "outside activities Committee" or something made up of 2 to 15 people who act as a COR.

 

Maybe TH IH decides he doesn't need a COR and acts as the COR himself or just eliminates the position.

 

Maybe the COR is a really laid back guy/gal who just lets the committee majority vote run the operation as he knows this is the best way to actually have a smooth running organazation.

 

Yeah, that last one describes our COR. He shows up to every meeting wether den or committee. He is there for anything invovling scouts. He even drives way, way out of his way to make a daytime appearance at camping trips - although he has elected not to camp out himself( old age, physical discomfort, etc...)

 

Thing is, he is there and knows what issues are going on. He doesn't need us to tell him who said what or why so and so isn't playing nice.

 

When (cough , cough)..I mean "if" we have an issue to the point we feel the best answer is to remove somebody...he supports us and goes with the majority vote.

 

But...the COr is the one who has to do the deed.

Even if we have a 100% agreement within the committee...the COR has to sign off on it and technically, the COR is the one with the authority.

 

I cannot be the one to tell the ( in this case) CC that he is out. The CC could not tell me. Any member of the committee couldn't tell the CC or me( CM ).

 

The COR has to do it.

 

Now, in our pack, we are set up that all leaders attend the committee meetings and all of us have a vote.

 

Why? Because we all volunteer, we all bust our butts and we work together as a team that way.

 

So far, and most likely due to our setup. we have only bhad to have 1 "come to Jeasus" meeting with a committee member. WE did not ask that person to leave, we did not tell that person to leave. We just said that thing were going to change if she wanted to continue.

 

She left of her own accord.

 

But we reached that decision as a group, and respoinded as a group.

 

It's just that our group included the COR who was in total agreement with us.