Jump to content

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, walk in the woods said:

But to the OPs point, it's being interpreted differently than the clear language by the people that wrote the clear language to begin with, National.  

My guess is that Cyndi @ Member Care Contact Center  (if that's even her real name) isn't quite at the level of the execs (lawyers?) at National writing the policy. Probably a midling call-center attendee who has to answer 1000s of calls/emails ever day about hundreds of different items.  Sure it'd be nice if they were all on the same page, but I bet if you resubmit the question 10 times, I'm not sure you'd get a consensus either way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/gss/gss01/  is the most up to date location moving forward for the Barriers to Abuse.    A one source of truth if you will.   The "72 hours rule" is All adul

I've yet to meet any parents who want what you all keep referring to as "Family Scouting."  Every parent I talk with wants their kids to have a great Scouting experience - have fun, learn a lot,

That is funny.  That is not what the Guide To Safe Scouting says.

12 minutes ago, Pale Horse said:

My guess is that Cyndi @ Member Care Contact Center  (if that's even her real name) isn't quite at the level of the execs (lawyers?) at National writing the policy. Probably a midling call-center attendee who has to answer 1000s of calls/emails ever day about hundreds of different items.  Sure it'd be nice if they were all on the same page, but I bet if you resubmit the question 10 times, I'm not sure you'd get a consensus either way.

Sounds like that needs to be done,

 

who else wants to email and post results?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, perdidochas said:

I don't see the big deal. IMHO, all parents who go on campouts (even under 72 hrs) should take YPT for their own protection, and more importantly, so they know what's going on.  It doesn't take that long. 

True, but what about the next step in getting them all registered?  Who's paying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Pale Horse said:

My guess is that Cyndi @ Member Care Contact Center  (if that's even her real name) isn't quite at the level of the execs (lawyers?) at National writing the policy. Probably a midling call-center attendee who has to answer 1000s of calls/emails ever day about hundreds of different items.  Sure it'd be nice if they were all on the same page, but I bet if you resubmit the question 10 times, I'm not sure you'd get a consensus either way.

To me that's a problem.  The Member Care Contact Center is supposed to be the source for information.  Getting your call center scripts up-to-date is part and parcel of rolling out new programs, products, and initiatives.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, walk in the woods said:

But to the OPs point, it's being interpreted differently than the clear language by the people that wrote the clear language to begin with, National.  

Original poster had trouble with council interpretation.  Councils and national are very different organizations.  Completely different.  Different agendas too.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, perdidochas said:

I don't see the big deal. IMHO, all parents who go on campouts (even under 72 hrs) should take YPT for their own protection, and more importantly, so they know what's going on.  It doesn't take that long. 

YPT yes, but pay the $33 registration fee to National (plus whatever your local council adds for insurance) doesn't seem feasible. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, scotteg83 said:

YPT yes, but pay the $33 registration fee to National (plus whatever your local council adds for insurance) doesn't seem feasible. 

Really?

My state requires every volunteer who might have regular or unsupervised contact with students or in-class time to undergo a background check. "Regular" means more than 4 times in a month. The volunteer gets to pay $60 for the privilege. $33 if you are in the vicinity for more than 72 hours seems more feasible than that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, LVAllen said:

Really?

My state requires every volunteer who might have regular or unsupervised contact with students or in-class time to undergo a background check. "Regular" means more than 4 times in a month. The volunteer gets to pay $60 for the privilege. $33 if you are in the vicinity for more than 72 hours seems more feasible than that.

Yes, but do you tell parents that sign up for sports the same thing? Most parents plan to show up with their kid, and do as little as possible. They aren’t the “volunteer”, more like wishful innocent bystander.  But to say, registration double, or tripled (one parent or two) to have your child participate, is going to scare off parents. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

GSUSA requires all adults who camp to be registered too.

I do see an inherent conflict in the fact that parents are required to camp at the Cub Scout level.  But, at the Scouts BSA level, if it really is that anyone who camps for more than 72 hours all year has to register - that's really not so crazy.

Beyond that though - it seems a little ridiculous that this forum needs to try to interpret the response from someone on the BSA helpdesk.  As forums go, this is certainly the most active one I know of.  There has to be someone that we can contact on behalf of the forum.  I'm sure it's in the best interest of the BSA for this group to get it right.  Anyone know who we should reach out to?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ParkMan said:

GSUSA requires all adults who camp to be registered too.

I do see an inherent conflict in the fact that parents are required to camp at the Cub Scout level.  But, at the Scouts BSA level, if it really is that anyone who camps for more than 72 hours all year has to register - that's really not so crazy.

Beyond that though - it seems a little ridiculous that this forum needs to try to interpret the response from someone on the BSA helpdesk.  As forums go, this is certainly the most active one I know of.  There has to be someone that we can contact on behalf of the forum.  I'm sure it's in the best interest of the BSA for this group to get it right.  Anyone know who we should reach out to?

RichardB who frequents this forum deals with health and safety at national.  He would be a good person to answer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...