Jump to content

Chapter 11 announced


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Don't know.

Well, at least you admit it

12 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Most separated or retired military officers at or above the rank of O-4, and most separated or retired enlisted at or above E-6 would be great candidates as well.

Ok, let's play this game. O-4, 2 years of service or less = $59,824.80.

Double what they made on active duty would be...$119,649 or exactly what most S.E.s make.

For example, the two smallest Councils in the U.S. (that I know of).

Alameda Council: the S.E. makes $113,717.

Piedmont Council: the S.E. makes $112,832.

So, exactly what you think they should be making.

But wait, you don't want someone with a bare 2 years. How about something reasonable. 10 years in.

O-4 = $89,524.80. Double is $179,049.60.

Which is what my S.E. makes (mid-size Council).

In other words, they are being paid what you want them to be paid.

 

Edited by CynicalScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

What is legally right is not always morally right.

This is a general post, my first on the forum. I have read this thread from the beginning. If you have access, of which I'm unsure as a newbie, you can see my background. I'm both a former high-a

Posted Images

Just now, CynicalScouter said:

Well, at least you admit it

Ok, let's play this game. O-4, 2 years of service or less = $59,824.80.

Double what they made on active duty would be...$119,649 or exactly what most S.E.s make.

For example, the two smallest Councils in the U.S. (that I know of).

Alameda Council: the S.E. makes $113,717.

Piedmont Council: the S.E. makes $112,832.

 

I don't think it's the pay that is at issue. It's who we are recruiting. We don't seem to hire competent people, but if we do, they leave or stay through altruism but suffer in frustration. This forum is full of stories about competent people being pushed out or around by the BSA farm system. There was a recent discussion about what DEs and DCs and Councils do and it was mind boggling how dysfunctional the whole structure is. If you don't hire competent people, or competent people are unable to operate within your system, then every salary is going to be resented.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, yknot said:

I don't think it's the pay that is at issue.

But it is. Just had someone in this thread indicate they believe that S.E.s should not be making more than the median salary of the people in their council.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

But it is. Just had someone in this thread indicate they believe that S.E.s should not be making more than the median salary of the people in their council.

Can you blame them? Most people sitting in the unit, district, or even council chair don't see what an SE brings to the table. They see council workhorses serving most of their needs. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

But wait, you don't want someone with a bare 2 years.

You are a bit ignorant here, brother...O-4's with two years of service are pretty scarce...usually only medical career fields, who are people with their professional degrees already.  Doctors, lawyers, etc. 

The average person is promoted to O-4 at around the 11 year point.  So the comparison is an O-4 at 10-12 years service, as you point out.

And, sorry for the vague pronoun antecedent, but I meant doubling the E pay for the council level.

Hire the O's for Regional/National level...99% of the retired officers I know have more integrity in their pinkie than any council execs I have met.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, yknot said:

I don't think it's the pay that is at issue. It's who we are recruiting. We don't seem to hire competent people, but if we do, they leave or stay through altruism but suffer in frustration.

It is funny, we often hear the most complaints about the pay at the top, and then a snicker of the pay at the bottom.

We will have a broken professional core as long we pay entry level DEs such a tiny wage for someone with a 4 year degree. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Just had someone in this thread indicate they believe that S.E.s should not be making more than the median salary of the people in their council.

As a baseline....a suggestion...add percentages based on performance.  It's as good, or arbitrary, a scheme as saying pay them a percentage of their expenditures...which seems really whack, especially if most of those expenditures are fixed and they don't control that money anyway...

6 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

We will have a broken professional core as long we pay entry level DEs such a tiny wage for someone with a 4 year degree. 

Best comment of the day, @mrjohns2  If I could give it ten likes, I would.

Edited by InquisitiveScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites

You can bet your sweet campfire that there is nothing we can do about the current situation and if we continue to focus on what cant be done the business is finished.  None of this at all has any effect on unit operations.  If we can't use anything "BSA" then so be it.  To use the example of Eagle Scouts would indicate that the BSA is just a means to an end where everyone who participates will earn Eagle.  Thats not how it should be.  If the fees go up the fees go up.  If they close the doors on the BSA then the door is closed and there will be a lot of independent groups popping up. If the focus is all about what could happen and not on the youth and individual units the BSA is through.  If there is no youth program there will be no youth.  If there aren't any youth there is no Scouting.  High adventure?  Most young people can't afford Philmont, but they can afford a week in a national forrest as long as someone will take them.  The bankruptcy and all of the fall out does not have to devastate the entire organization if people can adapt to the changes.  You can make up theoretical links to the kids but most of them don't know or care about this issue.  And believe it or not, that's what this is all about.  The bankruptcy and all of the negativity generated by it is just another attempt to destroy the BSA.  But, in spite of it all Troops, Packs, Crews, Ships, and Posts are still meeting, camping, racing wooden cars and sitting around campfires.  This is because the kids are enjoying themselves and that doesn't take a national office, Chief Scout Executive, or a national committee.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

And, sorry for the vague pronoun antecedent, but I meant doubling the E pay for the council level.

E-6 after 10 years - $45,237.60. Doubles to $90,475.20.

Again, not that dissimilar to what S.E.s make now, especially if you adjust for council size and number of employees in the council.

And I would also note that the size of the council in terms of number of scouts served should play a factor. The budget/expenditures is used because while not all not for profits have "members" (like BSA does in the sense of Scouts) they all have expenses and budgets.

But clearly no matter what data I bring, the answer will always be "all scout executives should be making less than they do now." So fine. Have at it.

Don't be shocked when people leave.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

We will have a broken professional core as long we pay entry level DEs such a tiny wage for someone with a 4 year degree. 

Told my (new) Troop Committee Chair we our council was hiring a new DE. He was just curious what the salary was. So I forwarded the job posting. "Part time?" he said. Nope. And this person had to cover 2-3 counties and dozens of units. That day he gained a much bigger appreciation for what DEs do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

And many nights and weekends to boot for a DE.  Plus, little opportunity for advancement.  Board members often see the talent in DE's and hire them into their own businesses.

As a former pro, I cannot tell you  how many former coworkers either doubled, and in one case tripled, their salaries leaving the BSA to work for a board member or with the board member's company.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Mrjeff said:

I admire all of our paid Scouters.  Our SE is involved and engaged with our Scouts and enjoys spending time with them.  Our DEs are exceptional and work tirelessly to assist our units to be successful.  Thay are worth every penny they're paid.  When I retired I was asked to take on the responsibilities of a DE and I declined the offer as I am well aware of the work they do and the sacrifices they make.  If they were paid by the hour they would all be wealthy.   Scouting needs those professionals and I am thankful for them.

❤️ 

  • Thanks 1
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...