Uniforms "Required"

[qwazse 4345]

@5thGenTexan, it sounds like you’re in an ebb cycle. It happens. I’m afraid uniforming won’t help. The age pyramid in your troop has collapsed. That’s not bad, but it will try all y’all’s patience.

You’re in a “lead the horse to water” situation with your SM. You can share your vision with him, but I suspect you’ve done that. If there’s no other adult more to your liking who is willing to step forward, you must proceed with who you have. I’m gathering that syrupy sweet doesn’t come easy for you, but your best bet is to find one thing that this SM does right and heap on the praise.

The SPL is your key, but the lock seems pretty stiff. There might be a way to loosen it. In that 15 minutes of chaos before the SM arrives, have a special treat for the him and the PLs and assistants. It could be a snack, it could be a round of cards, darts, swap some patches, whatever. Something just for youth leadership to engage youth leadership. I sat in on “mini-PLCs” on the SM’s behalf for a year until he was ready to grab those reigns. Again, your goal here is to get to know these youth. Inform them of the next NYLT or other training. And figure out what it would take to get them there.

[Tron 82]

On 7/4/2023 at 3:56 PM, 5thGenTexan said:

I am looking for guidance... I know what the BSA guidelines say.

Uniforms are part of the Aims and Methods.  I know the BSA says uniforms are preferred and encouraged.  I know that a Scout can't be required to wear a uniform to be registered in Scouts.

 

So, how do I approach this with the Committee and other Adult leaders.  I would like our adults, if they are actively working with Scouts at meetings to be in uniform with all the correct insignia.  This is not a uniform police thing...  Our SM, even after two years shows up sometimes in uniform and still has a Pack Unit number on the sleeve instead of the Troop unit number, no position patch at all.  Other leaders have uniforms with lots of things missing if they wear a uniform at all.  It does NOT encourage Scouts to wear their uniform properly.

I am willing to give some time to get things in order.  

I would like beginning Labor Day all leaders wear uniforms to any official Troop event.  It must be worn properly.  If they are serving on a BOR, they need to be in uniform

I would like Scouts to likewise have their uniforms at all events and properly worn. 

I would like, but may not win this one.  Green pants/shorts.  I dont care if they are BSA as long as they dark green.

 

So, how do I go about presenting this without saying its "required"

Oh boy, you're in a bind because lax uniform standards have become "the standard" in your unit. One thing to differentiate is that units/leaders cannot force "Scouts" to have a uniform; however, there is no such rule for adult leaders, as a matter of fact the Troop Leader Guidebooks state that part of the position description for adult leaders is that they wear the uniform, and wear it correctly. 

If the issues are financial, work with people, find some "experienced" uniforms on sale and hook some people up. Remind people what the real standard is. What I find is that most people will have a uniform top, get people to that point and then iterate up towards the ideal from there. Keep in mind that for unit numbers and position patches, if a person has only 1 uniform they are supposed to wear the position patch and unit numbers of their "primary role" and their epaulets are supposed to match the position patch.

The best I advice I think I can give you is to make sure your uniform is full, and worn correctly, and be the standard. When someone asks, make a point to explain that you are following the standard. 

[5thGenTexan 504]

14 hours ago, Tron said:

Keep in mind that for unit numbers and position patches, if a person has only 1 uniform they are supposed to wear the position patch and unit numbers of their "primary role" and their epaulets are supposed to match the position patch.

SM only has one position.  He is just lazy and doesnt care.

[Tron 82]

Sou

5 hours ago, 5thGenTexan said:

SM only has one position.  He is just lazy and doesnt care.

Sounds like you need to find a way to replace him.

[BetterWithCheddar 125]

Perhaps I'm in the minority here, but I'm a (mostly) enthusiastic adult volunteer who is uncomfortable wearing a scout uniform. I do own a blank adult uniform with proper epaulets that's reserved for special occasions, but I prefer to wear khakis and a branded polo to most Pack or Den meetings.

I've never served in the military, nor have I been a police officer, fire fighter, or first responder. To me, uniforms convey a much higher level of service. I don't put my life on the line to serve my country or community. I'm just a dad who wants to ensure my son makes friends and gets outdoors.

I don't judge other adults on their uniform use unless their sloppy appearance becomes a bad example for the kids.

[nolesrule 58]

3 hours ago, BetterWithCheddar said:

To me, uniforms convey a much higher level of service. I don't put my life on the line to serve my country or community.

I just want to address this, because I think it misses the point of uniforms. Uniforms are part of everyday life, sometimes subtly, sometimes not so subtly. A uniform is really just an outward expression of an individual's commitment to the aims and ideals of the group the uniform represents, and can act as a mirror to help reflect that back at yourself. It adds a level of outward expectation to strive to live up to.

When I worked as a bagger at a grocery store in high school, I had a uniform (branded polo, black pants). When I worked at Blockbuster Video in college I had a uniform (light blue oxford shirt, khakis, dress shoes.... it was before they switched to branded polos).

In both of those jobs I held, there were certain expectations that came with uniform whether the customer realized it or not, and in a subtle way it helped me live up to them. If you've ever compared grocery stores in the south east, you know that baggers at Publix are generally a step above other stores (if they even have baggers at all). At Blockbuster, there was an expectation to follow the "G.U.E.S.T." principles for interacting with customers. In Scouting it's an outward expression of your commitment to follow the Oath and Law.

Sports teams also wear uniforms. And it's not just so you know which team someone is on during a competition.

The "uniform is "just" a method, but it's more widely used than people realize if they stop to look around.

On the other hand, I have this huge phobia of eating in my field uniform. Especially on spaghetti night at summer camp.

[BetterWithCheddar 125]

1 hour ago, nolesrule said:

I just want to address this, because I think it misses the point of uniforms. Uniforms are part of everyday life, sometimes subtly, sometimes not so subtly. A uniform is really just an outward expression of an individual's commitment to the aims and ideals of the group the uniform represents, and can act as a mirror to help reflect that back at yourself. It adds a level of outward expectation to strive to live up to.

I appreciate this angle, but let me ask - can't a leader or group of leaders express this same commitment with khakis, a branded polo / fleece, and a name tag? Aside from baseball, you never see a coach dress up like their players and yet no one seems to question their commitment to an organization. Appearance is important, but there are often multiple methods to accomplish the same objective. 

One of my direct reports at work is an Eagle Scout (like myself). We work in a profession that tends to skew conservative and he occasionally presents himself in a less traditional manner. That said, he's not only the nicest guy I've ever worked with, but also the most diligent. He's way ahead of where he needs to be in his development plan and it's reflecting well on me (his manager) and our company. It would have been short-sighted of me to pass on his resume based on how he dressed for his interview.

Edited July 16, 2023 by BetterWithCheddar

[AwakeEnergyScouter 247]

1 hour ago, BetterWithCheddar said:

I appreciate this angle, but let me ask - can't a leader or group of leaders express this same commitment with khakis, a branded polo / fleece, and a name tag? Aside from baseball, you never see a coach dress up like their players and yet no one seems to question their commitment to an organization. Appearance is important, but there are often multiple methods to accomplish the same objective. 

As an old scout from a country which very much eschews authoritarianism, so much so that there are only suggestions (no rules) for where to put what badge on the scout shirt, perhaps I can help.

We always wore our scout shirts (only thing we had as part of a "uniform") during scouting events, because our leaders required it and they always wore them. I don't really know what a field uniform is, and this stuff about class X and Y uniforms here confused me a lot initially. And scout socks - really?? Still, I bought it all because while it seems a little over the top and sloppy at the same time (socks are part of the uniform, but t-shirts are ok?), it is de facto how we show that we are scouts representing the movement because it always has been.

Yes, one could do it a different way. Absolutely. One could also show that one is reigning monarch in some other way than a kingdom apple, a spire, a kingdom key, and a crown. Symbols are all empty of inherent meaning. But because this is because that is, and that is not because this is not, symbols get their meaning from sequences of societal events that one cannot, as a practical matter, ignore and expect success. Only dedicated anti-monarchists would support getting rid of the contents of the Royal Treasure Chamber. The crowns and scepters and whatnot is part of our history as a people and a nation. Getting rid of them feels dangerously close to trying to erase history.

Take the swastika, for example. It had one meaning for centuries, and then due to unfortunate sequences of events the meaning changed completely in at least Europe and the Anglophone countries. Even though it is historically correct to say that the current associations isn't its "true" meaning, European and Anglophone people will associate it with the Nazis regardless of what you mean by it, and it's such a common and strong association that it isn't in anyone's individual power to change it. Time for the association to fade is required.

That we scouts are defined by wearing our shirts and neckerchiefs is an incredibly strong association, because it is one of our forms that we have all, worldwide, carried on since the start. The form isn't absolute - we have different shirt colors, different design specifics (ours have no epaulets, probably because that does feel a bit military and we are absolutely not that), and a plethora of different badges meaning different things. Same for neckerchiefs. But we all have some kind of Western collared shirt with front pockets with badges and neckerchiefs. Because that's what a scout looks like in people's minds, and always has been.

No sports team has ever had the convention for over 100 years that coaches wear anything in particular. A better analogy is that one sports team decided jerseys with numbers were no good and decided to have everyone just play in whatever they wanted instead. They could do that, but there would be consequences because they would be bucking strong expectations. Without a strong reason (human rights or justice) to take the consequences, why do it?

When I was a scout myself, I didn't really understand why our leaders were on us so much about wearing our shirts. But now that I'm older, I understand. At the time, it seemed like we singled ourselves out as weird. But that's part of the point. Are you willing to publicly take a stand for the scout oath and law, even if it doesn't make you cool or popular? Wearing the shirt is practice in being willing to stand and work for scouting publicly, because everyone who sees you instantly knows you're a scout.

[AwakeEnergyScouter 247]

@BetterWithCheddar Check out this scout, who led an online democracy jamboree campfire in 2020. Like your star Eagle scout employee, they don't confirm to traditional ideas about proper appearance, but the shirt (despite the scout also not putting the badges where convention would put them) and neckerchief make them instantly recognizable as a scout regardless. Our shirts and neckers are absolutely core to our public image, much more so than adhering to bourgeoisie convention. We have room for rebels, too, exactly because the symbolism of shirt, badges and neckers is so very strong.

The screenshot is from this video in case it isn't quite clear enough. The campfire actually starts at about 20:30. 

 

Edited July 16, 2023 by AwakeEnergyScouter
Got the year wrong.

[MattR 2659]

4 hours ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

No sports team has ever had the convention for over 100 years that coaches wear anything in particular

<thread stealing>

Check out Major League Baseball. Any coach or manager that steps onto the field has to wear a uniform. BTW, there's a difference between a MLB manager and coach

Yes, a minor edit to your post. Just pointing out an unusual American custom. I like that one.

</thread stealing>

[KublaiKen 192]

4 hours ago, MattR said:

<thread stealing>

Check out Major League Baseball. Any coach or manager that steps onto the field has to wear a uniform. BTW, there's a difference between a MLB manager and coach

Yes, a minor edit to your post. Just pointing out an unusual American custom. I like that one.

</thread stealing>

And as a lifelong NL fan, I think if they wear the uniform they ought to make 'em hit. 

[Tron 82]

On 7/16/2023 at 10:51 AM, BetterWithCheddar said:

I appreciate this angle, but let me ask - can't a leader or group of leaders express this same commitment with khakis, a branded polo / fleece, and a name tag? Aside from baseball, you never see a coach dress up like their players and yet no one seems to question their commitment to an organization. Appearance is important, but there are often multiple methods to accomplish the same objective. 

One of my direct reports at work is an Eagle Scout (like myself). We work in a profession that tends to skew conservative and he occasionally presents himself in a less traditional manner. That said, he's not only the nicest guy I've ever worked with, but also the most diligent. He's way ahead of where he needs to be in his development plan and it's reflecting well on me (his manager) and our company. It would have been short-sighted of me to pass on his resume based on how he dressed for his interview.

I would say no. One of the major points of the uniform is common appearance that creates an in group.  Everyone in uniform also strips away displays of social class and allows the group to more closely bond and see each other as part of the in group. Whether you realize it or not, by not wearing a uniform you are signaling your social class and subconsciously telling the group that you are not really part of it. From a BSA specific standpoint by not wearing the uniform you are sending the message that it is ok to not wear the uniform. You're also inadvertently teaching the scouts that it is ok to cherry pick which rules to follow (when you sign your membership application each year you are attesting to follow the rules and regulations of the BSA, and the rules and regulations of the BSA include scouters wearing their uniforms to set the example for the scouts).