Council Negates Training Requirements for a Unit?

[InquisitiveScouter]

Please help me make this make sense.

There is a unit in our District with five adult leaders and eight Scouts on their roster.  Scouts are all high schoolers.  Five of the eight are the children of three of the adult leaders.

These adult leaders have, over the past few years, consistently neglected to complete training for their positions.  Commissioners and trainers have had ongoing engagement over the years, but these leaders ignored efforts to help them get their training.  They have, at a minimum, kept YPT (now SYT) and Hazardous Weather (as required by Guide to Safe Scouting) up to date.  (I personally have not engaged with them, except by email, but I know their Commissioner and the District Training Chair have contacted this unit numerous times over the years.)

As of yesterday, the Troop is now at 0% leader trained.  No one has Hazardous Weather done.  They are still SYT current.

The District Training Chair brought this new low to the attention of our District Commissioner, District Chair, and District Executive (a brand new guy), with a call to action to contact the unit to, at a minimum, get Hazardous Weather done.  (I do not know if the unit actually has any camping planned.) 

The new DE response, with courtesy copy to our Assistant Scout Executive, basically told everyone not to worry about any of the training from here on, as this unit is going to fold after their last Scout earns Eagle in a few months.

That response is just wrong on so many levels, and sends a bevy of mixed messages that do not align with the stated safety standards, aims of the program, training policies, and negates the sustained efforts of the Commissioner Corps and District to get the unit do what is required.

Further, by putting that in an email, it now gives the council some liability if an incident should occur where safety training may have made the difference.  I'm really shaking my head on that one...

Again, help me make this make sense?

 

 

 

[Tron]

Patently wrong approach. Like you said this sends a message. Is the unit going to fold or is the DE allowing the scout to eagle (we dont punish scouts for adult mistakes) and then revoking the charter?

 

From a liability standpoint hazardous weather is related to outdoor activities and not just camping. Without hazardous weather the unit is technically not allowed to go for a walk around the block.

[InquisitiveScouter]

2 hours ago, Tron said:

Patently wrong approach. Like you said this sends a message. Is the unit going to fold or is the DE allowing the scout to eagle (we dont punish scouts for adult mistakes) and then revoking the charter?

 

From a liability standpoint hazardous weather is related to outdoor activities and not just camping. Without hazardous weather the unit is technically not allowed to go for a walk around the block.

Agreed, but it is only expressly required for camping.

-----------------------------------

Camping

Scouting America has established the following guidelines for a safe and quality camping experience. Fundamental guiding principles for camping:

 - Supervision of camping activities must include qualified, registered, adult leadership.

 - At a minimum, one leader present is current in Hazardous Weather Training for all unit types. It is recommended that all leaders complete this training every two years.

-------------------------------------

https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/gss/gss03/

Edited April 2 by InquisitiveScouter