District Commissioner's role

[alex 10]

I have a question about the district commissioner. There is a situation in our troop.

 

At a campout, they did their usual things, cook, capture the flag and being around the fire. Two Scouts were accussed of sneaking out in the middle of the night to walk around and meet other friends. The Scoutmaster apparently told them to come back to camp about 12:30 and they did. Someone within the troop told the District Commissioner about the situation. The DC told them not to speak to the parents and have a committee meeting about it. The DC also told them if the committee saw fit, they should put the boys on probation and not participate in Summer camp.

 

Is the DC the one who decides what to do within a troop?

 

Thanks,

alex

[Eamonn 61]

As a rule a District Commissioner would not get involved in the day to day running of a unit.

However if someone were to ask a specific question he or she would give an answer.

I kinda think that this is the case here.

Matters of discipline at the troop level should be managed and handled by the troop committee.

But it would be very unusual for a District Commissioner to decide what goes on within a troop.

Eamonn.

[scoutldr 732]

The Troop is owned by the Chartering Organization. They and the Troop Committee decide how to run the troop, ideally through the Patrol Leaders Council. A District Commissioner's job is to recruit and train the Commissioner Corps within the District, which consists of Assistant District Commissioners, Roundtable Commissioners, and Unit Commissioners. A Unit Commissioner is typically assigned 2-4 units which he/she will routinely visit, get to know, and monitor their program. The UC's job is that of a friend and mentor to offer advice on improving the program. Also, a UC can be sent in to trouble-shoot a troop that is not advancing, not participating in District events, etc. All are symptoms of a troop in trouble, and keeping a unit from folding is a #1 priority of the District Committee.

 

In the situation you describe, it sounds like the DC was asked for advice and he gave it. I don't disagree with the advice. In the Troop I serve, we don't inform or involve parents except in the most serious situations. I think the Scouts appreciate the fact that every little infraction is not going to be reported back to the parents, but we deal with it "man to man", so to speak. Of course, I would have no problem calling a parent if the situation warranted it.

[Gags 10]

So 2 scouts leave the campsite, with the SM's approval, obey his instructions to be back by 12:30, and suddenly they're not only getting a "reputation" with the Troop Comm., but the DC (or is it UC?) is putting the thoughts into peoples heads that barring them from Summer Camp is justified?

 

Am I a little slow today or is there more to this story? What rule were they breaking?

 

--Gags

[alex 10]

Actually, the 2 Scouts were walking around the camp area when the Scoutmaster told them to come back. Then they were accused of sneaking out around 12:30 or so. The Scouts denied they snuck out. The stories they told are very consistent and I believed them.

 

However, the CC seems to be really mad at them(Scouts) and talked with the DC not UC. That is when the DC told her, our CC, the Scouts aren't allowed to go to summer camp. Unfortunately, I'm just the ASM so the adults don't listen to what I have to say.

 

The point is....under Youth Membership Responsibities...it states that the parents are to be spoken with first and they with the unit decide the best course of action. This situation didn't happen this way. The committee met without the parents or 2 scouts knowledge and the CC took it to the District. All took place before the parents were spoken to.

 

alex

[nldscout 18]

"That is when the DC told her, our CC, the Scouts aren't allowed to go to summer camp."

 

No DC has the right to tell a troop who can go and who cannot go to summer Camp. That is a SM/Committee decision.

 

Ok now to the problem, so the scouts went and visited a few friends. What does the SM say about it. If he has no issues then the CC needs to be told to "Back Off", the SM runs the program and if he see's no problem then there should be no issue for the CC to discuss.

 

Sounds to me like the CC needs to cool off and get a grip.

 

Under "Youth membership responsibilities", What is that, never heard nof such an animal.

[SemperParatus 1]

alex,

 

Not only should the DC stay out of this, but so should the CC. The scouts (or scoutmasters if the scouts are not willing to address it) should determine what 'discipline' should be taken. Personally, I would just have a SM conference with each boy to discuss it and be done with it. IMO, a ban from summer camp is way too severe. My guess is that neither the DC or the CC have been camping with boys for quite awhile. The DC's opinion is irrelevant to your unit and carries about the same weight as the opinions of the posters on this forum. Your CC's decision to go outside the unit for guidance on such a minor infraction demonstrates a disturbing lack of understanding of unit operations.

[Fuzzy Bear 12]

The SM disciplines within the parameters of the Scout Oath and Law. If the Scout has broken the Oath or the Law, then it can be an opportunity for personal growth for that individual to take responsibility to renew his personal actions. Most of these situations would be considered minor and counseling rather than punishment would be the method for intervention. There could be instances where things might go beyond these boundaries and the SM would most likely say, "I think it is time I have help in adjusting this behavior".

 

The Troop Committee takes action beyond that point but stops short when there is a civil rule broken and then the DE and the DC would be consulted for further action. In most cases, discipline and the acts can be resolved at the Troop committee level but even the committee usually knows their limits of what they can deal with effectively.

 

The parents need to be informed when there is Committee action, simply because they can be an asset and support in the process for the Scout and the person or group providing the disciplinary actions. It is not a court where due process is needed but part of the system of this justice is to make sure that the person is able to tell their story and that some type of defense is available (parents). This also helps to moderate punishment before it becomes vengeance.

 

The "walk" in the night and the intrigue of "meeting" someone but with the resulting actions from those outside the unit with discipline involving Summer Camp doesn't make sense. Your story begs the question to be told in full.

 

It is possible that the SM was afraid that the Scouts would get hurt by wandering off or that the Scouts might be influenced to engage in un-Scout like behaviors with others not connected to the unit. Of course, the Scouts violated the curfew and didn't follow the procedure to stay within the camp area. The SM may have felt that he did not have control of the Scouts and that they are refusing to follow common sense in such matters. He may feel that he could not be responsible for their behavior. This may not be the first time or it may be that he doesn't know how to deal with it. It is at that point that he would involve the CC and turn it over to the Committee and the parents.

 

The CC may be new or there may not be a functioning committee and the DC was consulted because there was not a UC. This still would only be a consulting role. Coming up with the Summer Camp punishment doesn't fit the story and if the parents were part of the review, then they should have had input and been able to balance the decision unless they were also having similar problems. There is more here but I am not the one that should be writing it, so please forgive me before I do.

 

FB

 

[Eamonn 61]

While I personally do not agree with the decision of the Troop Committee. They are well within their rights to make it. They are the disciplining and ruling body of the Troop.

The District Commissioner may have, might have, could have made suggestions as to what actions the committee might want to take. He or she might well support the decision of the committee. In fact if the decision has been made, he or she would be wrong and would be really "Sticking his or her nose in where it's not needed" if he were to voice an opinion that went against the committees decision.

I do feel that there is something missing in the information that we have been given.

Is the District Commissioner also a member of the Troop committee? Did something else happen on this late night unauthorized hike?

A District Commissioner in our Council does not have the authority to prevent a Scout from attending summer camp. It just isn't up to him.

Most Troop Committees do not get involved without the Scoutmaster asking for them to get involved.

Could it be that these late night hikers were told not to go off hiking in the middle of the night, but went any way? I think if I was the SM, I would give them both a harsh reminder that they were in violation of the Scout Law. But maybe the SM is worried that this pair will take off during summer camp and he has told anyone that will listen that he is unwilling to be responsible for these Lads at a summer camp?

I know that if I were the District Commissioner I would state that this is a unit problem and ought to be dealt with "In house." If the CC asked me if the Committee were within their rights to not allow a boy to attend Summer camp? I would have to say that they were within their rights. However on a personal note, me being me I would try and do what I could to talk the CC into finding or looking at some other corrective measure.

Having Scouts take off in the middle of the night without permission, when no one has any idea of where they are going or what they are up to is not a good thing.

I wonder what we would be posting if one of these Lads had got into serious trouble? Or had been injured? I know I would be asking" Where was the leadership?"

Eamonn.