BSA franchises

[Eagle76 10]

I think the idea of splitting large troop or packs to form new ones is attractive, but there is another potential obstacle. Our Cub pack historically recruited from 4 elementary schools, although most members came from 2 of those. On a couple occasions the District rep wanted us to stop recruiting at a couple of them, because they wanted to form a new unit there. In one case, they apparently even had a unit number reserved for that pack. Their efforts were unsuccessful, and this is when our committee members began discussing how it would be better to help us recruit, then split the pack if it got too big. The potential obstacle is that theres a numbers game going on. Apparently, the more units they have, the better the rep looks, and they dont want to wait. For their purposes, the more units, the better, no matter how small they are or how much theyre struggling.

[Bob White 20]

Madkins

You misunderstand the 'shared responsibilities" agreement in scouting. Unit leaders are selected by the charter organization. The BSA cannot tell a unit that they cannot resgiter someone if they meet the joining requirements.

 

It is the COs responsibility to select and recruit it is the councils job to train.

 

"Things like the buddy system, two deep leadership, the Patrol Method, that a complete uniform is a Method of scouting, etc., need to be presented in a formal setting by district and council trainers."

 

Have you NEVER been to training? That is exactly what has been presented at adult leader training for decades!

 

As far as the unit trainer positon, that has existed for years in troop and pack scouting. But again, it is the unit's and CO's responsibility to select and recruit leaders. If the unit does not select a trainer there is little that the council or national can do about it.

 

If they have a trainer and they do not do their job properly there is nothing that the BSA can do about it.

 

How agressively training is offered is up to the council and district, thats their job not national's. National's role is to develop and distribute the training resouces to the councils. National also makes some training available at the national level but it is the unit's and council's responsibility to get people to go there.

 

Again that is why thoughtful leadership selection is so important.

 

 

 

 

 

[evmori 11]

OK. How many who are adult leaders were selected by their CO?

 

 

[scouter-mom 10]

Evmori,

 

In my somewhat limited access I can say that in our District there are some COs that do select their unit's leaders. There is a family that charters a troop (and a pack for a limited amount of time)...and they do chose their leaders, and have removed them also.

 

Of course, the LDS CO's chose their leaders (and remove them).

 

Other COs take suggestions from the other scouting adults and the COR signs off.

 

From what I know of in my district, the COs involvement in the selection of unit leaders runs the full gamut from very involved to barely involved.

[Bob White 20]

That is not the point Ed, the point is that it is not within the council or national's authority to select and approve unit leaders. The IH is responsible for approving the CR and CC and they are responsible for approving all other leaders. It is not the BSA's unit it is the CO's. It is the BSA's program.

 

The BSA can offer training but it's up to the individual to go, and learn. If the unit has not selected the right people no amount of training will make a meaningful difference.

 

If a scout leader is a criminal the BSA did not train him or her to be one, they were that way when the unit CHOSE them. The selection of leaders needs to be taken more seriously than

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[EagleInKY 14]

In our district, other than (1) LDS units and (2) new units, I don't see COs involved in leader selection at all.

 

For den leaders, committee members, assistant unit leaders, it's a "rubber stamp". It's like Radar and Colonel Blake, "here sign these". For unit leader positions, the CO likes to know who it is, but they don't do the selecting. Our pack committee (I'm CC) recently selected a new cubmaster. I saw Joe (COR) around town one day. "Joe, I think we've got a new Cubmaster lined up. It's going to be Charles. You remember him?". Joe replies, "yes, I know him, he'll do a good job.". Me, "I'll get the papers to you to sign here soon. Thanks."

[CNYScouter 46]

I totally agree with BW that the system the BSA has with COs responsible for selecting works and works well if used, but I just see that it is not being used by way too many CO's.

 

I can say that a conservative estimate in my district is that 66% of the COs are hands-off and do nothing more than supply a place to meet.

 

I also agree that if a unit has not selected the right people no amount of training (mandatory or not) will make a meaningful difference. Im in a Troop that has every leader fully trained in their position and these trained leaders have decided which parts of the BSA program are important to use and which ones are not.

 

BW - one of the points I wanted to make is why cant the BSA have a say in selecting leaders? I know its not policy now, but why doesnt BSA have set policies in selecting leaders to run its program?

With so many hand-off COs I really think the BSA needs to step up and set some policies regarding the selecting of leaders and at least have a say in who's running it's program.

 

I do like the idea for successful troops breaking off and starting but what about the areas where Troops never become successful enough to start a "plant" Troop.

 

The real point I was trying to make was how do we use the knowledge of these Troops that have been successful for years and put it to better use?

 

I was lucky to have as a patrol guide (??) at SM training a SM from a Troop that has had tremendous success for 30+ years. This SM was not a scout and not even been an SM that long. However, he started as an ASM with the troop and learned how to be successful just by being in a well-run program.

 

I learned more just by talking with him over the training weekend than I did from most of the training. After training, I visited his troop; watched how he lead the troop, and in the few hours I spent with him I could really see he understood the scouting program. I wish I could have spent more time just to learn more. If I could have spent 3 to 6 months working with him, I would really have the skills and knowledge to run an incredibly successful program.

 

So, how can we harness this knowledge and skill this troop has generated and really put it to use to improve the quality of the units out there?

 

 

(This message has been edited by CNYScouter)

[evmori 11]

Bob,

That wasn't my point at all! My point is the CO's aren't the ones choosing the leaders. The leaders are being chosen by the existing leaders in the unit. EagleinKY's example is probably more the norm than the exception.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White 20]

Leaders can certainly be recommended from among your volunteers. But only the Committee Chair along with either the IH or CR can approve them, they can also look beyond your recommendtion (not a bad idea sometimes) and choose someone who they believe would perform the role better. The troop does not belong to the leaders of the troop. It belongs to the Charter Organization.

 

You might not operate that way, You might not even like that, but as a trainer certainly you know that it is a fact that the Scouting program is designed and taught to function that way.

 

 

[Hunt 11]

If the Scouting program is designed for COs to select leaders, but the vast majority of COs are not doing this, isn't it possible that BSA should do something about it? Remember, even the leaders selected by COs still have to be approved by BSA--it would be fairly simple, I think, for BSA to modify the criteria for approval by including initial training, for example. I don't think that would take away the CO's ownership of the unit.

[evmori 11]

I am well aware of how the leader selection process is to work. My point is in reality, it isn't happening that way.

 

Maybe the BSA should change giving ownership to the CO & use the franchise method. That would get the ACLU off their back and might help with other problems in the long run.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White 20]

The BSA cannot do that due to the restrictions of the congressional charter, however a few local councils are trying to do just that by saying they will refuse to charter any volunteer or unit whose key volunteers (those in direct youth leadership roles) are not trained within 1 year of joining.

 

It is a dog with no teeth. No council is going to refuse to charter a unit, or even an individual, over this matter when they are responsible for showing an increase in adult and youth members, and units, as a performance criteria.

 

The solution is in training the IH, CR, and CC through personal contact. These are the people ultimately responsible for unit leader selection and operation. They are the folks empowered to hire and release volunteers. COs need to regain the ownership of THEIR units, and they need to be dilligent in their efforts to select and recruit quality individuals to learn and lead the scouting program.

 

Until that day comes we need leader to lead programs rather than to complain about the BSA.

 

 

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Bob, I love you like a brother, and fight with you just like a brother as well, but check out

http://www.minsitrails.com/Data/Documents/Newsletter/Mar2005/final.pdf

 

The Council I serve has mandated that all Cubmasters, Scoutmasters,Venturing Advisors and Committee Chairs be trained or the unit will not be recharterd for 2006. In 2004 the Cubmasters, Scoutmasters, and Venturing Advisors had to be trained. For 2007 its rumored all Cub Scout Den leaders (Tiger, Bear, etc) will have to be trained in their rank.

 

I know we dropped a few Crews because the Advisor refused training.

(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

[Bob White 20]

I do not deny that it is being threatened OGE. But it is being done by very councils and as I showed you in the e-mail I shared from national it is not a action they endorse.

 

And while a council might take a small unstable unit and refuse to charter them to make an example of them, no council is actually going to refuse a charter of a unit of any size based on this criterias. We are all aware of the three primary responsibilities of a the professional staff and they will make sure that all three are surpassed before they took an action like refusing a charter.

 

The dog growls good but in this case it will be unwilling to bite the hand that feeds it.

 

Do not misunderstand, I like the rule. But unless performance criteria is changed drastically this will never become anything more than a local experiment and very short lived.

 

 

[evmori 11]

Bob,

What part of the National Charter would prevent this?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10