Posted 05 July 2014 - 07:39 AM
1) BSA provides literature, material goods, training, sells memberships , provides publications, establishes exclusive franchises with it's member organizations and organizes activities. All at a minimal fee. Their annual and capital fund drives go a long way to pay for these programs, making sure the cost to the membership is subsidized. If they aren't selling a program, I'd be hard pressed to define it any other way.
2) The Courtesy Corporation establishes contractual exclusive franchises that in fact do sell Big Macs and shakes to the public. BSA does that as well through it's exclusive franchises (CO's). CO's are not customers of BSA they are franchises. I have never heard of any CO's that ever voted on anything the BSA does.
3) The BSA provides the franchises and no business is expected to follow the dictates of it's franchisees.
4) There are those that think the BSA should not act as though it were a business, but with budgets, programming, selling of goods and services, I find it very difficult to define it's not a business. Next time one pay's their membership fees to the country club, try and think of it as these people are providing golfing facilities altruistically to all the golfers that come around to pay green fees and rent carts after having stopped by the pro shop dropped and dime and had a liquid beverage before heading out to the links should have a say-so in how much the professional people of the organization get paid. Like that is ever going to happen.
5) BSA does not have a board of directors, thus it is a non-profit organization, just like a church, YMCA, Lions Club, VFW, or any other non-profit service organization. How it defines itself and runs it's operations is dependent only of what the membership is willing to pay for, not what it says on how it should run its operation.
The military is funded through taxation, whole different ballgame. As a matter of fact, it is not a business entity at all even though it uses business model definitions like budgets, payroll, etc.
Churches are funded through donations, not sales of goods and/or services, again, a whole different ballgame.
Whereas BSA is a non-profit organization, one must realize there are different types of business models that fall under this definition.
When was the last time anyone heard of the privates in the army being able to dictate the amount of money the generals get? And, by the way, the general can resign his commission at any time.
Clergy is a grey area, some feel they are called to service, others simply hired and fired, so it's hard pressed to have a specific model. Church organizations use different models, i.e. the Call Model, the Placement Model, the Hiring Model. Also remember, clergy are considered by some government entities as self-employed and are exempt from some other taxations.
Do the kids in the Boy & Girls Club get a say-so in how much the local or national directors get? Nope.
So the students in a parochial school get a say-so in how much the teachers and staff get paid? Nope
So I'm thinking we're talking apples and oranges in some of the business models being suggested here.
Next time someone thinks the professional staff of BSA are getting too many perks, let's try and see what we can do about getting them free housing for them and their families over and above the normal employee benefits. Then let's work on getting their taxes reduced or removed, too. Or maybe put them in harms way 24/7/365 for a pittance. Oh, the brass get more than pittance? My mistake.