Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Two Steps Forward, Two Steps Back.


  • Please log in to reply
101 replies to this topic

#41 Krampus

Krampus

    Side Kick to Nikolaus

  • Members
  • 1870 posts

Posted 06 May 2016 - 08:36 PM

@Eagle94-A1 come to Texas. We get up at 6:30, coffee is on, we have one ASM who gets up early to make breakfast. The boys get up at 7 and are done by 8:30. If they screw up KP they're cleaning dishes before dinner. :)

We're still strict on some things but we let the boys learn.
  • 1

#42 Eagle94-A1

Eagle94-A1

    Been there. Done that.

  • Members
  • 1698 posts

Posted 06 May 2016 - 10:08 PM

Back.

 

Anyway, Level Headed and I have some concerns. At the moment, neither one of our sons want to leave the troop due to the Scouts in the troop. But with the lack of patience, the way he took over a patrol's planning process, was influential in reassigning the patrols, and commenting on how only half the troop will be able to go canoeing, I see the troop falling apart and fast.

 

I know my son has commented on how the best scouts are all in one patrol. He doesn't like that the Scouts had no input into patrol selection. At least with the original plan for the troop reorg, the PLC decided to pull names out of cup at random.

 

I was told that while I was working with the AT Scouts, only 5 scouts from the other 2 patrols said they were going on the planned camp out with the troop.

 

I know the comment about 1/2 the troop going on the canoe trip in August worries me. When I mentioned what about the rest of the troop, I was told they could either meet them on the river, or do something else.

 

And i know that one of the dads has some concerns because we are not using the patrol method. His son is one of the plankowners in the troop. He was losing interest until he started teaching Scouts. Now it looks as if the Scout is losing interest. i know part of it is no Philmont trip. But part of it is the adults taking over.

 

Now Naysayer ASM did make a comment about leaving after the AT trip because he's had enough. Don't know if that was an idle threat or not. I personally don't think he will follow through. He's had a long history with the troop before it folded.


  • 0

"Train 'em. Trust 'em. LET THEM LEAD!" William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt


#43 Krampus

Krampus

    Side Kick to Nikolaus

  • Members
  • 1870 posts

Posted 07 May 2016 - 08:41 AM

:happy:

 


  • 2

#44 qwazse

qwazse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 6203 posts

Posted 07 May 2016 - 12:00 PM

I'm no expert in conflict management, but when I was in a similar position to yours I found the following (shared equally to folks favoring or opposing me) to set the tone nicely:
"I'm not about to be bothered by the burrs up anyone's butt ... Especially yours."

Not sure how that would come off to scouters in your neck of the woods. But the attitude carried me along pretty well.
  • 0

#45 Eagle94-A1

Eagle94-A1

    Been there. Done that.

  • Members
  • 1698 posts

Posted 07 May 2016 - 12:00 PM

@Krampus,

 

So true. I'd actually take you up on the TX offer if it wasn't for the mother-in-law. We as a family are thoroughly enjoying the normalcy while we can. But a relapse is on the back of our minds all the time.


  • 0

"Train 'em. Trust 'em. LET THEM LEAD!" William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt


#46 Sentinel947

Sentinel947

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 1512 posts

Posted 07 May 2016 - 02:38 PM

Sticky situation. If the CC or COR is not willing to resolve the SM issue, making a new troop might be the best way to go.
  • 0

#47 Eagle94-A1

Eagle94-A1

    Been there. Done that.

  • Members
  • 1698 posts

Posted 07 May 2016 - 05:15 PM

Had another chat with Oldest. He doesn't want to give up on the troop yet. He wants to try and change things via the older Scouts and the PLC first. BUT he is now agreeable to starting a new troop if needbe b/c I told him  that in all likelihood his 2 best friends, the rest of his old CS den, and probably a few others would follow suit.

 

And I need to change Naysayer's handle to something different, more inline with his personality. He's not a helicopter parent, who doesn't get involved except to hover, he gets involved, and involved heavily. He's more of an AC-130 Gunship, always aloft and ready to rain down fury when he thinks he sees the need. So let's refer to him as Gunship.


  • 2

"Train 'em. Trust 'em. LET THEM LEAD!" William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt


#48 sst3rd

sst3rd

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 436 posts

Posted 07 May 2016 - 05:37 PM

Eagle94-A1,

 

    I see nothing changing. Start a new troop, as you will have a clean slate to start with. It sounds as if all of the pieces for a new troop are available. Finding a sponsor isn't difficult. Peace of mind is important to old and young alike.

    Gunship and his partners may understand the error of their ways when the new troop runs the BSA program and grows, but probably not. His threat, idle or not, can only be dealt with by scouts moving to a new troop. Oldest will have fun and grow, using the patrol method. Do NOT look back, but forward to an exciting program.

 

sst3rd


  • 1

#49 Krampus

Krampus

    Side Kick to Nikolaus

  • Members
  • 1870 posts

Posted 07 May 2016 - 07:24 PM

Let's write a Scouter fiction book. We've got some cool names brewing here. ;)

[snaps fingers Bob Fosse style]
  • 0

#50 qwazse

qwazse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 6203 posts

Posted 07 May 2016 - 07:45 PM

.... ASM did make a comment about leaving after ... because he's had enough. Don't know if that was an idle threat or not. I personally don't think he will follow through. He's had a long history with the troop before it folded.

seen that behavior before. grubbing for sympathy. My reply: "do me a favor and find is your replacement."
  • 0

#51 desertrat77

desertrat77

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2153 posts

Posted 07 May 2016 - 07:51 PM

Let's write a Scouter fiction book. We've got some cool names brewing here. ;)

[snaps fingers Bob Fosse style]

Krampus, here's a start:

 

"Crusher"

"Eeyore"

"Mr. Beads"

"Peacock"

"Hand-Wringer"

"Basil Fawlty"  (as a SM no less)


  • 1

#52 Beavah

Beavah

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8158 posts

Posted 08 May 2016 - 09:33 AM

Eagle94-A1,

 

    I see nothing changing. Start a new troop, as you will have a clean slate to start with. It sounds as if all of the pieces for a new troop are available.

 

 

 

Yah, hmmmm....   Not sure why yeh think that, @sst3rd.

 

From my perspective da only time that it benefits Scouting to start a new troop is when all da available troops in an area are at capacity, eh?   Then in addition yeh have an identified underserved and interested market, along with some known good leaders, a likely strong sponsor, and perhaps some older boys or a "brother troop" who can help the new one get on its feet.

 

Startin' a new troop because adults are in some sort of adult drama ego contest almost always ends up with some boys and families in the new troop, some boys and families in the old troop, and a whole bunch of boys and families that leave scoutin' because they don't want to deal with other adults' dramafests.    Then yeh have two smaller troops, both of which are less viable, eh?  Almost certainly one or the other folds in less than 5 years, dumpin' another bunch of kids out of Scouting in the process.  Sometimes both troops fold. 

 

Yeh are almost never successful startin' a new troop from a position of dysfunction and weakness, eh?   New troops should be started from a position of strength.  Otherwise, all yeh do is make Scoutin' poorer in da area.

 

Beavah


  • 0

#53 Eagle94-A1

Eagle94-A1

    Been there. Done that.

  • Members
  • 1698 posts

Posted 08 May 2016 - 10:32 AM

@Qwasze,

 

Yes, I think it's an idle threat and/or a way to get some sympathy from the new leaders who just crossed over from Cub Scouts in the last 6-12 months. I've been busting my butt mentoring one, but now he's teamed up with Gunship, and I've heard some comments from him agreeing with Gunship. Patrol Method is "organized chaos" but it works. Best example of that is the Older Scouts in the troop.

 

@desertrat77,

 

Don't know if I'm Eeyore or Cassandra. However I feel like Yoda in Episode V when Luke goes off to Bespin. I don't think I'm being listened to, and the hand that Luke was dealt came off badly (pun intended)

 

@Beavah,

 

That is my worst fear: destroying the troop. Up until recently the troop was good. Yes they had some problems, but it was getting worked on. It is a slow process changing a troop's culture by doing it right, via the PLC. I've had some handicaps regarding the troop, specifically working with Cub and then when I stepped back from Cubs the accident, plus not being a member of the CO, but it was starting to change. Then Gunship's troop folded, and his Scout joined us. That is when the negative changes started. And it has gotten worse over time, culminating with the last two weeks.

 

All,

 

If I was to "start" a troop, it would really be RESTARTING one. Gunship's troop and pack both folded because he could not get enough leaders in their area to get involved. Again I have contacts with the CO and could probably get them to support restarting the troop. But I know I would tear the current troop apart, and there will be animosity for years to come from Gunship and a few other leaders, especially if I get the pack restarted.

 

Now part of the problem as to why the pack and troop folded,  I blame on council. In the push to increase units, they pushed for a new pack and troop to be started in an area that Gunship's pack and troop was recruiting from. Having a small pack, plus a newer, small pack recruiting from the same area is bad news. And eventually both packs and troops folded within 5 years of the second pack being started.

 

But one thing has been on the back of my mind. The troop I'm currently in folded while Gunship was an ASM. He got deployed overseas, and the troop got restarted.

 

Gunship took over as CM of a pack his youngest was in, and served as an ASM for the troop his step-son was in, both with the same CO. Both pack and troop could not get enough leaders to keep  them going. My question is WHY?

 

The CC/COR didn't want Gunship involved with the troop as a leader. There is a history between the two, and all of the ASMs ( including me) thought it was because of the history, and wanted Gunship involved. IH actually approved the application, and sent it forward.

 

The common denominator is Gunship.

 

Then the second-hand comment I was told by the Webelos DL, " You don't want to be in a troop with [Gunship] as a leader" is making me wonder.


  • 0

"Train 'em. Trust 'em. LET THEM LEAD!" William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt


#54 Eagle94-A1

Eagle94-A1

    Been there. Done that.

  • Members
  • 1698 posts

Posted 08 May 2016 - 10:48 AM


    Gunship and his partners may understand the error of their ways when the new troop runs the BSA program and grows, but probably not.

 

 

This quote is hitting home. I don't know what happened, but something occurred between the packs leadership and the troop's leadership when Gunship was a young ASM. Gunship blames the pack's CO to this day on the death of his troop. The Webelos were not even visiting the CO's troop, visiting another troop instead. In fact, he still has some feelings against the other troop, although no one remains from the time period.

 

But I know for a fact that a troop using the patrol method without a feeder pack can survive on it's own. My troop didn't have a feeder pack before I joined it, nor for 6 of the 7 years I was a youth. So What was the real reason the troop folded?


  • 0

"Train 'em. Trust 'em. LET THEM LEAD!" William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt


#55 desertrat77

desertrat77

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2153 posts

Posted 08 May 2016 - 10:58 AM

Eagle94,

 

My Star Wars knowledge begins and ends with the first movie in '77...I saw it with my Philmont contingent in Albuquerque the night before we arrived at the Ranch.   I saw the second one (once) and part of the third.   Then I thought "That's it for this story, what else could they come up with?"  :) :)

 

You are fighting the good fight, and doing so while taking the high road.   Reading your posts throughout the years here at the forum, that is your method and it speaks volumes.   There is a code name for that quality, and Eeyore is definitely not it!

 

Re Gunship--some leaders are just toxic, as you know.   Doesn't matter how many leadership seminars they've sat through, they won't change and the only thing we can do is just work around them, or depart.    We may have to grit our teeth and endure when the toxicity is at work or with family, but not in civic affairs.   We definitely have more flexibility to move on to greener pastures.

 

The Gunships of scouting can grind us down to the point where we want to quit entirely.  


  • 0

#56 Sentinel947

Sentinel947

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 1512 posts

Posted 08 May 2016 - 12:06 PM

Yah, hmmmm....   Not sure why yeh think that, @sst3rd.
 
From my perspective da only time that it benefits Scouting to start a new troop is when all da available troops in an area are at capacity, eh?   Then in addition yeh have an identified underserved and interested market, along with some known good leaders, a likely strong sponsor, and perhaps some older boys or a "brother troop" who can help the new one get on its feet.
 
Startin' a new troop because adults are in some sort of adult drama ego contest almost always ends up with some boys and families in the new troop, some boys and families in the old troop, and a whole bunch of boys and families that leave scoutin' because they don't want to deal with other adults' dramafests.    Then yeh have two smaller troops, both of which are less viable, eh?  Almost certainly one or the other folds in less than 5 years, dumpin' another bunch of kids out of Scouting in the process.  Sometimes both troops fold. 
 
Yeh are almost never successful startin' a new troop from a position of dysfunction and weakness, eh?   New troops should be started from a position of strength.  Otherwise, all yeh do is make Scoutin' poorer in da area.
 
Beavah


OK. That's nice in theory. I agree. In practice, how do you deal with the situation specifically in this thread?
  • 0

#57 Eagle94-A1

Eagle94-A1

    Been there. Done that.

  • Members
  • 1698 posts

Posted 08 May 2016 - 02:27 PM

I'm in the process of coming up with a game plan. Some of this is coming from the son. Some is what I was thinking about doing, and some from folks on this board.

 

1. Talk to the Older Scouts next weekend. The backpacking trip will consist of an ASM, let's call him Frustrated, and myself as well as his wife and my pack's CC whose son is going backpacking. Level Headed will be dropping his Scout off, so the Older Scouts may talk, especially since Gunship won't be around. EDITED: Frustrated and Level Headed are the #2 and #1 Leaders the Older Scouts will go to, even before me. I "talk too much" ;)

 

1.A. Talk to the UC about why Gunship's pack and troop at his church folded. Aiming for Friday IF he's in the country or not.

 

2. Since plans have to be revised for June, there is a triathlon where we are scheduled to go, come up with a survey of what the Scouts like, don't like, and want to do to improve the troop.

 

3. PLC and comes up with game plan using the surveys.

 

4. Ride herd on adults and see if Gunship actually leaves or not.

 

5. If things continue going down the sewer, talk to SM, CC, IH and see if they can get aboard the plan.

 

6. If they can get aboard the plan, go Patrol Method. If not, leave

 

7. Talk to my old den about starting up a new troop with the disgruntled Scouts from current troop.

 

8. Inventory and fund-raise as needed to get new troop gear

 

9. USE THE PATROL METHOD!


Edited by Eagle94-A1, 08 May 2016 - 02:29 PM.

  • 0

"Train 'em. Trust 'em. LET THEM LEAD!" William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt


#58 qwazse

qwazse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 6203 posts

Posted 08 May 2016 - 06:27 PM

OK. That's nice in theory. I agree. In practice, how do you deal with the situation specifically in this thread?

1. Maintain a firm hand with whatever authority you have.
2. Build a strong friendship in spite of stark disagreements.

To that end, I would discourage E91 from trying to dig dish from the UC. I can't think of any scenario where knowing that history does any good. I can see no see any scenario where a UC would have all the facts to give an unbiased opinion. Finally, I can see no scenario where a UC who would know such detailed information would be inclined to divulge it to a third party. I certainly would not want any unit of mine to have such an individual as UC.
  • 1

#59 Sentinel947

Sentinel947

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 1512 posts

Posted 08 May 2016 - 06:44 PM

1. Maintain a firm hand with whatever authority you have.
2. Build a strong friendship in spite of stark disagreements.
To that end, I would discourage E91 from trying to dig dish from the UC. I can't think of any scenario where knowing that history does any good. I can see no see any scenario where a UC would have all the facts to give an unbiased opinion. Finally, I can see no scenario where a UC who would know such detailed information would be inclined to divulge it to a third party. I certainly would not want any unit of mine to have such an individual as UC.

Not sure how the UC ties in. 

What happens when those disagreements are on how to fundamentally run the organization. When there is a power vacuum the CC refuses to deal with? When maintaining a firm stance continues to create friction with ano there adult who refuses to meet halfway. I'm pretty sure I've read that the gunship won't even talk to Eagle94. The SM is awol. How do you possibly fix that. I don't often suggest forming a new troop. But in Eagle94s case. It's that , quit or allow the current power struggle to continue.


Edited by Sentinel947, 08 May 2016 - 07:03 PM.

  • 0

#60 Eagle94-A1

Eagle94-A1

    Been there. Done that.

  • Members
  • 1698 posts

Posted 08 May 2016 - 07:19 PM

My UC was the one I recruited to be CM, then the SM, of the pack and troop Gunship was in before coming to my troop. Also he is one of the lay leaders of the chartering organization, and was serving on the committee when the troop folded. I know he wasn't as active a leader as he would have liked, but his company has exploded especially with their overseas customers. But he would know if the reason was Gunship or really they couldn't get parents to step up to the plate.  Also he would know if the church would be willing to restart the troop if a new sucker, I mean volunteer, was willing to restart the troop. As well as what equipment and resources the CO still has.

 

On a different note, talked to son some more. He really wants to try and solve this troops problems before giving up. Told him I'd do whatever it takes to help him out, and put up with anything as long as he's happy. Then the bombshell. He said he wouldn't' want to start a new troop, but go to another troop that friends from the home school group are in. I told him he would need to pay more of his share, because we couldn't afford it. Good news is that the troop IS Scout run. Bad news is that they do a lot of expensive trips.


Edited by Eagle94-A1, 08 May 2016 - 07:22 PM.

  • 0

"Train 'em. Trust 'em. LET THEM LEAD!" William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


IPB Skin By Virteq