fred8033

I was part of CA class action in the 1990s where BCBS of CA was negotiating discounts with medical providers ... BUT the patient bill was based on the unmarked down portion. BCBS was claiming they covered theirs without paying their fair share. The issue was if the original bill was $10,000 and BCBS/patient had a 50%/50% share ... then BCBS would negotiate drastically down on the whole bill but the patient would still owe the full $5000. BCBS could end up owing nothing. ... Down right ugly fraud.

Is this normal? Early in the case, fees documents were filed 1 to 2 months after the month. Now, it's almost five full months later. That means there is a huge backlog of unbilled fees pending. That sounds dangerous.

Near retirement? Or just vested? Even if just a little amount, I'd expect anyone with 10+ years has an amount vested that would be protected by the PBGC.

It would be interesting to understand further. BSA and LCs are all independent companies in effectively a franchise like model. (yet another item that could be argued) ... BSA works like a benefit service provider for LCs ... I can't find any PBGC specifics on this, but what I do read makes me think each LC could be liable for the unfunded part for their employees. I could not envision LCs becoming liable for the pensions of BSA national employees including BSA national employees functioning as registrars and scout shop employees. ... but then again, this ain't simple stuff.

It was. ... I still don't understand, but that's okay.

You have the correct answer. ... The key then is to keep the organization in a healthy state. i.e. still registered and running. I always wondered if the "Parent Booster" approach might be best. ... In another words, all parents of scouts should be members of the parents booster club. Put their name down as boosters. ... The tangent is if they don't want to be part of the parent boosters, then perhaps they should find another scout unit for their scout. ... Not trying to be mean ... just trying to get all parents with a piece of the ownership to get it right ... boosters than run election to select the next CC and board members. That club if structured right should provide liability protection and shield the individuals.

We are really extending a tangent. ... but ... Would LCs be liable for pension? If McDonalds went chapter 7 and had under funded corporate pensions, I don't think the mom&pop individual franchise stores would share the corporate pension debt. Similar for BSA &LCs. ... BUT ... that's a whole massive ugly wart of a debate we've had before. The legal separation between BSA & LCs.

Nice to see. Often these situations are where scouts can shine. Strong expertise. Special unique experiences.

I read the article. I'm not fully understanding the second part as the UMC seems to be doing slightly more than providing space and storage.

Argument is beating a dead horse argument that has been done over and over. First-class-first-year is about planning. Troop planning / structure should support an active involved scout being able to get to first class in first year. It doesn't mean the scouts have to get there. It's a reflection that the troop program should be planned to enable a driven motivated scout to achieve it.

Good reflection that society changed. Twenty years ago, meetings were a way for friends to see friends and socialize. Now, most do that on-line. Kids won't leverage forced structures to socialize anymore. ... BUT, they still want adventures. ... BSA would be much more attractive if we focus more and more on the "outing".

@ThenNow has fairly represented the situation over time. ... His above posts are correct and reasonable. Your statement "everyone gets nothing" has truth too; as the judge's wish that BSA continues reflects other unspoken reasons. IMHO ... To avoid a far uglier, larger and more costly liquidation case. To avoid re-starting bankruptcy ... after spending 150+ million ... after 29 months. To avoid opening new huge questions that chapter 11 bankruptcy did not address. To get victims as much money as possible. There is no guarantee a liquidation would mean more money to victims. To get victims money earlier. Chapter 11 approval puts money into a trust fairly soon. Chapter 7 would be an unknown future date. To avoid creating many more court cases. Liquidation would be a BSA only liquidation; not a settlement with all involved parties. To avoid asking if BSA can even cease to exist. BSA is not a normal non-profit. BSA was created by law; passed by congress; signed by the president. Though usually an honorific, the law has implications that creates a real mess. ... It's like asking if the federal reserve can cease to exist. It would probably take an act of congress to take BSA out of existence. ... Would "liquidation" just put BSA into limbo until a future president re-established BSA, say 10 years from now? ... Starting fresh with no YP oversight from this bankruptcy agreement? Short and specific ... Index ... Full document containing 30901 To avoid a huge number of new questions. ... BSA national indebted properties (Philmont, The Summit) and their mortgages ... different debt priorities ... the separation of BSA and LCs ... funding pensions ... etc, etc, etc. There is truth that liquidation could mean everyone gets nothing.

Stop here first ...

This case is hugely about money. Always has been. Other factors such as YP improvements started years ago before the bankruptcy and the bankruptcy settlement additional YP expectations are not really that controversial. The bankruptcy questions now are wholly about money. How much is needed? What is fair? How can you pay money to SOL time-barred victims while paying less to victims with open, active claims? How much should each party pay / receive. How to control manage the legal process spend rate?

That was a running joke where I worked years ago. Work that would never get done had a due-date of April 1st without a year. Everyone knew the work would never get done. It was listed that way so people would not try to add the work yet again ... or they could work to get the priority changed.

Dumb questions ... #1 Payments to the trust fund ... Perhaps I missed something. To get out of bankruptcy, BSA must put money into a bankruptcy related trust fund. Once out of bankruptcy (aka for the next five years), I did not think there were further payments into a bankruptcy related trust fund. Is that true? Would the new post-bankruptcy BSA still have debt to be paid to a bankruptcy related trust fund? #2 proceedings duration ... give BSA can show a viable business plan ... and given there is no dispute to that future business plan and ability to continue ... then how can the cost of the bankruptcy proceedings be the cause to fail emerging from chapter 11 ? It seems that the money that would go into the settlement trust would be (and has already been) the money to fund the bankruptcy proceedings. Obviously I'm not a lawyer. It just seems that the money that can pay past debts has already been identified. That money should go into the trust to close out the legal proceedings and pay debts. It is just perverted that the bankruptcy legal proceedings themselves would be the cause of a business to fail.

I wanted to jump on this statement, but grammatically thinking about it ... I'm ok. All sides could quickly address the issues, say three plus months. That's quick in this process. "Quickly" modifies "address those issues". ... When they start updating (July / August)? Not sure. How quick an update moves thru other hurdles? I wanted to jump on applying it to "get to a plan approval." ... There is no quick to reach a next decision. ... Negotiating doors are re-opened. ... Parties will want a better. A different deal. ... Many law firms looking to somehow re-coup their investments. Simply updating who represents who will take time. ... Add negotiating and agreeing on procedures to negotiate an update would take a month (July). ... Multiple parties posturing during multiple negotiation sessions. New vote? New hearings on updated plan? At least a month for judge to review / write a new decision in holiday season (Nov / Dec)? January plus. Six plus months at least if this pending decision is not some type of conclusion.

My sympathies. It is hard. I wish you the best. ... My only advice is don't let problems linger as such problems poison others experience and can just lead to more issues.

I've seen these too. My paranoia says ... is it an attempt to subvert the settlement? It would be interesting to see if these articles have a common root, as it smells like another manipulation of the legal process. On the flip side ... the BSA bankruptcy news has been quiet. It could be a simple effort to keep the story alive until the decision.

Agreed. Mission. Goals. Aims. Methods. ... Those words attempt to box scouting into a formalized structured algorithm. I'm not sure scouting always fits cleanly though a scouting is not any single objective. Rather, scouting has always been about getting youth together in an outdoor environment to stretch their comfort zone. Thru that environment, scouts learn and grow.

Calendar wise, yes. Timing wise so things happen well, no. There is a short window of 2 to 3 years when habits and the scouting experience is imprinted. Generalizations ... 16 & 17 years old ... lots of distractions ... girls, gas, jobs, school, graduation, applying for college ... for scouting, your son will have "habits" on how scouting works ... few scouts change habits during these years ... most can grow experiences or skill or leadership ... good time for adventure 13, 14 & 15 years old ... executing what you learned ... good time for scouts to show leadership in their troop ... learning to lead, stepping up 11 & 12 years old ... this is where those new to scouting are still forming habits. ... learning how the program works I've taken four sons through scouting until they turned 18. The years go quick. The timing is critical. If things derail, it's really hard to get them back on track before the magic time window is closed. I can't say any of my sons had an ideal scouting career through their years, but they all had adventures and grew character and learned skills. One of my son's friends had his connection to the troop implode when they were 13(??). Out of support, my son switched troops with his friend. The journey was very different. BUT, it was still a great journey. It's like high school football. You can always join in 7th grade or 9th grade or 11th grade, but it's harder to become a starter. The time window is short. Most do best by following a common pattern that starts in the earliest of years.

Sadly, these situations don't have an easy answer. Scouting is great when the magic mix of friendships, adventure and fulfilling the program comes together. When two of the three happens, it can be painful. My only comment ... Your son's scouting career is short. Help him find the positive. Perhaps it means you and your son sign up for special scouting adventures you both can find. It's not the perfect scouting idea, but he can be in the realm of scouting and have great experiences. EXAMPLE: Go to summer camp with a single camper program that many summer camps offer. Sometimes these can be great experiences. Look for other adventures. Perhaps it means protecting your scout from his own SM. That's sad, but it might be necessary. Perhaps it means letting your son solve his own problems with the SM. Perhaps if your son like the troop generally, maybe it will give him his best scouting experiences. I cringe at what you describe. If your son is already butting heads with the SM, it might grow worse. I'd hope your son would be looking up to the SM as an example. If that's not happening, I'd really want to change. I'm babbling because there is no clear easy answer. ... except it is okay to protect your son and help him find the right path.

Most COs would never know if there is a leader that is not registered as most COs never had that level of involvement. It was the rare exception when the CO knew the leaders in detail. ... Taking it further, until recently it was always a gray area if someone was a registered volunteer or just a parent or a leader who's registration never got completed. For this reason, I can hold the other unit leaders and the parents much more accountable than the CO. They saw the interaction. Someone should have spoke up.

COs ... I can't blame them much ... CO ownership was always more honorific than liability ownership ... all people involved in the paperwork knew that. BSA professionals. unit leaders. CO leaders. Except LDS, most unit leaders were not chosen by the CO except in honorific terms ... can you sign this form? It was more signed after-the fact and for awareness. .... Even twenty years ago, few believed the liability that the forms are now implying. ... COs thought they were doing a good deed for the community. Giving space. Supporting a good community program. ... Similar to opening their building for elections or a community meeting. Councils ... I don't blame them much either ... THIS IS MY VIEW. It might not be popular. ... From what I've seen, it was the standard of care for the time. If they removed the perpetrator and tried to track the person to keep them out of scouting, they did more than many organizations. I believe the circle of blame is ... #1 the perpetrator ... (less than #1) #2 the other adults in the unit (leaders, parents, etc) ... (less than #2) #3 local community (police, school, etc) ... police were often involved but could not pursue. schools were the experts with adults working with kids and where scouts recruited ...) .... #2a the experts ... CSA was really not well understood or managed or prevented or educated until last twenty years. I hate marking this has #4 of the outward radius from most blame as the real issue is CSA was not well handled until recently. I had #2a as #4 except it was the real cause. CSA was not well understood until last 20 years.

No humor, but I've had relatives that did similar. Older relatives that protected their garden with a BB gun or 22 from the kitchen. My natural reaction is to defend any person or group that is constantly beat-up / vilified / demonized by others. It does not mean I agree with them. I just hate society lifting itself up by trying to label another group or individual evil. Opposition is broader than NRA. Here are two examples. NAMI https://www.nami.org/Advocacy/Policy-Priorities/Responding-to-Crises/Extreme-Risk-Protection-Orders "NAMI supports Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) that focus on specific, current behaviors and evidence-based risk factors for violence. NAMI opposes any ERPO laws that target, single out, or discriminate against people with mental health conditions." "Most people with serious mental illness are never violent toward others and are more often victims of violence than perpetrators. Moreover, only 4% of violent acts in the U.S. are attributed to mental illness. Research tells us that other factors — such as a history of violence, misuse of alcohol or drugs, or prior convictions for violent misdemeanors — are greater predictors of violence." The Hill .... biased, but interesting points ... https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/civil-rights/319859-nra-the-mentally-ill-have-gun-rights-too/