fred8033

Understood. A personal context is meaningful. The question was about whether someone could be personally liable if the insurance was not properly in place. The DE at the time was probably in his young 20s. Probably first job. Minimal pay. Not an excuse. Just that he was not in a controlling situation. I'd hope he would have prevented the abuse. But as an inexperienced, minimal pay, passing on info he was given, I can't see a court order reaching into the company and having him pay for your victimization. Those held personally liable and asked to pay are more in the Purdue situation (owners, top level executives). I'd expect the DE's boss is in his retirement home and the scout exec from that time is at best really old. No excuses. The question was about whether anyone will be personally held liable. I can't anyone from 40 years ago would be held liable because they were too young or they are in their late years at best.

BSA? National is bankrupt. There is no money there. It's moot. People? The former DEs that were making a small wage at the time? Probably not. They were simply the middle-man for the message they were being given. Negligent medium-level professionals who repeated it in the 1970s / 1980s / 1990s? You need to pull them out of the retirement homes to be sued. The executive professionals who planned / signed the insurance contracts? They need to be dug up to be sued. Local councils? Individually they just don't have the cash to cover the liabilities without insurance. Many would argue the scouting program was happening in the CO's presence; in their facilities; under CO selected leadership. Plus, most LCs could argue they were hood-winked by the insurance problems too. IMHO ... there is no recovery path. FYI ... I forget the thread. A thread said that there are 40,000 to 100,000 COs that could be sued as part of this. I wish I could remember the context. Wow.

When I read this, I think about a single insurance company paying out twice for the same incident. I can't see an insurance company paying out a portion for a BSA claim. Then, later paying a separate portion for a LC claim. And, a separate portion for a CO claim. ... My understanding ... and this is what I'd like to understand ... before the insurance company pays anything to cover a list of incidents, that payment would have to cover the incident as a whole; not just the portion owed by one party. Are we in a multi-billion dollar game of chicken right now? No one can afford never reaching an agreement. Not BSA. Not the LCs. Not the COs. Not the victims. Not the victim's lawyers. As sick as it sounds, the only parties that may do better if an agreement can't be reached seems to be BSA and the insurance companies. BSA because it could go thru a BSA-only bankruptcy. Insurance companies because they can push out, delay and fight liability.

Could suits also face a LC challenge to negligence? If an LC can show relatively few cases and the LC followed procedure to roll them up, the LC could claim it was following trained procedure, doing more than other organizations and was blind to the BSA records showing larger number of incidents? ... I'm not sure it would work, but the negligence tier changes. In some ways, this seems right as it moves general huge level negligence into looking at specific incidents. That seems to be a good thing; extremely painful, but good. I should clarify "good". By good, I mean that I absolutely cringe thinking of someone effectively getting $5,000 to $20,000 for the trauma of CSA. Dealing with the specifics seems to get people their day in court. I doubt it gets more money, but moves away from the hidden abstract and an insulting amount of money.

Great answer. Wrong thread. Perhaps aims/goals/benefits need to be split between where leaders actively invest and where the scouts passively benefit. * Actively invest in camping, outdoors, etc * Passively benefit from character building, leadership, etc. I swear camping overnight in a torrential down pour goes a long way to a new scout building character and far more than almost all scout leaders.

Yet another potential tangent. For revisiting purpose, Let's de-escalate leadership. It's the natural outcome we can brag about. We should invest on fellowship. Youth spending time with youth. Youth working with youth. Leadership will be a natural outcome. Too often the program is damaged by badly teaching leadership. Reviewing this thead. Clearly reflects I need to get back to work.

Absolutely. My youngest son has that on the back of his sash too. I'm not a fan of the metal pin devices to count extra, but it's one way. I'd like to see bragging rights recognition like that. Heck, if for every 25 nights, my oldest could have earned it 10 times before he aged out. My youngest 5 times. ... me ... I've lost count.

Your other points are good. I want to emphasize #1. Originally, Baden-Powell created scouting during urbanization and the loss of scout-craft. Using the military like structure that alienates many. Using archaic skills (heresy, but often viewed this way) that many now just don't care about. I really question "clarity of mission". As a parent, I scream for ways to get my kids outside and getting experiences. IMHO, this aligns with the society valuing "bucket lists"; another version of bragging rights. What items would you like to be able to say you've done? 50 mile bike ride? Swimming? Canoeing? Skiing. Snow camping. Rockies? Zip lines. Horses. etc, etc, etc. Laser tag. Dodge ball. Paint ball. (again heresy). Everyone wants bragging rights. Things to be proud of. ... That's the whole purpose of the merit badge sash. Bragging rights. ... Sadly, today the MB sash is "Look at what I wasted my time doing." ... Remember how I filled out that MB workbook. Remember how we sat in that classroom on Monday nights or that Saturday morning. Look I've got all four citizen badges. I know others might not like it, but the back of a few of my son's sash'es have really cool things they have done. High adventure base patches. National parks / monuments. IMHO, the back of their sash is more about bragging rights than the front. The back tells their scouting story. I really wish the front of the MB sash was for real bragging rights too. How about a stripe (or tent) for every 20 nights of camping. How about another wheel for every 50 miles of biking. Another pear of shoes patch for every 25 miles of hiking. etc, etc, etc. I wish scouting was a great bucket list activity.

Sad thought is the debt may save SBR during bankruptcy. Similar for Philmont with the question of whether the Philmont debt will be challenged. A similar thing may save BSA's IP. BSA's IP value is reduced by BSA's congressional charter that says BSA is a perpetual corporation. BSA can sell assets; such as it's IP. BUT, theoretically a future president (say an Eagle Scout) could restart / reinvigorate BSA. How much would you spend on BSA's IP if you knew that BSA could be resurrected and compete against you? BSA's congressional charter doesn't mean much, but it does mean BSA is perpetual and continues to exist ... even if liquidated. http://www.usscouts.org/aboutbsa/bsacharter.asp That would take an act of Congress to change.

Not a simple question. Scouting will survive. It has a strong legacy and many desire the program to continue. ... I look at today's youth. Couch bound with internet and video games. We need an outdoor program emphasizing fellowship and adventure. Will BSA survive? I think so. It won't be as rich for decades, but it will. In reality, it doesn't really need much to continue. BSA is it's intellectual property and vision. Perhaps the question is whether it will keep Philmont, Sea Base, Northern Tier and the Summit.

@T2Eagle is right. Id add on further. Coordinate with your DE or your a council staff. I'm sure there is a plan of communication even if the plan is that they have nothing yet to say this month. It is okay to push back on the DE. If you are getting curious unit leaders, let the DE know that you need something. In our district, it's the DE's job or even above him. I've yet to the RT commissioner or other volunteers speak to it. They are just not speaking from a point of knowledge. About as far as I'd share without good coordination is letting scouters know to look at articles on Bryan on scouting or other guided sources. Beyond that, I'd focus on the next district camporee or membership drive or MB weekend or ...

Great comments. I've been in multiple troops. Some of the worst scouting experiences we've had are in highly structured troops that often bragged about boy-led. Reality is it was boy-led and adult nagged. I think @InquisitiveScouter is exactly right. Scout's objectives may not be your objectives. Football and cards are great activities as they give the scouts a chance to socialize and connect. That is one of the most important aspects of scouting. Scouting is social. A successful scout builds life-long friendships. The only caveat I'll give is that not all scouts are the same. I'd encourage troops to find or choose at least one activity; maybe more. Maybe it's a hike to the highest point. Maybe it's a swim or exploring or ... something. If patrols or individual scouts don't want to participate, fine. BUT, try to give them the opportunity. There will always be some scouts that are not fully ready to socialize without guided activity. There will always be some scouts who know their parents are waiting at home for the scout to tell them what they did that was meaningful over the weekend. Oh, we hiked the XXXX up to XXXX and saw XXXXX. Or we earned XXXXX. Or we visited XXXXX. If the scouts choose the activity, you'll often see the scouts apply constructive cajoling to encourage participation. Hopefully, constructive pressure. ... BUT, ya know. If the scouts want their free time to de-compress and relax, fine.

I've seen several of our council level recruiting events. They bring in tens of scouts. A hugely successful event brings in a hundred. Usually the new scouts that were already going to join. They attend because they are aware of the event by having brothers or sisters or neighbors already in cub scouts.

I think we going back and forth over nothing. DEs help unit volunteer scouters and those unit volunteers do almost all the work. Council professionals help at the more indirect level of advertising, assembling materials, mapping out which areas are served, etc. The DE may help start a unit with a few meetings such as visiting the principal or a pastor; holding a recruiting night, etc. Beyond that, the local scouting is all unit based volunteers with the DE being the face of the council. Large councils tend to have more resources to staff the indirect level and the location of their offices is just not that important.

Yeah, I don't believe it. Units recruit. District execs start new units and support unit recruiting. Councils fund raise, plan and advertise summer camps, etc. Councils are extremely valuable, but the concepts of the past need to be rethought and resized.

Administratively, districts could provide the face-time; as they do now. Beyond that, the key face time is in the unit.

Sad. I can understand, but sad. Our council has at least three or four camps near. At least two less than an hour from downtown. Perhaps it's my view that the traditional scouting "office" building is not needed anymore. Yeah. Perhaps it's not the perfect answer. Perhaps an concept adjustment is needed. The issue is the cost of the council office properties is huge compared to the number of scouts served. I'm betting in my council, it's about $40 per scout given the pre-pandemic number of scouts ... not including staff.

I'd hope. GAAP is generally accepted. I've seen some. Some are posted thru non-profit sites. Per BSA: https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/financeimpact/pdf/local_council_accounting_manual_2014.pdf "Local councils are required to prepare and present financial statements in conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), which are established and promulgated by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). " I believe the statements are audited too by outside accounting agencies.

My personal opinion. The time of small or medium sized councils is past. Youth scouting is face-to-face. Council scouting is administrative and benefits from efficiencies of size. Times have drastically changed. Physical infrastructure has always costed money. Now, technical infrastructure requires skill and cost but gets drastically cheaper as it scales out. Plus, scouters don't need to drive into the council office for almost anything anymore. Recharter online. Buy advancements online. Get trained online. Attend RT virtually. Except for massive states where it is a 10 hour drive edge-to-edge, I see little reason to have more than one council a state. One thing that might help is to leverage the camps for scouter training for scouters that are far-away from the local council. I'm always confused why scout offices are not located at the camps. I've assumed it's from the days of driving in; hitting the scout shop and needing a physical presence to be seen by the donors.

I agree. It's a common and a reasonable answer. Another version is periodic furloughs. Work several weeks. Take an unpaid week. It's a chance to provide some income; help a company ride out hard times; preseve skills/knowledge; provide the potential of a continued career after business resumes. This stuff ain't easy. Every executive / manager / lead I've know takes this stuff really hard. I remember my dad as a manager drive home with tears because he had to lay off best friends and put others in hard situations. I remember a senior direct and myself in an elevator on the day of major layoffs and we were both really shaken. This stuff ain't easy.

Airplane companies and airlines have their own mandatory reporting for incidents; effectively analogous to BSA mandatory reporting of incidents. In that case, I'd look for FAA to report the numbers. https://www.faa.gov/data_research/ I'd really like to see the same independent numerical reporting for crimes including CSA. This is one possible place to put the data. I'm 100% sure there are others. https://bjs.ojp.gov/data

This is the one place where I differ. I'm okay saying BSA must report out. I just don't think any organization does well reporting ugly statistics on itself. Like any organization, BSA wants to look good. Specifics get explained away or defined away or plain old lost. It's just too tempting. With mandatory reporting laws, society has a great opportunity to independently roll-up incident numbers and investigate problem areas. The question is who should own those numbers? FBI. GAO. HHS. I really think it's a bad idea to trust numbers from any organization when those numbers would make the organization look bad.

Yep. Agreed, not an exoneration. Paper registration may or may not make it into the office for months. Often only at recharter. Often got held up for multiple reasons. Signatures. Money. BSA depended on millions (literally millions) of volunteer helpers. Unit paperwork helpers were usually registered, never their full-time job. Our unit membership person probably had one week a year where it was six hours work. Then probably an hour a month after that. Usually, just another parent in the pack / troop. Only in the last two years did our school require volunteers to be registered and background checked before they started helping / interacting with students. It is the same with scouts. When I look at our local sports clubs, they have yet to make that transition. I'm not defending BSA or attacking it. A paperwork system where you may or may not get the paperwork in a timely way with manual checks and names that shift is problematic. I just think that was a sign of the times though. Not an exoneration at all though.

Be patient with my statement. I am one that viewed the IVF files as doing something where organizations didn't. And in many ways, I still believe that. ... I won't go into the thought process now. With that said, the re-entrant issue I can understand. Experienced scouters have always seen the challenges getting rosters and training records right. We would have people missing from the roster for years or people still on the roster that had been gone. I remember realizing registrars often had a district file with post-it-notes with apps that were missing signatures or did not have money or recently training certificate.... They were waiting for the DE or a unit volunteer to come in and help address the issue.. Other times, an in-between person (volunteer or professional) would forget to drop off the app. It's only in the last decade where the roster is "mostly" current. AND, only this decade where it's emphasized that all the paperwork needs to be processed before you volunteer. This seems to follow a larger trend. Our local schools are doing that too. In 2004, I helped at my kid's elementary school. No app. No ID. Nothing. Just showed up. Now, you can't help at school or chaperone or ... without first comleting the background check. So, ... I can fully see how the paper systems were really hard to track volunteers when they slightly changed their name or moved between states.