Stosh

LeCastor, Well, if the boys don't have BSA pants, what makes one think they have BSA shorts? Kinda like, well, with no shorts and no shirt, what then identifies the boy as a scout? Oh, he wears his $5 camp t-shirt. Nice uniform, how many camps does BSA have? As far as watering things down, we see it happening in most of what BSA does. What was once a bastion of boyhood activity dedicated to the outdoors, we now have a PC version marketed towards the modern boy. Well the outdoor activities don't interest the electronic couch gamer one bit and the watered down version of what was once camping and outdoors doesn't really fit with the boys into the outdoors stuff. So in fact by making a ton of compromises, no one ends up with what they want and if one is selling a product no one wants, it's kind of a waste of time. Boys want to play sports at the highest level of competition. They want to achieve beyond what others merely dabble in. The join gangs for the camaraderie. And what does BSA offer? a milk toast version of camping. No wonder everyone under 18 thinks it's dorky. 50 years ago you were a dork if you were NOT in scouts, now it's done a 180. So what's going on? If you remember the days you wore your scout uniform to school because you had a den meeting after school, then you know what I'm talking about. Today we can't get boys to even wear their uniforms to a meeting. So, LeCastor, you walking about watering down from the previous edition of the handbook or one from the 1950's? Stosh

That's because the uniform is no longer a field uniform, it's too fancy schmancy, blingy thingy to be taken out and actually worn in the woods. Scouting is outing, but not in uniform. Stosh

With that logic Torchwood, I guess I would prefer the boys to not wear the uniform at all. Of course there will be times when they will not be allowed full participation in the BSA program because of that, but not even the BSA adheres to it's own "methods". So then there's the ramifications of those half hearted gestures towards uniforming. If they just wear the shirt, do they use the scout salute or the civilian hand over heart? What if they are just wearing a BSA hat and BSA pants and no shirt, do they scout or civilian salute? What about if they wear BSA belt and socks but bluejeans and tshirt? Once one deviates from the "promote the wearing of the correct complete uniform on all suitable occasions," then one has nothing more than a free-for all method of whatever wild hair is appropriate today kinda of a justification agenda on uniforming. So A scout is Thrifty, he buys a belt off of E-Bay and now he has his scout uniform. Works for me. Stosh Stosh

And then there's the troop that sets as it's policy of blue jeans and red web belts with the BSA buckle. One can't deny that they don't all looked uniform, but I would venture to say not BSA uniformed. It leaves a lot of grey area in the fuzzy logic area. GUIDE to Safe Scouting is looked at not a a guide, but some sort of legal document, but the prescribed inspection sheet is... well just an advisory suggestion when it comes to how to dress as a scout. It's kinda interesting how everyone justifies their agendas. Stosh

Duck Wars! Stosh

Just enough that sunburning is a problem. Stosh

TAHAWK, There's always a disconnect between what we think is the leader and who really is the leader. Leadership is not something that is taught very well in today's society. We do well with management styles, but that's not leadership. We thus have to torque authority into the management dynamic to make it work and thus we see the problems we do in the troops. We don't do well with group dynamics either and this is the basis for the patrol method. How does a small group members interact with each other is not something that is taught, just assumed it would happen over time. Well, once one starts mixing and matching and changing and moving around and, and, and.... there's not much continuity being built. Take any 8 boys, and I mean any combination one wants. This is why I find it very easy to let the boys make that decision because it has really no impact on the process that will develop. If the boys change a bit down the road here and there is is usually not a major upset. But a forced entry of a new person, i.e. a new scout moving up out of the NSP, without the group's approval is an outside disruption that may never get resolved until the "intruder" is moved elsewhere. Ad hoc patrol at a camporee? Two different groups struggling to figure out what the other's are capable of and willing to do, while at the same time do a competition. Very frustrating to say the least. Do this often enough and the groups will adapt to chaos rather than teamwork and continuity. If each person is properly trained in their functionality within the group, the group will quickly figure out their own style of leadership. This is why I like GBB's material, everyone in the patrol has a "job". Some of the modern "leadership" training programs are more generic and are designed to be more of a management tool than a leadership style development. They also train to being PL, APL, SPL, ASPL roles. The personalities of the boys is irrelevant. I have had some dynamic, go-getter leaders that are very organized and effective, and yet I have also had some quiet, soft-spoken boys that do an excellent job of drawing out some of the more quiet boys in their patrol to do some great things. Once the boys are formed into their patrol, trained in their area of focus, then the leadership development begins. How do they take their job responsibility and translate that through their personality into taking care of business for the patrol. To me there are specific things a leader does within the framework of the patrol. 1) Patrol Leader - is not really the "leader" in a sense we have come to define it, but I see it more as a Coordinator of Leaders. His job is to bring out the leadership of each member of the group as their leadership dictates. The GrubMaster is working on getting lunch ready and it appears he might be struggling. The PL, in a servant leadership position, steps forward and says, "What can I do to help?" The GrubMaster is in control of the situation and states his most immediate need to the PL who rolls up his sleeves and gets to helping. So when the next election rolls around, who's the GrubMaster going to vote for for PL? Duh! 2) Assistant Patrol Leader - This is not the guy that sits around waiting for the PL to be absent. He is the PL's right-hand man! If he isn't right there with the PL, constantly asking, "What can I do to help?" he is not worth anything to the patrol. So the PL says, "I'm working with the QM right now, run over and check with the GrubMaster, to see if he needs some help." That kind of tag-team leadership is vital to a good patrol. 3) QuarterMaster - This patrol member's #1 priority is to make sure everyone has the correct equipment at the correct time. He works with the GrubMaster to make sure all the Dutch ovens, utensils, stoves, flies, etc. are all where they need to be and up and running so the GM can work his magic with the menu and not worry about whether or not there's fuel in the stove. The QM is in charge of setting up, maintaining, and tearing down camp. The first thing the PL/APL team does when they hit camp is work with the QM to make sure they set up camp according to his directives. He also keeps track of the functionality of all equipment and puts in periodic requisitions to the troop committee for needed replacement patrol equipment. 4) ActivityMaster - This is the annual calendar thinker in the group. What activities are coming up that sound like fun. What's it going to take to get the boys there. Is there equipment needed so I need to tell the QM to be prepared. Float it by the PL to see what he things about it. Lock it into the calendar and make sure everything is communicated plenty ahead to no one get's left out. 5) Scribe - This is the paperwork/finance guy. He keeps track of what's going on in the head of the ActivityMaster and makes sure funds are there if there are any financial costs associated with it, then takes care of. He works with the QM to make sure money is available for the equipment, he works with the GrubMaster to make sure money is collected for the cost of food. He works with the Activity Master to make sure any registrations and travel expenses are covered. His records should indicate how many are going and pass that information back to the QM, GM and PL so they know what they are dealing with for the activity. 6) etc. The list goes on through all 8 members picking up some kind of leadership opportunity. So from the brief outline above, "who's running the show?" The dictatorial, top-down management style is so inadequate for the patrol method is it kinda remarkable it is still around and being taught. It puts way too much emphasis on just one person's performance and if one realizes that 1 boy can do only so much, that means that 8 boys can do 8 times as much if given the opportunity to do so. It's also the basis for peer-leadership teamwork. Everyone at one time or another is "the leader". They function in their Position of Responsibility for the welfare of their patrol. When they are not doing their leading (by taking care of their boys), they are leading with servant leadership by asking, "What can I do to help?" This balance of leadership among patrol members is what teamwork is all about. So what happens when everything is running smoothly and the SPL comes and dictates a management decree into the mix? Yes, you all decided to go to Philmont this year, but you can't because you need to be with the NSP at summer camp. Yep, all leadership bets are off and the dynamics and espirit-de-corps is disrupted. And then the adults can't figure out why the boys are hanging around to get their Eagles and then disappearing. I have no doubt in my mind why, I see it all the time. Instead, the SPL needs to be coming and doing his leadership in the correct format. He comes to the older well-established patrol and asks the ActivityMaster where the boys will be doing week-long camp this year. They say "Camp A". Then he asks the NSP PL where they will be doing week-long camp this year and he says, "Camp B". No problem, now he goes back to his troop officers and devises a plan that meets the needs of his patrols. Hey, QM the two patrols are heading to two different camps on the same week. Devise a plan for the distribution of equipment, etc. Instead, what I hear from the adults is: "That's too much work to split the troop into two different groups so half the boys are going to be disappointed this summer. The new boys can't handle Camp A so everyone will be going to Camp B which means the older boys will get the chance to do the same summer camp they have been at for the past 6 years" That, my friend, is adult led. They have the authority and everyone else in the troop answers to them so everything I have said in this post is pretty much a moot point, and now you know why the older boys quit and the younger boys don't listen and the adults are frustrated they get little or no cooperation out of the boys. From the boys' perspective, it's just a lot easier to sit around and wait to be told by an adult to do something than it is to try and lead and be corrected later on down the road. Adults trumping the efforts of the boys and then telling the SPL to go tell the PL how it's going to work is not boy-led. Stosh

I wear hats all the time, but when in scout uniform it's either the campaign hat or the expedition hat. Hate the baseball caps, totally worthless in the outdoors. Stosh

One must also remember that while rank and responsibility don't imply the same thing, the level of authority also needs to be considered. It would appear that from Atomic's initial concern that it wasn't his rank was being questioned. That word has double meaning. I don't think he was referring to rank in the advancement sense because a PL can be of any rank advancement as well as the ASPL. I think he was referring to the ranking of authority given to complete his responsibility. This dynamic is what is being addressed here. While in the role of ASPL, this boy does not carry over that level of authority in the patrol so as to trump the authority of the PL as he seems to think. In a servant leadership style of patrol method structure, the PL's rank/authority is foremost. He is the one delivering the program to the members of his patrol. He is the customer contact person. The SPL/ASPL team are his immediate support personnel if he should have need of their expertise. They are senior in knowledge, not in rank/authority. IF, and it's a big IF, the SPL and ASPL understand this appropriately they would understand that the could never be a part of a functioning patrol because they would need to be excused frequently to assist other PL's in the troop, leaving the patrol shorthanded. In order to service the patrols, the QM, Scribe and other troop officers would need to excuse themselves from patrol membership as well so as to free them up to be of assistance with any patrol having difficulty. In the PLC, the SPL becomes the coordinator of information flowing from the PL's. He facilitates the cooperation between patrols, but has no authority to dictate any decisions on the PL's. He can invite and offer up opportunities for PL's to consider but if "his word rules", or his authority overrides the PL, the the PL is stripped of his authority and, I might add, his responsibility as well. If the SPL steps in and dictates, then the PL does not need to follow through because now the SPL is running that patrol and the PL is basically at that point in name only. My boys are all trained whenever an adult or troop officer does this to answer, "With all due respect, it is my job to run this patrol, thank you for your suggestion, I'll take it under advisement." And then he can if he wishes, totally ignore it. It might sound a bit harsh, but it turns the troop officers and rogue ASM's into servant leaders rather quickly. Stosh

There's nothing wrong with a tax-exempt organization running a business. It's not the activity one does, it's the way the organization is structured with the government that makes it a tax-exempt organization. In our case we are chartered by a church, so we can run any kind of fundraiser as many times as we wish because a church can do that. If our boys want to do a car wash every Sunday morning in the church parking lot after church, so be it, not a problem and not a business because the church is structured as a not for-profit business for tax purposes. If a unit is using it's own tax-exempt structure and EIN number, they fall into the rules pertaining to a not for-profit business for tax purposes as well. It all boils down to the combination of EIN and tax-exemption status the unit holds. Stosh

This must be why one of our members who happens to be our city's tax lawyer told our group to keep the amount of funds in the bank low because of our tax-exempt status. One always hears dialog both ways on these kinds of issues, and I just like to err on the side that will result in the least amount of damage. Stosh

Sorry, Fred, but I kinda disagree with not being able to shop around and find a troop that best suits the new scout right away instead of having to wait and find out that it's not what they want/need. By then they are disillusioned in the program and simply quit assuming that all troops operate the same way. Why would they not think this, they have had no experience in knowing otherwise. Blind loyalty to the CO's troop isn't all that beneficial to the boys unless one simply believes that one-size-fits-all. And if it doesn't fit, quit. Yes, I run a boy-led program and when my boys promote the troop, they always emphasize that if you join, you are expected to roll up your sleeves and work along with the rest of the boys. This is not a good fit for a boy that wants to be catered to by adults and have his Eagle handed to him after 6-7 years down the road. I know that my troop won't work for everyone, why would I expect everyone to want to join? Stosh

Welcome, Atomictissue! Excellent thread, it points to a problem common to a lot of troops. First of all, I concur that the ASPL does not belong in a patrol. Sentinel has it correct that this ASPL needs to learn what Servant Leadership is all about. Obviously this scout also needs to review his Scout Law (Courteous, kind, helpful, etc.) and make sure he gets at least a basic understanding of what any leadership is all about. Servant leadership states that the ASPL is supposed to be assisting the PL's be successful. Obviously he missed that lesson. Solution: First of all cut him loose from the patrol, and deal with the SPL whenever necessary. If the SPL is not available then talk with the ASPL. The ASPL in my book should be the PL of the non-patrol member leadership, i.e. troop QM, Scribe, Chap Aide, etc. When one sets up the organizational structure of a troop incorrectly, these kinds of problem will result. By the way, in my troop the highest ranking officer is the PL! Everyone else assists him in helping him become successful with his patrol. If there be anyone "above" him, then the PL might as well forget leading anything, he will be undermined every step of the way. When this happens everyone sits around scratching their heads wondering what went wrong. It would seem that from your original comments, you have been set up to fail by whatever system your troop is operating under. Visit directly with your SM and explain that unless you have the authority to go along with the responsibility of being a PL, that you will need to step down and have someone else put up with the hassle. One can fulfill rank advancement POR a lot better in a position that is not designed to fail. Even Den Chief is better than what you have now and I have found some of my best leaders start out as Den Chiefs and from the comments from those boys, a lot more rewarding experience. Stosh

I think a lot of the problem arises in the territorialism of a lot of CO's. They have a Cub program that flows into Boy Scouts. Well and good except not every boys wants what their troop has to offer. So what does he do? He goes shopping. GASP! Little traitor!!! Well, any boy can go to any troop they wish. End of discussion. I run a boy-led program and not all boys want that. They want adults to provide a program because that's what they think they've paid for, like a sports team or YMCA membership, etc. I have one of my charter boys announce to me his mom is moving and he's going to have to quit the troop. Well, my job is to find him another troop in the area he is moving to. ("Take Care of Your Boys!") I feel bad he's moving, but I'd feel worse if he quit scouting. When we were first starting out, another nearby troop offered to have our troop come with them to summer camp so they would have larger numbers to associate with. The camp was the council camp, but my boys decided on another program that better met their needs and politely declined their generosity. I have seen troops compete for new Cubs and take on 20 new boys only to lose all but one or two. Instead of helping the boys find a troop that best suits them, they only kept score. Well the 18-19 boys that weren't satisfied all just quit scouts. It was a real bummer to see that happening year after year. Too often the process is seen as a competition, not an evaluation process to see that each boy gets the best opportunity for scouting. Stosh

I just thought that if the boy wasn't into camping, that maybe he wouldn't be happy with ANY troop leadership because they all kinda push it as the core of the program. Stosh

Gee, a lot of people have Bibles they don't read, too. Stosh

Just an off the cuff kinda rhetorical non-judgmental question. What is the draw to Scouting if one really doesn't like the outdoors? I joined scouts because of that. Joined Civil Air Patrol because I like to fly, etc. I really don't understand what would draw someone to scouts if it wasn't for the outdoor program. Stosh

I am led to believe that Eagle94's experience is more common than Seattle's. I think Eagle's position of being with the Pack then UC might appear at first to be an end-around and he was cut off at the pass. No matter how positive and productive the intention might have been, politics seems to always win out in the end. I do think it works better the other way around if one can manage it. I was ASM of a troop that went back to the Pack and took on WDL and brought the boys through the transition. Obviously as an ASM I did have a bit of street cred whereas a Pack leader might not get that kind of traction in the troop. I would think that any WDL that made overtures to a troop would at least make a token gesture to the potential new boys. Even that doesn't always wash. Knowing what I know about the competition between troops and being a new troop in a new area, I have to beat the bushes to even be noticed, and it does pay off. On the other hand, I have also invited Web II boys to events and had their leadership been so obnoxious that I preferred they go to a different troop with their boys. Some of the boys did come anyway but the majority of the WD went with the WDL to a troop were the SM and WDL were best buddies. Welcome to the world of BSA Politics. Stosh

This issue leaves a lot of open ended questions. Does the money belong to the troop or the CO and by what authority does the troop have to give away the CO's money. If the organization is touting itself as non-profit, what's it doing raking in a profit every year? If the funds are accumulating more than needed, quit the fundraising. A bank account does the program no good unless spent on maintaining and improving the program. The money was a designated gift and assumed that when the donation was made it would be used in accordance to the wishes of the donor. "Hi, I'm Johnny and I'm selling popcorn so I can go to camp next summer." and then spend the popcorn money on adult training at Philmont? or gives it away to another program? That constitutes fraud. If an organization has an EIN with tens of thousands of dollars in the bank, it will show up on the radar that taxes haven't been paid under that EIN and a check for tax-exempt status doesn't show on the system.... That should show up on IRS radar. Saving up a bit for a rainy day doesn't mean one has to be prepared for a hurricane of the century. Stosh

The old tri-colors used to have a huge pin on the back. If they have gone to the posts with the pinch things, then I will guarantee they will fall off on a regular basis. Really a bad choice to move to that. See if you can find an old safety pin backed tri-color off of E-bay. Barring that, cut the erasers off of old wooden pencils and fasten with them, they hold better than the pinch things. Stosh

Money in the bank is of no use to the boys. Stosh

I used to be part of a troop with a SM exactly like LanceEagle describes. The operative phrase is USED TO BE. One can only put up with just so much of this shenanigans before one decides anything is better than what one has. This SM (WB, Silver Beaver, etc.) has since been removed from Scouting. Too late for me, but just fine for the troop. Stosh

With 3 feeder packs in the area, we do not do any Open Houses. It was suggested to the boys to request an invite to attend on of their den meetings and do a demo/presentation kinda thingy. The boys generally like doing it because it allows them a chance to plan what they want to do and they have skin in the game and there is no Scouts milling about not doing anything, they all tend to be involved. With multiple patrols we could cover multiple dens if they happened to have a den meeting on the same night. Then when we invite them to our winter cabin camping, we do invite the Webelos boys from all the packs and just add water to the soup to adjust if a large group shows up. That makes two contacts with the Web II boys before they decide what troop they wish to join. When the boys show up at Blue Gold with neckers/books for the cross over, generally the SPL/PL's know the boys by name and have started some kind of discussion with them. The boys get a lesson if they wish on how to "Schmooze the Room," as well. Stosh