Gone

BSA can't pull this off for a number of reasons. First, there are so few WRFA classes held right now. I live in a major metro area. We have one troop that teaches WFRA 1-2 times a year. There are a few other groups that do but finding their info and getting a spot is tough enough now, imagine if this was mandatory for all activities. They would have to offer ten-fold more classes in numerous locations and multiple times per year. BSA is barely equipped to offer IOLS more than once a year. Now add in cub leaders to this mix. If true this would go down the most poorly thought out idea from BSA in a long while.

Because it fits the viewpoint of those in control, so not in I&P. Now if someone had posted something about Scott Walker ice climbing McKinley for charity that'd be in I&P before you hit "post".

I wonder if they'll rename Mt. Kennedy in 2085 after his contribution to the office is forgotten.

I guess the golf courses were closed.

Good. I hope the district/council does something. That's not a situation they can let go.

During 2016 only, though. If you are Tenderfoot on January 1, 2016 you may continue to use the 2015 requirements for SC and FC until December 31, 2016. If you don't make FC by then you MUST use the 2016 requirements. Same goes for any rank. If go the entire 2016 without completing your "current" rank requirements under which you were grandfathered with the old requirements, you must use the 2016 requirements as of 1/1/17. At least that's how the BSA guide reads to me.

Total opposite experience. They are run by paid staff who do what they think those who they report to want. The ones I have interacted with see us (volunteers/members) as the sheep they lead.

Hopefully you reported the problem to the CO, no?

As we have seen, what the councils want is not what the membership wants.

@@desertrat77 We've got a few threads about districts, councils, national and their BSA operating model. The most recent one not in I&P is here and I posted my summation of what I think is wrong there. BSA wants to address change. They create STEM. They eliminate the most controversial portion of their membership policy. They tinker with courting urban youth. They open the program to women and girls. They start Venturing (from Explorers). BSA *seems* to embrace change -- albeit very misguided and poorly implemented many times. So why do they continue to hold on to a business operating model with councils and districts which many, many people know does not work? The dichotomy in thinking is staggering UNLESS you explain the reluctance to do so with the self-preservation argument of the paid BSA staff. Then you can clearly explain why they continue to feed the sacred cow.

You boiled down my point well. I hate to come off as a nay-sayer, but I have lived through this duplicated middle management for years and years. It is exactly that: a waste of money. No unit in my area needs district or council except for paperwork processing. Do that online and we would not even need them for that. We can get gear from Scoutstuff faster and without the drive to/from to pick it up. Before it got moved to I&P (where it died) we were talking about how to fix the district/council model since many do think it is broken and redundant in another thread. With many companies moving to "the cloud" and pushing business processes (think: paperwork and manual tasks that could be automated) to centralized, consolidated functions, BSA continues to maintain a business operating model that does not fit its mission, nor the modern times. They're all too willing to change the political climate within the organization, why not change their operating model? The reason, I think, is self-preservation of their JOBS and NOT what is best for the organization. If Gates was a REAL change agent (he's not, from a business perspective) he'd make the hard choice to re-organize BSA to a more efficient model and not continue the current model.

ROFL Calico, when has BSA EVER gotten a program change right? You can continue to throw those of us think council or districts are useless under the bus, but the evidence against them is pretty clear. They're useless and BSA, with their six figure leaders, *is* a group of money grubbing parasites. If they're not please offer evidence to the contrary.

....or a rock.

@ya lazima vumbi sorry you missed a pretty clear argument. Don't know how to make it any clearer for you. Communication methods and changes in the scouting program are not the same thing.