NeilLup

Hunt makes these very good points: "I will agree with those who say that a declining membership is not a valid reason to change core values of the organization. On the other hand, I would suggest that a strong membership and a long history are not reasons to avoid questioning policies on ethical grounds." I would suggest, however, that declining membership, other factors, and even passage of time are exceedingly valid reasons to assess carefully what the core values of an organization really are and what instead represents the interpretation and practice of core values at one time and place which may not necessarily be correct and appropriate at another time and place. Probably the best example I have heard relates to our promise to "do our duty to Country." During the time of Vietnam, there were those who made that promise and believed that they should join the military, fight and perhaps die for what the leaders of the country were espousing. There were others who made that same promise who believed that their obligation to our country and to American ideals required them to oppose the administrations and to oppose the war. Many members of those groups believed, sincerely, that they were doing their "duty to their country." And certainly there were those in both groups who had some insincerity (avoiding the dangers of war on one hand, avoiding the penalties of avoiding the draft on the other hand.) But for all of us at that time and place, it forced a reassessment and reevaluation of what our core values really were and of what our behavior and actions should be in light of those core values.

I don't think in this case that it's a matter of the squeaky wheel getting the grease. A better analogy might be that the party that buys 10,000 cars is much more likely to get cars designed the way that they want than is the party that buys one car.

I believe that the correct organizational structure to consider for the BSA is a franchise operation. The National Council grants a franchise (charter) to a local council with exclusive rights to administer Boy Scouting within a particular geographical area. That local council then recommends various local organizations (sponsors) to be granted franchises (charters) to administer the Scouting program. Those franchise holders can either agree to carry out the program the way that the franchisor directs, or they can choose not to accept the franchise. If they fail to carry it out, their franchise can be removed. The key point is that, unlike GSUSA, the franchise holders (sponsors) are independent, separate organizations. The unit is their organization. It does not belong to the National Council or the local council. The only clearly quantifiable authority that the National Council has is the ultimate authority to remove the franchise. Almost all other authority is "jawboning" authority. Not unlike McDonald's restaurants. However, within McDonald's restaurants, when a major franchise holder walks in and says "I own 200 restaurants and I think this should happen." Mickey D sits up and takes notice. If the franchise holders representing 50% of the restaurants think something should happen, then McD listens extremely hard. The same thing is the case within the BSA. The BSA wants to keep its major franchise holders happy and will do what it believes is necessary to keep them happy users of Scouting.

There may be a subset of dissent which is worth mentioning -- maybe it is the same thing, maybe not. There may be those of us whose feelings on a particular issue, like gay leadership, are not particularly strong one way or another but who are concerned that by taking the extremely adamant view that the BSA has, it risks marginalizing itself and no longer being the broad scope, nation-wide, unifying organization that it has tried to be through its history. At one time, we said "Scouting is for all boys." Is that still the case? Should that be the case? One side may say "Our values are not for sale." The other group can then say "Of course our values are for sale. You've sold out to the other side." I guess my point is that there are at least two areas of concern. One is the issues themselves (gays, atheists, etc.) The other is whether Scouting, particularly in some parts of the country, is becoming perceived as a much more narrow, politically motivated, special interest type of youth organization and whether that will diminish the value and the impact which Scouting as a movement will have in our country.(This message has been edited by NeilLup)

I can speak a little about one National Committee where I do have some knowledge. I believe there are three youth members on the National Boy Scouting Committee: The National OA Chief (who is also a member of the National Executive Board) The National OA Vice Chief The Antarctic Scout (who is also a member of the National Executive Board) The OA Chief and Vice Chief are selected in a double selection process where all the voters are youth. The Antarctic Scout is selected in an extremely rigorous process involving volunteers and pros coordinated with the National Science Foundation. The OA Chief and Vice Chief have one year terms. The Antarctic Scout has a two year term but a substantial part of his term is spent in Antarctica. As far as the degree of dissent which is appropriate, one guidance is the Scout Law: OBEDIENT A Scout follows the rules of his family, school, and troop. He obeys the laws of his community and country. If he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, he tries to have them changed in an orderly manner rather than disobey them. Now "orderly" is an interesting word. One wonders where George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ghandi, Martin Luther King, and Nelson Mandella would fit on the "orderly" scale.

Hello SM Ron, Check out the 21st Century Pioneer Award offered by the Boston Minuteman Council. This is a diversity award intended for Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts and is offered at several different age/ability levels. www.bsaboston.org then go to resources, then to 21st Century Pioneer Award. If several of your Scouts earned this award, it would be a definite diversity item.

Let me pour a little gasoline upon the troubled fire Suppose the boy were asked a question that I was asked at my Eagle Board "Is there anything about any of your ranks that was not done according to the requirements? Did you cheat on any of the requirements? Is there any reason that you shouldn't be an Eagle Scout." What would you have the boy say? If I were on the Board and he told the story of serving as APL, I would pass him for having demonstrated Eagle Scout level Trustworthiness.

Hello Scoutldr, With respect to the Eagle BOR, they may have phrased the question a bit more helpfully. I would suggest that the question should be "How do YOU honor the point of the Law 'A Scout is Reverent.' " or "How do YOU do your best to do your Duty to God?" It isn't supposed to be some abstruse philosophical discussion, rather it is very practical and personal. At the same time, if the boy doesn't have a very religious home life, he may require some help and guidance and counseling by the Board. Boleta lays out very nicely how this can be done. I have heard of Board of Review in some parts of the country which give the boy an exceedingly hard time if he doesn't accept Jesus Christ as his personal savior. This is highly inappropriate. This is not supposed to be some last line of defense to trap an nascent atheist before he becomes an Eagle Scout. Presumably, for years, they boy has been pledging to the Oath and Law. It is a discussion of one of the points of the Oath and Law just like the discussion of the other points.

I believe that I have read that in about 80-90% of these cases, the charges are accurate and in about 10-20%, they are completely inaccurate and even intentionally false. And, without a complete and thorough investigation, it is IMPOSSIBLE to tell which is which. Sometime even then (he said, he said). It is completely appropriate for a leader accused in these circumstances to be removed from contact with youth until matters are resolved. Other than that, one can only say that these situations do happen and when they happen, Scouting does its best to address and resolve them quickly and thoroughly with appropriate concern for the interests of all parties.

When my wife joined the advertising business, she was taught this little poem which could also can be very useful for job seekers. Tell me fast and tell me true Or else, my friend, away with you Don't lecture on how it came to be But say what the darned thing does for me When someone interviews you for a job, there is only one thing in the person's mind -- what can you do for them. How can they make a lot more money than you cost as a result of you're being on their team? (Or the non profit equivalent; provide a lot more service, etc.) Being an Eagle Scout is certainly relevant but only if they perceive it as enhancing your value. And YOU need to convince them of that value. You can't assume that they know what being an Eagle Scout means and what it means to YOU which is, after all, the only thing that is relevant. It takes some hard work and research to figure out what you can do for a company. But if you first apply for a job with that idea in mind in your letter or resume or whatever, then keep it in mind if you are granted an interview, you will really stand out. You might practice what I have heard called an "elevator speech". The idea is that you get into an elevator with the person you have been trying to meet for a month. He or she is on their way up to their office on the 40th floor. They ask you "Ok, what is it that you want?" You have until the elevator opens on the 40th floor (about 30 seconds) to answer and convince them that they should continue the conversation. Don't automatically assume that the words "Eagle Scout" are understood by everybody or that, in some parts of the country, they necessarily are viewed positively by everybody. But, if you have internalized the Scout Oath and Scout Law and have developed life skills on the Eagle trail and can show that, regardless of the person's feeling about Scouting, you will be desired. A final thought. I have read that this is the worst summer for summer jobs in almost 2 decades. And an anecdote. In our council, we have a superb young man who just graduated from Harvard cum laude with a batchelors degree and master's degree in 4 years. He also did sufficient Scouting stuff during his time at Harvard that he was awarded the District Award of Merit and the Silver Beaver. He is an Eagle Scout with 4 palms. And he can't find a job! Most recently, he told me he was a candidate for a math teaching job (he is a great teacher). The job went to a Harvard classmate. It turns out that they really wanted a crew coach and being a math teacher was the excuse to pay their crew coach. In another one, he was the second choice. Their first choice was admitted to be less qualified. However, the first choice's wife was a teacher in a very important field of great scarcity. The wife made it clear that she couldn't take the job unless there was a job for her husband too. I have never heard this young man question the value of being an Eagle Scout. Job hunting is one of the most demanding, most frustrating, most painful things you will ever do. If you show the same dedication and gumption you showed in earning the Eagle Scout award, you will make out great.

The source that I found said the change was made in 1949. And if 1965 is old for you, FOG, you're not old

Am I correct, Fuzzy Bear, that in the early days of the OA, an Ordeal member wore the sash over the right shoulder and a Brotherhood member over the left shoulder. This would have given the desired bandolier effect if worn with the MB sash. I also remember as a Scout that we speculated on what one would do if one had enough Merit Badges to fill up the front of one sash. We postulated bandolier sashes for the additional MBs. With your sense of humor, you would fit in well with some of the members of our training team.

A few years ago, there was a nationally televised commercial by WalMart showing the way they had helped some boy complete his Eagle Scout project. The boy consistently wore official BSA blue jeans. I have to believe that either the local council didn't know anything about the commercial (they would have provided uniform trousers) or else the Troop was one of those "We refuse to wear uniform trousers; our uniform is blue jeans."

Why does not BSA just change from Boy Scouts to just plain Scouts and allow girls 11-17 as well join.>> The merger of BSA and GSUSA was considered extremely seriously in the early '70s. I believe it was killed by GSUSA who feared they would become second class citizens. BTW, at one time there were a number of GSUSA equivalents of Scout Executive who were male. Currently, there are only two and one is very active as a BSA volunteer in the Northeast Region. I believe that the BSA believes that single sex programs are appropriate for youth below age 14 and coed programs are inappropriate. They believe that the additional level of interactions caused in younger coed programs are more difficult to manage and not particularly attractive to youth (boys don't want those "icky girls" around.) In addition, several of the large churches who are major national sponsors feel strongly about this issue. In one case, the church feels so strongly that they, as a matter of policy, decline to participate in an activity if there is coed adult leadership, let alone coed youth. I believe that I read at one time that there were only 3 organizations in the World Brotherhood of Scouting who were single sex - the USA, Saudi Arabia and the Phillipines.

There is, I believe, one circumstance where wearing the OA sash to the Court of Honor is appropriate. If the boy has been designated Troop OA Representative as his Position of Responsibility, then he can be considered to be doing an OA job as he serves as a leader in the Troop. Clearly, the boy is extremely proud of being an OA member. I would have probably let his wearing the sash go at the Court of Honor and gently told him about it the next week. I would respectfully suggest that the last thing that an enthusiastic 11 year old needs is a visitation by the uniform police. I can't count the number of Eagle Courts of Honor where the candidate (and often everybody else) wears their OA sash, often together with their merit badge sash.

Hello BSAbrit, The finest SM I ever recruited was a bank president. He made it clear that he could only make a fraction of meetings and would rarely make campouts. However, he was a magnificent organizer and inspiring leader, organized the ASM's extremely well, set a vision and ran a great Troop. He also was extremely well respected in the community. When he signed on, within a couple of weeks, we had ten new Scouts whose families said "Well if Mr. XXXXX is going to be SM, that is something we want to do." He also is an Eagle Scout and was later presented the Distinguished Eagle Scout award.

I know of at least two women who are/have been Scout Executives. One was in Connecticut, I believe, about a decade ago. The other, I believe, is still serving in Illinois. There may be others. There also is more than a smattering of District Executives. I believe that I heard figures which suggest that about 18% of professional Scouters are female.(This message has been edited by NeilLup)

One thing I might suggest. Consider inviting a Cub Scout Pack or, if there is a new Boy Scout Troop in your area, inviting them to the Eagle Court. I well remember when my year old Troop was invited to an Eagle Court by a nearby Troop. It was the largest single factor in convincing me that I could become an Eagle Scout and I should set that as my goal.

I received my beads only 3 days ago>> Congratulations again, Pete. Wear them with pride as you do good things for youth.

Hello Pete, I hope you have the opportunity to be on WB staff. I believe that first time WB staff service is the finest training course that we have in the BSA.

Hello Pete, Your CD is required to send in a report to the local council with a copy to the area, copy to the region and a copy to National. Copies of these are kept for awhile but then are discarded after a few years. The main purpose of these reports is to learn about changes that the CD thinks should occur and about statistics concerning the course. The CD is then required to send in a final report 18 mmonths after the course. This gives statistics on who has finished and what the completion percentage was for the course. Please feel free to ask whatever questions you wish, Pete. There is very, very , very little in Scouting that is "secret." Congratulations on completing the practical course. Now get your ticket done

Hello Zahnada, There are youth staff for one and a half days of 21st Century WB. They do instruct and run physical activities. The adults clearly see what the youth can and should do. However, as far as staffing the entire course, I believe I disagree with that for a couple of reasons. Teaching capability isn't one of them. Youth certainly can have that capability. One reason is point of view. An important objective of WB and adult leader training is teaching of the purposes of Scouting from an adult leader's point of view and clarifying how to structure the program to aid youth. There are some topics that it would be unfair to expect even the best youth to be able to teach adults. Another reason is credibility. I first was a SM when I was 24 years old and I had a serious credibility issue. The parents tolerated and accepted me but still, I wasn't one of the group; I wasn't a parent and didn't have children. This credibility problem would, in my opinion, be very severe if youth taught more than they now do. Another issue related to information about and comfort with the district and council. WB is not just about Troops or even about units. Another reason is that WB now is not just for BS leaders. A substantial portion of WB participants are Cub Scout leaders. I don't think that the youth would have sufficient familiarity in depth with the CS program to be really helpful or credible. Personally, I think the WB balance is great the way it is. If your council has an outdoor skills training, even like IOLS, I see no reason that youth could not be skills instructors there.

Am I correct, Eamonn, that you mean all the courses held at Gilwell Park, not all courses held anywhere in the world?

News to me, Pete and I have been to Gilwell Park. No such record was mentioned. I believe that there is not any recording of the names of Wood Badge holders in the National office or in the regional offices. In the local councils, it is catch as catch can. At one time, all Course Director certificates were issued out of Gilwell Park and later they were all issued out of the National Council. But those names are not kept Nationally either. All persons who have completed Wood Badge training are "members of Gilwell Troop 1." But this is an honorary membership. There is, to my knowledge, no formal worldwide roll of such membership.

Where have I seen something like the measuring sticks Eamonn suggests? Could it be 21st Century Wood Badge? Hmmm. Remembering that the objective of everything we do in Scouting is the improvement of citizenship, character and fitness, if we enable a Scout, either by himself or in coordination with his adult leaders, to set standards, work toward them, judge his progress, amend the standards if appropriate, and then weigh his performance against these standards, we have achieved a major step toward our objectives. Actually, my understanding is that today's youth are pretty good at this kind of thing. They have problems in other areas, but this, by and large, is an area of relative strength. So if there is a disconnect between what we think the Scout should be doing and actual performance, the problem may not be with the standard setting process. Rather, it may be that the Scout and/or Scout parents has different objectives (Have as much fun as possible with as little work as possible; earn the Eagle Scout award as quickly as possible with as little distracting work and little time taken away from other activities as possible) than we have. If no boy joins Scouting to have his character improved, they why shouldn't the boy's starting objective be to have as much fun as possible with as little work as possible? The problem, as I understand it, comes when the Board of Review sits a little like the jury in American Idol and votes, after the fact, that the boy's performance hasn't met the standard. If the standard was not outlined and agreed to in advance, then the after the fact rejection can be considered inappropriate and unfair.