mrjohns2

Uh, wow! Our council made a step change when we lost our very good, very overworked registrar. We then hired someone new and they left in 4 weeks (?). We now have 2 people sharing the job and can ramp up each to 100% or down. It has been a step change. Applications, paper scanned applications, for adults and Scouts, entered the next morning, in the system late in the day, fully in the system the following day. 24-48 to full entry. We are spoiled.

Unit Leader for a troop is the SM. It isn’t just any leader in the unit. If the SM is not available, though, I’d have the ASM or CC sign and put a note along the lines of “in lieu of the SM”.

The salary is in the filings. Do you mean it just wasn’t talked about? Again, sad. There is enough money there with $200,000 to have at least some “at risk” based on criteria.

I have not been on a council board or executive committee. It is sad that it wasn’t an annual closed door discussion amongst the board. When I served on our church board for 3-4 years, it was an annual discussion. First amongst the board and then with the minister. Yes, our central church had ranges, but those were guidelines. We had full congregational control. We couldn’t hit the low end most of the time, so it was a hard spot to be in as a board. I have assumed (maybe wrongly) that this is how council boards operate. I know that churches that were on (or off) the low end had a harder time attracting ANY candidates, but NEVER the leading candidates unless they were returning to their home area to be close to elderly parents.

The council executive board are all volunteers. They don’t have a chance at the salaries. I’m not clear what you are getting at. The volunteers vote on her salaries and budget. Not the pros. Now the pros maybe lobby, but it isn’t like they choose their own pay. You could talk to your council board if you really wanted those that vote on it to hear your concerns. Or you could post here. Or both.

I don’t know if it works that way. So, you are proposing they take a $125,000 pay cut to declare they care about Scouting? You do know they don’t set their own pay, right?

You are moving as the SM of one failing troop to be SM of another?

At times it seems to also be an indicator of those “in the know”. A way of creating a clique of those that keep up with the pointless changes. Those people are empowered while all brand equity is thrown out the window.

Great point. This happens at times at work where they change the name of tools etc with no real change. I wonder where an idea like this idea gets started and how it gets championed into reality.

Side note. It is no longer a Bridge of Review. It changed last year. https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2021/08/02/take-note-of-these-11-key-changes-in-the-2021-guide-to-advancement/amp/

Are you playing Devil’s advocate?

No, that is on Part A and the site Approval (SE or designer). Both are done prior to the event. The final part, part B, only has the signature of the STCA. Source: training and forms required to be submitted before and after assessment.

We were supposed to move to that in 2023. They told people and then said they will do it for 2024.

Same here. Not a pro’s job normally.

The charters were extended too. So, they continued to be a unit and count in the numbers. The drop will likely Jan 1 of this year.

I’m not so sure. The way I understood it, at least in my council, the people still had to “reup” or not. It was only the $75 (now $100) charter that was extended. So, they dropped or not already. At least in my council.

My.scouting has that. What they are showing is, for example, say 10/25/22 compared to 10/31/21 to see how the end of October compares to month to date. Are we on track to where we were at this time last year. Then they have the end of the year 12/31/21 to show how far we were max to max if you will. That is, are we on track tend wise to how we ended 2021. It doesn’t show say 10/25 to 10/25 as the exact day is irrelevant. Month totals tell a lot more.

I'm not so sure. They are comparing end of year to end of year. Each year you will have some who do re-up. Yes, there are different ways of slicing it, but if you compare current as of today to end of year last year, that is pretty close to apples to apples. That doesn't misrepresent anything. To get what you want, you would want to compare post recharter to post recharter. Say, April 1st to April 1st. Again, you wouldn't compare Oct to April 1st of this year. It wouldn't be apples to apples.

What do you mean? Attention etc?

Does anyone have last year’s jump due to recruiting? Or is that too hard to sus out?

Packs have rented our camp’s dinning hall (minus kitchen) to tent inside. Most loved it. You could do sledding outside and then go home.

I can tell you about our district. So a very micro view 1600 10/31/21 1650 12/31/21 1740 10/23/22

@BetterWithCheddarI think you are right. I don't want to admit it, but that is what I did and what I am seeing my daughter do.

As someone who was ready to cite your credentials, I still find it interesting you continue choose the word accidental. Here is a good article that covers the topic. https://www.nrafamily.org/content/how-to-avoid-negligent-discharges-2/

Agreed. Incidents like this one are rooted in many causes. If there were often only one cause, we would have more incidents.