Error in rank advancement

[patcjohn]

We've learned that our just-elected SPL had been signed off on his Star rank, in error (had not held POR). The biggest problem is what to do about the rank advancement, but the other problem is that our Troop had instituted a policy that the SPL had to be at least Star rank. Advice?

[SemperParatus]

Given that the error was discovered after he was elected SPL and assuming it was not an intentional act of deception on anyone's part, I do not think it would be appropriate to deny him the SPL position.

 

As SPL, the POR requirement for Star should be satisfied in the near future.

 

I guess the bigger question is how both the SM and BOR overlooked the lack of POR in granting rank in the first place.(This message has been edited by SemperParatus)

[Trevorum]

I agree with Semper. It's an embarrassment, but let him serve as SPL. My question would be, why did he think he had satisfied all requirements?

 

To be fair, we had a similar case where the fellow served for 6 months as an APL, thinking this was a valid PoR for Star. I discovered his mistake in his SM conference. The poor fellow had to reset his advancement clock by 6 months, but I feel it was an important lesson in 'reading the fine print'! He's now Life and working on his last MB.

[EagleInKY]

You should let him remain SPL. After all, that is a troop-based requirement, not BSA policy. However, the rank advancement must be corrected. Great opportunity to teach fairness, truth and integrity.

[Lynda J]

Here we go again with adults making policies on scouting advancement they have no right to make.

There is no requirement that a scout be of a certain rank in order to be elected SPL. One of the best SPLs we have had in our troop was 2nd Class. He did a wonderful job. The boys in the troop are to elect the scout they think will do the best job. That is what the boys did. As adults we have to remember no where on the uniform or any scouting material does it state

"ADULT SCOUTS OF AMERICA". It says "BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA'.

 

As far as the error. An adult make that error by signing off. The scout should not be punished for that. He was elected SPL by his troop and that is the position he holds.

[dan]

Lynda J

I would suggest you read the SM handbook and what it says about the SPL. It does say that a min. rank for the SPL, but it can be waived for young troops.

[Trevorum]

Lynda, I fully agree with your point that the troop should be run by the scouts themselves. BUT, patcjohn said, "...our Troop had instituted a policy ...", not "the adults decided". Maybe the scouts voted the policy themselves.

 

For example, our troop voted to have four ASPLs. We, the adults, think this is a fine idea for a troop of our size, but we didn't tell them how many ASPLs they need.

[NWScouter]

Dan please cite where that is in the SM Handbook. I don't remember it being there. For the rest of us it is nice to say something is in such ans such, but put a citation in or say "I believe I saw it in" or like wording.

Thanks

[dan]

Your kidding right? So when anybody post anything about the BSA lets post where all readers can find it, Page number, chapter, and line. The actually book is not enough.

I will look it up when I get home tonight.

 

Are some of you posters saying that if the troop adult leadership decides that the troop is large enough to have 2 ASPL they should do nothing because the scouts did not think of it or know about it? Just because the SM decides that 2 ASPL are needed does not mean the troop is not boy run.

 

If the adult leadership decides that a Scout must have completed NYLT and be a Star scout to run for SPL, you are saying that the troop is not boy run? Even though it is in accordance with the BSA program?

The SM should be picking out the future leaders of the troop to go to NYLT, so it would seem that he should add this requirement.

 

In life we all have rules to follow, rules that we do not agree with or have even voted on, how is this any different than the adult leadership putting rules in place like the above? As long as they are in accordance with the BSA program.

Are we not suppose to be preparing the youth for adult life?

[NWScouter]

Looking in SM Handbook (2001 revision) p. 13 it says concerning a SPL Each troop sets it own requirements and schedule of elections (p.13) . The hand book does not even make suggestion on the requirements but does on the length of term. Just to be thorough I checked the handbook I had when I went through SM Basic ( 1981) it reads All Scouts that meet the requirements of the Patrol Leaders Council are eligible. A new troop might have few requirements while an older one might set a minimum of First Class or Star Rank and 1 years experience in the troop for eligibility. (p.50)

It looks like there is no BSA rule on the rank of SPL only troop set requirements.

 

Dan,

It was directed not only at you. I find myself checking things out that I am sure of and finding that my memory is not as good or the latest version has changed, such as here. By giving were it is from and the date of publication we can determine if it correct now. For in this example I am not sure if there is or is not a later revision to the SM Handbook, that has changed this.

 

[dan]

NWScouter

I apologize, you where correct my memory is not as good as I thought it was. Now I need to look to see where I saw a suggested rank for SPL.

 

[Hunt]

"If the adult leadership decides that a Scout must have completed NYLT and be a Star scout to run for SPL, you are saying that the troop is not boy run?"

 

I will answer "yes" to this. It means that the adults have decided that the boys who want leadership positions must pursue rank advancement. Well, let me break it up a bit. I guess I wouldn't quibble too much with having a training requirement. But what is the purpose of requiring that a leader achieve Star rank? If it's to ensure that he's a dedicated scout, why can't the boys who are voting decide that? If it's to ensure that he has Scout skills, why can't the boys who are voting decide that? To put it another way, this is one of those requirements that sounds OK when you say it, but when you try to define the reason for it, it's hard to come up with a good reason to take the decision away from the boys.

[SWScouter]

Another good reference for the qualification to be a SPL is in the SPL handbook. There is a whole chapter named, are you ready, Qualifications of a Senior Patrol Leader. It basically says that the troop can decide what the qualifications are, whether they be age, rank, tenure, etc. It does mention that a newer smaller troop would most likely have more lenient qualifications than a larger, more established troop. This basically makes sense since the SPL is the highest youth leadership position in the troop and there is a larger pool of boys to select from.

 

SWScouter

[Hunt]

I said on another thread that I can accept the idea of some kind of screening of SPL candidates to avoid disaster--I just don't think a rank requirement is necessarily a good surrogate for an able SPL.

[Lynda J]

I went back and looked in my SM Handbook and in my New Leader Essentials and no where do either of them have any rank or age requirement. I didn't think they did since I just taught a NLE training Saturday and am SPL for the course.

Like I stated before one of the best SPL our troop has had since I have been there was 2nd class and 11. One of the worse was Life and 15. The boys actually voted to remove him after 3 months. But that was their decission not the adults.