Class "A" Dress Uniform

[Twoplusto]

The troop ClassA dress uniform is scout pants ( not shorts), scout uniform shirt with proper patch placement, troop hat, troop neckerchief, black shoes or hiking boots. This is in the troop's by-laws. For a scout to receive his awards on stage at a court of honor the scout needs to be in this uniform or the scout gets the awards after the court of honor.

 

This troop policy has been ineffect for years. Is the troop committee within its right to require this uniform for the scout to receive their awards on stage?

[shortridge]

The troop committee should be silent on this issue. The PLC should be setting and policing uniform standards and how CoHs are run.

 

And, really? Pants not shorts? I guess the troop never goes outdoors during the summer and hasn't heard of switchbacks. And micromanaging the color and type of footwear, and saying they have to wear headgear? Get off the boys' backs. Geez.(This message has been edited by Shortridge)

[Scoutfish]

If the scouts themselves elect to use this policy, then so be it. And it should be reviewed and revoted on every two years to be sure that the new scouts also like this policy.

 

But the committee should not be making this rule.

 

 

[Wood_Owl]

The troop committee does not have the power to set BSA policy.

Uniforms can be requested, but are not required in BSA regulations. Scouts cannot be 'discriminated agaisnt' for not wearing their uniforms.

(This message has been edited by Wood_Owl)

[qwazse]

Do you also have a by-law about the menu that a boy may prepare for his patrol cooking requirement?

[mikecummings157]

Ditto what Shortridge said. This is a PLC matter.

[Lisabob]

overkill.

 

Now the real question is, what would it take to change this? Troops that have something as specific as this in their bylaws also tend to be adult-controlled and not inclined to lighten up.

[drmbear]

And even considering that it is a rediculous thing for a Troop Committee to be establishing, no troop should be punishing a Scout if they are not able to comply. A class A uniform should meet the requirements on the Uniform Inspection Sheet, which states: "Pants/Shorts. Official pants or official uniform pants or shorts; no cuffs. (Units have no option to change.)" Why would your troop make shorts unacceptible? Even as a youth, I tended to wear the shorts just about year round. I wore my shorts to my Eagle Court of Honor. To me, that is the uniform, something to be worn in activity. And actually, I've heard that a Scout Uniform from any generation or time period is still an acceptible Scout Uniform. I don't even think I would want to be part of a troop that had completely arbitrary and punishing "rules" like this. This is something youth do for fun in their spare time, not the military.

[BSA24]

Sometimes we get so hung up on the purpose, we forget the fun part. "Let's make men out of them. Get me a car battery! We'll shock some sense into them! We'll build a boy scout shock collar for our next wood badge ticket objective."

 

[sarcasm] Everyone knows that boys love to dress formally. Shiny black shoes for those boy scouts. That will work wonders for attracting youth in a society where the standard is baggy shorts and a tattoo. [/sarcasm]

 

Is the troop committee within their rights?

 

The Scoutmaster needs to represent the boys to the committee and stand them down. The committee should be informed by the boys through the scoutmaster what their program is going to be and how the committee can help bring it to life. "Thanks for your input. The boys rejected that idea and instead voted on this. We need you to do these things so we can execute this plan."

 

Upside down org chart - the scoutmaster keeps the crazy out of the program, and the boys do the scouting. The committee helps with forms, funding, transportation, equipment, etc.

(This message has been edited by BSA24)

[Eagle92]

With all due respect, some religions due have strict guidelines on dress. The female Muslim Venturers in the Centennial Parade I saw come immediately to mind. And if the CO is a religious house of worship, they can set the uniform standard of no shorts.

 

Also I was told LDS units also have no shorts policies due to religious reasons.

 

 

[shortridge]

If the CO sets the policy, and it's consistent across activities, that's one thing. But a committee should not be micromanaging the COH dress code. That tells Scouts two things: first, that they are not in control of their troop, and second, that an indoor, on-stage awards ceremony is more important to the adults than getting outdoors and camping and hiking.

[Jeffrey H]

There is no "Class A Dress Uniform." There is only the uniform and it's meant to be worn for casual and more formal settings.

 

In my part of the scouting world, it appears that adult leaders make the call when the boys should wear their uniforms, not the boys. I'm not saying this is right, but if that decision really belongs to the boys, then the adults in my district are either ignorant of the rules or they are disregaring them.

 

 

[Oak Tree]

Sounds ok to me. I say that they are within their rights. They aren't preventing the Scouts from actually earning the awards, just from being recognized up front. Same as not getting to go to Jamboree if you don't have the full uniform. Or not being on the Boys' Life cover.

 

Now, presumably, they are verifying that everyone has the means to acquire the uniform, and are maybe even providing ways to help that happen.

[Eagle92]

Folks,

 

I agree the PLC needs to set the policy and run the troop with the SM running interference. But sometimes there are extenuating circumstances like religious objections to shorts.

 

Now with the exception of when religious awards are given out, only time I've seen any awards given out at a church service is Eagle. And the unit made it clear "No Shorts" for the service.

 

I know when my CO has Scout Sunday services, they want pants also.

 

Now I admit I'm not too keen on by-laws and what not. I think the Promise/Oath, and Law for your level should be all ya need.

 

 

 

 

[shortridge]

"Same as not getting to go to Jamboree if you don't have the full uniform. Or not being on the Boys' Life cover."

 

There's the full uniform, and then there's a specific kind of uniform, which is what the committee is requiring in this circumstance. Dictating pants over shorts, mandating a hat and requiring a certain type of footgear is ridiculous. What about the Scout whose Switchbacks are now two-tone (or who's lost the legs), whose head sweats like crazy when he wears a hat and who doesn't own a pair of black shoes or hiking boots (because he's an ultralight backpacker and wears sneakers on the trail, and tan shoes for dress-up occasions)? This committee has decided it is vitally important for their Scouts to look pretty, according to their definition of pretty, and in the process has taken over the role of the PLC. Simply silly.

 

Eagle, I agree completely if a religious CO has a uniform requirement based on the principles of its faith. I understand members of the LDS church may have some rules for modest dress (though I find it difficult to believe that Irving would have developed Scout shorts that don't meet the requirements of such a huge chunk of their membership), and some Muslims may have certain dress codes, as well. But even those COs should apply those requirements uniformly (no pun intended), make expectations clear from the start, and turn enforcement of those standards over to the PLC.