is COR voting member of pack committee

[rrelaljrksw]

We are in the process of forming our pack committee. I know that we report to the COR, but are they a member of the committee and can they vote? We have a COR who wants to be VERY involved with our pack and some of the parents want to know if we're ever allowed to make our own decisions. I know the CO who is also our COR owns the pack, money, equipment, etc... But do they have total control in how we run our program or spend the money? What if anything do we get to decide for ourselves?(This message has been edited by rrelaljrksw)(This message has been edited by rrelaljrksw)

[rkfrance]

The CO provides elements for the program and selects the COR. Essentially, they can deny anything if they choose. As for vote, see previous sentence.

 

I'd recommend starting slowly and getting to know all the players. Training is essential, even for the COR. If you're all on the same page, you'll minimize any conflicts.

[scoutldr]

There are no "rules" about such things. Committees need to set their ground rules up front...most are very informal and not strict about "rules of order". THe COR is the liaison between the Unit and the CO. So, I would say, yes they have the final say...but if they continued to usurp the responsibilities of the COmmittee and Unit Leader, I would have to have the proverbial "friendly cup of coffee" and ask them to either let me do my job, or find a replacement.

[Oak Tree]

I don't think I've ever seen our pack committee or our troop committee take a vote. And I don't think it should be necessary. But as scoutldr says, there are no official rules about that sort of thing.

 

Yes, the CO gets to decide how you run the program and spend the money. But most give only very broad principles on this. Most leaders get that being a dictator is not the best way to build a program, but a COR could be a dictator. So could an IH. More common is the Cubmaster or Scoutmaster who is a dictator. Ideally you'd avoid all forms of dictatorship.

 

I do like the idea of a friendly cup of coffee. You don't say what your position is...I'd want to involve the CC and/or CM in that discussion.

[rrelaljrksw]

Currently I'm an MC doing advancements and treasurer. For the last few months I've also been doing the CC's job. Our CC is also our COR and the head of our CO. The COR is considering giving me the position of CC. I have a great relationship with the COR and we are usually on the same page. A few of the DL's are causing problems because they don't agree with the COR and constantly challenge decisions that are made. They believe the pack should be able to make mistakes and learn from them instead of following the COR's good advice and succeeding right of the bat. They would like to use the committee to overrule the COR if the need arose. I'm just trying to figure out how much authority each person has and what to do if everyone doesn't agree.

[ScoutNut]

First of all, your COR needs to recruit more committee members. Doing the jobs of Advancement, Treasurer, and CC is doing 2 jobs to many.

 

What are these disagreements about? What decisions are being challenged? Could the DL's have a point about the decisions being wrong for the Pack?

 

Every single registered adult in your Pack needs to get fully trained for their position(s) NOW. That includes the COR taking training for both COR and CC.

 

You have to ALL have the same vision for the Pack, know the BSA rules and regs, and learn to work TOGETHER. If you start waving the big stick of who has authority over who, and entrench everyone in the Us vs Them mode, your Pack will self destruct.

 

Contact your Unit Commissioner to act as an impartial voice during your decision discussions.

 

[scoutldr]

Sounds like a lack of training. The DL's work for the CM to carry out the vision and program decided on by the committee. And I agree, there is no reason to be double/triple-hatted unless you want to have all the power.

[shortridge]

And everyone, ultimately, works for the chartered organization and its designated representative. That's the bottom line. If the CO wants you to do things a certain way to carry out its program, you do it. If you don't like it, find another CO in which you are better agreement with.

[Beavah]

Yah, a person who is IH, COR, and CC? That's pretty involved, eh? Either that, or a small CO!

 

I think folks just need to be told up front what da situation is before they become Den Leaders. Sounds like that might not have been done adequately. Most folks are pretty amicable if they know the lay of the land when they volunteer, eh? It's only when they had different expectations and then get surprised that it's an issue.

 

Now personally, I'd also be counseling the IH/COR that he/she has to leave some room so that volunteers have "ownership" of their area, and so the group feels like a group that the organization values for its contributions and expertise. For that reason, it's good to create some boundaries and procedures, eh? This part of the budget is allocated to da DL to use as they see fit (no COR input), this part of the budget is controlled by the committee (COR input but agreement to go along with the group decision), this part of the budget is controlled by the COR directly (perhaps for camperships).

 

Same thing with other stuff, eh? These are da CO's general expectations, these are specific CO policies we all live by, this level of thing must go to the COR for approval, this other level of thing is for the group/committee to decide, anything else is up to the CM or DL.

 

In other words, establish some written or unwritten practices for different spheres of control so that folks feel real ownership of their area, and aren't steppin' on each other or getting hurt feelings.

 

Beavah

 

[eghiglie]

At our monthly parents/committee meeting anyone who is registered can vote.

 

We try to get sold majorities on votes. The few times that the vote has been without consensus we take a fresh look a week later or so. It happens once or twice a year.

 

The COR is from the Church and they give us a lot of leeway. They have only said no once and we respected it. He can vote as he is on the charter.

[stricklat]

my question is what are you voting on? As CC you should have a vision of what you want for the pack. the other CM's and DL's can make suggestions, but that's all. A pack is not a democracy. Think Tyrant, like a Ceasar. The COR should ahve enough faith in the CC that the chartering organizations wishes will be followed.

[John-in-KC]

No, not tyrant!

 

Collegial. Consensus.

 

Cubmaster and Den Leaders are responsible for the PROGRAM. They use the tools provided by National (Committee/chartered partner guidance, Boys Life, program helps, Scouter, annual set of themes, Pow-Wow help books, ad infinitum) to provide activities for the boys throughout the program year. Cubmaster helps the DLs and runs the 3 ring circus called the Pack Meeting.

 

Cubmaster is ex officio on the Committee. He reports on what's happening, furnishes support needs, and solicits calendar/program inputs.

 

Committee supports the Cubmaster: Finances, Advancement, Activities Support, calendar coordination. In particular, the Chair coordinates with the Cubmaster and the COR, to make sure all have similar vision and goals. In a well-trained Pack, there should be very little voting and much more consensus on the needed decisions.

 

At least that's how I read the Cub Scout Leader's Guide and the Troop Commitee Handbooks...

[Beavah]

Yah, egad! There is absolutely nothing in any of the BSA materials that makes anybody a tyrant/king. That would be really a very poor understanding and use of da BSA program.

 

Closest real-world comparison is a business model, eh? Committee is da Board of Directors, unit leader is the CEO. All are partners to achieve da corporate mission. COR is representative of da parent corporation, IH is head of da parent corporation. The BSA even uses the "board of directors" comparison in its materials.

 

And tyrant/kings are just plain bad boardsmanship.

 

Now the thing with Cub Packs is that by and large in most places the committee is just the group of regular volunteer parents. That makes the board of directors comparison fall apart, eh? If yeh put a bunch of customers on the board of a company, they tend to vote themselves largesse (high quality products for free!) at the expense of the company and workers. Pack turnover is so high that yeh don't tend to get the long-timer wisdom that anchors most troops. So with a pack, yeh have to find a way to work with that, eh? Loyalty to the CO is one way, in church-sponsored packs. Strong CCs or CMs is another. A spirit of consensus is another.

 

No one right way. But da tyrant/king is definitely the wrong way almost all the time.

 

Beavah

 

[hotair36]

I think the initial question was answered when we found out that the CC is the COR. He/She gets a voice either way. CC as tie breaker or COR/IH as approval function.

Is the COR an active member of the District Committee or Council? CORs are the voting members, just ask how that worked in Chicago when the CORs were mobilized and voted down the nominated slates for Council officers multiple times.

[stricklat]

Let me explain. As a committee there should be nothing to vote on. The Committee Chairman recruits Committee Members to run the behind-the-scenes aspects of scouting: arranging fundraisers, filing tour permits, buying awards, Blue and gold things, etc. The Committee Chairman makes sure all of these things run smoothly. If it doesn't, then the Chairman finds someone else to do the job.

 

But there is nothing to vote upon. Maybe the Committee Chairman would like a pack Committee Member to find and plan a large overnight experience- i.e. spening the night in a museum or naval ship museum. The Committee Member should do it. Period. No vote.

 

If the COR asks the Committee Chairman to have the pack help the CO with something-fund raiser or civic service- than the Chairman delegates the task. The task gets done. Everyone is happy.

 

No one votes. If there is a problem with the CC, then an individual should got to the COR and discuss the problem.

 

I am not saying be a king, but this isn't a democracy either.