How would you do it?

[evmori]

Well then, there shouldn't be an issue with untrained leaders, should there?

 

Apparently not! But what about the untrained & uninterested CO's?

[John-in-KC]

Bob,

 

In a different thread, you stated:

http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=179058&p=2#id_179210

 

"The unit's leaders all sign BSA membership application forms in which by their signature they contract with the BSA (and I quote) "I agree to comply with the Charter and Bylaws, and the rules and regulations, of the Boy Scouts of America and the local council."

 

 

What you cited were program materials.

 

Can you or can you not cite from the Charter and Bylaws and Rules and Regulations?

 

I'll relieve you from the burden of local council rules. As we've seen from OGE and others, some local Councils do have training of volunteers as a condition of volunteer service.

 

So, can you or can you not cite from the National Charter/Bylaws/Rules-Regulations?

[FScouter]

Ed, you've tossed out that question 4 or 5 times in the last 3 days. So, how about it? What's your idea?

[John-in-KC]

I certainly have an idea. Having read closely both the New Unit App and the Annual Charter Agreement, I think it's time Scouting revise the contract... make training a condition of charter and recharter for the IH and COR.

 

Further, make training a specified condition of volunteer service.

 

This is no more and no less than what OGE says his home Council does.

 

As I've stated earlier, though, reworking the entire outdoor curriculum, so that it allows the outdoor novice to accumulate outdoor experience away from youth is a big need imo.

 

 

[evmori]

I have answered that before FScouter. Training should be mandatory for CO's & adult leaders. If ya wanna join or charter a unit, ya gotta take the training! No training, no joining or chartering.

 

You turn FScouter. What's your idea?

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White]

Hi John

The Girl Scouts do that, but there is a big difference in our two organizations. It's called "the charter concept", we have one the Girk Scouts do not.

In Girl Scouts every unit is owned by the national organization. In the BSA they are not, the units are owned by the charter organization.

 

The BSA by design is limited in what it can tell units what to do. they can direct the CO's to follow agreed upon elements, but they cannot totally control their operations. The charter concept does not allow that.

 

That is why some councils have gone to mandatory training and not theBSA. When councils first did this I contacted the head of training at thetime and asked him if the national office supported this action. His response was that while the national office was aware of the practice they not not support it or recommend it.

 

Units are chartered to the councils. Councils are fairly autonomous corporations. So while National is willing to let councls do this, National cannot without first doing away with charter organizations and taking ownership of the units themselves, and that ain't gonna happen.

 

So while its fine to say National oughta...you first need to understand that the charter concept limits what national can and cannot do.

 

So that puts things back in the hands of the charter organizations.

[John-in-KC]

Bottom line then is this:

 

Beavah's interpretation of the BSA licensing and use model is then what is actually happening on the ground. The license provides opportunity for training; training is not a condition of the license.

 

We'll all do our best to encourage folks to learn, but high volume systemic use of the training products? Don't count on it anytime soon.