Is OA worth it?

[croushorn]

Fantastic Michael! Your words carry a hundred times more weight than any of us old blabber guys does!

[Tokala]

A small correction to Scouter760's comment: "Anyway, when we give the boys choices, sometimes they choose differently than we would. In this case, the SM could override their choice, but I hope that doesn't have to be done very often."

 

The Scoutmaster approves the eligible Scouts prior to the election. Once they cast their votes he doesn't have the "option" to override the results of the election. A good Scoutmaster gives his approval ahead of time and let's the youth decide.

[fleetfootedfox]

Our lodge's bylaws state...

 

"The unit leader may veto the election of any candidate after the election by refusing to sign the candidate's citation. However, if one candidate is vetoed, another may not be substituted in his place. The name will be dropped and the unit will have one candidate less than the number which were elected."

 

"It is suggested that the unit leader should consult with the other adult leaders who are present at the election before exercising his veto. However, this is the option of the unit leader."

[croushorn]

Scouter760 your lodges bylaws are in conflict with OA national rules and that is not allowed. I regret that any of your Councils Scouts have been prevented from joining the order by this flawed bylaw. Shame on your Program Director, he should know better.

[sst3rd]

In short, "yes" the Order of the Arrow is worth it.

 

To bring to light the "Scoutmaster's Approval" BEFORE the OA Election; our Troop had no Scouts ready to be nominated for the Troop to vote on to be a candidate for the OA this year. This is rare, but it happens. Scoutmasters (and anyone else for that matter) cannot remove a Scout AFTER he has been elected as a candidate. Scoutmasters must approve or disapprove a Scout BEFORE the election. Scoutmasters have been a bit lax with this requirement, and need to take it far more seriously then they have in the past. Sometimes Scoutmasters, you have to be the bad guy and not allow every name to be nominated. Use this requirement "wisely."

 

sst3rd

[fleetfootedfox]

ursus - It is my understanding that national's rules are often really more guidelines, but for now if I assume you're right, how would I prove that to somebody else? What document, what specific quote could I use to make the point convincingly?

 

Thanks.

[shortridge]

Turn it around - ask the folks in charge where they draw that authority from. They won't be able to back it up.

 

Check out Appendix 2 of the Guide to Inductions, available at www.oa-bsa.org. It states nothing about vetoing the results of an election.

 

The sample unit election forms also on that site have a space for the unit leader to approve nominees, but no space for a veto.

 

===

 

Serving in the OA and working camp staff kept me active in Scouting.

 

Unfortunately, lodges and chapters vary widely in quality - as do troops, teams, packs, ships and crews. As someone else said, you get out of it what you put into it.

[nolesrule]

Here's an excerpt from the section on Elections from the Order of the Arrow Guide for Officers and Advisors (page 22) which is available as a public download on the OA website...

 

"4. The unit leader provides a list of all registered active members of the unit who meet all eligibility requirements including attitude and participation. The names of these members are entered on the report form and the unit leader signs the certification."

 

This is the only point in the entire elections procedure where the unit leader has a say in who is and is not eligible to be voted for. The unit leader is given this leeway because of the "attitude" eligibility requirement.

 

If you read the procedure in its entirety, you will see that the step after votes are counted is to write down the names and contact information of those who received enough votes onto a form and the OA Elections Team turns it in. There is no stage written in the procedures that allows for the unit leader to "scratch a name off" after the vote count has been finalized.

 

That's enough about procedure...

 

Or, let's use the scouting advancements as an analogy. The eligibility list is the Scoutmaster Conference, and the election is the Board of Review. When you have a problem with a scout, you take care of it with the scoutmaster conference. You don't wait until after he passes the board of review and then withhold the advancement.

 

 

 

 

[fleetfootedfox]

shortridge,

 

You are quite right in pointing out that this is an issue of authority.

 

However, just because there is no national rule saying you can do something doesn't mean you can't do it.

 

For what it's worth, I don't care much for the veto idea and would hope it's something that's not abused.

 

The same lodge also requires units to do their elections in a council camp at least every other year.

[fleetfootedfox]

This veto issue is way off topic from the original post, so I'm going to start a new thread. Thanks.

[Bob White]

Is OA worth it?

 

Perhaps. It would depend on the individual and what they are looking for in the OA, and the state of the local OA program at that time.

 

In the council I serve the OA has not been of interest to me sa a member. It does very little in the way of youth training and is for the most part run by a group of adults that have been in place for many years. They do two weekends of service a year at the local scout camp and that is about the extend of their activities.

 

As a unit leader I have always supported the OA's mission and never discourage scouts from membership. None but a few scouts who have gone through the orderal have had an interest in returning for other activities or for earning their Brotherhood.

 

I am sure that this is a local problem and probably not indicative of the situation in every council. But it shows that the local Chapter needs to do some things differently, but as long as these same scouters are core to the local OA program I would not expect any significant changes anytime soon.

 

[nolesrule]

The Lodge is within its rights to set the time of year of a unit OA election, but is supposed to work with the unit to set the date/time/location. However, the OA encourages (their word, not mine) that it be held prior to summer camp so that the odds of having at least 50% of the registered youth present for the election are increased, since you can't even hold the vote without it.