when elections fall short

[fleetfootedfox]

Hate to say, but I think I agree with scottteng to some degree. The process is subjective and open to interpretation, so it could easily turn into a popularity contest. On the other hand, it seems like that is not what we're talking about here. As usual, it is the adult who is causing the problem, not the boys. In our lodge, they have a rule that the scoutmaster can disqualify boys after-the-fact. I am sure that the adult advisers could get that changed if they wanted to.

[Eagle92]

Scouter760,

I think we discussed this in another thread about your lodge. According to the Guide for Officers and Advisers, p 20,

the unit leader must approve the candidate PRIOR to the election. I know every lodge does things a little differently, heck I've been in 5 already, but I am surprised that someone hasn't brought that up to your lodge before.

 

in order to change the "SM's can disqualify after the elcection" policy, all anyone has to do is say it violates national policy and implement the national policy.

 

Now if it is written into the lodge's by-laws, then you can still do it as above, but go through the formal process as well to get ti off the books so to speak.

 

Hope this helps.

[John-in-KC]

shortridge,

 

Yes, we will have to agree to disagree. I've seen a SM tell a youth brother at RT to "get out of my face, the election will be run my way or you'll never see the door of my troop again." Not even "effective listening for Commissioners" or the WB listening module works for a youth who is told to "STFU."

 

Friendly? No.

 

So... the Adviser took him and his COR aside... the water was oiled rather quickly.

 

BTW, the CA went to that particular E-team event, just to be sure.

 

There are times and places where the youth members just aren't going to get traction. In those cases, it's time to use techniques that lower the communication barrier.