COR and "firing"

[MIcommitteechair]

Recently, our Troop went through major changes. This included a few parents very upset and leaving because they did not like the direction the current leadership was going (boy-run Troop instead of adult-run Troop). After spending all the time getting scouts "trained" and learning their positions, along with manuals on how to do these jobs in our Troop along with creating Troop By-Laws, one patrol decided to leave. This was headed by one of the parents who swears in front of the boys, often smells of alcohol at functions, belittles the majority of boys and parents in attendance, and openly opposes diversity. This parent is a registered adult.

 

The TCC and SM asked the COR to speak to this parent. Long story short, the COR likes this parent and does not see a problem with how they act. After the TCC and SM objected more, they were both removed from their positions. The DC stands by whatever the COR does as the COR owns the unit. The Pros also support whatever decision is made by the COR.

 

Is there anyone that can be appealed to?

[ScoutNut]

Actually, the COR does NOT own the unit.

 

The unit is owned by the Charter Organization.

 

The COR, or - Charter Organization Representative - is the REPRESENTATIVE of the Charter Organization (CO). The COR is an intermediary between the CO, the CO's unit, and the BSA District/Council.

 

The person to talk to about this mess would be the head of the Charter Organization (IH-Institutional Head) itself.

 

If the IH of your CO is backing the COR, than your only recourse is to find a different Troop, or start a new one.

[moosetracker]

You say "The COR owns the unit" in which case maybe not.. If your COR is also your Institutional Head then he is the end all in the decision maker.. BUT, some CORs are not the institutional head, this is the head of the organization you are chartered to. The COR could be the middle man between the IH & the troop.. So if your COR is not the minister of the church, or the President of the organization or whatever, then you can go to them.. Beware though the IH will more take the COR side especially if he knows the COR, doesn't know you personally, and really hasn't involved himself in knowing what boy scouts is about.. That's because he assigned the COR to manage the BSA for him, and he will most likely take his opinion and back him (unless he is fine with his COR quitting.)..

 

Basically the COR (and/or IH) decision is not something you can fight.. They can hire and fire the volunteers in your group. That is why their signature is on the Adult application.

[Papadaddy]

All unit leaders serve at the pleasure of the CO, and most of the time that power is delegated to the COR. Unless there is a youth protection issue, most Councils won't get involved with unit politics. Take your talents (and wallet) elsewhere.

[moosetracker]

Actually, the COR does NOT own the unit.

 

The unit is owned by the Charter Organization.

 

The COR, or - Charter Organization Representative - is the REPRESENTATIVE of the Charter Organization (CO). The COR is an intermediary between the CO, the CO's unit, and the BSA District/Council.

 

The person to talk to about this mess would be the head of the Charter Organization (IH-Institutional Head) itself.

 

If the IH of your CO is backing the COR, than your only recourse is to find a different Troop, or start a new one.

I would have said the same thing ScoutNut, except this year our IH decided not to find a new COR and take the role on himself, when time came to recharter I asked council if we would have a problem and was told the IH being the COR is very common..

 

Really if your IH is actively engaged in the BSA unit, why would he need an middleman?.. It does make sense.

[Stosh]

Been there, done that. Nothing you can do. Look for another troop, or in my case, start one. I found out along the way there are very vocal parents that really don't want boy-led, mature, confident sons in their household. They will have the leadership removed even if they are a very small minority. Just look at it as either they go or you do. Them helping you out the door is not all that bad. The incentive to move on to bigger and better sometimes needs a little push.

 

Stosh

[qwazse]

Unless the COR is not representing the chartered organization, you'd best move on.

 

Just because the pros support the COR, does not mean they won't support the former SM and CC if they find another organization willing to house them and the patrol of boys who want to carry this forward. In fact, the DE may have been talking up scouting to a potential CO which would like to field a troop, but does not have seasoned leadership. Hope you can encourage the SM and CC to keep on scouting!

[MIcommitteechair]

Thank you for your responses. The minister at the methodist church has been contacted by a number of the parents. They are trying to get the charter released so we can go elsewhere. The COR is signed up at the IH. He is just a member of the parish, not the minister. The pros are supporting the SM and TCC starting a new unit elsewhere and it sounds like over half the scouts and parents want to move with the SM and TCC. The work of the SM/TCC changing the unit enabled the scouts to earn JTE-Gold for 2013 for the first time in about ten years. Just so sad for the boys involved in all this. Very unfair to all of them.

[ScoutNut]

If the church, and the IH/COR are still going to have a Troop with the church, there is no way that the church will release the charter to you.

 

The Troop is not disbanding, it is just splitting.

 

It is up to the folks leaving to go out, get a new charter organization, and start a brand new Troop - from scratch - with them. Or, failing that, you can find another Troop that runs a good, boy-led, program, and join them.

[DuctTape]

If you do decide to start a new troop, the CO doesn't need to exist already. The adults can form a "Group of Citizens" and become the CO. In effect it is the TC which is the CO. The difficulty is finding a location. Sometimes organizations are more willing (or able) to allow BSA to use their facilities without being the CO. Public Schools for example.

[qwazse]

Agree with SN and DT, just tell your DE you've got several parents who disagree on what they want for their boys, a capable SM and CC, boys who will follow them, and a willingness to start a new troop. If there's another CO available, and they generally agree with how you want to implement the program, go there. If not, become that CO. That way you take the high ground and minimize ill will.

[moosetracker]

I agree with everyone else, that if the Troop splits, you being the group leaving will not get to take all the toys.. It will stay with the half of the group that is staying.. On top of that, if the COR is also the IH, then he would be the one that is the person to go to in order to ask for anything, the minister of the church has no say in anything, he basically has decided to have nothing to do with the unit.. The church is just providing the space. It is almost like a group of parents did form this group,

 

As DuctTape put it. If you formed a group called "Group of Citizens" or "Friends of Scouting" and a school said you could meet at their school, then years later they decide to split or even if they just want to meet at a new facility.. The school principle is not who you would go to for permission to move to the other location, or if splitting from him to decide which group gets what..

 

That IH, owns it all.. It does not sound like he will give you a single tent stake.. Find a new CO, or a new location and form your own CO..

[Twocubdad]

Not that it really matters here, but how does the COR get himself appointed as Institutional Head? The IH is the in-fact leader of the chartering organization and is the Institutional Head through BSA by way of his/her position in with the institution How do you appoint someone other than the in-fact head of the institution to be IH? I know that the in-fact leader of the chartering institution can also serve as COR, but he/she starts as IH and is appointed COR.

[moosetracker]

Not that it really matters here, but how does the COR get himself appointed as Institutional Head? The IH is the in-fact leader of the chartering organization and is the Institutional Head through BSA by way of his/her position in with the institution How do you appoint someone other than the in-fact head of the institution to be IH? I know that the in-fact leader of the chartering institution can also serve as COR, but he/she starts as IH and is appointed COR.

That's why I think the church is not the CO.. That this might be a "friends of" organization that simply used the church as it's meeting place.. Otherwise, I don't know, people not understanding how the program worked, I don't think could get that high up without the Council straightening out the mis-information..

 

The troop I am UC of I think may have assigned their own COR, not understanding the position and it is not up to the troop to appoint.. Our DE told me they have listed for COR someone other then the IH, when I know our IH planned on being COR of the BSA units.. Now, things may have changed, and if a member of the church is a member of BSA, this arrangement may be a recent event.. But, considering the troop thought they were done with the yearly re-chartering simply by going on-line and using the software.. I think it most likely they choose a COR themselves figuring out the software required them to have one listed.. NOW my DE is unaware this different COR may be a problem needing to be fixed.. But I would think he would have picked up on if they sited some troop member as IH when he knew the church and knew who the IH was..

[MIcommitteechair]

If you do decide to start a new troop, the CO doesn't need to exist already. The adults can form a "Group of Citizens" and become the CO. In effect it is the TC which is the CO. The difficulty is finding a location. Sometimes organizations are more willing (or able) to allow BSA to use their facilities without being the CO. Public Schools for example.

How does one go about forming a "Group of Citizens?"