Committee overstepping their bounds

[perdidochas]

We currently have a new SPL (well, two months into office), who due to school related activities had to miss about six weeks of meetings. He has been communicating (well after the first week) with his ASPL, and for the most part, after the first week, everything has gone smoothly. Thankfully, he chose a good ASPL. The problem is that the committee doesn't like this at all. (The Scoutmaster and Assistant Scoutmasters grumbled a bit, but we used it as a learning experience for the boys). They have recently decided that our by-laws should be amended so that the committee can remove boy leaders from their PORs. They also amended the by-laws to require a uniform for Boards of Reviews.

 

In terms of the committee removing boy leaders, does anybody know of a source I can use that shows this is totally wrong? I'm not sure that any of them have been through Committee training. The Scoutmaster and I (an Assistant Scoutmaster) have been (we used to be Committee members) through Committee Training, and of course, our own required training. The current SPLs parents are irritated with this new policy, because they feel it is aimed at their son. I tend to agree. I just want a source to quote that shows this is inappropriate. I've already found the source in the Guide to Advancement for the uniform rule being wrong.

 

[LeCastor]

Wow, I don't like the idea of the Troop Committee thinking they have the authority to remove a youth leader. In this case, the SPL appointed an ASPL to be there in his absence. Sounds like this is working well. The Troop Committee is there to support the Scoutmaster and make sure that the Troop runs according to BSA guidelines, right?

 

http://meritbadge.org/wiki/index.php/Troop_Committee

 

That link isn't official BSA. However, it draws from publications that the BSA provides its adult members. Perhaps you could thumb through the Scoutmaster's handbook and see what it says for the committee's responsibility. My reading of this is the Troop Committee supports the Scoutmaster and if the Scoutmaster supports the SPL and ASPL there shouldn't be an issue...

 

Suggesting (politely) that the committee members take Troop Committee Challenge might not be a bad idea.

[perdidochas]

LeCastor,

 

Thanks. I didn't like the idea either, but basically, a few of the committee members aren't big fans of the SPL anyway, and on top of that we had a fairly ineffective ASPL last term (my son's (the previous SPL) choice for ASPL). I've known the boy since I was his Tiger Cub Den Leader, so I know his shortcomings and his strengths, and work with them. I will try to figure out how to get the MCs to take the Troop Committee Challenge, nicely.

 

On this note, what are the guidelines for removing a Scout from a POR? My basic view is that unless they never show up, they should remain in a POR, regardless of ability to do so well. A troop can survive 6 months :-)

[LeCastor]

Unless there is a glaring safety issue at hand, I don't see why a Scout should be removed from the position he was elected to carry out. The Scoutmaster is the person who works with the Scouts on an individual level and would advise on problem-solving and potential behavior changes. I really don't expect the Committee Chair to intervene without first approaching the Scoutmaster and discussing it, and even then it's up to the Scoutmaster to take any action. There's no call to amend the Troop's by-laws.

 

Here's an older thread about a Scoutmaster asking the "removal" question:

 

http://www.scouter.com/forum/the-patrol-method/8830-can-a-sm-remove-the-spl-from-his-position

[qwazse]

This is where you nail your position patches to the wall and say "Who wants them?"

There's plenty of literature out there about who appoints youth leaders, and it ain't the committee.

It's not on you to find a policy to the contrary, it's on them.

 

To combat this ... Here's what I did (as advisor of a crew, but I would not hesitate to do it for a troop full of boys in this circumstance):

• I required that no committee be held in the absence of the crew president.
  

It's very simple: youth leadership starts and ends with the direct contact unit leaders, otherwise don't have direct contact unit leaders. If your gaggle of old farts wants to push some boys around, then there'd better be a carrot for that stick. I would suggest the following amendment to your by-laws:

• No amendment to the by-laws may be voted on the day its motion is submitted.
  
• SPL and ASPL have full veto power over every motion to amend by-laws.
  
• The amendment must be proposed, given a review period sufficiently long enough for the PLC to meet and discuss it. Then brought up for a vote.
  
• The SPL/ASPL must be present for the vote on the amendment.
  
• At each change of youth leadership, each amendment may be reviewed and the SPL/ASPL may submit a motion to rescind any amendment that they and the PLC deem to be ungainly.
  

In other words, if they want to play SM via parliamentary procedure, you want it in writing that they will act like an SM.

[perdidochas]

Turns out this has been in the By-Laws for years (found and old copy of by-laws dating to 2010 with this), but has never been enforced to my knowledge (at least not since I've been with the troop since Spring 2010). Regardless, it should be changed. That should be a Scoutmaster decision.

[King Ding Dong]

There is no voting in a Unit Committee. The members do their jobs and the CO has authority on unit policies.

[Sentinel947]

Your troops bylaws, regardless of when they were written, are wrong. Your job as the Scoutmaster is to handle the program, and that includes the SPL. If a committee member thinks they can do things better, I'd invite them to swap positions.

[T2Eagle]

In a strictly hierarchical sense I suppose the Committee, or at least the Committee Chair, can remove a boy from his post since a SM can dismiss a scout from the POR and the CC can determine who is SM, but really all that is beside the point. As almost everyone here agrees this is not the Committee's proper role. Decisions like these are best made by the SM working with the ASMs, If other folks want to express an opinion that's great, take it under advisement.

 

The real question is whether to have the battle about the by-laws or wait and see if you have the battle about them actually trying to do it. After all, how would this work in practice? Would they then appoint a new SPL? Call for elections? What if the SM doesn't like who they pick? What about the Librarian, what's their opinon on him, how about the Chaplain's Aide, is he doing his job? The best response to all this is to smile and nod, assure everybody that the SM has everything under control and is working closely with the scout to make everything work. Then go spend time with the boys.

[SSScout]

Politics are not Scouting. This is politics. This is The Committee (sounds like a Scorcese movie) trying to micromanage the Troop. It's the SM's job to micromanage, and then you say that's not "Boy Led". It is the Committtee's job to support the SM and if they feel he/she is not doing the right job to RECOMMEND that either the SM resign, or the IH remove him/her.

From this distance, and with this limited info, I feel the SM is doing his job, the boy elected SPL (elected, right?) is doing his job , even if by remote, and all should be well.

Is there more "behind the scenes"? Is there jealousy or somebody's son not getting ahead fast enough or someone concerned with the Troop's prestige in the community or something else about the incumbent SPL's outside of the Troops life?

[Stosh]

With my new troop the ASM and CC asked me when it would be a good time to sit down and write out by-laws for the troop. My polite answer was, "Never".

 

I said the troop has 3 rules: 1) Safety First, 2) Look and act like a scout, and 3) Have fun.

 

What would one put in the by-laws that those rules don't cover?

 

They asked about the leadership structure, I said the boys are to figure that out on their own. Terms of service, as long as their buddies want them in that position they stay. If the BOYS decide it's time for a leadership change, they simply do it however they wish. NO ADULTS are allowed to dictate the leadership in a Boy-Led, Patrol-Method structure.

 

If the SPL has sports and the ASPL takes over supporting the PL's I don't have a problem with that and the boys if they do, will just adjust the situation accordingly. If there's a serious need by one of the PL's that requires an SPL and only the ASPL is available and he can't handle it, then the next step is to go to the ASPL's support person for help, the SM, the same person the SPL would go to if he couldn't handle a PL's problem. The SPL and ASPL are basically interchangable in their duties except when the SPL is in session and the ASPL assumes his duties of being the PL of the troop officers.

 

In order for the Boy-led, Patrol Method to work properly the gatekeeper of adult involvement is the SM. Only the SM can make arrangements for adults to assist the boys with issues they are having with their patrols. He might assign an ASM with special skills to help a patrol that has asked for help. He/she might just help on their own or form a small committee to assist in helping a PL. Whatever it takes to help make the SPL successful in helping the PL be successful.

 

100% of committee involvement in the program is meddling where they don't belong. I'd even go so far as to say 100% of the SM's involvement in the program when not directly requested or doesn't pertain to one of the three troop rules, is also meddling where he/she doesn't belong.

 

Stosh

[perdidochas]

Politics are not Scouting. This is politics. This is The Committee (sounds like a Scorcese movie) trying to micromanage the Troop. It's the SM's job to micromanage, and then you say that's not "Boy Led". It is the Committtee's job to support the SM and if they feel he/she is not doing the right job to RECOMMEND that either the SM resign, or the IH remove him/her.

From this distance, and with this limited info, I feel the SM is doing his job, the boy elected SPL (elected, right?) is doing his job , even if by remote, and all should be well.

Is there more "behind the scenes"? Is there jealousy or somebody's son not getting ahead fast enough or someone concerned with the Troop's prestige in the community or something else about the incumbent SPL's outside of the Troops life?

 

I think the main thing they are irritated with is that he didn't show up for his first PLC as SPL (which was the second troop meeting after he came into office). He also irritated one of the committee members at the COH, when he showed up without his MB sash and was kind of flippant when asked why. (he got permission to not attend his school activity for the COH, but it cost him his "chair" in the Orchestra--he went from 1st to 3rd for missing practice for the COH).

 

I was thinking the troop was running pretty smoothly, and then a committee member sends out an email with the section about Troop Committee being able to remove youth leaders for a variety of reasons, the first one being missing more than three consecutive meetings. This hasn't been enforced ever before.

[perdidochas]

With my new troop the ASM and CC asked me when it would be a good time to sit down and write out by-laws for the troop. My polite answer was, "Never".

 

I said the troop has 3 rules: 1) Safety First, 2) Look and act like a scout, and 3) Have fun.

 

What would one put in the by-laws that those rules don't cover?

 

They asked about the leadership structure, I said the boys are to figure that out on their own. Terms of service, as long as their buddies want them in that position they stay. If the BOYS decide it's time for a leadership change, they simply do it however they wish. NO ADULTS are allowed to dictate the leadership in a Boy-Led, Patrol-Method structure.

 

If the SPL has sports and the ASPL takes over supporting the PL's I don't have a problem with that and the boys if they do, will just adjust the situation accordingly. If there's a serious need by one of the PL's that requires an SPL and only the ASPL is available and he can't handle it, then the next step is to go to the ASPL's support person for help, the SM, the same person the SPL would go to if he couldn't handle a PL's problem. The SPL and ASPL are basically interchangable in their duties except when the SPL is in session and the ASPL assumes his duties of being the PL of the troop officers.

 

In order for the Boy-led, Patrol Method to work properly the gatekeeper of adult involvement is the SM. Only the SM can make arrangements for adults to assist the boys with issues they are having with their patrols. He might assign an ASM with special skills to help a patrol that has asked for help. He/she might just help on their own or form a small committee to assist in helping a PL. Whatever it takes to help make the SPL successful in helping the PL be successful.

 

100% of committee involvement in the program is meddling where they don't belong. I'd even go so far as to say 100% of the SM's involvement in the program when not directly requested or doesn't pertain to one of the three troop rules, is also meddling where he/she doesn't belong.

 

Stosh

 

I do like the idea of by-laws, but IMHO, it should just govern the money aspects of a troop--scout accounts, etc. I do like your basic three rules.

[LeCastor]

This is pretty timely from Clarke Green:

 

http://scoutmastercg.com/the-authority-of-youth-leadership/

[qwazse]

... (he got permission to not attend his school activity for the COH' date=' but it cost him his "chair" in the Orchestra--he went from 1st to 3rd for missing practice for the COH).[/quote']

 

If it's any consolation to the scout, let him know that someone in internet land has been there, done that, wrote the book, got his "chair" back, because at the end of the term, a scout knows how to fit in solo practices while the rest of the world slacks. {I'd use a Pittsburgh-ese term here, but some of you would take it the wrong way.}

 

I was thinking the troop was running pretty smoothly' date=' and then a committee member sends out an email ...[/quote']

 

There's them who'll blow smoke, and them who'll get your cobbler on cooking coals.

 

This is where your role as ASM comes to the fore. The SM may feel he needs to use a little political correctness. But his "cheerleaders" can elevate him by declaring to the committee that an action of his (in this case how he chose to work with a boy) was the best thing for the troop.

 

I have replied ... in a committee meeting, while the SM was feeling shamed and not knowing what to say about not meeting some advancement benchmark ... that certain things are not and never will be a priority for the direct-contact adult leadership in this troop. Years before, when I was just a MC, I recalled an ASM telling a CM point-blank that a decision was strictly the purview of the SM and things would be best if the committee allows him to exercise his prerogative.

 

There may be things that irk me about my SM, but the committee will never know. The "assistant" on my position patch makes it obvious which side I should take in these circumstances.

 

So, get your pom poms! You know your people, so you can best figure out when and how to speak up and give the "This is how it's gonna be" speech. But it's in your court to do so.