Should SM be asked to leave?

[Stosh]

So can the death penalty, how far does one want to push it? 

 

I guess one can justify just about anything if they really want to if they try hard enough.

[MattR]

 

Should this SM be removed?  I'm not going to play the "we need both sides of the story" game here - normally I would agree but I will say, without one doubt, that he's got to go.

 

He could be the biggest jerk in the district but if the committee likes him then that's what they want. If the scouts like camping only 4 times a year then what happens when this parent demands he leaves? I often hear and see what happens when a new parent tries making a big change in a troop and it doesn't work. It doesn't matter how valid the new parent's ideas are. This SM does sound like a jerk but unless there are other parents that agree this is likely not going to end well. If this guy is so bad then why is it that everyone accepts it?

 

This troop could very well be a mess. Who will help these new parents fix it? I suspect nobody will help them. This troop doesn't care about advancement or camping, so who's going to suddenly start doing more? Not the parents that have been there. The parents that like to camp have already left. The worst case scenario is the new SPL and his parents get into a power struggle with the old guard. Best case is the new SPL ligts a fire in this troop and a bunch of scouts and their parents say we want to follow him. That's not going to happen over night. That's why I asked what the SPL thought about the situation. If he see's it as a challenge then keep on going. If he's frustrated then he should look elsewhere.

[Hedgehog]

If the SPL is supposed to be "running the troop", why isn't he the one talking with the CC and COR?  We're not talking about some young scout who's lost his necker and the SPL wouldn't help him find it, we're talking about an Eagle candidate who needs to step up his game and show a bit more leadership than just on his petty little Eagle project.  That project is supposed to be able to translate leadership into the real world out there.  What we have is leadership just enough to get by on the project.  If one is going to run with the big dogs, one had better learn how the pecking order works.  SSScouter seemed to allude to this quite nicely.

 

Maybe SPL is 6'+ and looks like a 17 year old, if he doesn't  have the fortitude to figure out this as being more than just wearing a patch or having a lesson plan written down, then he needs to find a more comfortable POR. 

 

 

Stosh:

 

I don't think that any Boy Scout should be expected to take on an adult who:  1) has a grudge against the boy because he won as SPL rather than the SM's son; 2) shows no respect for the BSA program (no blue cards, no merit badge counselor registration, no uniform, no CoH); 3) shows no respect for members of the Committee; 4) violates YPT guidelines regarding texting; and 4) has expressed a belligerent attitude toward the boy.  

 

I can tell you that if that was my son, it would not be a battle he fights alone.

[eagle90]

As a SM for a good number of years with over 50 Eagle Scouts (No, we are not a mill, just eager scouts), I purposely do not attend Eagle projects.   At first I did, but I found the scouts attending the project would come to me with questions instead of the candidate.  Didn't want to infringe on his project and leadership and a chance to learn and grow.

[Sentinel947]

I'll play the "both sides of the story" game. I don't this poster well. I don't know the Troop. I don't know the SM. It would be pretty useless for me to offer any advice other than, talk to the CC and IH, tell them what you know, and it's their job to handle it.

​In short, in cases of other Troop politics, I give what the next step is, (Which is report to the CC and IH). Zuzy is probably telling the truth. I try not to speculate about situations I know next to nothing about.

 

There are some folks on here, like Stosh, Krampus, MattR, and Eagledad, (and that's by no means an exhaustive list!) that I feel like I know pretty well, and I trust what they say.  

 

The unfortunate nature of the internet is, not everything is true, anybody can pretend to be anything, and say anything, and you'll never quite know for sure. Pretty serious accusations.

 

But since we're all speculating, I'll bite. If the alleged information is accurate, and it was my Troop, I'd do what I could remove that Scoutmaster. If I couldn't, as an ASM, I'd step down until they found a suitable replacement.

​Sentinel947

[Stosh]

Stosh:

 

I don't think that any Boy Scout should be expected to take on an adult who:

 

I don't believe I said anything about taking on the SM.  I only indicated that if the SPL were to be leading the troop and showing leadership he would be taking on the SM role.  Obviously the SM with his laptop isn't leading and he's expecting the boy to lead and the boy isn't.  He has a case for the lack of the boy's leadership.

 

 1) has a grudge against the boy because he won as SPL rather than the SM's son;

 

Maybe, maybe not.  We don't know for sure, but the SM's son is surely not showing any leadership initiative here either.

 

2) shows no respect for the BSA program (no blue cards, no merit badge counselor registration, no uniform, no CoH);

 

As pointed out the possibility that those in the troop may not care about any of those things.  After all the case can be made that there are a far greater SM's out there that are currently showing no respect for the BSA program by not using the patrol method or boy led.  The VAST majority find half uniforms and "Class-B" ignorance as a commonly accepted practice.  So to single out this SM on those items is a joke.

 

3) shows no respect for members of the Committee;

 

As UC I have heard worse on more than one occasion.

 

4) violates YPT guidelines regarding texting;  

 

I find this infraction falling under the category of 99.9% of the COR's never reprimanding a SM for such things.

 

and 4) has expressed a belligerent attitude toward the boy.  

 

Belligerence?  I have often put scouts on the spot such as this to challenge them to step up their game and start leading.  Not knowing the full extent of this situation, I can only conclude one of two possibilities.  1) the SM is a jerk, of which there are plenty of them out there like this or 2) the ASM is fighting his son's battle for him and should step back and let his son lead as the SM expects him to.

 

As pointed out in another thread, an ASM serves at the pleasure of the SM.  If he/she can't handle that, step down and let the SM find someone who is capable of working with him.  If that's too difficult, move on to another troop.  Been there, done that, and even after I left it was a very long time before the COR removed the SM.

 

I can tell you that if that was my son, it would not be a battle he fights alone.

 

Not a problem, I have witnessed many cases where mom and dad come running to the rescue of  their precious little defenseless child from some Neanderthal brute of an abusive adult. 

 

Edited February 23, 2016 by Stosh

[desertrat77]

Your Scoutson is learning early a valuable lesson:  how to get along with a boss.  

 

SSScout is right on the money.

 

The SPL's situation sounds familiar.   Many moons ago, after I made Eagle and moved to another state, I joined a troop and was made SPL.   The SM took a special interest in making my life miserable, highlighting errors that I made and inventing ones when I did things right.   I could not win as long as this guy was SM.

 

But I learned a few things about human dynamics, lessons that I used many times in the future at work.

 

Back to the case at hand:  As others have mentioned, there may be no replacement in the wings.   No one willing to step up.   No one qualified.   Sounds like the other adult leaders are numb to the SM's methods, or are okay with it.

 

Has anyone talked to the SM?   (Perhaps so but I missed it.)   I doubt he'd change much, but has he had some frank feedback from any other adult leader in the troop?

 

Others have mentioned this, and I concur with them--a situation that I find intolerable as a parent may just be merely annoying to my kid.   "Dad, don't say anything, I can handle it."   Okay.   I've wanted to figuratively throat punch a few select baseball coaches and a youth minster in the past, but my kids said please don't.   Perspective.

 

SM not showing up to the Eagle project:   I'm okay with that.   It's the candidate's project and opportunity to lead without a bunch of adults cluttering up the situation.

 

Sounds like the SPL has the right game plan.  Persevering.  Taking the high road.  Doing a great job.   Overcoming obstacles.  Striving to provide a great program.   All hallmarks of a good Eagle-to-be.

Edited February 23, 2016 by desertrat77

[Krampus]

The unfortunate nature of the internet is, not everything is true, anybody can pretend to be anything, and say anything, and you'll never quite know for sure. Pretty serious accusations.

[Sentinel947]

 

Woof woof.

[gumbymaster]

I've occasionally had this internal debate myself regarding my son's troop.

 

There are many things that, as an experienced Scouter, I would like to see done, or done differently; but I have to remind myself that as a Webelos, my son visited several troops, and saw how they worked and what they did, and this is the one he chose to join.  He could have chosen one closer to my vision, but he did not.  Presumably many of the other Scouts are in a similar way of thinking.

 

So while I can, and do work to improve (in my opinion) some of the things in the Troop behind the scenes, I'm not prepared to try an invoke a major change in the way things are done, just because I think they should be.  Now, with Safety, and YP I am a little more forceful; but otherwise, it would be limited to making Scouts (TC->SM->PLC) aware of options, or aware of reasons why doing something differently might be beneficial.

 

What I don't want to see in an exodus of Scouts looking for a new unit, because this isn't the unit they signed up to join.  The balance is I also don't want lethargy and tradition interfering with the Scouts themselves deciding what could be different.

 

Sometimes all it takes is a motivated youth leader to take over and show the others the possibilities - if the Scouts don't like it, they don't reelect him or those like him; but the Scouts don't get to elect the Scoutmaster - here they would vote with their feet.

 

For the discussion above, it sounds like the Scouts of the troop might be ready for the new vision of your Son, someone with new ideas, training, and experience -> leadership.  I hope that he is successful in-spite of the challenges the current SM poses.

Edited February 23, 2016 by gumbymaster

[Krampus]

I would offer this advice to anyone with suggestions about the troop operations: Talk to the SM about your "vision". He may share it. He may be trying to implement it and not know how. He may have tried and failed. He may not know how. He may disagree. The point is, the SM may be simply maintaining the status quo simply out of survival instinct or for any one of a number of other reasons.

 

While the SM in the OP may NOT be open to change or comment, my guess is that the majority of SMs will be.

[Stosh]

As adults we are there to create opportunities for the boys, not visions, not goals and for sure not roadblocks.  Just opportunities for them to make decisions on regarding THEIR program.  For the most part, they stay within the boundaries of the BSA program and when they don't, I as SM just don't support that which I know is not appropriate.  If they wish to paint-ball as an outing, they may do so outside the program of the BSA, without BSA adult YPT, etc.  If some parent wishes to take on the supervision of that activity on their own, it's up to them and their homeowner's umbrella policy whether or not they wish to support it.

 

VERY rarely do such circumstances come up and usually resolve themselves rather quickly.

 

But whatever the boys want, I as SM with the help of my ASM see to it they get support.

 

Just as was pointed out, the decisions for the various youth personalities varies and the BSA allows for differing interests, maturity and programmatic goals.  When boys age out and new ones come on-board, the personality of the group changes and the supporting roles need adapt.

 

Rigid adult mandates, rules, covenants, policies, by-laws, etc. are all inflexible and tend to try and regulate what the boys are allowed, thus taking away opportunities rather than promoting them.  The reason why boy-led is so chaotic is because of the fluidity of the program.  Boy's lead for maximum 7 years, but those 7 years are all different.  Young boys lead differently than older boys and when the younger boys get older they lead differently than when they were younger..

 

Toss into that a rigid adult who can't handle the messy boy-led processes and one will automatically set up a conflict situation.  Adults wield dominance over the boys and things "run smoothly", but one always has to be vigilant and ask, is this the adventure these boys signed on for?  So, we're back to square one... is that OPPORTUNITY being given the boys as an option?

[zuzy]

Heretic, not sure where you are coming from?  Son "just" was elected to SPL postion two weeks ago and is VERY responsible!!!  He just needs direction as to what the SM wants. SM was very inappropriate in expecting that my son "knew" how to run things, when he was never even spoken to about the SPL position in this troop.  Son wants to help change this troop with REAL boy leadership and REAL boy involvement, but needs a bit of direction is all.

[zuzy]

Committee is very disgruntled with SM, and Chairwoman that was called bad name wants to quit post, my hubby, Unit commissioner has calmed her, telling her that he will take care of things and will put SM in his place.  KIds DO NOT like going camping 4 times a year and my son is going to change that with HIS LEADERSHIP.  He will get them camping once a month with hopefully day outings inbetween.  My hubby is just trying to do this diplomatically and let SM hang himself, make the noose a little bit tighter.

[Stosh]

Heretic, not sure where you are coming from?  Son "just" was elected to SPL postion two weeks ago and is VERY responsible!!!

 

Never assumed he wasn't.. 

 

 He just needs direction as to what the SM wants.

 

It is obvious that the BOYS elected him to be SPL and if boy-led, what "direction" is needed from the SM?  That process sounds like the SPL son is seeking leadership from the SM when in fact he should be taking the reins and going with it.  If the SM doesn't like the direction the SPL is taking, then I'm sure he'll say something.  

 

SM was very inappropriate in expecting that my son "knew" how to run things, when he was never even spoken to about the SPL position in this troop.  

 

Then take the lead and go with it based on what the boys think the SPL is capable of doing.  They had a reason why they elected him and if they were putting him into the SPL position just to see him fail, then it's up to your son to prove them wrong.  But if they elected him to see him succeed, then they will back him even if he runs afoul of the SM.  SPL backed by the boys wanting boy-led will do well against the adult-run dynamic changes in the troop.  This is his opportunity, what he does with it is important.  But doing nothing is a recipe for failure right off the bat.

 

Son wants to help change this troop with REAL boy leadership and REAL boy involvement, but needs a bit of direction is all.

 

Then tell him to do it and quit looking to the SM and other adults to do it for him.  If your son wants to have a legacy of change, then quit talking about it, quite waiting for the adults to do it, and simply get out and lead!  If the SM doesn't like it he'll say something.  Until then, "Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead!" 

Edited February 23, 2016 by Stosh