SM pulls rank advancement after successful BOR

[Stosh]

Codes of Conduct that interfere with the BSA rules of advancement are not valid.  They are nothing more than means to bully the boys into advancement rules beyond those spelled out by BSA.

 

Sorry.  I have never in 40+ years of working with youth ever needed Code of Conduct contracts.  Those that do need them abuse them on a routine basis and the youth suffer.  If all the advancement requirements are fulfilled and signed off on including the BOR then even if the boy goes out and robs a bank before the COH, he still has earned the rank.

[Stosh]

http://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2017/01/13/what-is-the-scouter-code-of-conduct/?utm_source=Volunteers&utm_campaign=f05ede39a3-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_01_18&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_9777d746fe-f05ede39a3-207459917

 

Why in the world would we as Scouters need such a thing.... Oh, yeah, I forgot.

[TAHAWK]

Scouter's Code of Conduct.

1. I will be a living example of the Scout Oath, Law. Motto and Slogan.  (Replaces previous Scouter's Code of Conduct.  Don't confuse detailed user's instructions with a code of conduct.)

 

2. I will always teach, use, and support Boy Scouting's most important Method, the Patrol Method as B.S.A. defines that Method (And B.S.A. should be about the task of defining that Method in all of its training materials for Scouts and Scouters.).

 

3. I will do my very best to encourage the Scouts in my unit to camp and/or hike each month of the year and be examples of living the Outdoor Code and principles of Leave No Trace.

 

4. I will do my best to develop the Scouts in my unit as responsible and capable leaders by training, example, and opportunity to lead.

 

5. I will do my best to encourage the individual Scouts in my unit to grow into self-confident, contentious, caring citizens who make the Good Turn, respect for others, and attention to their spiritual life an integral part of their personal culture.

 

6. I will encourage and facilitate advancement in rank and earning (actually earning) of Merit Badges by the Scouts of my unit as a means of encouraging their growth in skills and knowledge and as good citizens.

 

7. I will wear official B.S.A. uniform at all Boy Scout indoor program and, as practicable, at Boy Scout outdoor program and will strongly encourage the Scouts of my unit to do the same. (Having a "uniform" - that is, the same clothing, for all Scouts and Scouters, instead of merely a B.S.A. brand of clothing, would greatly facilitate this goal.)

Edited January 19, 2017 by TAHAWK

[IM_Kathy]

ok just my opinion...  when I have a boy transfer to join my troop I sit down and talk to him anyway.  I like to know where he is in the advancement.  What he's looking for.  What he's enjoying so far with my troop.   

 

I then make sure the scout meets our Committee Chair, Outdoor Chair, Treasurer, and Advancement chair.  They too sit down and ask him basically same stuff.  What can the troop do to help him?  Does he have issues with fundraising and does he think he'll need financial support?  What camping locations has he attended and would recommend?  Has he heard of a camp ground that sounds interesting?  What has he enjoyed the most with scouting?  What does he look forward to with scouting?  What has he cooked on his campouts, and what does he want to try to cook in the future?  What outdoor skills does he think he still needs to improve on?   These adults also explain their jobs to him during this time so he knows who to talk to about certain things in the future.

 

And you know what... he's now meet and gotten comfortable with the adult leaders.  He knows who to turn to for issues that are above the SPL's job.  And in so doing he's also completed a Scoutmaster conference and his board of review!  

 

I do this even if not up for rank change.  But when up for a rank it's a double duty but it counts!

[EmberMike]

I skimmed this thread, so maybe I missed answers to some questions I'd have. But immediately this whole debacle has me wondering:

 

What's the SM's process for pulling rank and (possibly) re-issuing it later? Another conf and BOR? How do the records for that look? Multiple sign-off dates?

 

As far as I know a SM can't remove rank on their own after it's earned. Doesn't policy favor the scout in this case and the rank is already officially earned unless council steps in to remove it?

 

Going by current policy, the rank was earned. Period. Anything beyond that of off policy and not enforceable. If I were a leader in the new troop, seeing the signed BOR is all I'd need to know to recognize the rank earned. They don't need to get into the politics of the issue. Just go by the book, the kid has the rank already. 

Edited February 16, 2017 by EmberMike

[Col. Flagg]

Going by current policy, the rank was earned. Period. Anything beyond that of off policy and not enforceable. If I were a leader in the new troop, seeing the signed BOR is all I'd need to know to recognize the rank earned. They don't need to get into the politics of the issue. Just go by the book, the kid has the rank already. 

 

Spot on! The Scout's book is signed, he's earned the rank. All the new SM has to do is drive to the Scout Shop to pick up the rank, award it to the new Scout and welcome him warmly in to the new troop. Done.

[David CO]

Spot on! The Scout's book is signed, he's earned the rank. All the new SM has to do is drive to the Scout Shop to pick up the rank, award it to the new Scout and welcome him warmly in to the new troop. Done.

 

I disagree.  The committee members from the old troop are saying the BOR never took place.  If the BOR never took place, the signatures in the book are invalid.

[Col. Flagg]

I disagree.  The committee members from the old troop are saying the BOR never took place.  If the BOR never took place, the signatures in the book are invalid.

 

A Scout is Trustworthy....probably more so than any adults with agendas. Ask the Scout. If he said the signature is from his other troop's BOR, then accept it. If he says he doesn't know where it came from, give the kid a BOR if his book is otherwise signed off.

 

This can all go away with just one adult rising above all this crappola and investing in the Scout, rather than playing troop-palace intrigue with a bunch of silly parents.

[perdidochas]

I disagree.  The committee members from the old troop are saying the BOR never took place.  If the BOR never took place, the signatures in the book are invalid.

If they signed his book, it took place.  Per BSA policy, the Scout's handbook is the official record.  If they signed it, the signatures can't be invalid. They can only be invalid if they didn't actually sign it.  If they signed it, and then act as if it was invalid, IMHO, they are lying, and should be immediately removed from the BSA.  There is no provision for stripping earned rank. That alone is a major departure from BSA rules. 

[David CO]

If they signed his book, it took place.  Per BSA policy, the Scout's handbook is the official record.  If they signed it, the signatures can't be invalid. They can only be invalid if they didn't actually sign it.  If they signed it, and then act as if it was invalid, IMHO, they are lying, and should be immediately removed from the BSA.  There is no provision for stripping earned rank. That alone is a major departure from BSA rules. 

 

I don't know who is lying.  I am more inclined to believe teachers over students, and scouters over scouts.  Others on this forum take the opposite approach.  

 

IMHO, none of us on this forum are capable of determining who in this matter is lying and who is telling the truth.  I certainly am not.  

 

Yes, there is no provision for stripping earned rank.  I don't think any of us disagree on that.  

[perdidochas]

I don't know who is lying.  I am more inclined to believe teachers over students, and scouters over scouts.  Others on this forum take the opposite approach.  

 

IMHO, none of us on this forum are capable of determining who in this matter is lying and who is telling the truth.  I certainly am not.  

 

Yes, there is no provision for stripping earned rank.  I don't think any of us disagree on that.  

 

Well, I assume that the person telling the tale to me is telling the truth, unless inconsistencies occur.  I can easily imagine a misguided SM taking away rank. 

 

My point about the lying is if their signatures are in his handbook, then the BOR has been done.  If they acknowledge something is their signature, then claim it didn't take place, then they are lying. 

[Col. Flagg]

I don't know who is lying.  I am more inclined to believe teachers over students, and scouters over scouts.  Others on this forum take the opposite approach.  

 

IMHO, none of us on this forum are capable of determining who in this matter is lying and who is telling the truth.  I certainly am not.  

 

Yes, there is no provision for stripping earned rank.  I don't think any of us disagree on that.  

 

 

Well, I assume that the person telling the tale to me is telling the truth, unless inconsistencies occur.  I can easily imagine a misguided SM taking away rank. 

 

My point about the lying is if their signatures are in his handbook, then the BOR has been done.  If they acknowledge something is their signature, then claim it didn't take place, then they are lying. 

 

@@David CO you're right. We have no way of knowing who is telling the truth since are not involved in the primary incident. So I put myself in the new SM's shoes:

• I welcome the new Scout warmly in to the troop.
• I have the meeting with him that's been suggested above.
• We review his records and his handbook. I ask him about his BOR. Who was there? Who signed? His response and mannerisms should tell me if there's any fire where we think there's smoke. If not, I take the book at face value, trust the Scout and award the rank.
• If the Scout's answer is suspicious, then we hold a BOR for him so he can close our the rank. Then we award the rank.

Regardless of whether or not the Scout knows who signed, why would we suspect the Scout over the Scouter? I think we've all seen cases where both parties could be equally liable to not tell the truth. So let's trust BOTH parties. If the BOR is in contention just have another BOR and award the rank. Done!

[TAHAWK]

I don't know who is lying.  I am more inclined to believe teachers over students, and scouters over scouts.  Others on this forum take the opposite approach.  

 

IMHO, none of us on this forum are capable of determining who in this matter is lying and who is telling the truth.  I certainly am not.  

 

Yes, there is no provision for stripping earned rank.  I don't think any of us disagree on that.  

We are not a court.  We are given facts second hand and asked for advice based upon those facts.  

 

If the claimed facts are, on their face, improbable, that would likely impact the advice or the willingness to give advice.

 

Reject the facts given out of prejudice and that impacts the advice, but in no useful fashion.

[EmberMike]

Of course there's no way to know for sure who might be lying, but based on what we know, the scout seems likely to be in the right here. The SM supposedly revoked rank, right? So the rank had to have been awarded in the first place to be revoked, and apparently this SM has a history of revoking rank and other unusual disciplinary methods. In this scenario, rank was awarded, new troop should recognize that rank, and we're done. 

 

On the unlikely chance that the BOR did not take place, or there is any question of the validity of the BOR, the new troop just needs to hold another one during which any questions/concerns about the previous BOR or anything else leading up to this point can be discussed if the new troop needs clarity on anything fro this scout's past. 

 

Either way, this should have long since been resolved, it's not that complicated. 

 

Even in the event that the BOR never actually happened, and in which case the old troop is essentially saying this scout forged signatures in his book, that can also likely be resolved by simply discussing it with the scout. In that unfortunate scenario, then it is up to the troop to decide what to do next or take it to council. 

 

What I'm stuck on here is the lack of action. The new troop can't just sit it out and say they don't want to get involved. They can't just ignore this forever and keep the kid at previous rank. Eventually this needs to be dealt with, and months have already gone by. Deal with it, and move on. 

[David CO]

@@David CO you're right. We have no way of knowing who is telling the truth since are not involved in the primary incident. So I put myself in the new SM's shoes:

• I welcome the new Scout warmly in to the troop.
• I have the meeting with him that's been suggested above.
• We review his records and his handbook. I ask him about his BOR. Who was there? Who signed? His response and mannerisms should tell me if there's any fire where we think there's smoke. If not, I take the book at face value, trust the Scout and award the rank.
• If the Scout's answer is suspicious, then we hold a BOR for him so he can close our the rank. Then we award the rank.

Regardless of whether or not the Scout knows who signed, why would we suspect the Scout over the Scouter? I think we've all seen cases where both parties could be equally liable to not tell the truth. So let's trust BOTH parties. If the BOR is in contention just have another BOR and award the rank. Done!

 

If the scout had not already taken the matter to council, I would agree with you.