Sticky SM issue

[Greg78]

Greetings FScouter!

 

Please keep in mind there was no committee and the SM was the link to the CO. Most of the time period the CO board was not exactly interested in their Scout Program. Now there is a new CO board (president) that wants to take care of things.

 

The SM always painted a rosy picture for the COR.

 

And of course hind sight is 20-20. We could have and should have.

 

The SM should have done something after the first set of boys asked her to step down. SM has never followed up with the boys that have left.

Doing exit interviews just makes sense to make improvements to your program. Or the committee could have done this - oh wait, there is no committee.

 

[Bob White]

Quotes from Greg78

4/8/04

The committee was taken by surprise but was not in the position to change leadership at the time.

 

4/9/04

She loaded up< U>the committee with her relatives when she began.

 

The workers aren't firing the Boss, The Troop committee is.

 

We will go as far as we can with the committee and approach the CO with the results.

 

- we are at the committee action stage now.

 

We will have a meeting with the committee and the CO and go from there.

 

The committee and ASM's are meeting with the CO tonight.

 

4/15/04

So, as it became apparent to the committee members and parents

 

After the parents and committee came together and made their recommendations to the CO..

 

 

From PNscouter

5/18/04

have worked with Greg on this issue and am the person which the committee may have chosen

 

5/19/04

All of these issues were discussed at the committee level

 

 

Which brings us to today when Greg78 writes

Please keep in mind there was no committee

 

HUH?

Where did they go? Both Greg78 and PNScouter referred to them, and now Greg78 tells us they never existed?

 

Lets keep in mind we still have not had any specific things that the SM has done wrong explained to us. Now thats certainly Gregs right to withhold. But it is unfair to ask us what should be done when we still do not know why any of this has happened.

 

It has boiled down to this.

1.The CO wants to have scouting and has selected and approved a Scoutmaster.

2.Some adults and scouts do not like the choice.

 

They can either

A. Stay and work together to develop a good scouting program

B. Leave and join another troop or work with a new Charter organization.

 

Solution:

Pick one now and do it. It is unfair to everyone to hang around and continue to breed dissension whether in view of the scouts or not.

 

[FScouter]

Your Scoutmaster painted a rosy picture for your chartered organization, when the truth was otherwise. And now the CO is somewhat skeptical that the situation is really as bad as it is. It never hurts to be a member of your chartered organization and to maintain some kind of relationship with them. Two or more pictures give a better view than one.

[Greg78]

Bob -

 

Sorry I seem to contridict myself.

 

When I refer to the committee early on it was just us ASM's.

 

When I refer to the committee from 4/9 on it was with the new committee members we signed up from our group of parents that wanted a change.

(Yes, we tried to load up the committee to have more votes than the SM's family members) It didn't seem right for us to do that so we brought as many parents as we could to the meeting and had them all decide.

 

As I stated before - we never really had a proper committee, there has never been a chairman. There was on paper but the guy that was signed up was the SM's father (I've never met the guy) and no one did the job becuase we never had committee meetings.

 

We pursued this because scouts are leaving the program (not just the ones in the troop now) and they all pointed to the SM as the reason.

 

She has been asked 4 times to step down. Twice by the boys and twice by the parents. Previous to our troop she was asked to leave another troop.

 

She never made any attempt to address this with the boys, the parents, or the Club. She never asked any of us to help figure out a way to improve her style so the boys would look up to her.

She never attempted to form a committee. We have done that and she has worked to limit our input by questioning the validity of the new members I recruited and our ability to make decisions about the program. We asked her to take a different leadership role in the troop and she dismissed that.

I would also point out that her every response has been excuse after excuse about why she didn't have a committee, why she wasn't using the patrol method, and dismissive, attacking comments to the boys when presented with why they are unhappy with her leadership.

 

Does this sound like someone who is trying to work together? This was the CO Board's stated goal. For us to work together. PNScounter and myself have made the effort as well as the boys and other parents.

 

The SM has not recruited any boys but her son into the troop.

 

The current CO Board did not choose the scoutmaster - It was very obvious the board followed the current president who apparently has formed a personal dislike for me.

The decision was made about the adults involved - not the boys - which is the whole reason I have been involved with this CR** in the first place. For the boys.

 

We are not interested in continuing any dissension either. We wanted to deal with this issue at the lowest level possible to prevent just that. We have strong leaders in other parents and have continued to run the program.

 

We will likely take those leaders and go elsewhere since it is evident the CO isn't interested in us running the program.

 

This is how strongly I believe in the patrol method - The CO should be looking at the troop as it's own patrol - we are the closest to the wins and loses and best able to make decisions to align with the Scouting program. We are the ones that are trained in the program. Of course the SM is too - and look where we are with that!

 

Our older boys decided to stick with the troop until summer camp and then we'll split. (split...what an awful thing for this group:-(

 

 

[Bob White]

Greg78

Fish or cut bait.

 

You say you are trained in the program yet you talk about parents and scouts asking the SM to step down. Where in the BSA program did you learn that? Whoever gave you the idea that the boys choose the Scoutmaster, or the parents for that matter?

 

You have yet to tell us one thing the scoutmaster has done wrong but you have shared plenty of things that you and others have erred on.

 

The Institution Head of the charter organization has given you their decision. They are supporting the scoutmaster. You need to do the same or leave. No one is being benefitted by those opposing the legitimate authority of the IH and COR.

[Greg78]

Hey Bob,

You said:

You say you are trained in the program yet you talk about parents and scouts asking the SM to step down. Where in the BSA program did you learn that? Whoever gave you the idea that the boys choose the Scoutmaster, or the parents for that matter?

There are no published instructions for removing a scoutmaster. There is no BSA training for dealing with inadequate leaders. The COR and COIH are supposed to form a selection committee and recruit a suitable leader. Which if selected properly would be that exceptional person who is looked up to and respected by the youth they are charged with leading. If this had happened from the beginning we wouldnt be in the position we are now. We learned as we went. We acted on behalf of the boys. They took the initiative and asked the SM to step down because they want a leader they can look up to. When the SM didnt do anything we parents stepped in because we are invested with the program and want to see it succeed to its fullest potential. It seemed more than logical to us that the CO would work with the parents and boys to improve the quality of their program. They are losing many scouts to this leader.

 

Bob White said:

You have yet to tell us one thing the scoutmaster has done wrong but you have shared plenty of things that you and others have erred on.

As for what she did wrong What more do you need to know? The SM has worked against forming a committee, doesnt use the patrol method, leads with a stick, and the boys obviously dont respect the SM? If they did they never would have asked her to step down.

Heres a great link of what LBP thinks a scoutmaster should be.

http://usscouts.org/clipart/scoutdoc/bpaids/bpaidssm.doc

This SM was not delivering anything close to this style and we had leaders that would.

Sure we erred, we were learning as we went along. We acted in the best interests of our troop and our boys. As I stated before hindsight is 20-20. We may have erred with the process and should have included others at different times but the facts are the facts and the situation is the situation that started this ball rolling.

 

Bob White said:

The Institution Head of the charter organization has given you their decision. They are supporting the scoutmaster. You need to do the same or leave. No one is being benefited by those opposing the legitimate authority of the IH and COR.

 

Yes, we have our decision and as I said the decision wasnt about the boys, it was directed at the adults involved. The vote was for the adults to work together and admonishing the process we took that brought us to this point. Also about truth, justice, and the American way. (who would vote against that!) It still doesnt deal with the core issues.

I will accept their desire.

We will support the scoutmaster and the scouts while we are still involved with the troop. And we will work with the COR and CO board to get them more involved with their scout troop. (Most of the board didn't even know the Scout Troop belonged to them and that they were responsible for the troop's leadership)

 

**************************************************

I would like to share an observation about the forums here and the comment someone made about how it seems every week someone is on here looking to off a CO or SM or someone else in a position of leadership.

How come the embattled leadership never comes to this forum? I have yet to see a post entitled Lynch Mob or Help, no ones following me or How do I save my BSA program from parents that want to take it over

Heres my guess These embattled leaders do not seek outside advice, do not look for guidance from others, and dont communicate very well otherwise. Within this isolation they create for themselves, decide that their way is the only way and are unwilling to open discussion on their point of view.

True Leaders always welcome open discussion and are willing to change their ideas based on what they hear/learn from others. When you are open, honest and stay focused on the core issues you dont become embattled, you improve!

We should probably spin this to a new discussion if anyone wants to comment.

 

 

[caddmommy]

greg78

 

It sounds to me that your CO doesn't seem all that interested in what goes on with the troop and you and the others would be better off going elsewhere. If so many parents have a problem with a leader, the CO should do more than what it did to resolve the problem. If the boys are not repecting their leaders, then the program is not working, no matter how trained the leader may be.

 

Maybe the boys should start visiting the other troops in the area now. If they find one they like, see when they go to camp. If it's the same camp, you may be able to switch before the end of summer.

If the new troop goes a different week, talk to the camp director. Chances are, if there is room, he would be willing to switch weeks for you. This would give the boys a better chance to get to know each other.

[SeattlePioneer]

So---

 

does anyone have any information as to how this sticky wicket played itself out?

 

 

 

 

[Kahuna]

I don't know what happened, but I was somewhat amazed to see that, throughout this discussion (and I didn't read every word of every post) everyone is saying that the committee doesn't have the power to fire the SM. According to BSA, the CO, through it's rep, appoints the committee. The committee selects and appoints the adult leaders. The leaders all serve at the pleasure of the committee.

 

http://www.scouting.org/nav/enter.jsp?s=ba

[Eamonn]

Hi,Kahuna

The link you provided brought me to a page with lots of information abouts lots of stuff. If you could be a little more specific it would be a big help.

I did find this:

Since the leadership is the responsibility of the chartering organization, the institution head should provide his approval of the committee's selection.

The committee mentioned here is a nominating committee. They meet and nominate Troop Leaders and Committee members. The final word and final approval comes from the chartering organization and the institution head.

Being as he approved the leader only he can dismiss the leader.

In theory a nominating committee could comprise of people who are not in any way involved with the troop, maybe a Church Council might select the Scoutmaster and the introduce him to the Troop Committee without any input from them.

Of course this doesn't happen very often, but it could.

The institution head can of course delegate what ever he wants to the COR.

I don't think we ever did hear if this ever became unstuck.

Eamonn

 

 

 

 

[LodgeChief]

Sorry to join in so late but, here is what I think.

It is a units are supposed to be run by the youth with the leaders there as a means of guidance (...and transportation ) I was the SPL for several terms in my troop. My SM was new and when he was a youth in the troop, the adults ran the show. So, at PLC's and such when he was making decisions without my input on the matter or it was something that the PLC could decide, I would tell him. We kind of duked it out for about a year (with his wife, who is also an ASM, getting involved at the end of that year, until he started letting the boys actually run the troop) Since then he has been a much better SM. People can get along with him and he is much more friendly. When he wasn't letting any of the youth do anything, they got lazy and when they really needed to do something they wouldn't or didn't know how to do it. Now the troop runs well. I agree with Greg, it's a Boy Run Troop and By-God were going to run it!

As for the post asking why the youth thought they have the authority to get rid of adults, that's not what they were doing. They asked the SM to step down, the SM does not have to do it, therefore no decision as to the removal of someone happened. They just simply wanted it to be done. It's their troop, why shouldn't they be able to ask such a question. The troop is in existance because the youth members want to be there and they want to be a part of something great. Be the Lodge Chief for an OA Lodge, committee chairman have been asked to step down by the executive board. They don't have to but if they don't get their act together I'm going to replace them. I think that what those boys did was courageous and should not be criticized for doing that, nor should they be discouraged from speaking out against adults or what they think is not right, whatever it may be.

[Greg78]

Greetings All,

 

I see renewed interest in this topic.

 

Here's an update.

 

We formed a new troop.

 

About half the boys from the old troop came with us.

We have been fundraising like crazy for equipment. We have been pretty successful at it.

We have a very active committee and we are determined to make it work.

Our boys are learning their positions and responsibilities. We have held JLT with them all and are providing scholarships to 2 for the Council's weeklong JLT.

All of this years Webelos from the previous CO joined our troop.

We have two more committee members and one (maybe two more) ASM's.

All the boys have earned their own money or most of their cost for camp this summer.

Since our forming we have been to three Camporees, A klondike, a polar bear and one other camp.

I hear there are about 6 boys left in the other troop.

I wasn't able to attend it but the old troop and CO put on the spring camporee and though there were a few bumps it went OK.

 

So that's where we stand at this point. Our CO has been wonderfully supportive of us.

 

Thanks for all your help guys! It was a real learning experience for me and PNScouter.

 

Greg

 

[Kahuna]

Hi Eamonn,

 

Guess the moral to that story is to always check your url before you post it. It does take you a lot of places. What I was referring to is:

 

2-Selecting leadership. The head of the chartered organization appoints a chartered organization representative to provide leadership in the selection of a committee of adults that will provide overall supervision for the unit's program. The committee selects the adult unit leaders who will work with the youth. The chartered organization representative is also a voting member of the local council and may serve as a member of the district committee.

 

 

Which is under Fact Sheets: community organizations and scouting.

 

This has always been the way it is in scouting, since I've been in it. When I went to Schiff NEI in 1970 they were teaching it that way to new professionals. However, in the first Handbook for Scoutmasters in 1913, it says part of the Scoutmaster's responsibility, once he obtains his "commission" is to organize a troop committee. So in the "good old days" the SM picked his own committee.

[Vicki]

Greg, it sounds like you did what you needed to do and it is working out for you. Glad to hear back, so often people just post and disappear.

 

In terms of the process for removing an SM, I really appreciated Kahuna posting that historical reference. It points to the ongoing evolution of Scouting from the "command and control" orientation to "teamwork and cooperation". The latter can get messy at times, but I think the outcomes tend to be better for all concerned.

 

I've been stewing about this "boobies" comment and even though this is an old thread, I just have to say something. You guys may not have felt like you could comment but as a female leader and in a profession where women are still working their way to the top I sure as heck can. I would no more reference my sexuality in a conversation like that than I'll be walking on the moon any time soon. The person who can make that sort of comment makes it harder for the rest of us and I, for one, don't appreciate it. I don't care what the context was, that would have been a huge red flag as to this person's defensive orientation. A friend of mine was called out for OA last summer - I overheard one of the obviously old guard telling her, "so it was a sad day when women were allowed in." Her reply? "Obviously I didn't make that rule, I just got in." Non-defensive, water off a duck's back.

 

Thanks for letting me get that off my chest (pun intended:

[evmori]

I still think if there is a Sticky SM he needs a good hot shower!