Webelos Transition to Troops

[Cubber]

Thanks for all the perspectives on this. It is a divisive one.  In answer to some of the questions...

By 'us'- I meant the CM, the DLs, the committee members. The CC is also the COR in our case.

To clarify, we are not using any resources other than our web events calendar and email (paid for by the pack and run by me) to let parents know about invitations to visit other troops at their troop hosted events off site. We were asked not to communicate these events by our CC/COR.

Our CO provides space, but no other resources.

The last two scouts 'eagled-out' of the CO sponsored troop. And now the COR is working hard to recruit new boys in so they can recharter. 

7 hours ago, David CO said:

Yes. As a cub master,  you volunteered to support the scouting program of the Chartered Organization. It is not unreasonable for your CO to expect you to promote both of their registered units. You should agree to speak up for the troop.

I am not saying that you should lie to the scouts or their parents. Be truthful. Tell them that it is their choice, but leave no doubt in anyone's mind that you volunteer for and support the CO's units.

 

 

With all due respect to our CC and COR, I volunteered with this CO sponsored pack to represent the BSA and it's program, not the interests of the CO and the COR. I have an ethical commitment to each family in my pack and their sons to provide the best program I can for them.

In my opinion, taking into account everything written here, and the goodwill of the families that have put their trust in me, I should be giving all troops equal opportunity to connect with our Webelos. Of course, including our CO Troop should they successfully recharter.

I would not feel comfortable personally endorsing any particular troop. 

 

 

[David CO]

1 hour ago, Cubber said:

With all due respect to our CC and COR, I volunteered with this CO sponsored pack to represent the BSA and it's program, not the interests of the CO and the COR. 

If this is how you feel, then you owe it to your COR to be straight with him. Your COR can then decide if he wants to have a CM who refuses to acknowledge his authority.

[David CO]

4 hours ago, CalicoPenn said:

But that is not the question being asked. 

I think it has now been made clear that it is the question being asked.

[WisconsinMomma]

The CO owns the Pack, but they do not own the people in the Pack.  I find it unreasonable if a CO attempts to limit whom  a free person  can communicate and associate with.   The boys and families are free to choose.  Don't be a jerk about promoting other Troops in front of the CO, but if your den leaders are going out into the community there is nothing wrong with that.  They should know that they have options, and it is unreasonable if the CO wants to pretend the boys and families have only one choice.   Hope that helps.

A song:

You don''t own me

I'm not one of your many toys

You don't own me

Don't say I can't go out with other boys

 

 

[HelpfulTracks]

4 hours ago, David CO said:

If this is how you feel, then you owe it to your COR to be straight with him. Your COR can then decide if he wants to have a CM who refuses to acknowledge his authority.

As a servant leader my obligation is to help instill the values of Scouting in the youth.

I have agreed to abide by the CO's rules and policies. Within that framework, my duty is to the youth not the CO.

I would question the mission of the CO that tells me that it is more important to keep a youth under their authority at the expense of helping the youth reach their full potential and growth.

That would be equivalent to a youth directory impeding a youth from going on a mission with another church or a science club adviser impeding a youth from growing their knowledge by joining an astronomy club elsewhere. If the CO's mission is about maintaining authority and growing it's interest above those it serves I think the CO has lost site of its mission or had a faulty mission to begin with.

[Eagle94-A1]

AAAAHHHHHH, the CC is also COR. That changes things a bit. As David CO points out, the COR has the ability to decide who the Scouters in a unit are. Only person who can override the COR is the IH, and I've only seen that happen once.

So in theory the CC/COR could fire you for not following his directives.

And the CC/COR is doing his job in promoting the CO's troop. To expect anything less, is them not doing their job. Plus the CC/COR wants to keep the troop alive, so they need fresh blood. So it is understandable.

The problem I have is not so much forcing the den to look only at one troop, but WHAT HAPPENED TO THE TROOP THAT IT IS ABOUT TO DIE? ( caps for emphasis, this is a major concern.) Normally the COR covers all units at a CO: Pack, Troop, Ship, and  Crew. If problems arise between troop and pack, he is responsible for working them out. If the pack has concerns about the troop, the COR is suppose to mediate and reconcile them.

So why has this not been done until now?

 

I think there is a back story and we are missing it.

[perdidochas]

21 hours ago, Cubber said:

Hello everyone- I am a cubmaster with my first crop of Webelos that we are supporting in their transition to boy scouts.  We are very fortunate to have several troops inviting us for visits with their troops.

Recently, our committee chair has the program leaders to not to visit with any of them, and instead send all scouts to a troop associated with our sponsor organization that just graduated its last two boys. That's right, there are no boys currently in that troop. They are trying to recruit and restart it from the ground up.  However, the parents we have talked with are not interested in starting a program from the ground up. We are caught in a bit of a catch 22.

My question is: does the committee chair have the right to direct us to transition to a particular troop, especially if it has no boys in it? Has anyone else run into this resistance to allowing Webelos to check out multiple troops to find their right fit?

Thanks for sharing your experience!

Your Webelos have to visit with a troop. If your CO doesn't have a troop to visit, they cannot finish AOL.    The COR should have thought about this years ago, not now when they have no troop.  

[an_old_DC]

@Cubber when do unit charters expire in your council? This troop, with zero Scouts, is dead and may not receive another charter before your Webelos bridge to a troop. Why visit a dead troop that may be about to be dissolved?

There are serious unit-health issues with that troop, which the COR, CC and committee have neglected.

[an_old_DC]

3 minutes ago, perdidochas said:

Your Webelos have to visit with a troop. If your CO doesn't have a troop to visit, they cannot finish AOL.    The COR should have thought about this years ago, not now when they have no troop.  

Yes. You and I were posting at the same time.  A troop with zero Scouts is not a troop.

[Eagledad]

Parents are free to visit and join any troop they desire. The COR needs to sell their program just like all the other troops if he wants to build the troop back up.

Barry

[perdidochas]

5 hours ago, WisconsinMomma said:

The CO owns the Pack, but they do not own the people in the Pack.  I find it unreasonable if a CO attempts to limit whom  a free person  can communicate and associate with.   The boys and families are free to choose.  Don't be a jerk about promoting other Troops in front of the CO, but if your den leaders are going out into the community there is nothing wrong with that.  They should know that they have options, and it is unreasonable if the CO wants to pretend the boys and families have only one choice.   Hope that helps.

A song:

You don''t own me

I'm not one of your many toys

You don't own me

Don't say I can't go out with other boys

 

 

Well, they don't own the people in the pack, but they do have the right to determine who represents them as a leader in the pack.   The CO is in control of membership, if they so wish, and they can kick out leaders who don't do what they ask or don't represent them well.  My only question with the OP is how is he going to fulfill the requirement of visiting a troop.  That, and why didn't the CO start worrying about the Troop years ago--when they had more than two scouts left.  

[perdidochas]

51 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

AAAAHHHHHH, the CC is also COR. That changes things a bit. As David CO points out, the COR has the ability to decide who the Scouters in a unit are. Only person who can override the COR is the IH, and I've only seen that happen once.

So in theory the CC/COR could fire you for not following his directives.

And the CC/COR is doing his job in promoting the CO's troop. To expect anything less, is them not doing their job. Plus the CC/COR wants to keep the troop alive, so they need fresh blood. So it is understandable.

The problem I have is not so much forcing the den to look only at one troop, but WHAT HAPPENED TO THE TROOP THAT IT IS ABOUT TO DIE? ( caps for emphasis, this is a major concern.) Normally the COR covers all units at a CO: Pack, Troop, Ship, and  Crew. If problems arise between troop and pack, he is responsible for working them out. If the pack has concerns about the troop, the COR is suppose to mediate and reconcile them.

So why has this not been done until now?

 

I think there is a back story and we are missing it.

My thoughts as well, although I didn't express it nearly as well as you have.  This issue should have been addressed while the Troop still existed.  

[Cubber]

8 hours ago, David CO said:

If this is how you feel, then you owe it to your COR to be straight with him. Your COR can then decide if he wants to have a CM who refuses to acknowledge his authority.

David, CO. I am not sure why you have generalized that I refuse to acknowledge his authority because we disagree on this particular approach in this area. To squelch dialogue, questions, about disagreements with authority is a losing leadership strategy, and I have faith that my CC/COR will not do that. I have no intention of escalating this to any sort of show down about who is right or who gets to call the shots with higher authority. My goal here was to get a reality check before I discuss it in detail with him- to see if his perspective is either a policy that I have not read, or it is standard across the BSA- and clearly it is a subject of debate.   Sometimes people just disagree, and sometimes they can start there and reach an understanding.

The CC/COR and I both agree we are here to support the boys and their families in their scouting experience as our first priority. He is a good person, extremely dedicated to scouting, with a long history in the BSA.  I respect him and his authority. We just currently disagree on the this issue, and I am confident we can reach an understanding that works for everyone.

Thank you everyone. Here's hoping two reasonable adults with the same goal can work out the details. 

[an_old_DC]

1 hour ago, Cubber said:

...

The CC/COR and I both agree we are here to support the boys and their families in their scouting experience as our first priority. He is a good person, extremely dedicated to scouting, with a long history in the BSA.  I respect him and his authority. We just currently disagree on the this issue, and I am confident we can reach an understanding that works for everyone.

...

 

If the CC's first priority truly is to support the Scouts in their Scouting experience then he will not have a problem with Webelos visiting active and healthy troops so each Webelos can identify a troop that is a good fit for him personally.

[Cubber]

1 hour ago, perdidochas said:

So why has this not been done until now?

Exactly. This is one of the things I plan to ask.