Legal Liability of Scouters

[SeattlePioneer]

Does anyone care to describe what risks Scouter's take should an untoward event occur during the Scouting program? Whose behinds are on the chopping block, and what protections, if any, do Scouters have?

 

 

 

Seattle Pioneer

[Bob White]

registered Scouter who are trained and follow the Safety Policies and procedures of the BSA as recorded in the Gide to Safe Scouting and other activity specific related training and materiels have protection from a liability umbrella from the BSA. This include BSA supplied attorney services, and financial protection from court costs and any court ordered fines as a result of the scouter being found liable for any losses.

 

A scouter who does take reasonable steps to insure the safet y of the scouts (appropriate training, adherence to policies and procedures) will find him or herself without protection from the BSA.

 

 

 

 

[Eamonn]

Hey Bob,

"A scouter who does take reasonable steps to insure the safety of the scouts (appropriate training, adherence to policies and procedures) will find him or herself without protection from the BSA. "

Kinda think you forgot the word NOT?

Eamonn.

 

 

[Bob White]

Thanks for covimg my 6 Eamonn. You are right the line should have read..."A scouter who does NOT take reasonable steps to insure the safety of the scouts (appropriate training, adherence to policies and procedures) will find him or herself without protection from the BSA. "

 

Thanks

[evmori]

So what I hear is if a leader hasn't been to training but has all other bases covered, the BSA will not protect that leader?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Eamonn]

Ed,

I think Bob is talking about having the Scouts trained.

Eamonn.

[Prairie_Scouter]

I think that if a Scouter has followed the G2SS guidelines, he'd probably be covered even if he hadn't had training. If training was required in order to be covered by BSA, you'd think that they would make a BIG deal out of it, but they don't.

 

That having been said, although you can always get sued no matter who's supposed to be intervening on your behalf, BSA would most likely be seen as the better "target" in a liability case relative to almost any single individual.

[Hunt]

There's training and training. For example, if you take the scouts on a float trip, the Guide to Safe Scouting specifies that adults must have had Safe Swim Defense and Safety Afloat training. I suppose it is possible (but unlikely) that BSA would refuse to defend a unit if a mishap occurred on a float trip with untrained leaders. I don't think BSA would refuse to defend a unit just because its leaders didn't have, say, position-specific training.

[Prairie_Scouter]

Hunt,

Yep, you're right. I wasn't thinking about specific safety training like Climb on Safely; you're not allowed to go on those kinds of outings unless you have trained leaders in that area of activity. I'd expect BSA would question their need to cover a trip if something happened and the leaders didn't have specific safety training where it was required.

[SeattlePioneer]

 

 

 

Nice in theory, but as pointed out by others on this thread, the Scout organization has all the discretion in deciding what to cover. And the web of rules surrounding Scouting is such that overlooking or neglecting them is easy enough to do ---indeed, they create a formula for creating liability standards more extensive than what ordinary civil law might require.

 

So the real question is how does this work in practice? Does anyone know how litigation claims have been handled in situations they might be familiar with?

 

 

 

Seattle Pioneer

[frank10]

I'm no lawyer but I think we are covered under the `Volunteer Protection Act of 1997'

 

Quoted from: http://www.hotairballooning.org/info_volact_text.htm

 

 

SECTION 4. LIMITATION ON LIABILITY FOR VOLUNTEERS.

 

(a) LIABILITY PROTECTION FOR VOLUNTEERS- Except as provided in subsections (b) and (d), no volunteer of a nonprofit organization or governmental entity shall be liable for harm caused by an act or omission of the volunteer on behalf of the organization or entity if--

 

(1) the volunteer was acting within the scope of the volunteer's responsibilities in the nonprofit organization or governmental entity at the time of the act or omission;

 

(2) if appropriate or required, the volunteer was properly licensed, certified, or authorized by the appropriate authorities for the activities or practice in the State in which the harm occurred, where the activities were or practice was undertaken within the scope of the volunteer's responsibilities in the nonprofit organization or governmental entity;

 

(3) the harm was not caused by willful or criminal misconduct, gross negligence, reckless misconduct, or a conscious, flagrant indifference to the rights or safety of the individual harmed by the volunteer; and

 

(4) the harm was not caused by the volunteer operating a motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft, or other vehicle for which the State requires the operator or the owner of the vehicle, craft, or vessel to--

 

(A) possess an operator's license; or

 

(B) maintain insurance.

 

(This message has been edited by wingnut)

[FScouter]

"So the real question is how does this work in practice?"

 

Does it really matter? Certainly a Scouter that gets trained, follows the Guide to Safe Scouting, and uses common sense will be in a better position that an un-trained adult violating G2SS provisions and not using his head.

 

Not sure what you mean about a "web of rules". Everything thats going to expose you to legal liability in in the G2SS. It's all there in one place. Just follow it and be safe. Simple.

[eisely]

We have been told in our council, that notwithstanding all the training and compliance with rules, the scouter's own liability insurance is primary. Most homeowner policies provide coverage for volunteer activities. If you do not have homeowner liability coverage you ought to look into it, and if you do have it, verify your coverage. Automobile liability coverage is also primary.

 

It doesn't bother me that our council's liability policy is secondary because this way they can provide more dollar coverage.

[Kahuna]

It's always a good idea to have plenty of liability coverage included in your homeowners insurance. The amount depends on the amount of assets you have. If you are dirt poor and don't own anything significant, you are what's called "judgment proof."

 

However, the tricky part of all the other coverage, BSA or Volunteer Act, is always going to be legal representation. You should assume that you will have to hire your own lawyer, at least in the beginning, if you get threatened with a lawsuit. Your homeowners may or may not pay for that. The BSA will give you a lawyer if you qualify under their guidlines and your insurance company will give you one if you qualify under their guidlines. The Volunteer Act has loopholes and will not get you off the hook for legal fees in your defense.

 

This is not meant to be either legal advice or to scare anybody out of being a volunteer. In practice, unless you are doing something really, really stupid (and I'm sure none of us would be doing anything like that), the likelihood of legal action against you is remote.

 

The BSA policies are just intended to be good CYA stuff for all of us. Use good sense and you'll be okay most of the time. For the rest of the time, check your homeowners liability coverage.

[FScouter]

The Guide to Safe Scouting is not designed to provide legal protection as much as it's designed to prevent accidents and incidents from happening in the first place.