troop committee changes

[Novice_Cubmaster]

Hi All,

 

BobWhite - have to take a different spin on one of your statements:

"Since the unit does not belong to the commmittee but to the Charter organization which is represented by the IH, CR, and CC, what path the Co follows is their choice.

 

Their responsibility ois not to do what the committee wants but to follow the Scouting program, its ppoliciies, procedures and methods.

"

 

The CO, IH & COR's primary responsibility is to the Charter Organization, not to the scouting program or the scout unit(s) they charter. From my own experience & that of other unit leaders in our area - the less the CO is called upon to settle disputes with their units (of any nature), the happier they are to continue chartering their units.

 

NC

[Bob White]

That is only because they have come to see the unit as one that meets there rather than "their" unit. Do not think that just because the units in your community have degraded to that state, that all the units in the BSA have degraded to that state.

 

The fact that the units in your area do not have healthy relationships with the CO does not change the fact that the units belong to the CO. Not does it alter the fact that the BSA program is not designed for the committee to determine the CC or the CR, nor does anything in the BSa program support units to operating that way.

 

The solution is to fix the relationship not to alter the program structure.

 

Like it or not it is not the committee's job or the parents' job to tell the CO or their representatives what to do with their Scouting program.

[BrotherhoodWWW]

Bob White is on the trail of the truth of what BSA says about the ideal structure of Troop committees. However, I think his simple explaination is missing some of the trail markers. BSA says thay want to add many more adult leaders. BSA provides a training module for selecting quality leaders that is targeted to Unit committees. The Unit is responsible to select the leaders and the CO is responsible to APPROVE those selected leaders. So in different words the CO IH and COR have ultimate authority to decide what adults serve in leadership roles within the unit but often as not are not really involved in the selection process.

[Beavah]

Yah, OK BobWhite, I get where you're comin' from, eh? My guess is that yeh have some experience in a unit where primarily parents served on da committee, and you had some issues, eh? That happens. And in those circumstances, you're right. Sometimes the proper course is for the COR to tell a majority of the parents who want to do things a certain way "no."

 

There's lots of other possibilities out there though! Includin' times when a CC starts behavin' as though he were a COR and tryin' to dictate improperly to the committee. Every bit as bad if not worse.

 

Where you're not understandin' the program properly is you're improperly "upgrading" the CC job description to bein' the equivalent of da COR, and you're improperly "downgrading" the role and scope of da committee. That is evident when yeh say things like "the Charter organization which is represented by the IH, CR, and CC". The charter organization is represented only by the IH and CR, eh? The CC isn't a votin' member of the Council Corporation, eh? The CC does not have the same independent authority the COR has.

 

Rather, the entire committee as a group works on behalf of the chartered organization in runnin' their unit program. When it comes to representin' the CO in the day-to-day work and decisionmakin' of the unit, the CC is just one of many, all of whom are approved and appointed by da COR. Just as in a Board of Directors, the Chair by him/herself has no independent authority. Instead, the chair has a service role in da work of the committee. Where the treasurer keeps track of finances and the secretary takes meetin' minutes, the chair leads the meetin' and helps organize the group's work. The Chair's job is to keep things runnin' fairly and smoothly for da other members of the committee, and the committee's job is to work on behalf of da CO as directed by da COR.

 

So in a properly functionin' unit, the committee workin' on behalf of da CO uses some consistent mechanism to recruit members and delegate responsibilities. That's why the Chair's job description in the BSA materials is only to "see that all functions are delegated, coordinated, and completed" not necessarily to delegate, coordinate, etc. as a chair. And why the committee, or a subcommittee or steering committee appointed by da COR, does the recruiting and selection of new committee members, not the chair.

 

So when things are for some reason not runnin' well, the committee, which works on behalf of da CO, needs to address that, eh? And the recommendation of the committee, or its leadership subcommittee/steering committee, might well be to ask the CC to step aside and select a new CC (subject to the COR's approval), if the coordination/delegation/meeting organization of the committee's work is what's at fault. That's a committee doin' its job for da CO, eh? All that's perfectly consistent with da BSA materials.

 

Now, the real question for lynn07 is whether to proceed down such a path, and how to proceed, eh? That's a different question which cannot be answered by BSA materials. The real answer to "whether to proceed" with replacin' the CC depends on how "hot" people are runnin', what functions of the committee aren't bein' handled well, whether it's compromisin' the CO's mission, etc. People who are runnin' hot over a particular issue should let things cool down, IMO. Then they can proceed more rationally about the rest. Particularly, they can think about whether they're really supportin' the CO or are instead tryin' to be a mob of parents supportin' their own agenda or own kid .

 

The real answer to the "how to proceed" question also isn't answered by BSA materials, because it depends on how things are set up by da CO locally. Does the IH "call" da CC? Does the COR recruit personally? Is there a standing leadership subcommittee? Does the whole Committee serve that purpose? Are committee operations governed by Catholic canon law or Jewish custom or the PTO bylaws? All those and many more are supported by da BSA and consistent with da BSA's program materials and mission.

 

So if we're gonna be helpful (and friendly, and ...) to lynn07, IMO we have to move her out of "hot", listen to her describe what the problems are in the unit (is it really the CC who should be changed or somethin' else?), and listen to her describe how her CO/COR/Committee operations are really set up, eh? It helps to have a whole mess of us, each with experience in different unit committee setups, because one of us might understand hers better and give advice which really "clicks", eh?

 

And that's da BSA program, eh? A world with lots of people who are knowledgeable, helpful, etc. and are lookin' to give what they can to others as part of a Good Turn. Works a lot better than a book by itself! Which is why Scoutin' is such a wonderful thing.

 

Beavah

 

[Bob White]

I do not believe Beavah that I have posted anywhewre that the responsibility of the committee was not to work together to help the unit succeed. Have I?

 

What was being discussed waswho had authority over the selection and approval of the members and the Committee chair, and the fact that it did not rest with the committee. Nor does the selection and approval of the CR. The Committees role is not to run the scouting program for the IH but to support the program needs of the unit.

 

The BSA is not structured for the Committee to operate by majority rule. It is designed to have committee members carry out the assignments from the Chair. There are three cooks at the adult level to a scout unit's program recipe; the CR, the CC, and the unit's program leader.

 

What would probably help lynn07 (and others with committee problems) the most is not a variety of ways committes are run but in how they are meant to be structured so that they operate the way they are supposed to.

 

So should they have elections? NO

Does the Committee have that authority to change others positions? NO

Who does? The IH, CR and CC.

 

That is the scouting structure, not by my opinion, but by the training and resources of the BSA and Beavah I invite you to show any BSA resource that says otherwise.

[Beavah]

Yah, Bobwhite, you're entitled to your opinion, eh? It might be helpful to lynn07 and others if they are part of a program which is similarly run, and I think your contributions are valuable. I think yeh just need to be a bit more circumspect about bein' the Mouthpiece for da BSA, eh? Especially when, as in this case, your own understandin' of the program is very limited, and your "facts" in error.

 

I know I won't ever change your view, but since it may be a service to others, I'll explain.

 

No BSA material supports a notion that a CC makes committee appointments or does committee recruitin' solo. In the Troop Committee Guidebook under Recruiting Committee Members, that task is clearly associated with the committee as a whole. That same guide makes it a committee responsibility, and does not list it in da CC's job description. The materials that talk about selection of adults in a unit (Supplementary module) talk about how a steering committee appointed by the COR is to review, recruit, and select things like unit leaders and committee members including the Committee Chair. So in da only BSA material on the topic, it is not the committee chair, but rather the troop committee or a committee appointed by da COR which does that, eh? There is no restriction on the COR in the BSA materials, so the COR is free to appoint any committee, or to use the Troop Committee which he/she has already approved in that role.

 

In short, every bit of BSA material is consistent, eh? The selection, screening, recruiting of committee members is a job for the committee, not da CC as an individual.

 

There is nothing in da BSA materials anywhere which suggests that the Troop Committee or a leadership subcommittee or steering committee is not to take votes or make decisions by majority rule. That aspect is left entirely to the CO in terms of how it wants its committee to operate. The BSA is structured to work equally well for Chartered Organizations who have different approaches to committee operations. I personally recommend working for consensus, but that is not a requirement.

 

Similarly there is no BSA material which supports the notion of "Key 3" or "three cooks" at the unit level. That's a part of district operations which you're gettin' confused by. District operations are under the BSA's control, and so it's natural for da BSA to recommend a structure. Unit committee operations are not under the BSA's authority, however. Unit committee operations are determined by the CO, and therefore the BSA does not specify how they are to be conducted because that would be improper. Again, the BSA materials are designed to work equally well for a variety of different CO's and CO approaches to committee structure and operations.

 

Can a CO choose to structure and run a committee as you suggest? Yes, of course. It might work well for some CO's and da right kind of CC, though it's not personally somethin' I would recommend to an organization. I'm glad it's worked for you in the past, and that's a fine thing.

 

Beavah

 

[Bob White]

Here is one problem that persists Beavah. The reason that you won't find some of the things you attribute to me as saying is because I didn't say it. You have a habit of taking what I say and 'tossin' a liitle Beavah twist' on it and then attributing it to me.

 

Not a fair way to discuss the topic.

 

At no time did I say the committee could not recommend people for adult membership. But who are the only two members of the committtee that can approve the membership? The CC and CR.

 

The rest of the committee can certainly help identify poeople. But only the CC and CR can approve them and place them in a position.

 

Lynns question unless she has a new one now was abloiut electing the CC, And on page 7 og the troop Committee Guide Book it says that the CR SELECTS the Committee Chair. Do you know of ANY BSA training or resource that contradicts that? I didn't think so.

 

So who does the BSA says assigns committee responsibilities????

page 14...The Committee Chairperson

 

Under the CR on page 7 it says he or she "Maintains a close relationship with the committee chair and Scoutmaster". Under the The Chairpersons responsibility it says that he or she "Maintains a close relationship with the CR and Scoutmaster".

In The Scoutmaster/assistant Scpoutmaster training it tells of the need for the Scoutmaster, committee chair and CRE to work cloely together.

 

So you see that is not something I invented.

 

You asked "Can a CO choose to structure and run a committee as you suggest?

 

It is not what I suggest it is what the BSA recommends and supports through its training and resources. Its not a matter of "can a unit do" it is a matter of "this is how the unit should do it" in order to provide the best possible scouting program.

 

As I have asked several times in the past please stop rephrasing what I post, you give a very twisted impression of things.

 

 

[Beavah]

BobWhite, I'm sorry if I inadvertently twisted anything you posted. As that sort of discourteous public accusation is gettin' very old, let me take a step back and address your actual words. I would have originally, except that kind of pedantic critique seemed inappropriate. Not to mention unhelpful to readers in this kind of forum.

 

The Committee Chair is selected by the Institutional Head and/or the Charter Organization Representative.

Incorrect. The BSA materials recommend a steering committee selected by da COR to identify and select the CC. The IH or da COR can of course proceed without the recommendations and screening of a committee.

 

The Committee Chair selects the committee members... [and] assigns committee positions

Incorrect. Other committee positions are also selected by a COR-appointed steering or nominating committee. Nowhere in the materials does it suggest or recommend that the Committee Chair select or assign.

 

The Committee members serve at the behest of the Committee Chair and [iH].

Incorrect. Nowhere do the materials give that authority to da CC (unless it is specifically delegated by the COR/IH).

 

There are no elections

Incorrect. As you have admitted, there can be elections. The materials specifically tell the steering committee to select and rank candidates for positions, and they can choose to do that by voting or by consensus.

 

That is the responsibility of the Committee Chair to make that decision, since it is his or her team to lead. Just as the president selects his own Cabinet , the Committee Chair selects their own committee.

This is a poor understanding of the nature of a committee or Board of Directors (and recall that the materials specifically state that the committee is to act as a "Board of Directors"). A Chairman of the Board (CC) does not select the board. Nor does a chairman act in any way like an executive ("president") with a "cabinet." The materials do not list what you suggest as being the responsibility of da Committee Chair.

 

the Charter organization which is represented by the IH, CR, and CC

Incorrect or incomplete. The Chartered organization is headed by the IH, represented by the CR, and served by all the committee members (includin' da CC, but no more than any of the others).

 

So should they have elections? NO

Well, I agree sort of . But nowhere does it ever say that in BSA materials. Fact is, they should have elections if that's what da CO wants or what the CO/unit bylaws and regulations establish.

 

Does the Committee have that authority to change others positions? NO

Incorrect. The committee established by da COR has the authority to select, screen, etc. folks for committee positions. Only da COR and IH have real authority to approve such selections.

 

Who does? The IH, CR and CC.

Incorrect. No BSA material gives that authority to the CC as an individual. Only da IH or CR can act in that capacity.

 

But who are the only two members of the committtee that can approve the membership? The CC and CR.

Incorrect. Da CR does not need to be a member of the committee, and that role is never assigned to the CC by any BSA program material. It is reserved to da COR. When a CC signs an application, he/she signs on behalf of the committee, and only after the committee/steering committee/nominating committee appointed by da COR has made a selection.

 

And on page 7 og the troop Committee Guide Book it says that the CR SELECTS the Committee Chair. Do you know of ANY BSA training or resource that contradicts that?

Actually I think it says "secures", eh? And yes, the more recent supplementary module on selecting unit leadership recommends that da COR appoint a committee to do that selection, eh? As I said. Da COR can of course use any method he/she likes to secure a committee chair, and is not limited by the module.

 

******

 

Anyway, I don't want to hammer this anymore, eh? I just don't particularly like bein' accused of somethin' in public that I didn't do. It is was your actual written words which were inaccurate or incomplete, BobWhite, not my twist on 'em.

 

That's not to say that a lot of what you posted is bad advice, eh? I think you were also helpful in your counsel in many ways, and that contributed to da discussion. I'd just be more leery about advocatin' too strongly for a setup where da CC has so much individual authority, which is what you seem to be doin' from where I'm sittin'. I think that's a recipe for conflict within a unit, and isn't consistent with da BSA materials. YMMV, of course. I have seen units that ran OK that way, at least for as long as they had a CC of da right sort. But I think yeh set up a unit for unhealthy conflict if yeh are a bit too strident in declarin' "this is the (only) BSA way", and your stuff reads that way to me. That doesn't serve a troubled unit well, IMHO.

 

*****

 

Apologies to Lynn07 for the long stuff, eh? I think by now you've got the lay of the land, eh? You proceed accordin' to the methods established in your unit, if you as a committee member feel this is necessary to serve da mission of the CO, not what you personally want or who you like or such, eh? And if yeh don't think that system is workable, yeh recommend a different system to da COR to use goin' forward.

 

But whatever yeh do, proceed cautiously, slowly, and respectfully, eh? These things can tear a unit apart if not handled with the utmost kindness and discretion.

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[eisely]

Might as well add my two cents worth.

 

It is correct that the BSA Troop Committee Guidelines do not call for elections to Committee Chair or any other position, but such procedures are not prohibited either. If a particular unit or chartered organization wants to structure its affairs with detailed bylaws or other form of written procedures, there is nothing to prevent this. If such bylaws require elections for specific positions, there would be no reason this could not be done, but I think it would be cumbersome and ultimately counter productive.

 

The specific problem raised is removal/replacement of a troop committee chair. From my viewpoint this would be more difficult to do than replacement/removal of any other unit level adult volunteer, including the scoutmaster. The removal can be accomplished relatively bloodlessly at re chartering time, but the key person is the institutional head or designated chartered organization representative. The difficulty with this is that the re chartering process is one controlled mostly by the committee chair, who is the target for replacement. As was pointed out, most such institutional heads really do not want to get involved in these kinds of disputes, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't act. Unfortunately this requires a lot of "politicing" and can create a lot of ill will. The best outcome would be for someone at a higher level, say district or council, to recruit the person to a different position, assuming that the individual is capable and willing to do so.

[Bob White]

"The Committee Chair is selected by the Institutional Head and/or the Charter Organization Representative."

Troop Committee Guide Page 7 The charter organization Representative...Bullet #3 "Secures a troop Committee Chairperson and encourages training"

 

"The Committee Chair selects the committee members... [and] assigns committee positions

Troop Committee Guide page 14 The Committee Chair.

"You can have a full committee with a reasonable amount of recruiting effort. The first five positions are essential fill them first."

 

and Bullet 1 "Organize the committee to see that all functions are delegated, coordinate and completed."

 

The Committee members serve at the behest of the Committee Chair and [iH].

Let's look at what the current Commissioner Fieldbook says.

In Chapter 9 How to Remove a Volunteer under the sub heading "WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY"

"Who has the authority to remove a volunteer? A good rule of thumb is this; The person or group with the authority to appoint a volunteer has the authority to remove and replace that volunteer."

 

So who appoints and approves committee members??? The CR and the CC. You can see that on every adult application.

 

There are no elections

Everything in every resource of the BSA regarding committee members ay thay76are selected and approved by the CC and CR. Offer the forum any quote from any BSA resource or training syllabus saying that ANY are elected.

 

That is the responsibility of the Committee Chair to make that decision, since it is his or her team to lead. Just as the president selects his own Cabinet , the Committee Chair selects their own committee.

 

Your come back was to compare a business world board chairman not selecting his board. But I never used that model. I used the more appropriate model of the president and his cabinet. The President selects his committee the committee chair selects and approves his or hers. Dont believe it? Look at the adult application. Who approves all adults in the unit? I do not see how you can possibly refute that.

 

the Charter organization which is represented by the IH, CR, and CC

You already know that the CR represents the charter organization , and I have already given you the reference where the CR selects and approves the Committee chair. Well on page 8 of the troop Committee Guide it says As the troop committee works on behalf of the charter organization And who heads this group that works on behalf of the CO that is chosen by the CR and approved by the Institution head? Thats right the Committee chair. Is he or she a representative of the needs and wants of the charter organization? Yep! The CC.

 

 

Does the Committee have that authority to change others positions? NO

Your argument is that only the IH and CR can do that. Read the adult application. It takes the Committee Chair and either the CR or IH, not both. The only person that requires the signature of the CR and IH is the committee chair.

 

But who are the only two members of the committee that can approve the membership? The CC and CR.

 

You are correct there is only ONE person on the committee who can approve adult memberships, the Committee chair, and there are two people outside the committee who can approve committee members the IH and the CR. There is NO ONE ELSE in the unit with the authority to do that.

 

"And on page 7 of the troop Committee Guide Book it says that the CR SELECTS the Committee Chair. Do you know of ANY BSA training or resource that contradicts that?"

UYpou said "Actually I think it says "secures", eh? "

 

Yes, it says secures and it does not give any responsibility regarding the chair to any other individual or group. Look again at the adult application. Who can approve the membership and selection of the Committee Chair? ONLY the IH and the CR.

 

I never said the committee could not make suggestions but they have NO AUTHORITY in the matter.

 

[Beavah]

Troop Committee Guide Page 7 The charter organization Representative...Bullet #3 "Secures a troop Committee Chairperson and encourages training"

 

Yah, this time yeh got it right, eh? Secures, not selects. Then if yeh read da supplemental module, you'll learn a suggested mechanism for how a CR may secure a CC. By havin' a committee screen and select, and then reviewin' and approvin' their selection. The supplemental module is available at scouting.org, eh? Yeh can look it up yourself. You'll recognize the process that's recommended for unit leaders is also recommended for CC's.

 

 

Troop Committee Guide page 14 The Committee Chair.

"You can have a full committee with a reasonable amount of recruiting effort. The first five positions are essential fill them first."

 

Yah, yeh got the headin' wrong there, eh? The heading is "Troop Committee Organization and Responsibilities" not "The Committee Chair". The you in your quote refers not to the CC, but to the committee.

 

and Bullet 1 "Organize the committee to see that all functions are delegated, coordinate and completed."

 

Exactly. As I indicated, no mention that the CC appoints or assigns positions, eh? Just works to lead the committee to see that all functions are bein' accomplished, eh? That's why there's a whole separate section on recruitin' committee members, and why every job description says "report to the troop committee" and not "reports to the committee chair."

 

So who appoints and approves committee members??? The CR and the CC. You can see that on every adult application.

 

Sorry, BobWhite. There's nuthin' in any of the BSA materials that says the CC appoints and approves anything on his/her own without the agreement of the committee. Nor is there anything that says that on the adult application. There is only a signature line for the CC to sign on behalf of the committee which indicates the selection and approval by the committee. Misunderstandin' a line on the application should not void all the other BSA materials which explain the proper role of the CC.

 

Everything in every resource of the BSA regarding committee members ay thay76are selected and approved by the CC and CR.

 

Nope. Nuthin' in the materials says that about the CC. In fact, nuthin' says "select" about the CR, either. Only "approve." We just recognize that the CO as owner can act unilaterally through its representative if it decides to, eh? But that's definitely not the case for a CC. Nor is it what's generally recommended!

 

Your come back was to compare a business world board chairman not selecting his board. But I never used that model. I used the more appropriate model of the president and his cabinet.

 

Yah, that's your model, eh? You might think it's more appropriate. It's not the BSA model, though. The BSA's model is that "The troop committee is the troop's board of directors" [Committee Guidebook, p. 13]. The BSA materials do not support your notion that the CC is an executive role like a president and his cabinet.

 

the Charter organization which is represented by the IH, CR, and CC... Well on page 8 of the troop Committee Guide it says As the troop committee works on behalf of the charter organization

 

Exactly. The CR represents the Chartered Organization, and the committee works on behalf of the CO. The CC has no special status in that, and his/her role as CC is not to represent but to work on behalf of. That's an important distinction, eh? As you know, the BSA also designates specific individuals who represent the BSA, and not everybody who works on behalf of the BSA gets that authority. The CC is just one member of a larger group that works on behalf of the CO.

 

Yah, da rest of your post just reiterates the argument that havin' a signature line for the CC on an adult application form magically voids all the other BSA trainin' and materials. That's a novel interpretation, which might come from your notion of da CC as a president-type executive. If yeh instead understand the CC role as the BSA does - as a chair of the board - then yeh understand that the CC signs on behalf of a decision made by the committee.

 

******

 

All this I'm sure is tiresome for the other forum members, eh? We both know that the CO has the authority and responsibility to set up whatever mechanism for committee selection and appointment they like. Yah, and we both know that often even that is left to the committee. That makes the real situation in different units very different, so when respondin' to a particular issue, it's important to listen and be a friend and work to resolve any conflicts within the structure that's in place. That's what all da rest of our Commissioner Fieldbook says and means, eh?

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[BadenP]

Picking hairs now BW. Remember that the COR and the CC can be the same person it is the only adult unit dual registered position allowed. So if the CC and the COR are indeed the same person the committee would have the authority to decide many policy issues since the CO's interests is also represented. I think Beavah does present a much more accurate and detailed description of the policies concerning the committee and its functions rather than quoting a sentence or two out of context from a myriad of publications. Good job Beavah.

[Bob White]

The fact that the CR can choose to be the CC does not change any of the facts, the Committee members still have no authority in the matter and voting for the CC is stiil not a power of the committee, The CR selects the Committee chair and can even pick themselves for that position.

 

Certainly after almost 5 years of having once been a professional scouter you are aware of who signs adult appications?

[BadenP]

As a former professional scouter I sure do Bob and you are wrong once again. The COR has the authority to select all unit leadership and sign any and all applications, as the chosen representative of the CO, he represents their interests in all unit matters. The council can process any leader application as long as the COR or IH or both has signed it,technically they don't need both signatures since they both represent the CO, that is something DE's learn at professional training Bob. When the COR and CC are the same person this further solidifies the authority of any committee action since it also carries the authority of the CO. Technically after the COR is selected by the IH has only to sign the charter at renewal, and is the final authority to decide an issue if he disagrees with the actions of the COR, and in reality this very rarely happens.

 

Currently I am the CC/COR of my crew and guess who decided the best selection of a new advisor to replace me, I DID. However I did let the committee have a vote, not because I had to but because it was the right thing to do in this instance, it unified this committee and made them feel an integral part of this transitional process. You see Bob this is what Beavah was talking about, you can't always hide behind a regulation and play hardball ramrodding your wishes down the throats of others because the book says so, sometimes you have to act with compassion!(This message has been edited by BadenP)

[Bob White]

Hi BadenP

Perhaps at the council that once employed you that would be true. But as someone who used to be a professional for almost 5 years you must know that not all councils follow the same procedures. According to the BSA application form two signatures are required for every adul;t application. I can tell you from my 'brief' experience as a unit, district and council volunteer that in the councils I have lived in the only exception was CR whose application only requires the IH's signature.

 

When the CR is also the Committee Chair then the IH and CR sign the other applications for all other adults. Following the correct application approval process is one of the safeguards in the BSA youth Protection program, but as someone who was a professional for almost 5 years you already know that I'm sure.