Getting What You Pay for

[Scoutfish]

So this brings up a great question: What do you do if you do not get what you pay for?

 

At my council, it is plainly stated that money cannot be returned, but can be transfered to another class or event. I'm guessing this is the most practical way of dealing with rain dates and reschedules due to lack of participation. That, and I can understand the mathmatical nightmare of constantly refunding this amount or that amount due to schedule conflicts, people changing their minds, etc...

 

But what if you pay for a program that is presented half-a**ed or hardly any effort is put into it? Maybe they bait and switch?

 

Okay, being my son is a Webelos in our council and district, being I am a brand new Cubmaster in our council and district and that I want both of us to stay in and continue within the program - as well as my son cross into Boy Scouts.......I just can't realistically see threatening to sue to get our money back if it's not returned or transfered to a program that is run right or an equally ideal program at a later date.

 

 

 

So what would you do? How would you get your money back?(This message has been edited by scoutfish)

[packsaddle]

I'm going to plug my idea here again. There would be less need to worry about refunds if all this was fee-based and market forces were allowed to act on programs in the way that free markets are supposed to operate. This is not the case now because the central governing body already has most of the funding in hand from FOS and fundraisers and they can dish out whatever product they see fit, and we can take it or leave it. This is a system in which we give (donate) to the collective (organization) according to our ability and receive (get subsidies) according to our needs (as seen fit by the central authority). Sound familiar?

 

If the vendors had to depend on direct fees for products (services), then there would be incentive to provide better products (services) or else they could kiss the fees goodbye and get out-competed by other vendors with better products. This market-based approach takes control away from the strong central governing body and puts more control in the hands of the customers (parents) who really are best-able to decide what is best for their sons. This is the essence of the free market and the American economic system and it ought to be good enough for scouting as well.

 

See the difference? In a market-based system, the central governing body would still be free to beg for handouts. But if the production depended on the fees from the purchase of those products then the market would be able to work its magic.

The customers (the families) would benefit from improved products and the organization would benefit by becoming more efficient (removal of deadwood and dead weight) and the entire system would evolve toward greater benefit to the boys.

 

I have long been mystified by an organization that seems to embrace so many traditional conservative values, yet organized and operated more like the Soviet system. Another irony for the collection.

[shortridge]

John - Not to get too into politics, but I don't view Scouting so much as a free-market vs. communism issue as a centralized regime vs. local control issue. Theoretically, the Soviets had democracy. They just restricted elections to a single party. Theoretically, a council is controlled by the CORs. It just doesn't advertise that fact. That's how we need to exert influence and control over the council-level staffers and the SE. But since very few of them do, the status quo continues.

 

(I also think that's the answer to Scoutfish's question - to have your COR write a sternly worded letter to the SE and complain. But if you're like most units and have a CORINO (COR In Name Only), you're pretty much out of luck.)

 

I like the free-market idea in Scouting to a certain limit. At some point a council needs to have a guaranteed base of income to keep camps and basic operations running. That's what fundraising is supposed to provide for - or so I'd always thought.

 

Personally, I would like to have it spelled out exactly how much a particular program or camp costs. Now, when a parent pays for summer camp, he or she is under the assumption that that fee covers everything. But it doesn't - it can't. Increasing the fees to cover all expenses would result in huge sticker shock - but also educate a heck of a lot of parents and leaders.

[Scoutfish]

CORINO

 

I LOVE IT! LOL!

[packsaddle]

Shortridge writes, "I like the free-market idea in Scouting to a certain limit. At some point a council needs to have a guaranteed base of income to keep camps and basic operations running. That's what fundraising is supposed to provide for - or so I'd always thought.

Personally, I would like to have it spelled out exactly how much a particular program or camp costs. Now, when a parent pays for summer camp, he or she is under the assumption that that fee covers everything. But it doesn't - it can't. Increasing the fees to cover all expenses would result in huge sticker shock - but also educate a heck of a lot of parents and leaders."

 

..to a certain limit

At least that's a start in the 'right' direction. And I admit that I'm biased in thinking that 'education' is always a good thing.

If you compare BSA to corporations who engage in the free market, you'll find that they also have baseline salary and infrastructure needs that they must fund. The successful ones have superior products and earn our trust and loyalty by providing a good product for what we decide is a fair price. The others...OK they get obscene government bailouts if they're too big to fail or some such nonsense that our children have been saddled with.

BSA could work the same way as a corporation in the market economy but, as you suggest, somewhere along the lines the real costs of providing the product would have to be taken into account and 'education' would soon follow.

 

I know there are plenty of camps that are non-profit and which operate strictly on income from sales of their excellent products. This is possible for BSA as well. It has been my observation that 1) people who must pay the full cost of a product tend to appreciate the value of the product more, and 2) they tend to demand a better product if they think they've paid too much. Good for them on both counts!

By 'hiding' the real costs of summer camp and other things in the program, the customers are susceptible to the 'something-for-nothing' mentality and not only appreciate the product less as a result, they adopt an ethic that is counterproductive in the real world - the expectation of more handouts in the future (the welfare society).

If the issue is one of funding underprivileged boys, then THAT is where the donations should go. But that is not the way it works now. I admit that a change to a market approach would really open some eyes. Good!

 

I suggested the comparison to political systems (they're really economic systems) because the analogy is thought-provoking. The irony that I mentioned, however, is very real, at least to me.

[Scoutfish]

"Now, when a parent pays for summer camp, he or she is under the assumption that that fee covers everything"

 

 

Ihave no doubt there are many who think that way, but that wasn't what I meant in my example of:

 

" But what if you pay for a program that is presented half-a**ed or hardly any effort is put into it? Maybe they bait and switch?"

 

I'm talking about things like being told you get "3 mile hile around scenic lake" and in reality, it's 9 laps around a retention pond, or something along the lines of the previous example of Eagle trail that in reality ended up being skeeter bite trail.

 

I have no issue of paying "X: dollars for camp, and paying for extras such as shirts, patches and what not. I have no problem paying for coarse materials and supplies either. And if my den/pack/ troop elects to take an additional off camp- BSA santioned event...I'll pay for that too.

 

But if I pay for my son to take High Adventure climbing (or whatever it's technically called) It better be climbing high, and not a set of aroebic stair master steps!

[Basementdweller]

So what exactly are you paying for??????

[Basementdweller]

Gateway time out got me(This message has been edited by Basementdweller)

[Scoutfish]

Well....so far......fee-less training. Haven't sent my son to any camps yet, but looking at Webelos resident this Aug.

 

I support and donate to our council.

 

Biggest thing was - What would you do against such a policy: " At my council, it is plainly stated that money cannot be returned, but can be transfered to another class or event." - if you did not get what was promised to you?

[Eagle92]

In the original post, the scouts were told they would participate in one program, but were given another. Units talk with their feet, i.e. not going to Camp XYZ in favor of another. Don't like what's going on at the camp you went to, you don't go back.

 

One of the camps I know of a bad program reputation at one time. Lots of units decided to go OOC. Change didn't happen over nite, but it took approx. 4 years and 2 CDs, one of which was staff during the heyday of the camp, to turn it around. Camp now has an awesome program, awesome facilities, and and awesome staff.

 

I know of one SM had an issue with something that happened at camp. He promised never to return to that camp again, and kept that promise. In 11 years since he told me that, his troop went to the camp 1 time, and that was after he retired s from being SM. That troop found another camp they liked, and have been there ever since, save one year.

 

 

Now I admit I think a scout should pay his way, been there , done that. But we all know that the actual cost of summer camp, depending upon location, is more likely $400 to $600 per week per scout, if not more. I know I couldn't afford that cost growing up, and in my neck of the woods the fee is causing problems. SE pretty much told the OA that they need to raise more camperships b/c the economy is in the tank and people cannot afford to pay the fee.

[OldGreyEagle]

How quickly we moved from the best hope to assure you get what you pay for, and that is an interested Charter Organization Rep

 

[moosetracker]

Since my son was the one with the Eagle Trail which turned into a disaster..

 

Being that it was not a unit that went, but more provisional with every boy coming from different units, I am unsure what else other parents did. But this I do know.

 

BAD word of mouth got out.. The Council was cocky enough to try to promote the next year of running Eagle Trail as last year, at our roundtabel.. Because it the spokesperson was a lad no more then 18 who was doing the promotion, everyone had the presence of mind not to kill the messager.. But, the room got that sickly quiet.. The Scout knew something was wrong, looked around stopped short on Trail-To-Eagle, and went on to a different topic.

 

Before Summer Camp started it was made known Trail-To-Eagle would not be offered that year, nor has it returned since.

 

Some of the boys during the camp week protested by sneaking out of camp and setting a local fire.. Others were drummed out for stealling (both dumb ways of protesting. They did themselves worse damage. But definately showed the organizers did not have as tight of a control as they wanted to.) Some around Wed. remembered some Dr appt or something, had their parents pick them up, and never returned.

 

My son held off on completeing MB's on purpose. He so wanted a fantastic Trail to Eagle, he went to a different camp the next year to retake it again and had a great time. I think the statement he was not "Eagle Material" made him feel he had something to prove.

 

Also every year my son went with the troop 1 week and provisional a second week.( We told him we would pay for one week, if he wanted a second, he could earn it through popcorn sales, and he did.) Anyway, from that point on, he never took provisional with our Councils camps again. He did not trust them without his troop for support.

 

So I don't know if other families got their money back one way or the other. But, the message was sent.

 

Outside of boyscouts if I paid for professional painter to paint my house blue, and I return to find it painted, but in pink.. I would not pay those painters regardless of if the house was well painted or not. That was not what I contracted for.

 

My son may have attended camp, for a week. But it was not what he signed up for. In fact with a medical condition that was taking time to diagnose, that resembled epileptic seizures sometimes triggering 10 - 25 times a day. The quiet studious camp that we signed him up for was fine. But under Dr. orders he was not to do anything strenious.. He came to camp with the Med form stateing his condition, and a scout who was also going to take the course, but also personally watch out for him. So they were not blind to his condition. Yet, he was ridiculed for refusing to go to the heights on the COPE course, and could have been injured in many of the other activities they were "forced" into doing. Luckily for him, it was an unusually quiet week from attacks.

 

Found he has dystonia, but it is now well contained with medicine, but found out what it is is that he looses his entire muscle coordination (like muscular dystrophy, which it is a cousin of) with change of movement, sitting to standing, standing to walking, walking to running.. etc. (Not everytime he changed motion, but that was the trigger for it.) Imagine being up high on a tightrope at the COPE course, and loosing all control of your muscles! Where were their brains?

[Scoutfish]

 

 

EXACTLY! They may have given your house the best paint job ever. They might have used no less than 4 contrasting paint colors for the trim. They might have even painted your driveway to look like coblestone........But they didn't do what they promised..therefore, I wouldn't pay either!

 

 

And the good news is..You know what condition your son has. That's over half the battle.

 

[pinkflame]

Maybe my perspective is more activist, but i usually figure that I don't have much right to complain if I'm not willing to do something to fix a situation. There are Scouting professionals, but us volunteer Scouters can and shold have a lot of input into the program; at camp and in the district and council as wel as in our own units.

 

One year our troop went to an out of council camp that had some missing elements in its program. The medic who was supposed to care for the camp did not show up. The First Aid and emergency Preparedness MB class (and the first aid part of the trail to Eagle group) were being taught by a youth who was clearly unqualified. I am a family doctor. When I first saw this happening, i was, to say the least, chagrined. However, since we were already there I figured the best plan was to treat the whole event like a campsite and leave it better than when I found it. So I became camp doctor and i taught the classes. I ended up getting to know some really neat kids and making some very good SScouter friends. The troop has now gone back to that camp twice. I only got to spend one night the second time and did not get to go back the last time, but I think we made friends where e could have made enemies. Further, I think our boys learned the importance of being part of the solution instead fo part of the proble,.

 

So if the program is half-a**ed, maybe it is because enough adult Scouters didn't step up to make the program great.

[packsaddle]

Extending that logic, if the volunteers really chipped in they could dump the camp completely, pool their resources, and do everything on their own.

What you described is essentially placing the responsibility for a poor product on the customer. This happens in business as well. The businesses who do this often find themselves OUT of business if the market is working like it should.