Committee rules running amuck

[moosetracker]

Besides which, if they were so stuck on the training, why vote him into the position? Knowing he was unqualified to take the boys anywhere?

 

IOLS only is offered in spring and fall. As stated we are the only district offering IOLS in the council this season, so it is not a course you can get trained in within a week after being put in a position. All it takes is something else on the weekend of training (like a wedding)to miss the training in the Spring. I doubt he has been in the postion for more then a year, knowing who the SM was before him.

[Eagle92]

OGE and Beav,

Sorry if it sounded harsh, wasn't my intent. I was actually agreeing with Beav that the CO can set the requirements. But as mentioned it did sound like the CO is doing this after the fact, which can hurt the scouts. But as mentioned we don't have details.

[Beavah]

We too as a committee put in a rule for our troop that to go on outings, the adult leader had to do all the on-line required training available, and had a year from registration to get the required training.. We never as a committee applied it to a punishment on the boys if they didn't get trained.

 

Except that yeh would cancel an outing the boys had planned and worked toward because yeh didn't have the necessary adult leadership as a result of your local rule. Then some other scouter who heard about it from a fellow at round table could post it here and talk about how awful your renegade troop is for punishing da boys because the adults weren't trained, especially when their son needed that campout to advance and can't do the next 3 months worth of campouts because he's da captain of the underwater basketweaving debate team.

 

There's no way around it, eh? Mandatory training is goin' to hurt some units and kids. It's perhaps worth it if it makes things substantially better for all da others. If we believe that.

 

Beavah

 

[moosetracker]

Oh not at all!.. When the rule was in effect we had adult leadership of 6 to 15 going on the outings. Now that the troop is hard pressed to get adult leaders to go on outings, the rule got tossed out the window.

[The Blancmange]

 

Now, just like da MB that gets disallowed because the counselor wasn't approved, I'd expect the adults to then work with the boys to make sure they can proceed ahead.

I don't think that really works as an analogy here. The MB counselor registration process is there in order to ensure that the counselor has some level of expertise in the badge he or she is counseling. It is there to ensure a degree of competency, and is a part of the adult association method.

Scouts, especially 1st class and above, are supposed to know how to camp. Looking at the recent threads on patrol camping, being able to camp without adult involvement is something many look at as a goal to strive for. A patrol should not need an adult who has attened IOLS in order to camp. When a boy completes a MB without a registered counselor, there is some legitimate questions as to whether he received the full benefit of the badge. When these boys went camping without an IOLS trained adult they, well, went camping.   I suppose there a possibility that, with the untrained adult, the boys needed to be even more reliant on their own skills.

[PeteM]

Problem with the merit badge comparison is summer camps. They have youth, supposedly trained, but not at all, teaching merit badges, and then the youth getting their cards signed off at the end of the week. I've seen where the youth don't even have to attend the classes to get credit for the badge. Or what happens when the local council loses the registration form from an adult signing up for some merit badges? That happens a lot in my council. Shall we punish the death bed eagles that their counselors weren't properly registered, so you can't get eagle? Where does it stop?

 

PeteM

[moosetracker]

Yeah to compare this to a merit badge counsilor that was not registered. I would have to be here complaining that two unregistered parents took boys from the troop on a camping trip and were upset because the troop council did not give them credit for the event. The merit badge counsilor in the example is unregistered. This camping trip took place with the SM and an ASM in attendance.

 

Nationals required training will undoubtly hurt some troop and ultimately boys if their adult leaders refuse to be trained. They will end up not able to register at recharter time. This may make the troop short of people to take the boys on events, or if those refusing training are your top leaders and no one steps up to fill their shoes a unit may fold. This is a hardship, I see it could happen.

 

But the units should utilize nationals policy to get their leaders trained, or some policy that will just deny the adult leader of priviledges, but not adding on to the strictness of the policy in a way they are making it harder for the boys to get their requirments for a rank or MB harder.

 

Actually strangely enough National policy is pretty much what our troop once had in effect, the adult leader has a year to get trained, then they can't reregister if they don't get trained in that year. Only we did have the option as a committee to take the rule down when the troop, or boys were going to be negitively effected by it. Now we will not.

[evmori]

Wait a minute. The Scoutmaster is the gatekeeper for this stuff, not the committee. The committee has no say in this!

 

These questions are only for informational purposes.

 

How does this committee know the leaders who took the Scouts camping haven't taken the required training?

 

Are all the members of this committee trained?

 

 

[moosetracker]

Committees with enough adult leaders have a training chair, and most units use troopMaster or Pack master to track adult training. Plus at recharter time, they will mark a leader Trained or untrained for the position they hold. When required training comes into play, it will be another reason for a committee to make sure their leaders take the required training.. So that the committee know what training their leaders have and have not taken I don't see as an issue.

 

You are right about the SM being the gatekeeper. When our committee put in the rule of Leaders having the full training of a SM within a year of registration or they are denied going on events, it was not something the committee came up with on a whim. The SM at that time came to the committee and asked that they put this rule in place and enforce it. The committee then voted to back the SM. I as the training chair at the time, informed newly registered Adults, helped them find training courses, watched things and enforced the rule. SM changed over time, and the adult leaders got smaller. The SM started ignoring the rules to get someone on the event. So I brought it up that we should do away with the rule seeing it wasn't enforced anymore and made no sense to be given our current circumstance. The SM said he wanted to keep the rule, I was to enforce it, then continued to ignore the rule and made me the bad guy if I said anything to him or the untrained adult leader going on the event. So I just resigned the position..

 

The SM is and should be the gatekeeper for this, the committee can only support him with it. But, the SM must support the committee if he is requesting something from them.

 

Don't know if the committee is trained. But their training is all on-line, so it would be easier for them to do so quickly, where as the training for SM & ASM take the time due to not all courses are on-line so they must find courses offered that isn't interfering with the rest of their schedule.

[Beavah]

Scouts, especially 1st class and above, are supposed to know how to camp. Looking at the recent threads on patrol camping, being able to camp without adult involvement is something many look at as a goal to strive for. A patrol should not need an adult who has attened IOLS in order to camp.

 

Yah, but that's not quite what they're saying, eh?

 

I think it's closer to the MB example than you think.

 

What they're saying is that in order to earn First Class or Camping MB, your time in da field should be supervised by an adult with the necessary training and experience. Without that, there's a question of whether yeh really do "know how to camp". And if da troop is doing adult-less patrol campouts where they're relying on First Class scouts having the skills to be safe on their own, then it would be even more important that the adults who were signing off on their First Class requirements (including field time) were properly trained.

 

That's the same as the MBC example, isn't it?

 

Beavah

 

[rdclements]

OK, first of all you don't hold the youth responsible for adult errors (or disagreements).

If the Charter Org wants to define a minimum standard for SM/ASM training, that's OK. But that's a separate issue from whether a scout is "credited" with participation.

 

If Tommy Tenderfoot wants to include the campout in question on his list of x activities, that's the Scoutmaster's decision. If he wants to use the campout on his list of trips for the camping MB, that's up to the MB counselor.

 

In the end, any committee that would act this way has other problems that will surface in time...

[Kudu]

I can't believe that anyone is siding with the Commitee on this. This is why Baden-Powell coined the term "Parlour Scouting" to describe BSA camping requirements:

 

American boys were hampered too by numerous regulations governing the amount of equipment which had to to be taken on expeditions and the exact ratio of adult supervision. Baden-Powell described such highly organized camps as 'Parlour Scouting' (B-P memo to James West, June 1927).

 

In Baden-Powell's Scouting (the standard in the rest of the world) the Patrol Leaders run the Troop. There is no "Troop Committee" of adults. Period.

 

That being said, I have the perfect compromise for Parlour Committee Members who are not required to take even the inferior ItOLS, and leave Wood Badge with a love for the "numerous regulations that hamper expeditions."

 

If you read the BSA camping requirements from Tenderfoot to Eagle, there is absolutely no requirement that an Eagle Scout ever spend a night outdoors. He merely has to have slept in a tent he has pitched.

 

So pitch the tents indoors!

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

 

[evmori]

I'm with Kudu. The committee has completely over stepped it's authority on this one. Maybe they should concentrate on getting themselves trained and leave the kids to the Scoutmaster.

[NJCubScouter]

Kudu says:

 

If you read the BSA camping requirements from Tenderfoot to Eagle, there is absolutely no requirement that an Eagle Scout ever spend a night outdoors. He merely has to have slept in a tent he has pitched.

 

So pitch the tents indoors!

 

The "outdoors" is implied in the various requirements including the Camping MB. I don't know of anyone who interprets them otherwise. Is there anyone in this forum who gives credit for a night of camping (whether Camping MB or First Class, or otherwise) if the tent is not pitched outdoors?

[moosetracker]

Site selection is very important when camping in the great indoors.. You must position yourself so you are near the TV and the Fridge at the same time.

 

Also look out for those ferocious house cats!!!