Refusing Transfers

[Beavah]

Yah, there was an interestin' post by TNScoutTroop about refusing to accept transfer scouts to their "different" program that seemed like it could stir the pot in a new thread.

 

As I understood it, TNScoutTroop wants to be a "traditional" scout unit in terms of expecting proficiency in outdoor skills for advancement. So roughly a rank a year, First Class Scouts should be able to do a backpacking weekend on their own adult-less, that sort of thing. Very consistent with the core BSA program philosophy in most ways, though differing from what some units do and some of the more modern BSA program materials' focus.

 

Da problem TNScoutTroop is anticipatin' I think is a real one, eh? There's quite a bit of misunderstanding and tension when yeh have lads transfer between troops with different approaches and philosophies. It's really no different than when boys move from Cub Scouts into Boy Scouts and they or their parents are still stuck in Cub Scout mode. If yeh move from a rapid advancement, Eagle-and-out-at-14 program to a program like what TN is puttin' together, there's likely to be some confusion and even hard feelings. Similarly, if a lad moves from TN's troop to a rapid-advancement program there's likely to be some tension and disappointment, too. That sorta thing can lead to a lot of adult misbehavior and time wasted by the unit leaders.

 

So what should be "best practice" in handling transfers under such circumstances? A few troops I know tell parents when kids move up from cubs to give the boys some space, and they don't accept transfer parents as leaders until they've had at least a year of "cub scout deprogramming". Do we do somethin' similar for transfers?

 

How do yeh handle a 12-year-old Life Scout transfer with very weak skills who moves into a troop with a very active outdoor program where Life Scout refers to a 16 year old with 200 days in the field who can plan a high adventure trip from scratch? I've seen lads who were reduced to tears because their new troop assumed they had the skills and so put 'em into positions where they were set up for failure because they really didn't. Conversely, how do yeh handle a 15 year old First Class Scout who along with his parents develops an attitude about all da "Fake" Eagle Scouts his age who can't lash together a bridge without adult help? I've seen that, too.

 

What's the best way to avoid problems with such transfers? Just say "no?" Put conditions or expectations up front? What?

 

Beavah

 

[CalicoPenn]

Gee - here's a thought on the best way to avoid problems. Follow the program as laid out by the franchisor - I mean the Boy Scouts of America. Why is it we can walk into any franchised McDonalds anywhere in the United States (heck in the world) and feel comfortable that the Big Mac made in San Diego is going to look and taste the same as the Big Mac made in Altoona?

 

I know, I know - "but we're not McDonalds". I say balderdash - we're exactly like McDonalds - a national oprganization provides the standards, it's our job to follow them.

 

That applies to both those Troops that think they should follow the old ways because those ways were better and to those Troops that are lax on the standards because - well, who knows why they're lax - I could suggest laziness as one possibility, I'm sure there are more.

 

Follow the program and you won't have any problems with transfers.

[dScouter15]

I can see both sides of the argument. In one sense, I strongly believe that all units to strive to implement the entire program as defined by the BSA. I'm not saying this just "because its the rules," but rather because I've seen the BSA program work, and believe it works better than most alternatives. Furthermore, as an Eagle Scout myself, I'd like to think that my Eagle badge is roughly equal in value to anyone else's Eagle badge. I think that the Eagle award in its entirety is diminished when the requirements differ from troop to troop. I am just as skeptical of "Eagle Mills" as I am of the troops that make their scouts jump through a bunch of unnecessary hoops to earn Eagle, on top of the already challenging requirements.

 

At the same time, I think its unavoidable that local traditions, values, resources, backgrounds and experiences will influence an individual unit's program. I don't necessarily think that this is a bad thing, as I believe that most of the BSA's rules do allow for some degree of wiggle room in their implementation. I don't know how well the McDonalds analogy holds. In my mind, a visitor to several different Scout troops should see some consistent themes - uniforming, advancement requirements, values, etc - but should definitely see a lot of variety in activities, reflective of the individual troop's experience, resources, and interests. That said, I think that when troops diverge to the point where we're seriously considering not allowing a Scout to transfer from one troop to another, there is a serious problem with at least one of those troops.

 

In Beavah's original example, I think that the "traditional" troop is misunderstanding and misusing the advancement method. Earning a rank advancement means that you met some set of defined requirements - no more, no less. Tying position within the troop directly with rank is certainly not an appropriate implementation of the advancement method. Position within the troop should be determined by maturity, physical and emotional capability, experience, and age (roughly in that order). Granted there should be some correlation between all of these things and the Scout's current rank, but the I don't think there is a 100% certain mapping between rank and everything else that makes up Scouting ability and experience.

 

So, instead of denying a boy's application because he is over- or under-qualified based on his rank and how he compares to other scouts of that rank in the troop, just stick him in the patrol that is the best fit for his maturity, capabilities, etc. I'm guessing that if he's committed to that troop's program, he'll have no problem learning and growing within that troop, regardless of how his rank relates to that of the rest of the troop.

 

Maybe I'm looking too specifically at Beavah's example, and missing the big picture, but I'd certainly have a hard time refusing a boy's application based only on the type of troop he's transferring from. If he's interested in joining my troop, I'd guess his reason is because he likes my troop's program, and is willing to commit himself to be successful in it. I certainly wouldn't deny him just because his previous troop had a different approach.

[moosetracker]

1) If you have a well defined program that you think may not be the normal style of a troop.. (such as either following the guidelines of 1912, or following the guidelines of current day). Then you should be able to explain your program to a new crossover scout or a transfering scout, so that they understand the design of your program.

 

2) Figure out a working plan to get a transfer scout up to speed with the skills your troop think are important, that their other troop were lax in.. With a transfer scout go through the outline of this plan with them also so they are informed.

 

Then let the scout decide if this troop is where they want to be or not. If he decides to join welcome him and work with him to bring him up speed.

 

If you lay out everything up front, and follow that plan the scout may in time find this is not the troop for them and transfer out, but he should not have a feeling that you were at all unfair to him while he was there.

 

Taking the requirements and "assuring" the scouts really know them, and put them to constant use so that they remember them is not a bad thing.. Adding to the requirements (or subtracting) from them for rank requirement should not be done. Having a troop with extra challenges that don't have anything to do with rank requirement though is just fine..

 

The troop should not feel they have the right to pick & choose their new scouts. They should just truthfully lay out their troops objectives and then allow the scouts to make an informed decision..

[evmori]

I'm not sure I see a problem. The Scout will have to adapt to the program he transfers into. Either that or find a different unit.

[moosetracker]

P.S. due to another active thread going on I do have to state, that I do think that if a scout has been in your unit (or is currently in the unit) and it has proved not to be a healthy relationship and may threaten to tear the unit apart, that is when the unit has a right to ask them to leave (or not allow them to transfer back in).

 

Also as for the 2nd part of the question.. The feeling of superiority with your skills and looking down on "Fake" Eagle Scouts who don't have the same skill set. That will happen in a normal troop where the scouts have a normal skill set when they see a 13 yo Eagle who doesn't show maturity and/or skills. Or maybe not a young Eagle but still someone who is Eagle who is self-centered, or not a team player.

 

I don't know how you change that attitude, in truth I have to admit I even have that feeling..

 

I guess my beef is not with the Eagle, it is with the adults who never got proper training or chose to not follow the program. They are the ones that cheated the scout.

 

It does seem to hurt the program if a manager hires someone who puts on their resume they earned Eagle, and they have a poor work or team ethic. I know it is not their fault the scout just followed the program, and feels their skills are equal to every other Eagle.

 

 

[Basementdweller]

You are also missing the firestorm that accompanying the transfer.

 

You simply cannot ignore the real problem.....the parents. Just blindly looking at the scout is impossible.

 

 

 

I am comfortable with refusing this young man knowing, at least one side, of the history.

 

So what is the cost program, aggravation and lost families, to the troop, one boy just isn't worth it. I know others will see it differently, but running the troop is tough enough with out parents being jerks.

[moosetracker]

Basementdweller - I added the comment about the other thread as a side note of the only time a troop may have the right to reject a transfer..

 

But really, this is a thread on normal everyday transfers of normal everyday boys.. And someone thinking their troop should deny all transfers because they don't think a scout coming from a normal troop background would be a good fit for their troop, because of the higher standards of their troop.

 

Either the scout would be subpar, or feel they were treated unfairly and complain to the council that their troop is not following the BSA rules.. Or whatever.

[TNScoutTroop]

For the record, we didn't say we had committed to refusing all transfers. We plan to caution people, in some detail, and probably discourage most transfers. But, we really haven't gotten that far yet.

 

What we did, was pose a question, and a hypothetical response, if the answer to the question was negative:

 

"What about a Scout who insists on transferring in, even after being discouraged: can we insist on some evidence of real skills? (If the answer here is "No!", we'll probably just refuse transfers altogether.)"

 

This is all hypothetical, for now. We're just trying to work out how to handle things so we can serve our own boys, and help everyone else get what they expect from Scouting.

 

We plan to be as much "off the radar" of the District and Council as we can, to avoid producing conflict. We do find it ironic that, when there are over 100 troops in the Council producing apparently skill-less Eagles, it seems to be offensive to so many here that we might succeed (it hasn't happened, yet!) in creating a working troop that insists that both Scout and Scouter skills be real.

 

There's been lots of talk of us not following the rules, but it seems to us that a pretty strong case can be made that it's really the other 100 troops that, along with Mazzuca, aren't following the rules. But, we're not trying to change those troops, or Mazzuca, or the troops of the people here.

 

Why is it such a big deal that we are attempting to actually follow the original (and in many cases, modern) rules, in our own quiet little corner of Tennessee?

 

We're just here, trying to figure out how to work with our boys in a more traditional fashion, without stepping on toes or committing serious paperwork or bureaucratic violations. We doubt we'll really be 'competing' with other troops. Our 'market' is boys who've never been Scouts, or boys who gave up on Scouting as they encountered it. Most troops don't want these boys in the first place.

 

So, what's the problem?

 

Tn Scout Troop

[Mike F]

The troop I serve brings in transfer scouts every year.

As SM, I meet with them first to make sure they seem like a good fit and I talk to them about the program they are leaving as compared to ours.

Some jump in without missing a beat.

Some struggle to catch up with troop norms and appear on the outside to stagnate a year or two. I know they are growing to catch up.

If parents will trust us, we will get them there.

[moosetracker]

TNScouterTroop -

 

It is not that you are trying to run a high standard troop. Kudu & JBlake47 run retroactive high standard troops. Many right now think I might be battling with Kudu over his troop, I am not, merely stating there are things that you can change, and others that you can not such as you can demand a higher compentancy of the advancement requirements, but not add to if 15 of your own before they can reach a rank. But if he wants to run a different program then as long as he is fair with all the scouts equally, I have no problem.

 

The difference between Kudu and you is since Kudu does not run under the radar in this forum, I doubt he is running under the radar in his district or council. Meaning he has no fear of being on the radar, and takes pride in his troop. I have yet to hear how he handles transfers or new members.

 

The difference between JBlake47 and you is he is sad he could not entice some if not all of the 40 Webelos tranfers to try out his troop with their different approach. He did not sound like he was going to grill them for if their parents and the scouts had the right "mental attitude" and deny anyone who did not.

 

By you wanting to run under the radar, by you wanting to open your doors to people outside your church, but find a way to monitor who you accept and who you don't, by you wanting to deny transfers or expect them to be at your units expected skill set for their rank or have the right to deny them. By you wanting to train your own adult leaders and figure out how you can sign them off on the courses that will be required to be rechartered yourself without them ever going near other people who may tell them BSA policy that is different then what you want to drill into them is BSA policy.

 

You troop sound very very controlling, very domineering, very manipulative with both the scouts and the adult leaders. Your troop also sounds like it needs to run under the radar of your district & council for fear that the policies you will set up will not be of any BSA troop from 1912 - 2010 and that what you are establishing will be so against BSA policy it will cause your council to terminate it, if they ever got wind of what you were up to.

 

Sorry, but the secretiveness, the monitoring who joins, and the wish to segregate your adult leaders from hearing BSA policy from anyone else in the scouting community outside of your group. Just sends up red flags to me.

 

So what happens to the boy who is a crossover who chooses to join you troop, that after being in it for 6 months to a year, you decide is not cut out for your unit. Or his parents are not. Let say his parents have heard the BSA policies from a friend of theirs that is in another troop, and their fried enlightened them that your unit is unfairly doing A, B & C.. They are informing other parents in your troop? Soon they may report something to your District Exec. What will you do with them?

 

What about a scout that might be enjoying the friends in the troop, but is just slow to come up to your expectations for skill set.. Maybe really isn't interested in the scoutcraft skills, just in hanging out with his buddies.

 

How will you remove these unwanted members?

[evmori]

Maybe it's me but unless there is a verifiable problem (legal, behavioral) with a Scout, why would you refuse to let them transfer into your unit?

[Jeffrey H]

What's the best way to avoid problems with such transfers? Just say "no?" Put conditions or expectations up front? What

The new SM should counsel the new scout on expectations up front.  If the new SM has higher proficiecy standards to complete each requirement for First Class, I have no problem with it, just let new transfers know it.

[Nachamawat]

TNScouterTroop seems to have a flair for the royal we as though it gives more of an air of authority. I will simply tell you how I feel from a simply persons point of view!

 

I do not understand the need to make a foundation of Orthodox faith the basis of Boy Scouting. Lord Baden Powell said, "No man is much good unless he believes in God and obeys His laws. So every Scout should have a religion....Religion seems a very simple thing: First: Love and serve God. Second: Love and serve your neighbour." (Scouting for Boys)

 

There are twelve interweaving and coexisting Scout Laws not just one. Each of the laws has a valid life lesson to teach the Scout and yet only one law seems to receive any immediate reaction when it is spoken out loud. When a Scout or Scouter walks into an assembly of Scouts and says a Scout is Reverent there is an immediate expectation of silence and removal of head gear. No one immediately starts to do their assigned patrol duty when someone states a Scout is Helpful. Or has any other instantaneous reaction to the other eleven Laws.

 

We as Scouters are delivering a program designed to provide the following aims:

Growth in moral strength and character

Participating citizenship

Development in physical, mental, and emotional fitness

 

I think Scouting is an additional tool that society can use to hone our future leaders and followers to be better productive, educated, and well-rounded citizens. The other parts of the puzzle are the parents choice of church (and how often they attend), the parents choice of school (public or private), and the other thing that the parent chooses to allow the child to be involved in.

 

I think I, as a Scouter, can do my role in this very effectively without ever showing the full extent of my religious belief, the true nature of my political belief, and even the true nature of my sexual orientation (although I happen to be a heterosexual male, it should not really matter if I could keep my sexual activities and comments completely to myself just as I do in the other examples.) I can and do counsel the citizenship merit badge series apolitically. I can and do counsel the Scouts on the role of religion in Scouting without showing a religious bias.

 

I think if you want to have a more fervent religious experience for your child than the public school is offering then by all means send them to private school or home school them. If you want to have your child enriched in a more athletic environment in school seek out a more athletically competitive school or inquire into the process of beginning a charter school. But why do you feel that you need to change a process that was not designed for your specific desires and subvert the process for everyone else? BP said every Scout should have a religion he did not say your religion!

 

 

 

 

 

[John-in-KC]

To TNScouter:

 

Are your IH and COR onboard with this?

Do you have a good working relationship with your DE, District Commish, and Unit Commish?

 

Odds are someone will complain to the professionals, and the pros will send commish to the IH, COR, and you.

 

To Beavah: What is the risk exposure of a discrimination complaint against the Chartered Partner?