CO Pack does not support CO Troop

[SeattlePioneer]

Hello Baden P,

 

 

In another recent thread, a Chartered Organization was proposing to charge the unit for costs of providing services.

 

You might want to go back and re read that thread. The prevailing opinion did not support the idea that the unit should dutifully pay up whatever the CO desired.

 

Few Chartered Organizations have any written agreement with unit leaders requiring them to carry out particular policies for the CO.

 

The units I have been associated with are expected to act in their own interest to carry out the Scout program in good faith, not primarily to carry water for the CO.

 

Units are EXPLICITLY required to follow the rules and regulations of the BSA in their charter.

 

In short, I see units being subject to varying tests of obligation and loyalty. The idea that they are agents of the CO and that's it seems exagerated to me.

[Beavah]

Yah, hmmm.... that might be one of da best examples yet of the dangers of relyin' on Wikipedia (or any encyclopedia for that matter). The legal and ethical notion of agency extends far beyond da commercial code.

 

So let's take a look at the filing against Plantation United Methodist Church in da Florida Everglades hike case, eh? H.C. and A.S. were selected by defendant Plantation United Methodist Church as Scoutmaster and Assistant Scoutmaster, respectively. Both were serving in their roles as scouters during the accident. And, as such, they were servants or agents of Plantation United Methodist Church for which the Church is exposed to vicarious liability. In other words, the church is liable for the actions of its agents, the unit scouters.

 

Hands-off or hands-on might describe the nature of the agency relationship, eh? Lots of legal agents have pretty hands-off relationships with their principals. Heck, that's da reason why the role of agent exists, eh? To handle things so that the principal doesn't have to be hands-on.

 

So just because da principal is hands-off doesn't change the fact that a relationship exists. The Chartered Org. is responsible for the selection of unit scouters. Every year the IH, as executive officer of the Chartered Organization, signs a unit charter approving those adults listed in the charter to their roles as agent, and further authorizes the COR to act on his/her behalf in the selection of other unit scouters during the year.

 

As a unit scouter there really isn't any question, eh? Legally and ethically you are an agent for the Chartered Organization, and yeh owe a duty in that role to them, not to the BSA. Just like legally and ethically a Scout Executive is agent for the council corporation and its board, not the BSA.

 

I recognize that many scouters get confused by this, because ordinarily in their role they spend more time workin' with the BSA materials and council support staff than anyone at the CO. But those BSA materials and that council support is only available to 'em because the Chartered Organization contracted for that support to help its unit volunteers. Just like the CO can contract with ARC to provide CPR training to its scouters, too... it will look like it's the Red Cross to the volunteer, but actually it's da CO hiring the Red Cross for that service.

 

Or, since people sometimes love BSA material quotes:

 

Your troop is "owned" by a chartered organization, which receives a national charter yearly to use the Scouting program as a part of its youth work. ... The Troop Committee works on behalf of the chartered organization; your troop must be operated within the organization's policies. The chartered organization must also approve all adult leaders... In the chartered organization relationship, the Boy Scouts of America provides the program and support services, and the chartered organization provides the adult leadership and uses the program to accomplish its goals for youth. - Troop Committee Handbook

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[Twocubdad]

If I never lay eyes on my IH or COR and never have any interaction or contact with the CO whatsoever, that they give me the keys to the building, pay for the untilities and allow our 60 kids to meet on their property demands my loyalty, trust, gratitude and best efforts to act in their best interest. Period.

 

Everything else builds on that.

[Beavah]

Yah, sorry Seattle, I doubled with yeh. BadenP is right, eh? I don't think you're really understandin' what the BSA is and how it works.

 

Few Chartered Organizations have any written agreement with unit leaders requiring them to carry out particular policies for the CO.

 

Written instructions are nice, but they're not required. It's the duty of the unit scouters to serve the CO. Some of da bigger COs with central organizations like the Catholics and the LDS do have written support materials, of course, but even for them most of the relationship involves unit leaders individually knowing and doin' their best without having to be "told" to in writing.

 

 

Units are EXPLICITLY required to follow the rules and regulations of the BSA in their charter.

 

No, if yeh read da Charter Agreement, the Chartered Organization agrees to "Conduct the Scouting program according to its own policies and guidelines as well as those of the Boy Scouts of America" and the BSA council agrees to "respect the aims and objectives of the organization and offer the resources of Scouting to help in meeting those objectives."

 

 

The units I have been associated with are expected to act in their own interest to carry out the Scout program in good faith

 

Then yeh did not get adequately trained, or yeh missed what is admittedly a subtle point in training. The units you have been associated with are expected to act in the interest of their chartered organization and to carry out that organization's scouting program in good faith.

 

But now yeh know!

 

Beavah

[SeattlePioneer]

Hello Beavah,

 

 

In looking through the adult leader application, there is NOTHING that appoints leaders to be agents of the Chartered Organization.

 

The Charter certificate says:

 

"Boy Scouts of America

 

CHARTER

 

Granted to the

 

XXX [Chartered Organization]

 

Upon Application Through Authorized Representatives to Carry on the Scouting Program for

Character Development, Citizenship Training, Mentalo and Physical Fitness

Subject to the Provisions of the Charter and Bylaws and Rules and

Regulations of the Boy Scouts of America....."

 

 

 

The Chartered Organization is certainly free to impose additional obligations on unit leaders which might indeed make them agents of the Chartered Organization.

 

 

But you can't be an agent unless you AGREE TO BECOME ONE! The fact that the Co approves my position in the unit doesn't mean I'm their agent.

 

 

 

Frankly, I'm not a lawyer, and I don't claim to be versed in the fine point of agency law. I simply don't find your claim that unit leaders are agents of the CO and to owe a duty of loyalty to the CO to be convincing.

 

You do. I don't think you have a compelling case, so we'll simply have to disagree on that issue.

[Beavah]

Nope, SP, this is one of those questions that has an answer, eh? Like what time the sun is goin' to rise tomorrow in Seattle. People can have different opinions about it, but only one of those opinions is goin' to be correct. Not a fine point, either... a fundamental point of ethics. Of course what may well be true is that I'm an ineffective trainer or communicator, eh? Like Lisabob says, I blame da accent.

 

I guess you've never handled recharter paperwork. At the top of the roster is a signature line for the IH, which states that as IH he/she appoints all of the listed people to their positions and in so doing agrees the person listed as COR can make additional appointments during the year.

 

The fact that the CO appoints you to a unit leader position in the unit that they own and operate makes you their agent. Yeh agreed to be their agent when yeh accepted appointment to scouter in their program. They can terminate you at will, even if the BSA and every parent in the unit likes you. If yeh served in a Scoutreach unit which might be run directly by a BSA council, then you'd be agent for the council. Aside from Scoutreach, though, the BSA does not allow its program to be used by "independent" scouters, only by community agencies. So yeh can't be a unit scouter unless you have agreed to serve as a volunteer/agent for a chartered organization.

 

If yeh don't like that, yeh can always take on a district or council role instead. Of course, then you're still workin' for the council corporation, not the BSA. If yeh want to volunteer for da actual BSA yeh need to get yourself a gold-tab position.

 

Now, your last post used da word "loyalty" which has some deeper implications, and which I deliberately haven't used. Your duty as unit scouter is to act as an honest and responsible agent for the CO in their program, and do your best in their stead to achieve their mission. That doesn't carry a burden of "loyalty" the way most people mean it. Yeh are free to leave and sign on with another CO to start a competing unit, for example.

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[SeattlePioneer]

Well, you seem to be convinced by your own arguments, Beavah.

 

 

I don't find them persuasive.

 

A chartered organization could certainly establish an agency relationship with unit leaders by requiring them to sign such an agreement, detailing their responsibilities, as a condition of becoming a unit leader.

 

LDS units might have something like that going with their leaders.

 

 

The adult leader application is signed not only by the COR, but by the Scout Executive or his designee.

 

Above the signatures is noted "Approvals For Unit Scouters

We are unaware of anything contrary to the information stated in this application. This application has been reviewed according to BSA procedures and this applicant meets the leadership qualifications of the Boy Scouts Of America"

 

 

Nothing there about adhearing to the policies or standards of the CO. Leaders DO need to meet the standards of the BSA.

 

 

Again, can you show me where the unit leader is agreeing to become an agent of the CO? I simply don't see anything about that at all in the adult leader application.

 

IF adults were told they were going to be agents of a church for which they were not a member, or agents for a VFW Post they were not eligible to join, many would probably have reservations about it. And probably many of those chartered organizations might have reservations as well.

 

Instead, what adults understand is that they are going to be leaders in a SCOUT UNIT, run under the rules of the BSA. That's the common understanding I think, and that's what the adult leader application says.

 

The fact that the COR can fire a unit leader doesn't change that fact nor make the unit leader an agent of the CO. The BSA can fire unit leaders too, needless to say, and the Scout Executive can refuse to appoint adult leaders as well.

 

 

 

 

(This message has been edited by seattlepioneer)

[Beavah]

Again, can you show me where the unit leader is agreeing to become an agent of the CO? I simply don't see anything about that at all in the adult leader application.

 

Of course not. That's your membership application to the BSA, eh? In order to be eligible for registration in da BSA, you must already have been approved by the CO, which is why da CO's signature is required. The BSA can't appoint you to a unit position no matter how many application forms you submit to them. Only the CO can make you its agent and thereby a unit volunteer eligible for BSA membership.

 

Don't mix the two up, eh? To be eligible for BSA membership, yeh must already have agreed to be volunteer and agent for the CO.

 

Yep, yeh should think carefully about agreeing to do that if yeh aren't a member of the CO or have some fundamental disagreements with their positions on things which would affect your ability to represent them to the youth in your program. If yeh can't do that honestly, yeh have a moral obligation to resign.

 

But that's why I didn't use da word "loyalty", eh? Your role in their service is limited to the youth work in the troop. Yeh do not owe them any duty of "loyalty" in the bigger sense beyond being an honest and conscientious youth leader to help 'em with their youth mission. You might disagree entirely with their other positions and lobby against them, so long as it doesn't compromise your ability to work on their behalf in the troop.

 

Of course, I think yeh have an obligation to disclose that sort of potential conflict to 'em, so they can make an informed decision about whether it's too big a conflict for them to accept. But lots of scouters volunteer for programs at churches that aren't their own or at VFW's even if they're not vets or whatnot, and do so quite happily. Just like non-Catholics teach at Catholic schools, yeh see Jews as Scoutmasters in Catholic units, Catholics as Committee Members in Methodist units, and on and on.

 

In the end, though, it's da CO that's on the line for your behavior and your actions, not the BSA. They are trusting you with their facilities, their kids, their reputation and their very existence. And in that, as TwoCubDad says, yeh have a duty.

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[BadenP]

Seattle

 

I really don't understand why you are having such trouble grasping this concept. The BSA contracts with the Charter Organization NOT with the unit or its leaders. Your unit has no legal basis or status on its own but ONLY under the charter with the CO with whom the BSA creates this legally binding relationship. That is why on your charter it specifically states that it is granted to, Church XYZ, or American Legion Post 123 for Pack XXX. The direct relationship is with the CO, not the unit, and why only the COR has the legal authority to vote, instead of the unit leaders, at the council executive meetings. That is also why a CO can legally fold a unit under their charter, or dismiss its leaders, or seize their assets. So in reality like it or not all unit scout leaders are indeed agents or affiliates of their Charter Organization without whom they can not legally function as far as the BSA is concerned.

 

[SeattlePioneer]

The Council can fold a unit or dismiss adult leaders too.

 

 

So exactly WHERE did the CO appoint me as their agent? Exactly no where is the answer. The fact that the CO approves me as a leader doesn't make me their agent. The name of the CO appears no where on the adult leader application.

 

 

The CO can own the bank account and property of the unit, but it can't make someone an agent without their agreement, which is no where solicited on the adult leader application.

 

And the unit has far more in direct relationships with the BSA and it's council than it does with the typical CO.

 

 

I pointed out in another thread that in a child abuse case, a neighboring council made the claim that it had no libaility because the CO (an LDS Church) appointed the leaders. That claim was rejected when the case went to trial and the council was found liable for the actions of unit leaders.

 

 

I again suggest that since no one is an Xpert on agency law, that reasonable people are going to disagree about such things. I know Beavah rejected that too, suggesting that only unreasonable people could fail to agree with him.

 

Despite that, we are back to the idea that reasonable people are going to disagree.

 

 

[John-in-KC]

SP,

 

Listen to the attorney (Beavah). He's telling you the consequences of the contract. He's learned contract law, more than once.

 

When Beavah, or the judge, starts talking the stuff of law, I stop and listen.

[SeattlePioneer]

I've never heard Beavah make a claim that he is an attorney. Perhaps he would care to do so.

 

 

My basic objection is that as I understand it, an agency relationship is a contract between a master and servant to do some particular kinds of things.

 

To me that implies that you have to have a meeting of the minds to agree to be someone's agent. Nothing of the sort is established in the adult leader application or anywhere else. The name of the CO is not even mentioned in the adult leader application.

 

Secondly, the contractual relationship is between the CO and the BSA. Just because the CO and BSA have a contract doesn't establish the adult leader as an agent.

 

A CO that wants their unit leaders to be agents would need to ask them to sign an agency contract defining the mutual duties between the master and servant.

 

If A and B have a contract, does that obligate person C to A? No.

[The Blancmange]

So, how about that snow?

[clemlaw]

I think some people are getting confused from the use of the word "agent".

 

Maybe this will make things even more confusing, but to me, the relationship makes a lot more sense if you use the words "unpaid employee" instead of "agent". (And no, you're not really an employee, and there's no such thing as an "unpaid employee". But it just seems to me that the relationship makes more sense that way.)(And yes, when I say "unpaid employee", I really mean "agent". But it just seems to make more sense if we avoid that word.)

 

So you're an "unpaid employee" of the CO, and you owe them a certain degree of loyalty as a result of that. IMHO, that loyalty does not necessarily include funneling kids into the CO's troop. If they "hired" you to run the Cub Scout program, then you, as a loyal (unpaid) employee are obligated to do that job to the best of your ability. And if you believe, in good faith, that the competing troop down the street is better than the one that the CO runs, then they "hired" you to pass that tidbit of information on to the Cub Scouts. After all, your job description says "lead the Cub Scouts", and part of the job of leading Cub Scouts is giving them advice on how and where to continue their scouting career.

 

If the head of the CO says to you, "Mr. Cub Scout leader, I hereby order you to funnel kids into our troop, and stop talking up the one down the street", then you are obligated to follow that advice, or get fired, in which case you will forfeit your entire salary.

 

But if they don't say that, then IMHO, there's no particular duty to do so. Again, they hired you to run a good Cub Scout program, not to promote the other activities of the CO.(This message has been edited by clemlaw)

[JMHawkins]

There is the abstract principle, and then there's how you turn that principle into relevant actions. I completely agree we as unit leaders have obligations (and an agency obligation seems a reasonable enough description) to the CO. But what - exactly - are the particulars, especially as applied to this case?

 

Let's go with the agency idea a bit. I hire Beavah as my legal agent in some Real Estate dispute (I have no idea what Beavah's specialty is, let's assume it's Real Estate Law). It's pretty clear what his obligations to me are with respect to that particular dispute. But in the course of working with me on that case, he comes across some details of a Trademark dispute I'm also involved in (I'm a busy guy). Beavah - though not an expert in Trademark or IP law - thinks the lawyers I've retained for that case are botching it. What is his obligation - through agency or loyalty or simple decency - to tell me about his concerns? How strong a case should he make to me about my IP attorneys? Beavah and I don't have a long history of working together, he's maybe helped me file a couple of simple forms in the past, but handled nothing complicated for me as of yet so I have no real idea of his competency. Further, part of his strongest case for why the other lawyers are incompetent requires Beavah to let me know the other law firm has a very low opinion of Beavah's abilities and strongly recomends people go to another Real Estate law firm when they need help. I've had no problems with the IP attorneys before, and their other clients seem happy with them.

 

So Beavah, what course of action do you take?