Bylaws creation and leader issues

[semperfiscouter]

Good morning!

 

Our Pack is going to be reviewing an existing set of bylaws used by another pack, and deciding how we want to implement it in our pack. The "normal" stuff is in there, but do any of you have anything in particular that you would suggest be written or added? I also wanted to ask how some of your packs may have dealt with a leader who has laid their hands on a scout. We have one person, who's placed a firm grip on a scout and at a different time, onto a sibling of which seemed hurt at the time. There are other issues; aren't their always; but this, and the over attitude towards fellow leaders and scouts is rather poor to say the least. Council is aware of this person, but nothing has been done - has anyone had the unfortunate experience of having a leader kicked out, or otherwise barred from the Pack?

[CalicoPenn]

Bylaws? You don't need them - not unless your a "Friends Of" Pack in which case the "Friends of" group needs the Bylaws, not the Pack. You may need Standard Operating Procedures that just tells people the basic how-to's of the Pack (How to set-up the pinewood derby track, how the checking account works, how you gain access to the meeting space, etc.) but you don't need Bylaws.

 

As for the person laying hands on Scouts (and siblings), first thing is to make sure everyone has the proper training. Next, tell this person that under no circumstances is it allowable for an adult to lay hands in a disciplinary manner on any child not their own. Period - no discussion. If the person persists, don't wait for Council to do something about it - go to the COR and have the COR remove the person from the Pack - no second chances. Done and done - and don't look back. If the COR refuses, then every other adult leader tenders their immediate resignation to the COR and goes on and forms a new pack where the COR won't tolerate such nonsense. Again - done and done, and don't look back.

[semperfiscouter]

Thanks - and it looks like there are two different approaches. Unfortunately this person has done it in the past, and again this year. This person was upset at the time. The CC did speak with the person, however, this is part of his identity and personality and apparently he revels in the fact that he's an a...... I like the suggestion by CalicoPenn that the person needs to be dealt with. Thanks again for your timely advice and suggestions!

[NJCubScouter]

I don't think how you deal with an incident between a leader and a youth depends on the existence or contents of bylaws.

 

As for bylaws themselves, if your unit already had bylaws, or the CO said you needed to have bylaws, then yes, you want to have the best bylaws you can have. However, if my unit did not have bylaws (and it doesn't) and I were reviewing a set from another unit for possible adoption in mine (which seems to be your situation), my approach would be to go to the top line of the document, do "Select all", then "Cut" and "Save." And then adopt that. But that might not work for everybody.

 

If you have a particular issue that needs a "rule" to cover future cases, then adopt a written rule. Or a parent handbook with the rules. But bylaws, I just don't think they are necessary.

[FScouter]

Article IX, Section 13, paragraph iii:

Adults are not allowed to put a hand on a Scout. Furthermore, adults must not have a poor attitude.

 

There you go - problems solved. Attitudes will now be good and no one will grip a Scout - it's in the bylaws.

[pchadbo]

"Article IX, Section 13, paragraph iii:

Adults are not allowed to put a hand on a Scout. Furthermore, adults must not have a poor attitude"

 

 

Sub-paragraph iiia.:

 

Scouts WILL HAVE FUN!!!!!!!!

 

There now the adults have a good attitude and the kids are having fun.

 

All is good across the rainbow

 

[Eamonn]

The question about bylaws comes up a lot.

Some people swear by them and don't understand how any unit can function without them. While others just don't see the need for them.

I belong to the group who just doesn't see the need for them.

My reasons are:

1/ If we decide that we need a rule for everything then the rule book will get so big, no one will ever be able to find the rule when it is needed.

2/ Most times when someone asks about the bylaws, they are looking to bash someone over the head with the rule book, using rules and bylaws to their own end.

3/ What happens when there isn't a rule or bylaw?

4/ What we are doing isn't rocket science, it's supposed to be about serving kids and having fun.

5/ Maybe deep down I'm some sort of an rebel?

 

We don't need bylaws to tell us what's right or wrong, we should know what's acceptable and what isn't.

Any adult who harms a child is clearly in the wrong and needs to be removed.

The removal should be handled by the CO.

Ea.

[Scoutfish]

Some will say bylaws are not needed, but they are. I know it to be true.

 

But, realize that 99.9 percent of bylaws are not about the scouting program, or scouts, but about, for, and directed towards adults.

 

The situations also usually involve money:

 

Paying dues, paying recharter, popcorn, PWD, camping and trips, and misc supplies

 

PWD can also fall under bylaws as far as who can touch the cars after inspection, what rules are used ( pack, district, council, internet, or only what's in the box)

 

Money, money money! Bank accounts, treasurers , who has authority to sing or deposit.

 

We have bylaws for our pack. Like I said, 99.9 percent of them are soley to keep adults in check in the day to day running of the buisness side of the pack. And most of the are the result of adults who just decided to do whatever they wanted instead of following leader agreements or normal ways of doing things.

 

 

[Oak Tree]

We don't have "bylaws" by that name, but we do have some operating procedures, some of which sound a lot like by-laws. I think that it can be useful to detail how you're going to handle a situation ahead of time, especially if that's a situation that comes up again and again from time to time.

 

We've never had to resort to our document in terms of how we would handle unruly Scouts. Maybe we're just lucky. At this point, I feel like we could remove that section, and just deal with it if it ever comes up. But I can see how some people might feel better if it were written down.

 

They might say something like "Any inappropriate behavior by a leader will be addressed through a one-on-one discussion with the committee chair, who has the power to take action as he or she determines to be fair, without necessarily consulting with other members of the committee."

[KC9DDI]

I've come to realize that unit by-laws can take on a variety of forms in practice. While I'm wary of unit by-laws that rival the US Code in terms of length and complexity, I do feel that its important that some things be put down on paper. I think there's something to be said for having an authoritative source of information, rather than relying on word-of-mouth and oral tradition. I think this is especially important in a volunteer organization where adult volunteers can come and go fairly routinely - having a set of general guidelines for all to follow helps create a sense of consistency in the unit as a whole, as volunteer leaders come and go.

 

My troop does have a "Troop Handbook." Its about 10 pages long, which sounds like a lot, but isn't so bad when you consider how it is set up and what information it contains. The first several pages contain a brief welcome/introduction letter from the Chartered Org and CC, a brief history of the troop, and general information like where/when we meet, our goals for how often we go camping, our uniform policy, an overview of the patrol method and where the Scout "fits" in the greater scheme of world-wide Scouting, some emergency contact phone numbers, etc.

 

The meatiest part of the document addresses some processes and procedures that the troop makes use of. It's almost like an FAQ, and exists mainly to describe how we handle the logistics of the troop's day-to-day operations. For example: boards of review are typically conducted the 3rd meeting of the month, please contact the advancement chair at least a week ahead of time to schedule yours. Money and permission slips for camping trips must be turned in by the Tuesday before the camping trip. Courts of honor are held 3 times a year, all families are invited and asked to bring a dessert to share. Etc, etc. It is written in almost a conversational tone, and explains why we have each procedure (eg, "Turning in camping money and registration on time allows us to have an accurate head count, which helps ensure we have enough food and supplies on hand.") It is intended to be informative rather than imperative (if that makes any sense.)

 

There is a short bit of legalese that basically says we follow all BSA policies and local laws, that the SPL and SM are responsible for discipline issues at troop events, and that the troop reserves the right to remove any Scout or adult from a troop function, and that there is a procedure to have a Scout or adult removed from the troop. The legalese is about 6 sentences long, and has never really been an issue for us. Overall, we're looking at about 48% introductory material, 50% FAQs/procedures, and 2% legalese, which I think is pretty good by today's standards.

 

I wouldn't consider this document to be a set of "bylaws," but apparently some think that it is. What we do not have is any kind of guidelines for our PLC or committee meetings. This has, on occasion, caused some problems. Over the past several years, there have been some heated discussions and hurt feelings over the way money was spent, that certain decisions were made with or without certain people present, etc. Some may say that this is an example of why we need more detailed bylaws, but I don't think so. One, I think that when these disagreements do occur, its better for the subsequent discussions to focus on the core issue, be it poor judgement, lack of courtesy, or violation of somebody else's existing applicable policy (local law, BSA policy or CR guidelines). I'd rather have that kind of discussion that someone pulling out a rule book and saying "you violated rule 256.36a, punishable by 6 months of KP duty at camp!" Second, and to be blunt, I don't want some gung-ho amateur lawyer to devise volumes and volumes of bylaws, 90% of which are duplicates of other laws we already have (courtesy of the government or the BSA or the CR), 5% of which cover situations we'll never realistically encounter, 4% of which are self serving political crud, and the remaining 1% being stuff we already knew to begin with.

 

To tie all this back into the original question- semperfi, you mentioned that all the "normal" stuff is in those bylaws - but what exactly is that normal stuff?

[infoscouter]

bylaw   /ˈbaɪˌlɔ/

[bahy-law]

 

noun

1. a standing rule governing the regulation of a corporation's or society's internal affairs.

 

A Scout unit is not a corporation. Bylaws generally state who can be a member (the BSA tells us that). They state who can vote (In general the only voting that gets done in the BSA is by Chartered Organization Representatives at District and Council meetings). They state how often officers are elected (BSA leaders aren't elected - they are appointed by the Chartered Organization). They define the officers and their duties (the BSA has already defined our leadership positions and responsibilities).

 

Very often unit "bylaws" restate, break and/or mangle BSA policies. Most of what a unit needs to operate is defined by the BSA in its literature. Duplicating that just wastes time and paper.

 

The biggest problem with "bylaws" is that parents/leaders think that because they contain the word 'law', somehow they are enforceable (generally by the council/district). They're not. In fact, if what's in the "bylaw" is contrary to BSA policy, the BSA policy is going to prevail. And if the Chartered Organization Representative or Institution Head says otherwise, all the "bylaws" in the world will do no good.

 

Units need policies, generally about handling money. The simpler and shorter your policies are the better. And call them policies or procedures - not bylaws.

 

As to the leader. If your Committee Chair and Chartered Organization Representative are unhappy with behavior of this individual, they should ask him/her to step down. They can do that at any time. It doesn't take a vote or lots of discussion. If the individual isn't performing effectively as a leader, then they shouldn't BE a leader. The CC and COR need to exert their authority and end the individuals term, and find a replacement.

[Beavah]

Yah, da various legal eagles and those with less experience will go on about da various definitions of bylaws vs. policies and whatnot. As Calico says, if you're a "Friends of" charter you do need to pay attention to that sort of thing, because odds are in your state you're functioning as an unincorporated association and your bylaws or association governing documents have real legal effect with some important considerations on joint and several liability to be taken into account.

 

In other units, you're really just a ministry or outreach program of the Chartered Organization, and what they say is the only real "law." However, lots of CO's believe in a governance structure that's created by bylaws and democratic along da Roberts Rules model. So it's perfectly natural in those organizations for a unit committee to have bylaws and decide things by votes. That might not be the same for a religious-based unit, which might follow canon law or da Young Men's Program rules or whatever.

 

Personally, I recommend simple written bylaws and policies for units because they're a good communication device, eh? They help people see the structure and intent of the unit and make things "transparent" so it doesn't look like a couple of old guy buddies just do whatever they want. And, honestly, often when yeh see units without bylaws or votes it's because a couple of old guy buddies just do what they want . Bylaws and policies also help the keep the one or two complainers in every unit from "hijacking" meetings pushing an agenda for their own kid. They can say their piece, get voted down, and the group can move on in short order. Without 'em, it's left to da CC or SM to cut 'em off, and then yeh get complaints about "my way or the highway" Scoutmasters.

 

And while we all love consensus and would prefer to operate that way, that isn't always possible. Sometimes, yeh have to make a decision when people disagree. Votes are better than making the CC into the King.

 

Anyways, one thing that bylaws can help with is hard cases, like havin' a procedure in place for considering removal of a scout or an adult. Those things always involve a lot of emotion and usually aren't things yeh want a big all-parents type committee dealing with. Havin' thoughtful procedures in place can be a real blessing.

 

Semperfiscouter, how you proceed with your "hard case" I think depends a lot on what you mean by "lay hands on" a scout, and what the parents of the boy feel, and what the expectations and rules of the Chartering Organization are. I can imagine lots of cases where some gentle physical restraint of an angry/upset/rambunctious/special needs young fellow would be perfectly appropriate. I can imagine a few cases where physical restraint of a rambunctious lad might feel a bit "too much", but the leader is good friends with the parents of the boy and knows the boy well, and so it's OK in that context. And I can imagine a leader who just doesn't have the knack of working with zany cub scouts and is responding inappropriately and therefore needs to move to a committee support role rather than a kid-contact role. Then of course there's the worst case - real nastiness or corporal punishment or somethin' that hits a "youth protection" threshold where the unit/CO might remove the leader entirely and ban them from the premises, and the BSA might revoke a registration.

 

It sorta sounds like you're somewhere in the middle two cases with this fellow, leaning toward case three. Personally, I'd start with the serious sit-down talk with the fellow and the CC, CM, and COR. Sometimes folks don't know how they come off, and off-handed feedback doesn't register on 'em. Loyalty and Kindness demand that we first approach the person unambiguously with concerns and give 'em a chance to change.

 

But if that doesn't work, or the concerns are more serious and immediate, then I think da committee and COR and IH simply drop his registration as a leader. It sounds like there's nothing here that the BSA itself would take action on independently, so it's a leadership decision that's up to the Chartered Organization. If the fellow isn't meeting your/their expectations, then just remove him from da position, gently but firmly.

 

Beavah

 

[FScouter]

And, honestly, often when yeh see units without bylaws or votes it's because a couple of old guy buddies just do what they want.

 

Two old guys that do whatever they want are going to do so whether there are bylaws in place or not. And when they do whatever they want with bylaws to the contrary, it just makes a farce of bylaws.

 

The point is, bylaws dont fix anything and the two old guys do whatever they want anyway.

[emb021]

Every so often we have a thread on bylaws in scout units. We just had another recently.

 

I happen to be a parliamentarian, so a very familiar with bylaws, having written them and help groups revise them.

 

Pretty much all groups need bylaws. If you are in a group without bylaws, basically, you're not a real group.

 

The thing is, unit committees don't need bylaws. This is because they are not a standalone group, and what is covered by bylaws is covered by BSA documents. (the chartered org is the group with bylaws) BSA as a National organization has bylaws, every council has bylaws. The BSA recommends crews and ships have bylaws, and that's in.

 

The biggest problem is that too often when people bring up the subject of bylaws in unit committees, it seems that what they want is not bylaws, but a policy/procedure document. Bylaws serve a specific purpose. I have to wonder if many scouters are part of organizations that have bylaws and have any experience with them. I'm a member of several organizations and ALL of them have bylaws (for the national group and for the local chapters I'm a member of). Bylaws document how a group is organized. It covers members (types, rights, etc), officers (duties, elected, removed, etc), meetings, committees and stuff like that. They DON'T deal with a lot of stuff about what you can and can't do and the like.

 

So please educate yourself on what bylaws are really about before you start pushing for bylaws in your unit committee.

 

[Beavah]

The thing is, unit committees don't need bylaws. This is because they are not a standalone group, and what is covered by bylaws is covered by BSA documents.

 

I keep hearin' this, and I just don't see it.

 

So let's take a simple case. The Troop Committee is thinkin' of putting a substantial amount of money out to buy a new trailer. Some folks agree, others think the money should be spent differently.

 

Now, tell me, since everything is "covered by BSA documents" how to proceed.

 

Who runs the discussion? What if she can't be there? How many people are required to participate? Just the signatories on the checking account? Does everything have to go to the IH every time you spend money? Who can cut off the one parent who wants all the money to go to Jamboree expenses since her kid is going to Jamboree? How do they decide? Who gets to vote? Who decides who is part of the group that gets to vote? What sort of vote is required? Does it matter if da fellow selling the trailer only wants $10 for it?

 

If yeh can find me BSA documents that "cover" all of those things, I'll eat my campaign hat.

 

Fact is, BSA documents can never cover these things, because they're properly da purview of the CO and the unit, not the BSA. The BSA does not meddle in unit governance; it has no authority to do so.

 

With the exception of da self-chartering groups, the distinction between articles and bylaws and policies isn't worth worryin' about at the unit level, even though those distinctions have meaning in da broader world. But units really should have some things in place and agreed to that address governance, or the CO should.

 

Beavah

 

(This message has been edited by Beavah)