Advancement problem in troop

[Beavah]

Hi, I've come to this forum for advice.

 

I'm a committee member in a small troop and I've only been around a few years. Initially I thought this troop was going to be a great experience for my son, but it's become increasingly frustrating. I want my kid to work hard and earn his ranks, and he has been. As troop scribe he's been on the PLC, and part of the role of every boy on the PLC in our troop is that you take a hand in planning outings. As a small troop, that seems to work best, and gives all the boys some fun and responsibility. I know my son would be bored to tears if he only got to record meeting minutes as Scribe.

 

The problem we have is that the Scoutmaster (well, just past SM but he still really runs things) is a guy who is mostly in it to get his son to Eagle as rapidly as possible. His son gets MBs signed off by dad, his son was troop librarian and didn't do a lick of work. All of the boys knew that even the things he claimed credit for were really done by someone else. None of them spoke up, though, because they were afraid of the SM. Then the boy went on to being Quartermaster because his dad pressured the SPL into giving him a PoR since he "needed one". The boy left the gear room a mess all the time, and didn't follow through with his duties once.

 

Now the boy is coming up for Life Scout. He's only a seventh grader, and has been advanced by dad way ahead of other kids his age. The new SM says it's OK, but most of the boys and parents are disgusted. The problem is that the former SM and the current SM are "best buddies", and they are personal friends with the Unit Commissioner who is one of the little group of cronies that seems to always pave the way for their sons or their favorite kids. Most of the rest of the parents are increasingly frustrated by it. This isn't what I want for our troop, and my son is increasingly disappointed and losing interest in scouts. We know several families who were looking to join, but went elsewhere when they were turned off by this little group of leaders who just push things for their own kids. The unit commissioner thinks he's going to help by pushing recruiting, and is always talking "recruiting this" and "recruiting that", but the reason we don't get many new boys is because they are turned off by the pack of cronies.

 

What I need help with is that I'm advancement chair, and the former SM's son is being put up for Life Scout in the middle of seventh grade, continuing his dad-driven quest for a paper Eagle. The boy hasn't done the work expected of the other boys, he's really just a lump and is surly to other adults when dad or dad's buddies aren't watching. If the BOR rubber-stamps this kid's advancement I think my own son will be so discouraged he'll want to quit scouts, and I know some other families who might as well.

 

Of course, all of the paperwork is complete, signed by dad and dad's buddy, but everyone knows the boy hasn't really done the work. What options do I have? I have to guide the other parents on the BOR, some of whom aren't familiar with the BSA program and don't understand this shouldn't be the way.

 

----

 

Yah, anyway, you get the point. I wonder what we would say to this person? Call the COR! Get the SM removed! Send the former SM for retraining because he clearly doesn't understand the program!

 

And yet, it could easily be the very same situation where the other side was presented in the parent thread I spun this one from.

 

Again, I recommend that we all be thoughtful, slow, and wise about these things, eh? And those of us who are servin' in the Commissioner Corps in particular.

 

B

 

[Engineer61]

For me the path to follow on this depends on where you sit in the equation.

 

If this were an SM with this issue, and the Scout were and ASM's (for example), then the action to take comes from the standpoint of "What do I do for the Troop that teaches what is right and wrong with this situation?"

 

If, as stated in the post, the parent is just a Committee Member, which means zero power; then the solution comes from the standpoint of, "How to I teach my son what to do in this situation?"

 

Why the difference? Because the SM is responsible for the Troop...a committee member is not.

 

Since the OP is dealing with open cronyism, going outside to the anyone but the COR will probably result in negative repercussions on both the parent and the Scout. Simply moving to another Troop would teach the Scout not to stand up and fix what's not right. So, as a parent, which bridge do you burn?

 

The answer is: It depends on the will of the parent and Scout.

[JMHawkins]

Kudu recommends movie night showing Master and Commander for TLT. So Beavah, I take it you might suggest Rashomon for UC training...

[packsaddle]

Yeah, I have been reading the other thread. I have never been outside the unit level but from what I've observed from that level, I agree with Beavah's characterization of (for want of a better description) UC impotence.

 

I have observed this situation twice at the unit level. Both times, because I knew the personalities very well, I also understood that there were other things below the surface that were really driving the dynamic. In both cases there were individuals who had personal agendas. I was able to work within the unit to deflect what was almost certainly going to be destructive confrontations. I was effective partially because by that time I had no dogs in the fight (my son had been gone for a couple of years) and I had a strong advantage of greater and longer experience.

Anyway, nothing about those two experiences was fun.

 

I guess I'm supposed to actually respond to Beavah's post eventually so here goes: Unless you really do have full understanding of the parties and personalities involved in something like this, there is a strong risk of getting it wrong and possibly making things a lot worse. Sometimes we have to conclude (as I did when I started reading the other thread) that we don't really understand things well enough to 'fix' them. But then, THAT in itself requires a fair amount of understanding. Sometimes it's better to listen attentively and then wish them best of success.

 

Knowing that we're on our own gives us ownership of both the problem and the solution. It can be powerful incentive to 'call the question' as well as to remove any external 'scapegoat' when the answer to the question is unpleasant.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[Twocubdad]

My advice to your guy would be to sit down with his committee chairman and get his input. The advancement chairman serves as part of the troop committee and reports to the CC. He needs to express his concerns to the CC and see where the CC stands.

 

That's more than just a chain of command thing. The AC seems to have a clear understanding of the new & old SM's ideas of how the troop program should run. If the CC shares the SM's point of view, your AC needs to decide if he/she can support the troop's way of running it's program. If the AC wants to work through the troop structure to change things, that's his/her choice. If not, it may be best for the AC to step down and/or move on to a program which better aligns with his point of view.

[Oak Tree]

Part of the BOR's job is to make sure that the Scoutmaster isn't just rubber-stamping things. "one reason for a board of review is to ensure the Scout did what he was supposed to do to meet the requirements."

 

"If any member dissents, the decision cannot be for approval. If a board decides not to approve, the candidate must be so informed and told what he can do to improve."

 

As a committee member, you do have an obligation to uphold the standards. I would suggest, though, that talking to the Scoutmaster ahead of time would be a better approach than fighting the battle through the Scout.

 

Also, if you do decide that the boy really doesn't merit approval, you'll need to decide what the requirements are. It doesn't really seem fair to the boy to tell him that he didn't do the POR well enough, if such requirements weren't communicated to him ahead of time. If there were indeed requirements that were given ahead of time and he knew about them, then that might be a valid reason. From your description, though, it sounds like Scout spirit may be lacking. If you truly believe that this boy isn't showing Scout spirit, and that everyone else knows it, that may be a more defensible position on your part. You could try to hold him up on either requirement - a board's decision is final within the unit and would have to be appealed to the council to be overturned.

 

If I were you, though, I'd try to work this out between the adults first. If the committee really has no faith in the Scoutmaster, you're going to need to figure out a long-term solution, hopefully without using the Scouts as cannon fodder.

 

 

[moosetracker]

Ha.. Ha.. Beavah..

 

Advice would be if the CC/committee isn't in agreement with the SM then it is up to the CC/committee to discuss it with the SM as adults rather then slapping a young scout in the face, to prove a point.

 

Also Advancment chair should have been monitoring it early on, and made notices of pencil whipping early on.. Not attempt to disrail it on the 11th hour by again slapping the Scout in the face..

 

Troop now has more control over the Eagle project. Perhaps they can slow things down and set up an Eagle Advisor that guarentees this scout works his Eagle project correctly with out Dad running the show. But, the Eagle Advisor should be fair enough to acknowledge and give credit to the scout if/when he does commit to running the project, rather then forcing unfair hurtles on this scout, or ignoring progress made by this scout due to orignial impressions of the scout that the Advisor is unwilling to alter if the scout starts to alter his attitude.

 

As for the make-believe OP.. Let his scout know that his journey is his own. He should do what he needs to in order to take pride in his own path, and not worry or judge the path of others.. You learn as much from poor examples as you do from good examples.. Just know that he does not want to be like the paper eagle, nor does he want to grow up to be a father similar to this boys father. It is an important lesson learned.

[Eamonn]

Life really shouldn't be this hard!

There does seem to a big cast in this production.

Current SM who is OK with allowing things to slide.

Ex-SM who is running things from the side lines.

Unit commissioner who is close Friend of Ex- SM.

Advancement Chair who is a newbie who wants to see things done right.

 

I can't remember seeing what position the Ex-SM holds? If any.

 

There is more things wrong with this Troop than just a problem with advancement.

If I were advising the Advancement Chair, I think I'd advise him to have a meeting with the District Commissioner, with a view to in as nice a way as is possible removing and replacing the UC with a strong Commissioner who understands how a Troop Committee should work.

At the same time maybe someone from the District Training Team might be able to help the Troop Committee by offering them some training.

My thinking is that once the Committee really understands what their job is a lot of this silliness will be put to bed.

This still leaves the what to do about the EX-SM's son?

While the Lad very well may be a lazy little toad? It's not his fault that the MB's have been mishandled. It is his fault that he hasn't performed the duties that are /were expected of him in a POR.

The Advancement Chair and the SM need to work on a list of what is expected and present it to this Lad. If he really hasn't done the job maybe he can be given a Mulligan, the opportunity to redo the job. This very well might upset his Dad, but maybe this will help let him know that EX-SM's don't rule the roost.

Ea.

 

[perdidochas]

Committee and SM need to get on the same page.

[Deaf Scouter]

There should be a rule in place within your Troop that no parent can sign off on their own son. This SM is doing a GREAT disservice to his son in a very fundamental be prepared for life rule... things are worked for, things are earned through work.

 

So SM signs off on stuff and it comes up to the BOR. BOR review can put a stop to it with stating exactly what hasn't been done and what is in question. You as the advancement chair educate and pick whom is on this BOR as NEITHER SM are involved. BOR does have the right to veto the advancement that the SM puts forth. You ask a bunch of questions to this scout and simply say he is not ready. If the SM then turns onto your scout, then preach the scout laws, ideal, and aims!