SPL requirements

[Drimcynn]

Greetings to all.

First of all I want to thank you for all the posts on these forums. Very helpful. I have been a scoutmaster in a troop for a total of two weeks now. All the Asst. Scoutmaster have mystically moved away and the Old Scoutmaster is on our committee now but is slow to respond due to his fatigue on the subjects. Since I was the Asst. over the new scout patrol and the more I get trained the more I realize that the troop I grew up in didn't have it quite right I am still trying to learn some things and remember others

 

One of the things coming up is new leadership. It has been past 6 months and I don't want this to slip any longer for a new Troop leadership. My main question is any requirements for Senior Patrol Leader. I can't seem to remember them. Age or rank? Anyways please let me know and I will keep looking in the handbooks.

[shemgren]

The SPL is elected by all members of the troop. Each troop sets its own requiremnts and schedule of elections, though the SPL are ususally chosen at six-to-twelve-month intervals and can be reelected. The senior patrol leader of an established troop is often selected from experienced Scouts of a certian age and rank. In a new troop or a troop without older members, boys are still likely to choose a Scout whom they respect and believe will provide the best leadership. (The Scoutmaster Handbook, No. 33009, page 13) The same requirements are laid out in The Senior Patrol Leader Handbook, No. 32501, page 9.

 

Troops are completely allowed to set requirements for the office of SPL. This should be done at the Patrol Leader's Council (PLC) level. In a large troop (135 members)I served as a ASM during my Air Force Days, the SPL had to be a Life Scout.

[acco40]

In my son's troop, we have been having a myriad of leadership gyrations. The current Scoutmaster publicly told the troop he was stepping down "in the near future" in the February time frame. The troop had a trying summer camp (June) and an "eventful" summer. Finally he notified one SA (not all), the COR, DE and selected other Council staff of his intention to step down in August. At the late August SM meeting, which the SM was not present, one of the ASMs pushed to have himself designated as the "successor" SM. My comment was that until I was notified publicly that the SM was stepping down, I would not participate in selecting a new SM. Two weeks later I asked the SM about the issue and his comment was that he told the COR he was stepping down and refused to tell the full committee and troop memebers. However, the troop committee chair was aware of his actions. Well, two weeks have passed, the SM decided that he will remain, the committee chair resigned (unrelated) and appointed a new comittee chair.

 

My beef in all of this is that the COR and the full committee should be involved in selecting (committee function) and approving (COR and CO) a new SM and Committee chair. The SM issue is touchy. He did formally resign. Then he before another SM was "installed" he decided to keep on as SM. Should he have that option? My view is that once he has resigned, only the Committee and COR/CO can reinstate him or elect to go with someone else.

 

The day after the SM decided to remain or should it be regain the SM position, The SA who had his eyes on SM quit. I feel like a cast member of "As the World Turns."

 

What does all of this have to do with SPL requirements? The SPL was the son of the SA who left. So now we have lost our SPL and the old/new SM is appointing a new SPL (which I will soon tell him is not his function). Although I do not necessarily agree with the end result of who the SM, SPL & Committee Chair are, I vehemently disagree with the process of how they were selected. Those individuals, however, can't seem to separate my dislike of the process with their own egos. Comments?(This message has been edited by acco40)

[james_clegg]

People are people.

No matter where you go people have the same problems they had in 1200 BC.

You can only control you.

In my short time in scouting I have seen more people problems than I would care for.

 

Now back to SPL issue

Some suggested requirements are Rank (Life)

attendance at least 80% in uniform.

And example of how to follow the scout law.

At least 1 scout camp

 

using requirements like these, have the boys vote on the boys who meet these requirements be the canidits.

 

 

jc(This message has been edited by james_clegg)

[Bob White]

Returning to the original question asked in this string.

My main question is any requirements for Senior Patrol Leader. I can't seem to remember them. Age or rank? Anyways please let me know and I will keep looking in the handbooks.

 

From page 9 of the BSA's Senior Patrol Leader handbook.

 

each Troop sets it's own age, rank, and other qualification standards for its senior patrol leader, though these may be temporarily waived if a troop is newly organized.

 

Keep in mind that the "troop" is made of the patrols and representented by the patrol leaders not the scoutmaster or other adults.

 

Bob White

[bugle344]

Email me and I can email you a copy of our officer requirements and job descriptions on MS WORD. gmoffice@insightbb.com

We borrowed this from another Troop and added our own items.

 

I hate paperwork, but this booklet solved thousands of problems and questions! The JLT book is rather vague. I wanted a "checklist" the officer could use to guide him. I was tired of being the "meanie", demanding the officer be present to fulfill his duties.

 

We print a copy for each Scout's notebook and review each position as we take nominations for elections. The elected Scout signs that he accepts these guidelines and the responsiblities it outlines (uniform, attendance, etc). We also have the parents sign a copy. This simple paper took the responsibility off my shoulders and placed it on the boy and his parents. When the older boys start to make whining sounds about not working with the younger Scouts, etc., I don't have to beg or coerce anymore. They signed the commitment.

 

This also got the parents on my side, getting the boys there on time, in uniform, rescheduling around sports, etc.

[captnkirk]

As stated above, each troop sets their own requirements for Senior Patrol Leader.

 

In our troop, we required that a boy be 13 and at least First Class to run for SPL, but these requirements could be changed if there weren't enough boys who met that requirement. (Unfortunately, this has been the case in the past.)

 

The requirements in our troop are set by the Scoutmaster, but they must be approved by the committee. A few years ago, after electing an SPL who did a particularly poor job, (he didn't really want the job in the first place, but wasn't given a chance to really consider it until after he was elected,) a new set of requirements were set up to prevent it from happening again.

 

I don't like these requirements, but it wouldn't be fair if I didn't give them as an option. Certain boys are selected by the Scoutmaster as qualified for the position. If each of these boys is interested, they are nominated for the boys to vote on. However, these boys are only elected to the position of ASPL, and after 6 months as ASPL, they become SPL. Also, because of this, nominees must be approved by the SPL they will be serving under as well.

 

Like I said, I don't like these requirements, as they have several downfalls, and don't fix the problem they were intended to solve, in my opinion. For one thing, they require a year's commitment from the boy. Many of our Scouts are involved in other activites that can take them away from meetings for some time. (In our troop it seems to be marching band.) Also, it takes away the nominations from the boys. Plus, I think an SPL should choose his assistant, not be handed one, even one he approved.

 

The basis of this idea was to give the boy six months to train for the position. I think that the boy should definately be trained, but I personally feel that this requirement can easily be filled by Junior Leader Training or by experience in any number of positions, not merely ASPL. Well, I hope that this will be some help in giving you some ideas for requirements for SPL.

[red feather]

Congratulations or condolances are in order. not knowing the makeup of your troop as far as ranks and ages, hopefully the scouts will elect the most qualified to lead them.

 

Remember, guidelines are just that guidelines. You will have to adapt them to your situation and go from there.

 

I have know seen any published requirements for SPL. Too many troops and too many variations.

 

Good luck.

 

YIS

[evmori]

We posted our POR's on our web site. The URL is

http://www.bsa.net/pa/t1.

 

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[denver4und@aol.com]

Acco 40 wrote:

 

"My beef in all of this is that the COR and the full committee should be involved in selecting (committee function) and approving (COR and CO) a new SM and Committee chair. The SM issue is touchy. He did formally resign. Then he before another SM was "installed" he decided to keep on as SM. Should he have that option? My view is that once he has resigned, only the Committee and COR/CO can reinstate him or elect to go with someone else."

 

Why?

 

Why do you want him to go? Do most folks feel that way? If so, it's time for some deep thinking and heartfelt talk among the committee the COR and the Charted Institution, BUT DON'T LEAVE THE CURRENT SM OUT of the party.

 

No one wants him to go? Then why worry about formalities? We all have bad days, and if my committee took me up on it when I'm frustrated, I wouldn't be SM either.

 

So Why?

 

[denver4und@aol.com]

Acco40 wrote:

 

"My beef in all of this is that the COR and the full committee should be involved in selecting (committee function) and approving (COR and CO) a new SM and Committee chair. The SM issue is touchy. He did formally resign. Then he before another SM was "installed" he decided to keep on as SM. Should he have that option? My view is that once he has resigned, only the Committee and COR/CO can reinstate him or elect to go with someone else."

 

Why?

 

Why do you want the SM go go? Does everyone else feel the same? If no one wants him to go, then why all the desire for formality?

 

If everyone wants a change, why? Its time for a tough, heartfelt meeting of the committee, the COR and the Chartered Institution. But the SM NEEDS TO BE PART OF THE DISCUSSION. Maybe he felt unsupported, unappreciated that day. Gee, he wouldn't be the first SM to have a bad day. If there is a widespread dissatisfaction, can it be fixed? Does the SM know that everyone (someone) feels that way?

 

As a SM I am constantly amazed that adults will get upset over something, but never say one word to me. They'll call meetings, they've even wrote petitions, and enver delivered them to me or invited me to the meeting.

 

so, the real question must be Why?

 

[Compass]

It is as Bob White says: troops (boys/PLC, not adults) make the rules regarding requirements.

 

New (or reorganized or struggling) troops tend not to have much or any requirements.

 

Larger, established troops with lots of willing, able, and qualified candidates tend to create rules and stipulations. They can afford to be more picky.

 

In my old troop, when I was a boy, the requirement for the job was 1st Class rank, and you could not be elected twice in a row (SPL only). (Much) more recently (nephew's and son's troops), you could not be elected twice in a row for any position (too many qualified and willing boys, and not enough positions).

 

acco40, reading between the lines, it sounds like there is a bit of an old boy network there, where there is an insider group doing the pickin' and choosin', excluding others from the process, without concern for recommended rules and procedures (or others' thoughts and opinions). Folks go along with this approach as long as they don't have a problem with the outcome. Unfortunately, when you wait until a there's a bad outcome, the 'tradition' has become etched in stone and is very difficult to change. If this is true, I hope you have success with the adults, but it's going to be tough. However, do continue to push for SPL re-elections.