I need some advice

[scout-parent]

My son was the senior patrol leader of his troop until last week when he was removed by his scoutmaster along with all the patrol leaders (with the exception of the patrol leaders with Asst. Scoutmaster parents). He and the other patrol leaders were then forced to join a venture patrol. The SM said the boys weren't doing their jobs and if they were in business they would be fired. No serious problems, just a failure to lead. My son, needless to say is crushed, as are the other patrol leaders. My son says that scouts should be boy run doesn't think that the SM should be able to remove them in this way without a vote of the other scouts. My son called the council HQ and was told to check with the Committee chairman and see what the troop rules are. He's asked the Committee chairman if there is a constitution and was told there was not and the SM can do anything he wants. My son feels that with Venture Patrols being optional, how can he be forced to join one?

 

Are scoutmasters all powerful? Can they do whatever they want? Can scouts be forced to join venture patrols? I'm not one of those parents that meddles and always takes the side of their son. If he wasn't leading, the SM should have had a vote of the scouts and removed him. Fine with me. It's how he did it. If he was in business he would have been fired? He's a 16 year old kid, trying his best. The adults should have taught him how to lead. We also find it odd that the only patrol leaders that were removed had no parents as ASM's. The only kids that can't lead didn't have patents in uniform? Very strange.

 

Does my son have any recourse? Through the county council? I just want this done properly. If he gets voted out, oh well, that's the breaks. I want him to get a fair shake and the procedure done according to scouting rules.

 

My son who loved scouting for the last 4 or 5 years, is confused. His head is spinning and he's trying to get the decision reversed by going through channels. I'm glad he's trying. He's also going to propose to the committee chairman that the troop develop a constitution for the future good of the troop. For someone that can't lead, that seems like some leadership to me.

 

This scoutmaster has also had his eagle scout proposal for 7 weeks. Is this the normal time to get an approval? I think the SM is being mean by "firing" my son and holding his paperwork. We've told my son he might be better off leaving and starting over in another troop. He wants to work within his own troop to fix it.

 

Thanks for your help.

 

 

[SueM]

OMG..I'm reacting as a parent and also a Scoutmaster, but this seems terribly wrong!! As a Scoutmaster, my FIRST duty is to train Jr. leaders, to do their job. If I see they aren't performing, then I should have a discussion with them again about the expectation of their leadership role and find out why they are not doing what they should and give them not only the chance to try again, but the tools they need to do the job better. If they still are not doing their job, then it should be up to their patrol to replace him, though I think the SM can point out "weaknesses" they really shouldn't "force" the patrols to vote any way. I can't figure any senario where I would -force- a boy into a Venture Patrol though...and to have his Eagle Proposal for 7 weeks???? Something is -seriously- wrong here!! I might be tempted to talk to not only your district people but you Chartered Organization about these issues...it sounds like a Scoutmaster on a power trip to me!!

 

Sue M.

[sst3rd]

scout-parent,

 

You'll get a lot of advise on this one. Having only your point of view of the situation, limits the scope of my thoughts. From what you've stated,

1) How long has the SM been dissatisfied with these leader's leadership. He should have had a series of SM Conferences as soon as he saw any problems.

2) You mentioned training. Did these PL's get any? SM's are responsible for leadership training whether it happens on the Troop, District, or Council levels.

3) A Troop constitution is not necessary. Lot's of Troop's have By-Laws, they too are unnecessary. But I can't fault Troops that feel they need certain things in writing, it just makes things more complicated. For the record, I'm a SM, and our Troop has no By-Laws and we've been in existance for almost 40 years.

4) A SM is not all powerful. Only in extreme cases he should make big decisions as these.

5) No, he can't force Scouts to join a Venture Patrol. All PL's whose terms expire or maybe is asked to step down as PL for whatever reason, usually simply stay in their Patrols. No, there's no documentation for me to refer you to, it's just simply done that way. He should have been elected from his Patrol, thus he is still a member of that Patrol when his leadership is completed.

 

Sad that this had to happen. All of this was avoidable with early Scoutmaster Conferences and youth leadership training. I don't know if there are other Troops close by, but I'd take all of these Scouts to another Troop. Since he would like to work this out with this Troop, I wish him the best. Since you are drawing a conclusion about all of the PL's that were fired didn't have ASM's for parents, you'll need to take that to the Committee if you want to go further with this. Sounds like a big Troop, but the SM does not have the right to remove all of these PL's. How long were their terms? How close were they to finishing up their terms? Is he having these Patrols elect new PL's? Or is he appointing new PL's to finish these terms? Maybe he's letting the APL's take over? Maybe not, because these bad PL's were supposed to have chosen their APL's and the SM probably wouldn't want these Scouts to take over their Patrols.

 

I'd go to the Committee for answers. Do it respectfully, and expect answers in a reasonable time frame.

 

sst3rd

[scout-parent]

In answer to some of sst3rd's questions;

 

1) In speaking with the SM, he's been dissatisfied for a while and was "indirectly" showing his dissatisfaction. Nothing like "your doing this wrong, here is what you need to do to fix it" kind of thing.

 

2) They went on one camp out with only the leadership SPL, ASPL and the Patrol leaders along with the SM and ASM's. They've had several meetings at the SM's home. His formal leadership training through the county council was canceled by the county council and was never rescheduled.

 

4) The leadership have open ended terms. They don't expire unless the SM chooses to remove them, or they move up or leave the troop.

 

I believe that the SM is going to have elections for the new PL. How he usuall does it, is to rejigger the patrols so they contain most kids of one age and a member who's a year or two older. Usually the older kid is voted in as PL. This way the SM gets the people he wants (usually) and the patrols get to vote.

 

I'm not drawing conclusions about the scouts with parents as leaders. I'm just noting that from the outside it seems odd. Maybe it's just a coincidence?

 

Yes, I understand that you're only getting my point of view, but it's the only one I have :-)

 

Thanks for the help.

[scoutldr]

From SM Specific Training, the primary job of the SM is to train junior leaders to run the troop. Has he ever conducted Junior Leader Training (JLT) within the troop? As a parent, your concerns should be voiced to the Committee Chair and/or the Chartered Org Rep (COR). If they need help dealing with the issue, their resource is the Unit Commissioner assigned to the unit.

[SemperParatus]

I know all the facts are not available on this one, but no matter what they may be, it is clear that the SM has overacted big time. Removing the entire PLC goes way beyond any sense of reasonableness. The dismissed PLC (and their parents) should make demand of the CC and COR that they be reinstated immediately. The CC and COR will need to figure out what to do with the SM as far as training, management, sensitivity is concerned. This could easily denegrate into a vote of no confidence in the SM - maybe it is needed. If the CC and COR decide to back the SM, then maybe you need to look for a troop that has leaders interested in building confidence in young men.

[FScouter]

The "constitution" (aka bylaws, rule book)may be found within the pages of the Scoutmaster Handbook, Patrol Leader Handbook, Troop Committee Guidebook, etc. There is no point in rewriting these publications.

[evmori]

While I agree the way this has been handled is really wrong I'm wondering if maybe there is another reason. Perhaps, the district or council is trying to increase the Venture numbers?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[scoutingagain]

Scout-parent,

 

I'm very sorry your son has had to endure this episode in scouting. If the SM was dissatisfied with how the your son, the SPL and other patrol leaders were doing their jobs, he should have told them and told them and helped them to correct their deficiencies. If at that point the youth leadership didn't cooperate with the SM and work to improve their performance, I could understand why an SM might take such action, although it would be a rare set of circumstances. I'm afraid your son has gotten an unfortunate lesson in real life.

 

Fscouter has listed the best resources that might be found on how a Troop is supposed to run and the roles and responsibilities of the various positions.

 

However, keep in mind a Scout Troop is not a constitutional democracy where individual scouts, or scouters for that matter, are garuanteed certain rights. It is more like a private corporation where individuals are given rights management feels like giving them and management reserves the right to take them away without prior notice. Having said that there is a line of authority that is recommended within a unit. The references provided by Fscouter will explain it better, but the short story is ultimate authority within a unit lies with the Chartering Institutional Head. This individual usually designates a Chartered Organization Representative(COR) whose responsibility is to select leadership for the Troop including the Committee Chairperson(CC) and Scoutmaster. So how much authority does an SM have? As much as the CC and COR are willing to let them have. If the CC and COR are not that involved, the SM can pretty much do what he wants as long as he doesn't violate rules in the Guide to Safe Scouting, or other national BSA policies like changing advancement requirements... unless either the CC or COR says "Whoa, wait a minute!", kind of like a CEO, unless the Chairman of the Board and Board of Directors steps in to operate a company. Unless there is a violation of BSA National policies, a District or Unit Commisioner can offer advice but that is about it.

 

However, I still think your son should contact your Committe Chairperson to find out what he did or didn't do to warrant his removal from his office and work to improve communications between the SM and the youth leadership of the troop so such an event doesn't happen in the future. At 16, I hope your son does not get too discouraged and stays in scouting.

 

Good luck,

 

SA

 

[OldGreyEagle]

I am wondering how having boy scouts in a Boy Scout Troop being in a Venture Patrol (part of a boy scout troop)would have any bearing on the Venturing Crew numbers of a District or Council, but that may be besides the point.

 

On topic, I join the chorus of scouters chagrined at the situation. It is indeed unfortunate this has occured. Its not standard practice, but sometimes the only power people feel they have is the ordering about of scouts, and they do so with relish. While a scoutmaster may remove a scout from a positon of responsibility, it is the last resort after having numerous counseling sessions, goal setting meetings and roses and thorns sessions.

[Eagledad]

>>I am wondering how having boy scouts in a Boy Scout Troop being in a Venture Patrol (part of a boy scout troop)would have any bearing on the Venturing Crew numbers of a District or Council, but that may be besides the point.

[fgoodwin]

If there's a failure here (based on your description), I think it is the SM who has failed his boys, not the opther way around.

 

As others have said, it is the SM's job to train the SPL, and if the SPL and his PLC aren't doing their jobs, the first place I'd look to is whoever trained them, and is (or should be) counseling them on an on-going basis.

 

Second, part of being "boy-led" is the opportunity to fail. If the patrols elected ineffective PLs, they need to live with the consequences of that decision until its time for new elections. Sometimes failure is a good way to learn a lesson.

 

Unless the rest of the boys were in immediate danger, I'd say the SM overreacted big-time by yanking the PLC en-masse. I'd have a talk with your CC, COR and UC immediately to get this straightened out. And your SM needs to make very clear what his expectations are of the SPL and PLC.

 

Yanking them, even after dropping a few hints, sounds like a formula for disaster. If you don't get satisfaction, then I'd say its time to look for a new troop, and be sure you ask how they handle boy leadership failures.

 

Good luck.

 

Fred Goodwin

ASM, T515

Alamo Area Council

[Meechgalanne]

I my self am the SPL of my troop. It would heart break me if i was removed because i wasnt doing my job properly. My advice, is have your son talk to the SM. Have come face to face and get all over into him. Especially have him surprise him. This will put the SM on the spot. if it were me, i'd do it in front of the entire troop. Im sorry but thats just plainly disrespectful and honestly, i wouldnt go out with a fight. Like stated before, he cant be forced to squat. So if he doesnt want to be a venturer then he doesnt need to be. The committee chairperson is the one in charge. The SM reports to him/her. Not the other way around. So have your son, along with you, talk to the entire committee, not just the chairperson because as you said he said the SM has all the power and thats not true. The SM is there to guide and to help train the PLC. Not force it and be a stick in the mud. So talk to the committee, and chances are all will be fixed. Remember, the committee is parents so they know where your coming from. Be sure to do your research though. The SM is there to train, hes suppossed to be helping your son, not ruining his life and making him against boyscouts. This is something i've always been concerned with, so please do me a favor if you dont mind and keep us updated. I hope my two cents helps you.

[Beavah]

A scout is courteous.

 

Before everyone goes running off to council and committee chairs and the like, the first step is the one that our SPL Meechgalanne suggests.

 

Your son, and perhaps one or two of the other boys, should sit down and talk with the SM. Politely, respectfully, and share concerns. I'd do it privately to start, Meech... it makes people less defensive.

 

I suspect this SM is a guy who is in over his head, and like many folks in over their heads he swings from underreacting (not providing direct feedback and training to the youth leaders) to overreacting (firing everybody). It's important to remember he's probably trying to do his best, too.

 

Recognize that at the point you go "over his head" to the CC / COR, you are asking for the Scoutmaster to be removed. No volunteer is going to stay around in any sort of positive way after having been overruled on a major public decision like this, unless the CC / COR or UC have a lot of finesse. Once it happens once, anyone with a complaint will try the "over his head" routine.

 

So just make sure that's the outcome you want before you go there. Lotsa times the "in over his head" guy is there because there's nobody else to take the job. Will the troop survive if this SM leaves?

 

There's also a "make lemonade" opportunity here. Go with the Venture patrol, volunteer as an ASM, and help your son and his friends make it AWESOME. Great chance for fun and leadership, with a nice "we showed him" kinda feel.

[SeattlePioneer]

Based on the limited information available, I share the consternation of those posting to the actions described. I like Beavah's suggestion for Scouts and parents to talk to the SM about his actions. In addition, if there is a Unit Commissioner, it might be useful to bring him into that discussion as well.

 

A UC who sees some bad SM decisions playing out may have some ideas on how to proceed.

 

 

 

Seattle Pioneer