Can a SM remove the SPL from his position?

[sherminator505]

Leadership as the Senior Patrol Leader, when properly performed, is not fake (I'm a BIG fan of SPLs).(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

[Kudu]

sherminator505 writes:

 

Leadership as the Senior Patrol Leader, when properly performed, is not fake (I'm a BIG fan of SPLs).

 

So are you a big enough "fan" of SPLs to "Announce new SPL/ASPL elections. If no one wants the jobs, all outings are canceled"?

 

dg98adams writes:

 

Scouts are boy-led, and if there is no boy Leadership, then there is no BOY SCOUTS.

 

Talk about "Red Flags!"

 

Fake Leadership is the kind of golden parachute thinking that comes when Wood Badge declares war on an Act of Congress.

 

The Congressional Charter requires the BSA to promote Scoutcraft, not leadership theory.

 

"Boy-led"? The Scouts said "Gee, no thanks!"

 

If a certain major-general says that Boy Scout Patrols do not need SPLs then they don't, no matter what office cubical experts tell you.

 

If in the future EagerLeader's Patrol Leaders decide they want an SPL, they will arrange an election without any adult taking it upon himself to impose one.

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

 

[Eagle92]

Kudu,

No disrespect, but I think it was GBB who thought up the concept of an SPL, and BP agreed with it. I personally like the concept of the SPL and an older scout patrol, in my day called the Leadership Corps,whose job was to work with the PLs in teaching the younger scouts, while doing their own program at the appropriate times. That's how it was done in my troop growing up, and we had a good cadre of 15-17 year olds active in the troop. Also by having the older scouts working with the younger ones, it kept the older scouts skills sharp, provided examples to the younger scouts, and allowed the older scouts to mentor and train the younger scouts.

 

With a few exceptions, i.e. someone realizing they do not have the time committment for the job, I think there may be other problems if someone not is not willing to be an SPL, ASPL, PL, etc.

[Kudu]

Eagle92 writes:

 

Kudu, No disrespect, but I think it was GBB who thought up the concept of an SPL,

 

No, Green Bar Bill's SPL was similar to Baden-Powell's Troop Leader: The Patrol Leaders run the Troop. In GBB's Patrol Method THEY select the SPL.

 

Fake Leadership holds TROOP-wide popularity contests and imposes POR requirements to encourage rapid six-month turn-overs which destabilize Patrol Leadership and cause frustration (Fake Wood Badge calls this "Storming." It is part of their formula).

 

Eagle92 writes:

 

and BP agreed with it.

 

B-P agreed with no such thing.

 

Baden-Powell's Wood Badge and Green Bar Bill's Wood Badge is a week of Patrol-based Scoutcraft that trains Scoutmasters how Patrol Leaders take their Patrols on their own Scoutcraft Adventures.

 

Fake Leadership kicks this rugged Patrol Scoutcraft out of Wood Badge and replaces it with boxes of tissue for weepy Wolf Den Leaders.

 

Baden-Powell is clear: A Boy Scout Troop does not need an SPL. If a Scoutmaster desires one, he must consult with the PLC. Obviously it is now in the Patrol Leaders' best interest to vote against a modern TROOP SPL because he in turn appoints TROOP ASPLs and TROOP Guides to vote against the Patrol Leaders in the PATROL Leaders' Council (of all places)!

 

Wood Badge is the TROOP Method, not the Patrol Method.

 

A Note to Young Readers: Recognize, Resist, and Report to Congress on YouTube!

 

An adult "leadership" expert who threatens to cancel all your outings if you don't elect an SPL does NOT have your best interests at heart. Show the world.

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

 

 

[OldGreyEagle]

I am not sure I understand what "fake leadership" is. I do know that when boys get together they inherently "elect" a leader. No, not with ballots, but the guy who they follow, who do what he suggests, the natural leader.

 

 

[Eagle92]

Kudu,

This may make you mad, as my troop's method does not seem to coincide 100% with BP, but here's how it went and it did work out beautifully for us.

 

Patrols elected their own PLs. In order to be an SPL, you had to be First Class or above, showing that you have mastered the basic scouting skills, and have been a PL for at least 6 months. If you met the criteria, then you could run in a troop wide election. Most of the time SPL was Star or Life.

 

Yes the SPL would pick the ASPL, and other troop level leaders, BUT he was limited to selecting those in the Leadership Corps. To be in the LC, you had to be First Class or higher, been a PL for at least 6 months, with most being PL for a year or more, and be voted in by the the LC. At that stage of their scouting careers there was little to no drama within the LC, and they were able to work with each other. yes they got to sit in on the PLC and they did vote, but for the most part those that did attend the planning conference (not every LC member did attend) usually offered advice and guidance to the PLs.

 

The LC didn't throw their weight around, and were really dedicated to working with the younger scouts more than anything. Yes they did their own thing, i.e. camped as a separate patrol, did LC specific activities on some trips, etc. I think that is why we did have such an active group of older scouts compared to other units, we used them, kept them involved, and provided some challenges to them. yes we had a good number of Eagles but we had folks who didn't really care about advancement, and just wanted to have fun in the outdoors, and my troop provided that.

 

 

[Spiney Norman]

"Fake Leadership kicks this rugged Patrol Scoutcraft out of Wood Badge and replaces it with boxes of tissue for weepy Wolf Den Leaders."

 

Good one Kudu.

 

I have to clean the coffee off my keyboard now. I couldn't agree with you more though.

[Eagle92]

Kudu,

 

Forgot to add don't knock all of us Wolf Den Leaders as some of us are chomping at the bit for the day for our sons to be old enough to get into scouts, so that we can sit around the leader's campsite, drinking coffee, and letting the PLs and SPLs deal with things.

 

E92

 

PS that is a funny one though!

 

PPS, forgot to add in my previous post that although elections for PL and SPL, were held every six months, basically when scouts decided to stay in their patrol or move to another, usually everyone stayed in their patrols, and the PL was usually reelected until he moved up to the LC. In fact I cannot think of a time when a PL wasn't reelected.

 

As for SPLs, those who ran for reelction would usually win, while some decided to step down due to other commitments, usually school. Once you were SPL, you were in the LC so you did have a role to play in the troop.(This message has been edited by eagle92)

[Eagledad]

>>I am not sure I understand what "fake leadership" is

[Engineer61]

The fact that you even hesitated speaks volumes.

 

If this boy is making threats, he needs to be gone immediately from your troop.

 

Scouting is not a "need" ... it is a "want".

 

Your parents EXPECT that you are ultimately IN CHARGE and RESPONSIBLE for everything that goes on in the Troop.

 

 

[Beavah]

Yah, end of the week, tired lad who collapses immediately into sleep as soon as he hits his mom's car, mouthing off to mom like an ordinary teenager.

 

Sometimes a lad who is extremely overtired should be cut some slack for being an ordinary kid, eh? Heck, I'm not sure I'm not grumpy after a week of lots of activity and less sleep than usual

 

So I don't think this calls for removal from da troop, but it does sound like the SPL job is a bit too much for him at the moment, and his "example" is not one yeh want to let stand as the proper behavior of an SPL in front of others.

 

So time for the SM conference to tell him he's no longer SPL. He'll get another chance to run the next time yeh have elections, if he can demonstrate he's ready for that responsibility in the interim. And time for da SM conference with the ASPL for an "attaboy" over his demonstrated responsibility at camp, and to give him the pep talk to step up to da SPL role. The best leaders are the ones who are smart enough not to want the job.

 

All ordinary scouting, all good lessons for boys becoming men.

 

Beavah

[Scoutfish]

My son is only 9 years old, so I can't speak from a parents point of view or experience with an older teenager, but I do know this:

 

We sometimes forget that our kids are still just kids. We impose a tad bit too much expectations on them sometimes. We tell them to act their age( in reality, We are thinking OUR age).

 

So anyways....I remember a few times in my life as an adult - who is married - who had a new child in my home.

 

Sometimes the simplest of things would drag you down and just flatten you in the dirt. Gotten into a few arguements with my wife and said somethings that were not only just in bad taste, but downright hateful. Spiteful nasty things that should not have been said.

 

The saving garec was that my wife had twice as many of those days.

 

It's not always a big burden that does it. Matter of fact, it's usually the small things that make me just lose it and freak. Turns ouyt tghere is a name for that condition:

 

STRESS!

 

JUst like most things, it doesn't start out full blast, but slowly and surely works itself into the final product.

 

The kid needs to be out of that position, but he does deserve having a thorough "mile in his shoes" understanding too!

[Gary_Miller]

SPL is an elected position, elected by the youth, therefor he can only be remove by the youth. For those of you who think other wise please show me where it says the SM can remove a youth from his youth elected position

 

Its the SM job to mentor and advise the SPL in his duties. Its not the ASM job it only the SM. When other adults start advising the SPL then the youth gets confused. No adult should be telling the SPL what to do or what needs done they should only give advise. SM need to understand that the SPL may or may not take their advise, the SPL has that option.

 

While I was not there so I don't know what really happened, I can only guess that the SPL was being bombarded by orders and directions. Coming from all directions, coming from all the adults on what needed to get done. The young man got frustrated with being TOLD what to do instead of being advised by the SM on what needed to be done.

 

So I suggest the SM don't fire the SPL, mostly because he can't. But the SM should take the SPL out for a Frosty, and talk about the problems find out what the SPL's feeling about the incident is and what needs to be done to correct the problems. Let the boy know your there to support and help him not to push him around and hound him. Let him know that he is the leader and that he reports to know one but you.

 

You have to let the SPL drive the car.

 

It does not matter what direction he goes as long as he ends up in the right place (think goals).

[Eagle92]

Gary,

Playing Devil's Advocate, so bear with me, but wear does it say that an SM can NOT remove a SPL? I think the key to remember is that we cannot be so bogged down into rules and regulations, that common sense cannot be used. There is a time and a place for everything.

 

Yes the role of a SM is to counsel and mentor, but he is ultimately responsible for the safety and well being of the troop, both youth and adults, and not just the SPL.

[Gary_Miller]

Eagle92;"Playing Devil's Advocate, so bear with me, but wear does it say that an SM can NOT remove a SPL? I think the key to remember is that we cannot be so bogged down into rules and regulations, that common sense cannot be used. There is a time and a place for everything."

 

I don't think you will find anything that says a SM can or cannot remove a youth from their leadership position. And your right we cannot be so bogged down in rules and regulations that common sense cannot be used.

 

That being said "Common Sense" says that only those who appoint to an elected position (or their elected representatives, PLC) are the only ones who can remove anyone from their position.

 

Eagle92; "Yes the role of a SM is to counsel and mentor, but he is ultimately responsible for the safety and well being of the troop, both youth and adults, and not just the SPL."

 

Your correct it is the SM responsibility to ensure the safety of all concerned. However, from what has been described I don't see a safety problem. I see a frustrated young man, who vented like young men will do at times.

 

Like I said before my bet would be that all the adults where giving this young man orders and directions on what needed to be done. It may even be that when the SPL did not do what the adult directed or expected that some form or verbal admonishment was dished out by the adults.

 

All this possibly could have be avoided if SM had a pre-camp breakdown meeting with the PLC or at the least the SPL the night before on what needed to happen to get pack-up and on the road.

 

The young man took all he could then like many young men he vented.

 

So whats the first thing the adults want to do? They want to fire the SPL, when much of the problem was possible/probably adult caused. But we all know the adults are never wrong.

 

The SM is the passenger in the car. The passengers job is to help the driver arrive safely at the destination with the car in tack. The passenger does this my offering advise and pointing out obstacles in the way that may cause problems or damage.