Removing an SPL?

[fgoodwin]

Without getting into the merits of any specific situation, what process does your troop follow to remove an SPL?

 

In my troop, the SM (with the backing of the troop committee) decided to remove the SPL after he had served three of his six months. I was told the SPL, even though elected by the troop, serves at the pleasure of the SM, and that the SM has the sole authority to remove the SPL.

 

Other ASMs were asked to offer their opinion, but ultimately the decision was left to the SM.

 

I have a really bad feeling about this . . .

[local1400]

After serving as SPL for two years my ASPL was voted in as SPL( by the boys-for the boys). Our troop had a new scoutmaster that fall, our 4th in 5 years and the first one who was the father of a scout. After 2 months the SM asked the troop for a recall and his son was elected. "T", who was voted out dropped out eventually. Looking back I think that just working with "T" may have been better than dumping him. We had an ASM who had previously taken the Green Bar members on a troop JLT trip that I know I benefitted from, and maybe should have been a yearly trip right after the fall elections. It was a weekend trip where the adults did all the instructing and even the cooking and cleaning too so the Jr. leaders could work on what planning and so forth needed to be done. Dont give up on him. Help him.

[CalicoPenn]

You're right to have bad feelings over this. Unless there was some serious violations of rules leading to health and safety issues, the SPL serves at the pleasure of the YOUTH members of the troop - NOT the Scoutmaster. The youth may nominate anyone they choose to be SPL - the Scoutmaster does not get veto power over nominations or the boy's choice for SPL - not before the election, not after the election. The only time the adults should be removing an SPL is if there are serious violations of rules - and then that lad should not only be removed as SPL but also from the troop - in other words, unless the boy is being removed from the troop, he remains as SPL until the next scheduled election. The Scoutmaster should be working with the SPL and the rest of the youth leaders - if the Scoutmaster cannot do this, then the Scoutmaster should step aside.

 

Which leads to the second post - there are no "recall" elections for SPL - unless initiated by the youth - and then only in rare instances. The Scoutmaster does not get to declare new elections in the middle of a term - if the youth leadership, with support of their patrol members, want to have new SPL elections before the end of the term, then they can request them. The proper thing to do is for the PLC to request the SPL step down - typically when this happens, the ASPL becomes SPL until the next scheduled election though the youth may agree to a new election. If the SPL refuses to step down, and the majority of the PLC is requesting the resignation, this becomes a rare instance of a recall election - but the SPL will more than likely end up dropping out of the troop. The Scoutmaster should be working with the PLC to prevent this scenario as much as possible.

 

Cases like this point out the wisdom of having elections for SPL 2 times per year - not once per year as is often the case.

 

The only youth leadership position that serves at the pleasure of the Scoutmaster if the Junior Assistant Scoutmaster. All other youth leadership positions serve at the pleasure of the SPL or of the boys.

 

Calico

[Eagledad]

>>the Scoutmaster does not get veto power over nominations or the boy's choice for SPL

[Beavah]

But if it does, then the SM should guide the SPL into understanding that the there are choices here and that there is nobility in choosing to step back because you find you arent ready for the responsibility.

 

Yah, I agree with Calico and Eagledad, eh? In a strong troop with good Adult Relationships and a lot of positive unit culture, removin' an SPL shouldn't be necessary. And if for some obscure reason it is necessary, it should be done by the kids in almost all cases.

 

But not all troops are strong, eh? Not all programs are ready to weather a poor SPL storm without floodin' becoming serious, and losin' a fair number of younger lads in the chaos. Not every SM has the ability to "reach" every boy who ends up in da SPL seat, and not every group of young boys makes the best choices when votin'. One troop in our district last year lost its entire crop of 1st year boys, because there were so many cancelations/schedule changes/poor events due to the foibles of the senior youth leaders.

 

So I think a good SM has to use wit and wisdom in playin' the hand s/he is dealt. And the rest of us as parents and district helpers should support the poor guy or gal in the trenches. So I'm glad to see your committee supportin' your SM, and I'd encourage you to do the same.

 

[FScouter]

Consider that the primary job of the Scoutmaster is to train boy leaders; to coach, guide, and support them. Removing a boy leader really points to the failure of the SM to accomplish his task.

[Beavah]

Removing a boy leader really points to the failure of the SM to accomplish his task.

 

Yah, sure, I agree with that, too, eh?

 

Sometimes, though, the task is too much. SM's can't gain much traction vs. parents or school or whatnot (girlfriend?). And lots of SM's are strugglin' with a bunch of issues at once, eh?

 

Sometimes a good man or woman recognizes a failure in one area, and then moves on so as to help the boys/troop/program in other areas. That's somethin' to support, nine times outa ten.

 

[LongHaul]

For those who believe boy led means boy led let me ask you what youd do in this situation. You are the SM of a troop of about 20 boys. A boy is elected SPL who you know does not want the responsibility he wants the title. The weekly troop meeting plans stop being made, the PLC becomes a discussion group for X Box vs Play Station and the monthly outings are not planned. You contact the boy and address the PLC about their responsibly to the members and receive a phone call from the SPLs parent telling you that the SPL knows that the adults will not let the troop disband and that eventually the adults will take up the slack and do the work that the former SPL was doing. Do you wait till the minority who didnt vote for this SPL leave for a troop that works? Do you pick up the slack and do the work the SPL is supposed to be doing? How do you force a boy to do something he knows you cant force him to do?

LongHaul

 

[EagleInKY]

There are certainly debates over what "boy-led" means, and in particular how it relates to youth leadership. As the SM, I do not believe boy-led means I turn a blind eye and allow the troop to fall apart.

 

Here's what I do. When the boys are nominated for SPL, I have veto power over any name. If I know the boy is only doing it for the "power" of the position, I'm probably not going to allow him to run. I use the opportunity to coach him on why he's not prepared and what he should do to be more prepared at the next election. I realize some won't like this approach, but I believe it's a fair balance. I don't veto anyone just because I don't think they'll be a good leader. Our current SPL is one I've really struggled with. In so many ways I'd love to replace him with a better leader. But I'd rather help him grow and allow the troop to limp along until the next election.

[OldGreyEagle]

Actually, I have always thought of myself as a boy lead troop advocate, but as the title of a thread read long ago there is a difference between boy lead and boy lead into the ground. I know I have commented many times that a scout cannot be told at his scoutmaster's conference that his past 4 or 6 month term of POR doesnt count because the scout didnt perform satisfactory, thats something that cant wait until the end of the POR. Now, if the holder of the POR, in this case isnt doing his job, the Scoutmaster needs to review the responsibilities with the scout, and then if no inprovement is made, be sure to document a meeting with the scout where expectations are laid out and goals set. If the goals or expectations are not met, I see no problem with the Scoutmaster setting new elections. This is a last result and not to be done lightly, but it may have to be done. The boys need to see that the goals and expectations of the scoutmaster are not a joke and must be met.

[Eagledad]

EagleInKy and GE gave good responses.

 

To me there are three parts to the question. The first is the intent of running for the position with wrong reasons. The scout is not being trustworthy, loyal or helpful; in fact he is being just plain deceitful. This is not a leadership skills issue, its all about character and nothing drives me harder than a boy in real need of new habits of character.

 

The second part is the leadership skills. I make no bones that leadership is an opportunity to grow and learn skills that will help the scout for the rest of his life. I have no trouble with a scout's struggles and failures when he gives his all to succeed. Infact a scout who is truly trying will never find me angry or disappointed, they usually find me positive and excited that they are trying. I love to be a cheerleader. So, I dont want a scout who doesnt want to learn from the experience and only takes the position away from someone who does truly does want to learn. Leadership in our troop is all about learning. This SPL either will take that seriously and learn a lot, or he will want to consider a change.

 

And the third part is the scouts who elected him. For whatever reason the scouts elected this young man, they now need to live with it long enough to learn just how bad leadership can affect their personal experience. There will be no adults taking over for this SPL.

 

I start out guiding the SPL the same way I do all the SPLs. I teach them how to write and use the agenda and send him out. Our Troops PLC meetings are weekly so that I can coach and guide more often to give them more opportunity to improve their previous performances. I will watch the first few meetings and meet the SPL after to listen to his critique of himself. I will add my part if any is needed.

 

Typically as the SPL gets his feet under him, I attend less of the meetings until eventually I dont even show up. But if this SPL is how Longhaul describes, he will find the SM hanging closer and closer. If he chooses to ignore my coaching and the program suffers, the SPL and I will spend more time discussing skills and ideals intended to help him improve. In fact he will find us together talking an hour before the PLC and Troop meeting, and an hour after. He will also get calls to check up on his planning and agenda items. The SPL will find the SM near him all the time. Something that is unusual for our troop. I smile and keep my voice normal and I dont show impatience. On the contrary, I enjoy the idea of helping boys develop new habits that lead toward positive character. Especially a kid whos intent was to use the position for his own self-serving intention over the rest of the troop. He will get a lot of advice and coaching on service to others and how the power leadership can be used for good, or bad. If he continues along his deceitful track, he will be guided on choices and the right thing to do. He will find the SM next to him all the time.

 

At the same time, I will coach the PLC on how to handle responsibility when the leader doesnt perform as expected, or more important, as needed. The will learn how to initiate taking charge where the SPL is lacking. They will be guided on how to work with the SPL to get him up to speed. The PLC will not lack in growing and learning new skills.

 

I also usually bring the parents in as well. Typically I get very close to my SPLs parents because we work as a team. Sometimes the parents dont want to be that involved and that is fine, but they will hear how their son performs. The worst parents are the ones who pressure their son to do this in the first place. My experience is they will coach their son to do just enough to make me happy. They are not concerned about their sons character or leadership skills, just the title of SPL.

 

This is how I have worked with these types of Scouts. I will say that scouts learn pretty quickly what they can get away with in our troop. So getting such an SPL is very rare. Usually our SPLs are the cream of the crop.

 

As for the For those who believe boy led means boy led comment, I understand that there are many different feelings of what boy run should really be. But feel there is a little sarcasm from that statement. It is my opinion boy run is the freewill that adults willingly give the scouts. To me boy run is a description of the troop adults, not the scouts. How much freewill we give the scouts is a matter of perspective and it is different for each adult because we all have different levels of fear and trust. Fear pretty much drives most of what we let the boys do in scouting. And, boy run doesnt ignore the Eight Methods, one of which is Adult Association. This needs to be a different subject, but I think most folks will likely find the hardest working adult scout leaders in the most boy run troops.

 

Sorry this was long, but I enjoy working in these kinds of situations. Thanks for allowing me give one example of how to handle this hypothetical situation.

 

I love this scouting stuff.

 

Barry

 

[CalicoPenn]

I've thought more about the veto power and I'll back off from the position that the Scoutmaster doesn't have verto power - but state that the Scoutmaster shouldn't have veto power except in the most egregrious cases - I'm of the mind that boy-led means boy-led, and part of this equation is the boys need to be allowed to live the consequences of their decisions. The Scoutmaster is there to counsel, guide, train, advise and coach. The boys choice might make the job more difficult at times, but that's the game we play.

 

As for the SPL and PLC who isn't doing the job because they know the adults won't let the troop fold - call their bluff. If the SPL and PLC haven't planned the meeting don't do it for them. No plan? Take ten minutes to explain that the SPL and PLC have decided not to take their responsibilities seriously and have not made plans for the meeting and as a result, the meeting is being cancelled. Explain that the adults are not going to pick up the slack and plan the meetings, that it is the SPL's and his PLC's responsibility to do so. Tell the Scouts that they should take the next week to figure out in their patrols and with their buddies what they want to do to solve the problem - and offer possibilities - new elections, give the SPL/PLC another chance, or just give up and fold the troop (to me it's important to put that last in there to let them know you're serious - and that the fate of the Troop truly does lie with the boys, not the adults). You're volunteers - if the boys don't want to do the job/be there, why continue to waste your time with them - if they choose the last option, offer to help those who want to continue in Scouting to find new units. It's quite probable that those who are no longer taking it seriously will drop out and give you a chance to rebuild the troop.

 

CalicoPenn

[dan]

Boy Lead or Boy Run?

My sons troop was a boy run troop. Meaning the SPL/PLC made all the decisions on what to do at meetings and campouts. They did not understand that Boy Lead means to lead the BSA program not make up a program as they want, meetings and campouts where filled with non scout activities. The scouts all thought that whatever they decided they wanted to do they where able to do it and they did for years.

A few of us started asking about the BSA program why we where not following it, the answer we received was the boys made the decisions, they where going to do it, I think the paintball guns on campouts was when the CC finally figured out that boy lead is not boy run. Our outgoing SM finally got it, he has been able to change most of the philosophy around. Dec 10th the new SM starts we will see where it goes with him, my thoughts is that it will become adult lead completely, I hope I am wrong.

Boy Lead is the SPL/PLC leading the BSA program.

BUT I can see some older troops that have been boy lead correctly for years that can become a boy run troop. They have seen the correct way to run a troop since they joined the unit and watched strong leaders SPLs ASPL, TG all following the BSA program and they know what is expected from them and what they need to do while following the program.

 

We where the troop Longhaul brought up, how do you change? Tell the boy leaders you job is to lead the BSA program, not lead a discussion on WFii vs Xbox.

 

[Joni4TA]

There's certainly "nothing on the books" about a resignation, if the situation requires that.

 

Case in point - my own son is the SPL in our Troop. He was nominated and decided to run, won by election and all that jazz. The SM ended up having some personal family problems and was unable to devote the time to work with my son and give him JLT, etc. While this was unfortunate, I do understand it, the husband and I weren't going to jump in and take over as SM, training our own son, but we were at least available to offer advice, should our son need it. Well, realistically our son would rather kiss a snake at the SM's request than ask for OUR help - Ewwww Parent Cooties and all

 

Fast Forward - - -

The SM is absolutely available now. My son calls him for questions... and the SM calls my son - but they only communicate the night before or sometimes mere hours before the weekly meeting. Nothing is prepared or planned, the boys are wild and are living at the absolute edge of the planning curve. It's like watching a crazy 8 race on a dirt track, just waiting for that inevitable CRASH!!! lol

 

So I told my son a week or so ago that if he didn't intend to act like an SPL in the full sense of the responsibility that goes along with that position, then he owed to the rest of the boys in his Troop to RESIGN! I told him it appeared that he was too caught up in online video gaming all week long, and that if he was only going to dedicate time to scouting in the weekly meeting and the monthly camping trips, he was doing nothing but selling himself and the entire Troop short. Basically I lit a fire under his rear end and told him to get moving and get with the Program or go jump in a lake and let someone else do the job!

 

I personally see nothing wrong with having that same kind of conversation with any other boy in the Troop, especially your SPL, whoever he is, relative, son, nephew, neighbor - whatever! And if the kid's parents have a problem with you trying to motivate their son to actually be the SPL he agreed to be - then I'd offer them a free ride to the next New Leader Essentials Training, to be followed by Scoutmaster Fundamentals and maybe a sneak preview at a JLT video!! (It's usually the parents who want to tell you how to do things that have never been trained in the first place - sorry for the assumption - bit of humor there )

 

My own son suddenly started operating a phone tree, went to the next weekly meeting prepared (with a Troop Meeting Plan even - ooooooooh He had called ahead to older boys/PLs and gotten some instruction period set up - stuff like that. So he "got it."

 

Maybe this SPL needs to have it laid out straight for him too - so he can "get it" or "leave it" whichever the case may be.

 

Also - I assume there is an ASPL in the picture? Don't be afraid to utilize him in this situation. If the SPL isn't/can't/won't treat the SPL position with respect, there's no reason not to use the ASPL in the SPL's basic absence. If you can get the ASPL in there doing the right thing - often times the SPL will rethink his current goals and objectives (read: BEHAVIOR) within the Troop.

 

And as far as an all-out SM Veto goes, I would have to say "NO" there's no such thing - but there are other things, like guidance, influence, persuasion..... And that nifty little phrase about how you get more flies with honey than you do with ________ ?

 

Good Luck!

 

 

[fgoodwin]

Not sure what happened, but I went to our weekly Troop Meeting Monday nite, and the SPL was still in charge and running things.

 

I hope this means last week's decision to remove the SPL has been reconsidered.