Peeved BOR Member

[CubsRgr8]

Ok, so maybe I'm a grumpy old man, but at least I'll get to vent.

 

Chaired a Life BOR a couple of weeks ago. The scout in question is one of two quartermasters for the troop. When asked about his performance as quartermaster (his required position of responsibility), he responded that he felt he had done "only a marginal job" (his words). I was glad to hear him admit it, because I agreed with him. Impressed with his honesty, I joined in with the other BOR members and approved his rank.

 

Fast forward to last night. It's tent cleaning and folding time - a big task given that over 30 tents went to summer camp - the ultimate quartermaster job, no? Guess who wasn't there? You got it - new Mr. Life. Also missing were most of the older scouts, leaving the grunt work to the first and second years.

 

Was I ever peeved! I feel personally let down by this scout because he said he would do a better job for the remainder of his term (through August). It doesn't really matter to me what was his excuse, he didn't follow through on something I felt he had promised me and the BOR he would do.

[OldGreyEagle]

You know, a Board of Review doesnt have to be about rank advancement, it can be held for a variety of reasons. It may not be a bad idea to hold another Board of Review with this scout and ask where he was. He may have a very legitimate reason, or he may not. If he does, you will feel better, and if he doesnt, well, at least he knows he is being watched. If he has a good reason, he still knows he is being watched. Note though his rank cant be revoked, but his performance in his position of responsibility can always be discussed, as long as its in the apropriate forum.

[acco40]

I've noticed in our troop that the Sr. Patrol (SPL and ASPL only right now) try to get away without doing any real work (we're management!) and sometimes our QM will putter around in the trailer when it is time for dishes, get water, etc. As SM, I've tried to get the boys to realize the importance of a duty roster which is only half embraced by the youth right now.

 

The older boys can become "work savy." If they know what they perceive as drudgery is going to be performed at a troop meeting, they'll find an excuse to miss it. My solution is to assign tents to individuals. If the parties are not present to clean and fold the tents, make sure the tents are waiting for them the next week!

 

Try not to take the QM's actions as personal.

[hops_scout]

One way around it is if you assign tents to go home with the individual right after the campout. Then, they have to return it at the next meeting. We give scoutbucks to people who return the tent at that very next meeting.

[eisely]

It seems to me the most expeditious way of dealing with this is to talk to your SM and get him to call the lad in for a SM conference.

[Bob White]

CubsRgr8

 

If you went into a restaurant and the cook met you at the door and told you that he was a bad cook, would it be his fault if you stayed for the meal and it turned out bad? After all, he gave fair warning.

 

The boy said he did not do a good job. His honesty may have earned him Scout Spirit but his lack of participation did not complete his leadership requirement.

 

The board passed him knowing that he did not do a good job. The rank does not give the scout skills, the skills earn the rank. Why did the board unanimously pass the scout?

 

The scout is just what he said he was. I'll give him this, he is honest and consistant.

 

The scout needs training in how to do his job, and in what is expected of him as a leader. The committee needs to read the Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures Manual and become as honest and consistant as the scout.

 

Just my 2 cents worth,

Bob White

[CubsRgr8]

Bob White, all I can say is mea culpa!

 

There is no doubt that this scout failed to actively provide leadership in his position. As a committee member, and the chair of his BOR, I should never have agreed to approve his rank on the basis of promised improvement in the future. I promise to find and review my copy of the Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures Manual. Then I will follow up with the scoutmaster. Thanks to all for their input!

 

 

[evmori]

If I'm not mistaken, the requirement to serve in a position of responsibility just says serve. Whether a good or bad job was done makes no difference.

 

I am not saying a poor job is acceptable. What I am saying is if a Scouts has a position of responsibility & is doing a sub-standard job and no on addresses it and he has served in the position for the required time he can't be denied the rank based on that.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[silver-shark]

"serve actively", are the actual words.

 

Although the rank cannot be taken away, the Scout is still moving toard the next one. Make sure that you're sitting on that next BOR if possible.

 

As a sidenote, adults from a boy's troop are not allowed to sit on his BOR in our District for Life or Eagle ranks. We have our Adult Leaders present to sit on the BORs for other troops and they have theirs present to sit in on ours. I thought that was the National POlicy?

[evmori]

Silver,

I don't think it is National policy since some councils allow Troops to hold their own Eagle Boards. It should be a National Policy.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[dan]

What would happen to the troops that do not have another troop within 100 miles or more, of them?

Which is why it could not be a National Policy.

 

[dsteele]

In matters of policy, I hope ya'll will trust your cyber-professional Scouter Steele.

 

Here's what the advancement policy and procedures manual says about Boy Scout Boards of Review:

 

"

"The Boy Scout is reviewed. After a Scout has completed all requirements for a rank, he has a board of review. For Tenderfoot, Second Class, First Class, Star, Life, and Eagle Palms, the review is conducted by members of the troop committee. The Eagle Scout board of review is conducted in accordance with local council procedures. "

 

It also talks about the composition of the non-eagle boards of review later in the document:

 

"Review for Tenderfoot Through Life Ranks and Eagle Palms

After a Scout has completed all requirements for Tenderfoot, Second Class, First Class, Star, and Life ranks, or an Eagle Palm, he appears before a board of review. This board of review is made up of at least three and not more than six members of the troop committee. One member serves as chairman, usually the committee member responsible for advancement. Unit leaders, assistant unit leaders, relatives, or guardians may not serve as members of a Scout's board of review."

 

Here's what the book says about Eagle Boards of Review:

 

"Eagle Scout

Boards of Review

The Boy Scouts of America has placed the Eagle Scout board of review in the hands of either the troop, team, crew, or ship committee or the district or council committee responsible for advancement. The council will decide and promulgate which method or methods may be used.

 

The board of review for an Eagle candidate is composed of a minimum of three members and a maximum of six members, 21 years of age or older. These members do not have to be registered in Scouting, but they must have an understanding of the importance and purpose of the Eagle board of review. At least one district or council advancement representative shall be a member of the Eagle board of review, when conducted at the unit level, and may serve as chairman if so requested by the unit.

 

Because of the importance of the Eagle Scout Award, a unanimous decision must be reached as to the Scout's qualifications. If a unanimous decision is not reached, a new review may be convened at the request of the applicant, the unit leader, or the unit committee. The review should take approximately 30 minutes."

 

Those are the policies. I'm surprised to read that a council is requiring a differnt review for the rank of Life as well as Eagle. Perhaps its to help the young man practice for the big bannana.

 

If your council is doing something different from what's in quotes, please consult your district or council advancement chairman.

 

Sorry for the length of my answer, but if you ask a policy question, I'll try to show you the policy.

 

DS

 

 

[Eamonn]

Wow!!

"cyber-professional" !!!

I have a CPA - However a CPS - That is impressive.

Eamonn

[dsteele]

Eamonn:

 

God, I love your sense of humor. I hope my invocation of the Lord's name doesn't awaken Merlyn to this thread!

 

I will not retract the cyber professional handle. In fact I may adopt it But I'll have to admit that I came close to using cyber-scout Executive until I remembered that we aren't a council. There's no such thing as an e-council and I hope there never will be.

 

DS

[silver-shark]

Thanks for the clarification Dave... I mean cyber-professional Scouter Steele.

 

I too wonder if our District, or maybe even Council does this at the Life rank to prepare them for the Eagle BOR which is held in the same manner. If so, it is working well. The 2 Eagle BORs that I have had the priviledge of sitting on were both as smooth as silk even though they weere 2 completely different types of boys. (One will be a future politician for sure and the other probably an avid outdoorsmany profession.) Both were extremely comfortable during the entire process..

 

Incidentily, we do have a member of the District Advancement Committee on each BOR for Life and Eagle, (our SM is one of them) and the remaining members are either Troop Committee Members, SMs or ASMs.