Attendance

[don]

I would like an answer as to why troops keep doing these things. An Attendance rule affects advancement and any rule that affects advancement is not allowed.

How many scouts or parents or scouters even know that they can go to the council/district/national to disagree with troops rules. My guess would be very few. And if they did question the troop rules, how would the troop react, probably not very well. It would effect the scout in some way with the troop, sometimes it is just easier and faster to do what the troops wants, if a scout tried to go over the troop, he could age out by the time it was solved.
Why do troops put in the rules. I see 2 reasons, one is they do not know any better, the troop probably had these rules when they where scouts. OR the troop really think they are helping the scouts by adding requirements.
Just like a troop that requires uniforms, if a scout was turned down for not having a uniform, for any rank, I am sure that national would over turn that really quick.

[ASM-142]

If someone starts complaining too much about troop rules they may need to find another troop or be willing to get more involved in the leadership. A complainer without involvement may be held against a scout (bad scout spirit).

[commish3]

WoodBadgeGirl,

Getting back to your original question. Based on what you shared , no, it does not seem to be a good decision.

But your post really addresses 2 distinctly separate requirements.
First, that the scout be activel, and secondly that he <B>actively serves</B> in a listed position of responsibility.

There are some responses that have been given, that although I understand why the poster feels the way they do, and the statement has been around a long time, I do not know of any resources in scouting today that supports their position.

<I>"The Scoutmaster determines active"

"The BSA considers registered as active"

"The troop can (or cannot) set attendance requirements"

"the BSA doesn't define active" </I>

I cannot find anything in the Scouting manuals that says only the Scoutmaster can determine "active". In fact the ONLY requirement that has to be signed by the Scoutmaster according to BSA handbooks is the completion of the Scoutmaster Conference.

What the BSA considers "active" is found in the Boy Scout Handbook. How each scout defines and fulfills active is great fodder for the Scoutmaster conference and for the Introduction to Leadership conference that is supposed to take place with each scout as they accept a junior leadership position.

No individual, unit, committee etc, except for the national executive board can add to or subtract from the advancement requirements. So a troop can set attendance minimums if they like, BUT they cannot tie it to advancement.

Who can best define active? The scout, in counsel with an adult leader. Who can sign the active requirement? As with any other requirement, whoever in the troop is approved to do so.

[wagionvigil]

Excellent Reply. Thanks for reducing it all down in a nutshell!

AS you can all tell from my post I am so totally against troops that do this stuff that I would fold the troop to stop it. Any Boy that wants to be in scouts will find another troop. I live in a rural area and have had boys from 4 neighboring towns. All of these towns had at least 1 troop and in some cases 2 or 3. My town has just one. So these boys found a troop but had to travel `15 or so miles to meetings. Did it work out? 6 of 8 made Eagle, One was almost Eagle but was killed in an Auto Accident the other moved to Ft. Hood Texas as Dad was in the Army where he made Eagle.

[West]

I don't belive that actual requiremets you be here x number of meetings are any good.

However, if a boy complets all his requiremts for star within a month of his first class and then dosn't come for 5 months, it's safe to say that no one around here will sign off on the requirement. If they show up only once a month it's not likely to happen either (strong participation at meetings and service projects he does attend may be enough to over come this though). Basicly you have to take it case by case.

However I have a problem with the thought that boys who only particate 3 months of the year shoud be able to make eagle. The reason it's a big deal to make eagle is that it takes commitment. Scouting is for everyone, and we should work hard to make sure they all feel welcome. However, we shouldn't concentrate on advancement so heavily that they feel it's the only thing worth being there for. Two of my best friends in scouts stayed until the day they turned 18 and never made it past Star. (Despite prodding from me, other boys and much of the adult leadership. Both of those guys could have easily made Eagle). Fact of the matter is they didn't care about advancement, but they loved the camping and service. (They made Star so they could do high adventure stuff). I think we need more of that attitude in scouts. There is a lot more to it then earning badges and makeing eagle, and if the program is strong the boys will want to come even without the advancement. Doing badges isn't what I like about the program, the friendship and experiances are.

[Woodbadgegirl]

No individual, unit, committee etc, except for the national executive board can add to or subtract from the advancement requirements. So a troop can set attendance minimums if they like, BUT they cannot tie it to advancement.

Thank you! What a wonderful post.

We had our meeting last night and two boys came before the committee and asked for the position of Chaplin's Aid and Historian count for their area of leadership in order to earn their ranks of Star. One young man stated that he was not told that Chaplin's aid was not considered a rank advancement role of leadership. The Committee Chairman said it was in our troop guidelines online on the website (http://www.bsatroop303.info if you would like to see our troop), the young man's answer was "I don't do onto the computer that much, but I read my scout handbook all the time and it says that I can be a Chaplin's aid and it counts as a role of leadership". I was very impressed with the boys. This young man only had 50% of the activities attendance because of family activities were in conflict with 2 troop activities during the summer. We all agreed that this was unfair and voted to let his role count. Well not all of us, we had to nays.

We tabled the subject of the 75% attendance policy for a meeting January. I was very disappointed. They are going to make a $150 canoe trip in July the required activity for the month of July! So if your scout is trying to make a rank advancement (Which mine will be) if he can't afford this trip, he can't miss anything else in order to advance!!!! I feel this is so very wrong.

I have asked to be on the committee that will be going over the troop guidelines. I pray they allow me to be on this. It looks like the advancement chair is pretty upset that they aren't following BSA guidelines, so I think he and I are on the same page.

I really don't want to leave troops. My son said something the other night that I thought was pretty grown up, he said "If I run from my problems, they will always run after me. I have to stand up for what I believe in even if that means that I stand alone". I was shocked that came from a 13 year old boy!

Thank you for your input on this subject.

[wagionvigil]

Have your advanement chair sign on and reaqd the lines here. Possibly he will make a stand in the favor of the scouts not the good ole boys.

[Woodbadgegirl]

Wag,

I spoke with him after the meeting last night and he said that he would be leaving the troop if they don't adhere to the BSA guidelines. I have a feeling that he isn't in favor of the "Good O Boys" way of thinking. What my husband can't stomach about this whole thing is that the CC doesn't even have a son in scouts. He doesn't even have a son! They are making it very hard for these young men to advance in this troop. Or they have to pick scouts over everything else in life, including family and school!

[ASM-142]

You can also bering this to the chartered organization. If they know that boys are (or will be) leaving over this they most likely will make changes.

[Woodbadgegirl]

We have issues with the Chartered Org to begin with. I have a feeling that if we brought it to them, they would drop the entire troop!

The AC is taking this issue to the District. I have already called National on this and they said that the troop can't impose attendance policies that effect adavancement, but I can't find anything that says that in writing!! This troop is from MO, they need to see it in writiing before they believe it!

[wagionvigil]

they cannot make a canoe trip required and cannot tie an activity to advancement

[Woodbadgegirl]

I hear ya, but how can I make it clear to them that they can't do this???

[wagionvigil]

It has been posted on here what more do they need? COntact your region office if all else fails.

[ASM-142]

I have already called National on this and they said that the troop can't impose attendance policies that effect adavancement

Request that National send it to you in writing.

[Woodbadgegirl]

I hear ya, but how can I make it clear to them that they can't do this???

I was just venting, not really asking a question, sorry.

It has been posted on here what more do they need?

Like they are really going to read this.

They are in for a rude awakening. My husband is the Cubmaster of the pack that doesn't have a troop. If this policy doesn't get changed, we may encourage the Webelos to go to a different troop. I don't want them to go throuogh what we are going through. That will be 10 boys they miss out on!

[Rick Tyler]

We had our meeting last night and two boys came before the committee and asked for the position of Chaplin's Aid and Historian count for their area of leadership in order to earn their ranks of Star.

First the nitpick: it's "Position of Responsbility" not "leadership job." This is a common misunderstanding among adults, and causes no end of confusion. This is why the argument, "The Bugler doesn't show leadership, he just blows his horn, so it shouldn't count as a leadership job for Star" is wrong. Wrong wrong wrong.

Second, this sort of discussion is none of the committee's business (unless the Scoutmaster said no, and the scouts were petitioning the committee to overrule the Scoutmaster). They provide logistical and operational support to the troop's program, which is managed by the Scoutmaster and Patrol Leader's Council. The committee's only other role in things like this is to provide oversight to make sure the SM and PLC are following BSA rules and troop policies. Troop policies cannot be in opposition to BSA rules and regulations.

Your troop is deeply dysfunctional. Have any of these leaders ever been to training? Does your district have an active Commissioner program? You might get ahold of your District Commissioner and see if he has any advice.

Good luck.

[wagionvigil]

Ka-ching!!!!!!
Rick is absolutely correct. "Woodbadgegirl" Please call nationl again and Have them Fax you that or email it to you immediately.
this is the type of troop that send my BP through the roof

[Woodbadgegirl]

First the nitpick: it's "Position of Responsbility" not "leadership job."

I agree! The CC called it leadership, we read out of the handbook and told him it was "responsibility".

Second, this sort of discussion is none of the committee's business (unless the Scoutmaster said no, and the scouts were petitioning the committee to overrule the Scoutmaster).

The Scoutmaster said "yes", but in this troop it doesn't have much pull. They all believe that they have control over the SM. The SM had the two boys talk to the committee.

Your troop is deeply dysfunctional. Have any of these leaders ever been to training? Does your district have an active Commissioner program? You might get ahold of your District Commissioner and see if he has any advice.

Oh I so agree!!! The SM is trained. We only have one ASM out of the 10 that is trained. I don't know if the CC is trained or not. Our troop trainer is the District trainer so I know she is over trained! I'm trained in all the Cub Scout stuff, but haven't been troop trained just yet.

I will call our District Commissioner. She might have some insight.

Thanks!

[West]

they cannot make a canoe trip required and cannot tie an activity to advancement

Yeah that's just nuts. While on the canoe trip they could do a lot that helps with advancement, but the trip itself can't be required.

As far as the cost to participate, any boy that wants to should be able to go. We've always had money avaiable for scouts to go on trips, expecally the ones that participated in fund raisers (dosn't even have to be sales, just work to make the fundraiser possible counts) and service projects. If the troop dosn't have enough money to cover him we go to the charterd orginization. There are a lot of groups and individuals within the church willing to help out when the need is there. We also maintain a uniform bank (many of the old ladies of the church pick up any used ones they find). Money should never be the issue that keeps kids out of scouting.

[wagionvigil]

Hold on therer Cowboy. WHat I was trying to say was. You cannot keep a scout from advancing if he does not attend an event. I agree there are all kinds of advancement posibilities on a canoe Trip. Have done several. Boundary Waters,Lake Nippissing in Canada, Yough River from Start to Finish so I know the possibilities. BUT you cannot say if you don't go on this trip you cannot advance. I am a firm believer that the kids that go to summer camp advance quicker. But I cannot require anyone to go to summer camp.