Re: Fw: How do you dismiss a SM
Mike Walton (blkeagle@DYNASTY.NET)
Tue, 1 Apr 1997 13:16:06 -0500
Ira followed up his posting and in thanking Cliff, he wrote:
>Unfortunately the troop in which I was involved, the SM/COR is the
>only member of the chartered organization. What the SM told the
>troop committee was that any attempt to remove him as SM would
>result in him as COR removing the troop committee.
I call this, Ira, when people write me privately about this kind of
thing, is "SBT", for either "stupid blackmail tactic", or
"Somewhere Behind the Times". In either case, my first response
to those that would post me privately about such a case, is to tell
the Scoutmaster "Go ahead. Make our days."
See, in order for this guy to do such an action, would involve his
or her boss AND the local District Executive, if not the Council
Scout Executive. Believe me, Ira, those pros DO NOT WANT TO GIVE
UP A UNIT OVER STUPIDITY!! If there's a VALID problem, both the
Council/District Executive and the head of the chartering
organization will take care of the problem (which means in most
cases, the Scoutmaster/COR and the Troop Committee Chair) and let
those remaining reorganize and recharter the unit.
In either case, the Scoutmaster, not the entire unit, leaves. And
to put it to boot, unless the Scoutmaster is sleeping with BOTH
District/Council Scout Executive and his or her boss, this pretty
well places him or her outside of the "circle of the BSA" for a
while...and maybe out of a job career-wise (but most of those
SBTers fail to think about THAT aspect...they are wanting to "scare
you off", thinking that you will "back down" because "he's the
Why am I so confident about the SM leaving and not him or her
carrying out and succeeding in their threat?? Because first off,
he's NOT supposed to be carried in both primary leader (SM,CM,EA,
SK,VC) AND as CR. He or she "can't be in a position to hire or
fire themselves" as the primary leader. An Assistant? Yeah. A
member of the Committee? Yeah. But NOT as the primary leader.
Someone may have caught it, or will catch it if it's true and
"take care of it administratively".
Second, by threating to "get rid of all of y'all", he or she is
telling you (and anyone else) that he can "run it all himself" and
therefore don't NEED the extra help. So let him try.
Finally, he can't do "jack". It takes the CHARTERED ORGANIZATIONAL
HEAD (unless this person has delegated this authority down to this
person) to "hire" and to "fire" Scouters. Period.
>Despite numerous abuses by the SM (fiscal abusues and verabl
>abuses to the scouts) and having these abuses laid out to both
>National and the Greater New York Council no real investigation
>was ever conducted and he remains SM.
So, you just take it the next step, Ira. Write to the Area
Director for Area Three, Northeast Region, BSA (your Council has
the address); as a matter of interest, what should happen is that
you or someone within your unit write to the Regional Director of
Operations at the Northeast Region, and cc: a copy to the Council
Executive, Greater New York City Councils. I GUARANTEE YOU a CSP
of *your choice* that once that smoking response leaves your CE's
boss' (the Area Director's) hands and given to your Council, you
will start to see SPARKS FLY.
See Ira, Regional Directors -- and in particular, the Regional
Director of Operations (numbers 3, 4, 5, and 6 in the overall
hirarachy of the BSA; they report to the National Director of
Operations whom report DIRECTLY to the Chief Scout Executive!)
don't want to "mess up their records" with stuff like that. They
are looking at perhaps serving as a Council Scout Executive of a
"top 25 Council" once they leave the Regional office. They're NOT
looking for a "safe haven", they ALREADY have it, and because of
their power in THAT particular position, they can "truly put the
hammer down" onto any Council that has NOT followed-through with
the way the BSA says that such an investigation should take place.
Now, on their defense, I want to warn you that such investigations
TAKE A SIGNIFICANT PERIOD OF TIME, and should be (or are) invisible
to the layperson Scouter, even those involved in the unit. They
are done with a large degree of care, because they don't want to
be caught up into a lawsuit nor do they want to be caught in a
situation whereby the Scouter "gets away with it" because the
Council Executive is too "lame" to "protect the program" the way it
should be protected. I always caution people whom write me
personally about going this route, especially when they "haven't
heard from the Council about it and my phone calls don't get
answered" after two or three months of "investigation". It takes
in some cases, almost six to eight MONTHS before final resolution
>Going to the Council or the DE with this type of problem in New
>York City is a waste of time and it is their intent to cover up
>any situation that reflects poorly on BSA.
It is only a waste of time if you choose it that way. Anytime
I bring up a discrepancy to my Region or to National, I feel it's
because its for the good of the program and its youth involved in
It's NOT a waste of time, even if I only get an autopenned note
thanking me for my letter and offering some lame "don't call us,
we'll call you". At LEAST you wrote, and placed it on paper "FOR
THE RECORD" as we Army types like to say.
>I hope that units in other parts of the country receive more
>concern from their local councils than I did.
But if all of this has been happening -- and continues to happen --
more than nine months ago, it's time to get the Region involved.
Just the asking of the Regional Office address may get *the ball
moving along* again, especially if you ask for the "address of the
Regional Director of Operations". For some reason, professionals
get *mighty friendly* when you mention THAT particular title.
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City