Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24

Thread: Additional POR Prelaunch Check

  1. #1
    GSL & AESL shiftypete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    12,212
    Thanks
    3,322
    Thanked 1,110 Times in 735 Posts

    Additional POR Prelaunch Check

    It seems TSA have launched a second pre-lanuch check of POR with additional proposed rule changes https://scouts.org.uk/media/1000588/...ember-2018.pdf

    The proposed changes include a complete rewrite of the entire Appointments Chapter. This is rather unexpected considering the appointments chapter includes at least some of the rules they already consulted on changing in last months pre-launch check.

    They are also suggesting a rule which bans individual home hospitality (i.e. Scouts staying with families in their family home) as part of visits abroad and heavily restrict them for Scouts and Guides visiting the UK.

    Peter Andrews AESL of Headingley Pirates ESU, Group Scout Leader & Webmaster of Falkoner Scout Group
    www.falkonerscouts.org.uk

    Previous Scouting Roles
    2003 - 2013 ABSL
    2017-2018 AGSL

    Wike, North Leeds District Campsite - www.wikecampsite.org.uk
    www.leeds-solar.co.uk
    Please note all views expressed are my own and not those of any organisation I'm associated with

  2. #2
    ESL and DESC ianw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    6,386
    Thanks
    1,454
    Thanked 2,008 Times in 1,168 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by shiftypete View Post
    They are also suggesting a rule which bans individual home hospitality (i.e. Scouts staying with families in their family home) as part of visits abroad and heavily restrict them for Scouts and Guides visiting the UK.
    The safeguarding dept strike again? I mean, I can see the issue. I know one of ours that went to the Japan Jamboree said it was one of the highlights. On the other hand, as a callow 17 year old I spent a week in a vicar's house in Germany sharing a room with a leader, nowt happened except lots of awkwardness and his snoring kept me awake, but still, I can see both sides to this one.
    Ian Wilkins
    Farnham District Explorer Scout Commissioner

    Jambowlree - Worldwide Scout Ten Pin Bowling Competition
    All sections, all countries, runs December 2018 - May 2019
    http://www.jambowlree.org

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    320
    Thanks
    59
    Thanked 86 Times in 50 Posts
    I'm glad they've added a mechanism to replace trustees outside of an AGM setting. Now that the Appointments chapter mentions EGMs though, they need to amend the constitution chapters in order to provide a mechanism to call one.

    Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Darren-M For This Useful Post:

    PaulArthurs (05-12-2018),shiftypete (05-12-2018)

  5. #4
    Group Scout Leader
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,066
    Thanks
    645
    Thanked 403 Times in 214 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by shiftypete View Post
    They are also suggesting a rule which bans individual home hospitality (i.e. Scouts staying with families in their family home) as part of visits abroad and heavily restrict them for Scouts and Guides visiting the UK.
    Looks like it will be home hospitality without the 'home'


    Paul

  6. #5
    Scout Leader (Bosun) Nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Thatcham, Berkshire
    Posts
    793
    Thanks
    24
    Thanked 128 Times in 70 Posts
    Great shame if they do ban individual home stays. One of the highlights of my daughter's Scouting life was a 7 week exchange with a Venture Scout in Australia. At the age of 17, three of them flew to the other side of the world to stay with their exchanges going to school and joining in with their host family's life. Whilst I know that the Scout Commonwealth Youth Exchange isn't currently running it will be a great shame if it isn't resurrected again at some point.

  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,726
    Thanks
    1,310
    Thanked 1,027 Times in 747 Posts
    I sometimes wonder how people from other countries regard how we deal with child protection in the UK...

    Home hospitality is a bit of an institution, and here we are writing it off because of risks that are so rare, they can't reasonably be measured.

    (I await someone with a link to that one occasion in 1975, in Belgium, in that dungeon none of their neighbours knew anything about... etc... )


    Edit: we could probably have an entire thread dedicated to home hospitality experiences... /edit

  8. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,355
    Thanks
    135
    Thanked 643 Times in 379 Posts
    Thing is, if home hospitality is now "verboten" in the UK, it presumably puts all school foreign exchanges off the agenda. My son's school currently has a home hospitality exchange going with schools in China (not that he'll be going at those airline prices!) - so presumably the risks can be mitigated to an acceptable level.
    Does anyone know what's going on?

  9. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    335
    Thanks
    118
    Thanked 91 Times in 74 Posts
    I am a bit concerned that the list of appointments where it is suggested that people should not be in post for more than ten years has been increased and now includes LTMs and GSLs.

    I admit to a bit of self interest as an LTM - although I fail to see why a person should have to go after a set time - but I think that the addition of GSLs is very wrong. I feel that really good GSLs are not that common and we should value them rather than say "your time's up I am afraid".

    I realise that this is only "guidance" but feel that some Districts may be "guided" more than others.

  10. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    320
    Thanks
    59
    Thanked 86 Times in 50 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveF View Post
    I am a bit concerned that the list of appointments where it is suggested that people should not be in post for more than ten years has been increased and now includes LTMs and GSLs.

    I admit to a bit of self interest as an LTM - although I fail to see why a person should have to go after a set time - but I think that the addition of GSLs is very wrong. I feel that really good GSLs are not that common and we should value them rather than say "your time's up I am afraid".

    I realise that this is only "guidance" but feel that some Districts may be "guided" more than others.
    I'd missed that aspect... one of the issues with doing a wholescale review. A "summary of key changes" section would have been helpful.

    It was a tad inconsistent to include CTMs but not LTMs, and DCs but not GSLs. I'm not sure of the usefulness of the rule in general though. The appointment review mechanism should be enabling line managers to have the honest conversations about whether someone is still suitable for the role without forcing them out regardless.

  11. #10
    GSL & AESL shiftypete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    12,212
    Thanks
    3,322
    Thanked 1,110 Times in 735 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveF View Post
    I am a bit concerned that the list of appointments where it is suggested that people should not be in post for more than ten years has been increased and now includes LTMs and GSLs.

    I admit to a bit of self interest as an LTM - although I fail to see why a person should have to go after a set time - but I think that the addition of GSLs is very wrong. I feel that really good GSLs are not that common and we should value them rather than say "your time's up I am afraid".

    I realise that this is only "guidance" but feel that some Districts may be "guided" more than others.
    I agree, I actually think the ideal would be for GSLs to be in post for more than 10 years. I can also see absolutely no reason why a LTM would have such a recommendation. Of course both roles should be reviewed at least every 5 years so that is the opportunity to move someone to a different role if they are no longer performing their role adequately.

    Peter Andrews AESL of Headingley Pirates ESU, Group Scout Leader & Webmaster of Falkoner Scout Group
    www.falkonerscouts.org.uk

    Previous Scouting Roles
    2003 - 2013 ABSL
    2017-2018 AGSL

    Wike, North Leeds District Campsite - www.wikecampsite.org.uk
    www.leeds-solar.co.uk
    Please note all views expressed are my own and not those of any organisation I'm associated with

  12. #11
    ESL and DESC ianw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    6,386
    Thanks
    1,454
    Thanked 2,008 Times in 1,168 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveF View Post
    I am a bit concerned that the list of appointments where it is suggested that people should not be in post for more than ten years has been increased and now includes LTMs and GSLs.

    I admit to a bit of self interest as an LTM - although I fail to see why a person should have to go after a set time - but I think that the addition of GSLs is very wrong. I feel that really good GSLs are not that common and we should value them rather than say "your time's up I am afraid".

    I realise that this is only "guidance" but feel that some Districts may be "guided" more than others.
    Yeah, it feels like it's giving weak managers that can't face up to someone and go "no, you're done" a get out to suck their teeth and go "weeeeellllll the guidance says"

    It's the basic problem of POR saying it's "Policy Organisation and Rules" but being chock full of random guidance that may or may not look like rules and gives people the "well it's in POR" stick to beat people with.

    Those roles in full...
    As guidance it is suggested that this rule also be applied to District Scout Network
    Commissioners, County Training Managers, Assistant County Commissioners, Assistant Regional
    Commissioners (Scotland), Assistant District Commissioners, District Explorer Scout
    Commissioners, Local Training Managers and Group Scout Leaders.
    Oh no! That's me too! DESC since 2006! But I'm still loving it*! Not sure my ego could take not being El Presidente of Farnham Explorers!



    * mostly
    Ian Wilkins
    Farnham District Explorer Scout Commissioner

    Jambowlree - Worldwide Scout Ten Pin Bowling Competition
    All sections, all countries, runs December 2018 - May 2019
    http://www.jambowlree.org

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to ianw For This Useful Post:

    shiftypete (06-12-2018)

  14. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,726
    Thanks
    1,310
    Thanked 1,027 Times in 747 Posts
    The assumption being, that you can get people into those roles in the first place...

    Have the people who write this stuff ever actually scouted before? Or perhaps they only ever did it in a model district?

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to pa_broon74 For This Useful Post:

    PaulArthurs (06-12-2018)

  16. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,959
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 178 Times in 129 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveF View Post
    I am a bit concerned that the list of appointments where it is suggested that people should not be in post for more than ten years has been increased and now includes LTMs and GSLs.

    I admit to a bit of self interest as an LTM - although I fail to see why a person should have to go after a set time - but I think that the addition of GSLs is very wrong. I feel that really good GSLs are not that common and we should value them rather than say "your time's up I am afraid".

    I realise that this is only "guidance" but feel that some Districts may be "guided" more than others.

    I also think that HQ believe that Groups have an abundance of people queuing up to be on Exec Committees as the Chair, Sec and Treasurer now have appointment reviews even though appointed by Group Scout Council ANNUALLY at the AGM.

    It also appears that all committee members not only have to do the Module 1 and GDPR but are also required to do Safety & I think Safeguarding every 5 years. I'm not certain that many get 5 years on the Committee so that is possibly academic.

    Not certain where much of this is heading.

    Getting too old for all this change so better give up I think.

  17. #14
    Group Scout Leader
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,066
    Thanks
    645
    Thanked 403 Times in 214 Posts
    There are a lot of changes being introduced through the re-write of this chapter of POR. No list of the changes has been provided so it is difficult to identify what the proposed changes are.

    The feedback form provides very little opportunity for a detailed response for the many elements to be changed

    Feedback closes 1 January. Presumably someone at Gilwell will then be collating all the responses and producing a summary. Someone at Gilwell will then presumably be producing recommendations on the changes for consideration by senior management. I assume senior management will then be making recommendations to senior volunteers who should be making the final decision on changes to POR. The final document will then be prepared. All in time to launch in January.


    Paul

  18. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to PaulArthurs For This Useful Post:

    Darren-M (06-12-2018),pa_broon74 (06-12-2018),shiftypete (06-12-2018)

  19. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,726
    Thanks
    1,310
    Thanked 1,027 Times in 747 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by daveb123 View Post
    I also think that HQ believe that Groups have an abundance of people queuing up to be on Exec Committees as the Chair, Sec and Treasurer now have appointment reviews even though appointed by Group Scout Council ANNUALLY at the AGM.

    It also appears that all committee members not only have to do the Module 1 and GDPR but are also required to do Safety & I think Safeguarding every 5 years. I'm not certain that many get 5 years on the Committee so that is possibly academic.

    Not certain where much of this is heading.

    Getting too old for all this change so better give up I think.
    It's a business now, and I think we arrived some time ago.

    There are people at HQ who are paid to think this rubbish up. They don't really care that it can't be implemented effectively (or if it can, only in what I'd venture to say is a minority of ideal districts/regions/counties). I think, all they seem to care about is the perpetuation of the business of Scouting, which is to one side of actual scouting - the stuff we do week in week out. It'snot a criticism, just an observation. They have a job to do, they may even think what they're doing is the right thing because from where they are, that's what it looks like. And, it's their job so...

    It's all just background noise, which in the short, medium and long term will mostly be ignored. They'll change it all again anyway (it's a circle, Hakuna Matata etc), so what's the point in wringing your hands about it?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Beavers with Additional needs
    By Tomsmum in forum Beaver Scouts
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 26-04-2017, 05:58 PM
  2. Beavers with additional needs
    By Tomsmum in forum Beaver Scouts
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 29-01-2016, 04:40 PM
  3. Check you address details before submitting a Disclosure Check.
    By hippysurfer in forum Project Compass
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 23-01-2015, 10:18 AM
  4. New additional requirements to QSA
    By brianpinto in forum Explorer Scouts
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-01-2014, 03:56 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •