Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 51112131415
Results 211 to 223 of 223

Thread: Stepping out the hut, where did the permission misnomer come from?

  1. #211
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    4,481
    Thanks
    1,620
    Thanked 1,215 Times in 881 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KoopaCooper View Post
    They were kicked out of Scouting. The SL told them in no uncertain terms to leave and never come back, and information regarding why they'd been given the boot quickly spread around the District, which would've made it extremely unlikely any other Group would've wanted them to join (assuming they even tried, which I don't think they did).

    And yes they were 14, but they wouldn't have been going up to Explorers anyway - this was the 1990s they had another year and a bit before they would've even been old enough to go up to Venture Scouts.
    This almost the wrong way round. The whole skills for life mantra being around now, but not then. Back in the day, we wouldn't have kicked them out, it's probably the last thing they needed.

    I struggle to imagine the scope of the dog's dinner that would be made out of it these days.

  2. #212
    Baloo KoopaCooper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    Streatham, London
    Posts
    85
    Thanks
    21
    Thanked 18 Times in 13 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by pa_broon74 View Post
    This almost the wrong way round. The whole skills for life mantra being around now, but not then. Back in the day, we wouldn't have kicked them out, it's probably the last thing they needed.

    I struggle to imagine the scope of the dog's dinner that would be made out of it these days.
    They weren't simply booted out for underage drinking, Pa - I'll be honest, they'd all been caught drinking before (in fact, the previous year to that, some of our troop and others from the district, along with a group of Canadian Scouts, 36 of us in all, had gone to Calais for a day trip...and 33 returned drunk*).

    It was the severity of this occasion - as I said, there was a massive medical bill from the US hospital, the local news got hold of the story I believe, not to mention an American bloke who was tricked into supplying the booze for them (he had no idea the girl and two boys were only 14) being convicted of supplying alcohol to minors and subsequently screwing up his career (he'd apparently been accepted into the army...was then refused), and the US local news also getting hold of the story. It was a huge mess all round. Our GSL (who had been one of the trip's organisers), agreed with the SL (both of them had been on the trip) that the Group had to expel all three to avoid anyone thinking the Group condoned such behaviour. I don't know, there may even have been instructions from higher up to expel them (I'm sure District at least would've heard about the whole thing)...

    *Two girls spent the day sunbathing and returned as lobsters, and I've always been teetotal.
    1988 - 1990: 4th Streatham Sea Scouts (PMLO), Beaver
    1990 - 1998: 1st Streatham Common, Cub & Scout
    2004 - 2011: 1st Streatham Common, OH
    2011 - 2012: 1st Streatham Common, CSSA
    2012 - 2019: 1st Streatham Common, ACSL
    2019 on: 1st Streatham Common, GSL

    Lambeth - The best District in England!


  3. #213
    Senior Member Bushfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Huddersfield
    Posts
    15,798
    Thanks
    455
    Thanked 3,007 Times in 1,642 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KoopaCooper View Post
    They weren't simply booted out for underage drinking, Pa - I'll be honest, they'd all been caught drinking before (in fact, the previous year to that, some of our troop and others from the district, along with a group of Canadian Scouts, 36 of us in all, had gone to Calais for a day trip...and 33 returned drunk*).

    It was the severity of this occasion - as I said, there was a massive medical bill from the US hospital, the local news got hold of the story I believe, not to mention an American bloke who was tricked into supplying the booze for them (he had no idea the girl and two boys were only 14) being convicted of supplying alcohol to minors and subsequently screwing up his career (he'd apparently been accepted into the army...was then refused), and the US local news also getting hold of the story. It was a huge mess all round. Our GSL (who had been one of the trip's organisers), agreed with the SL (both of them had been on the trip) that the Group had to expel all three to avoid anyone thinking the Group condoned such behaviour. I don't know, there may even have been instructions from higher up to expel them (I'm sure District at least would've heard about the whole thing)...

    *Two girls spent the day sunbathing and returned as lobsters, and I've always been teetotal.

    Were the GSL and the SL dealt with?

    I take kids abroad, have done many times, but we keep close control of their behaviour, even if we give them freedom to roam. If such an incident had arisen on my watch, I would have expected to have been dismissed.
    Ewan Scott

    It seems that there are a lot of Nawyecka Comanch around....





    Nawyecka Comanch'": "Means roundabout--man says he's going one way, means to go t'other" Ethan Edwards - The Searchers



    www.upperdearnevalleynavigators.org.uk

  4. #214
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    4,481
    Thanks
    1,620
    Thanked 1,215 Times in 881 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KoopaCooper View Post
    They weren't simply booted out for underage drinking, Pa - I'll be honest, they'd all been caught drinking before (in fact, the previous year to that, some of our troop and others from the district, along with a group of Canadian Scouts, 36 of us in all, had gone to Calais for a day trip...and 33 returned drunk*).

    It was the severity of this occasion - as I said, there was a massive medical bill from the US hospital, the local news got hold of the story I believe, not to mention an American bloke who was tricked into supplying the booze for them (he had no idea the girl and two boys were only 14) being convicted of supplying alcohol to minors and subsequently screwing up his career (he'd apparently been accepted into the army...was then refused), and the US local news also getting hold of the story. It was a huge mess all round. Our GSL (who had been one of the trip's organisers), agreed with the SL (both of them had been on the trip) that the Group had to expel all three to avoid anyone thinking the Group condoned such behaviour. I don't know, there may even have been instructions from higher up to expel them (I'm sure District at least would've heard about the whole thing)...

    *Two girls spent the day sunbathing and returned as lobsters, and I've always been teetotal.
    I think with the severity, it's an understandable reaction. We never had anyone hospitalised or prosecuted, (although there were one or two odd occasions where it was close.)

    We (I mostly) took (and take) the view, that if something like this happens, we can do nothing for them if we throw them out. It is a balance, at Scouts (and in the other youth work I used to do) we are/were neutral-leaning-toward-don't when it comes to this sort of thing. (Obviously with Scout-age kids it's a simple don't, but judgement needs to come into it with older end of Explorer-aged people).

    We phased it out of what we were doing completely, mostly due to members no longer being interested in doing it - which I found refreshing. Back in Venture Scout days, it was the norm and probably wasn't supportable going forward.

  5. #215
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    33
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 23 Times in 16 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Bushfella View Post
    I am not going to correct you. However, there was a case, I think last year - where TSA did close a Group with a hall and functioning team. I believe there was some huge dispute over how they operated, IIRC they were alleged to have ignored activity rules, NAN Forms were unknown and other issues. The Group denied the issues and complained about Point 2 in your list.

    To be honest. it is a bit like the old "I got kicked out of Scouts" story... It probably does happen but it is difficult to pin down the facts. Until this year, I didn't know of anyone who had kicked a kid out of Scouts.
    POR quite rightly makes it very hard to formally kick somebody out, I suspect very few young people are removed from Scouting using this route. Nothing though to stop you from persuading the parents that their offspring's path lies outside of Scouting and most reasonable parents will comply by removing them. You would only need to go down the formal route if they kicked up a fuss.

  6. #216
    GSL & AESL shiftypete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    12,504
    Thanks
    3,697
    Thanked 1,231 Times in 816 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Nik Bartlett View Post
    POR quite rightly makes it very hard to formally kick somebody out
    It really doesn't actually as one of the allowable ways to terminate youth membership is dismissal and the GSL can appove the dismisal of any youth member from their group
    15.8. Termination of Youth Membership sv
    Youth Membership may be terminated by:
    * resignation;
    * in the case of Beaver Scouts, Cub Scouts, Scouts, and Explorer Scouts by leaving their Group or Explorer Scout Unit without joining another;
    * in the case of Scout Network Members by leaving their County provision without joining another County;
    * failure to pay the Headquarters, Country, County, District and Group Membership Subscriptions;
    * dismissal.
    https://scouts.org.uk/por/15-complai...smissals/#15.8
    15.11. Dismissal of Beaver Scouts, Cub Scouts and Scouts
    No Beaver Scout, Cub Scout, or Scout may be dismissed from a Scout Group without the approval of the Group Scout Leader.
    https://scouts.org.uk/por/15-complai...missals/#15.11

    So basically so long as your GSL (or DESC in the case of Explorers) agrees you can terminate the membership of any youth member.

    The reason terminations are rare is because we are all here to try our best to help our youth members and kicking them out mean we would no longer be able to help them so we tend to behnd over backwards to avoid having to kick them out
    Last edited by shiftypete; 02-11-2019 at 08:57 PM.

    Peter Andrews ESL 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

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to shiftypete For This Useful Post:

    pa_broon74 (03-11-2019)

  8. #217
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    362
    Thanks
    138
    Thanked 98 Times in 79 Posts
    I agree with Pete that POR does not make it difficult to dismiss a member.

    I have only ever done it once but years ago a Venture Scout was rather rude to me when I had a word with him about his conduct. He had already had a warning from the Exec Committee about his behaviour. I just told him that this was the last straw and he was no longer a member of the unit. I told my GSL - who agreed with me - and that was it.

  9. #218
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Herts, UK
    Posts
    729
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 138 Times in 104 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard T View Post
    If the Scout Group is an entity in its own right, owning its own HQ, Equipment etc and affiliated to the Scout Association, and then for whatever reason decides to change this affiliation to another organisation and remain operating with the same structure as far as Group Exec/leader team goes, then wouldnt that group still be classed as operating, regardless of what POR/The Scout association rules say?
    Therefore if the Scout association seized its assets wouldnt that be the same scenario as above? " that one charity could not transfer all it's assets to another"
    Charities have to be managed in line with their governing documents. For independent charities, that's their constitutions. For those that are part of wider organisations, it's POR or the equivalent. It wouldn't be in line with POR, and therefore with the governing document, for the charity to leave and join some other organisation, or go independent.

    Someone asked whether the situation is unique but, apart from the obvious example of GirlGuiding and other national youth organisations, it's also similar for some church denominations, for example, where the local church is (since changes ten or so years ago) a separate charity, but also the local arm of the national body, and governed by its national rules. Being a separate charity is not the same as being an independent one.

    At least, that's how I understand it. But I am not a lawyer, as the saying goes.
    SL, 11th Hitchin

  10. #219
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    841
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 147 Times in 73 Posts
    Going back to the permission forms etc, and the DC insisting on risk assessments etc, doesnt the safety training( available as an online module) make this clear- that writtien risk assesments are not required?

  11. #220
    Senior Member Bushfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Huddersfield
    Posts
    15,798
    Thanks
    455
    Thanked 3,007 Times in 1,642 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by DKRSL View Post
    Charities have to be managed in line with their governing documents. For independent charities, that's their constitutions. For those that are part of wider organisations, it's POR or the equivalent. It wouldn't be in line with POR, and therefore with the governing document, for the charity to leave and join some other organisation, or go independent.

    Someone asked whether the situation is unique but, apart from the obvious example of GirlGuiding and other national youth organisations, it's also similar for some church denominations, for example, where the local church is (since changes ten or so years ago) a separate charity, but also the local arm of the national body, and governed by its national rules. Being a separate charity is not the same as being an independent one.

    At least, that's how I understand it. But I am not a lawyer, as the saying goes.

    That is my reading, but, if it has never been challenged it may just be a lot of words on a sheet of paper. As I said, all a bit academic.
    Ewan Scott

    It seems that there are a lot of Nawyecka Comanch around....





    Nawyecka Comanch'": "Means roundabout--man says he's going one way, means to go t'other" Ethan Edwards - The Searchers



    www.upperdearnevalleynavigators.org.uk

  12. #221
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    2,446
    Thanks
    409
    Thanked 431 Times in 270 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by DKRSL View Post
    Charities have to be managed in line with their governing documents. For independent charities, that's their constitutions. For those that are part of wider organisations, it's POR or the equivalent. It wouldn't be in line with POR, and therefore with the governing document, for the charity to leave and join some other organisation, or go independent.

    Someone asked whether the situation is unique but, apart from the obvious example of GirlGuiding and other national youth organisations, it's also similar for some church denominations, for example, where the local church is (since changes ten or so years ago) a separate charity, but also the local arm of the national body, and governed by its national rules. Being a separate charity is not the same as being an independent one.

    At least, that's how I understand it. But I am not a lawyer, as the saying goes.
    I would agree with that. I think the only way out of that would be to argue that some assets did not belong to the Scout Group but to some other body, such as a hall committee which were themselves an independent charity, not owned or registered with TSA.

  13. #222
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Herts, UK
    Posts
    729
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 138 Times in 104 Posts
    But that might be a difficult argument to make. There needs to be clarity about charity money, so any confusion about whether the resources to buy (for example) a tent were being given to (or alternatively provided by) a Group or a hall committee would be doubtful management of the charities. So, at least in theory, everyone should be clear about who actually owned the assets.
    SL, 11th Hitchin

  14. #223
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    4,481
    Thanks
    1,620
    Thanked 1,215 Times in 881 Posts
    I think drilling right down into it. The group (as a charity) isn't the people or the organisational structure. It's a legal entity - and it's the legal entity (an idea only having such physical mass as the paper it's written on), that owns everything.

    I still think there would be an argument to be made about ownership of assets in a group that could (reasonably) prove it had been operating independently of SHQ (in a general and detailed sense) for most of it's existence. One of the question that could be asked is, did the group follow the Scout training program (for example). Had they been using scout branding in fundraising and on a day to day basis? (I think that would be the key question...)

    As already said though, only the lawyers would win in that argument.

Similar Threads

  1. Stepping aside
    By chazkemp69 in forum Scouting Talk
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 12-06-2017, 11:47 AM
  2. Permission Forms
    By Neil Williams in forum Related Discussion UK Chief Commissioner Questions
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 16-06-2015, 04:48 AM
  3. Filming permission
    By Brian Foulkes in forum Scouting Talk
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 25-11-2011, 09:32 AM
  4. Permission to go and permission to shoot forms
    By jen in forum Scouting Talk
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 16-09-2010, 01:44 PM
  5. Parental permission
    By Graham in forum Scouting Talk
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 04-11-2003, 10:07 AM

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
  •