Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456789 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 127

Thread: Is there no shortage of Leaders?

  1. #76
    Very Old Member BigBadBaloo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Bracknell, Berkshire
    Posts
    4,515
    Thanks
    1,518
    Thanked 893 Times in 567 Posts
    Good luck with whatever you do.

    One piece of advice I would add is check your status with the Disclosure and Barring Service in case you need a DBS at some point in future. I believe I am right in saying that TSA are legally obliged to advise the service under certain circumstances if adult membership has been refused on vetting grounds. I may not have that quite right, but if I were you, I would check with the DBS.
    Peter

    Former CSL - 2nd Bracknell


    A journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step. Lao Tzu (600 BC - 531 BC)

  2. #77
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    829
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 144 Times in 70 Posts
    One issue that Scouting has is that personal issues/fall outs can cause all sorts of problems, you would like to think that as adults we can put personal issues aside and see things as they are, if a DC or another commissioner doesn't like Leader X on a personal level, but Leader X is providing a good programme, the YP are getting on well, as well as the adult leadership team and the rules+regulations ( ie POR) are being followed with not too much so called line management involved then things should be left to roll.

    Likewise if there has been a falling out on a personal level, and things have soured in a previous group/district, then the appointments committee/team / whatever should be aware of this, and take a previous personal issues fall out into account+ give the applicant the benefit of doubt while their appointment is pre provisional.

    And if an applicant is turned down, then they should have the right to know why, if there is a mistake with the records and information that groups/districts/countys/TSA hold on an individual then they should have the right to review that data, and correct it where/if required ( i believe this is a right/requirement under the GDPR stuff) As above is there is an error thats causing issues then it could have an effect should that person be required to complete a DBS check ( or similar) in the future

  3. #78
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    485
    Thanks
    99
    Thanked 99 Times in 66 Posts
    They're hardly going to have turned him down without giving any hint of a reason are they. Once again I feel like we are only being given half the story. So I can't comment on the situation.

    What I can say is that if a leader we didn't know approached my group about running a cub pack, having had trouble elsewhere, I'd have given him a fair chance unless I heard otherwise from people I trusted, not word of mouth from another district. That would probably mean a chat through the reasons, meet the team, and then a stint helping as an OH at an existing section to see how things went. Then consultation with all the other leaders in the group. Then, if we were totally satisfied that the person we were getting was someone we wanted to be part of the group, then, and only then, we'd put them through as our new CSL and there's absolutely no way I'd accept the district turning them down on the back of some previous DCs word - unless it a was a very good reason based in proper fact and that reason was backed up by Gilwell.

  4. #79
    Senior Member big chris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    12,244
    Thanks
    1,871
    Thanked 3,354 Times in 1,448 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr_Pepper View Post
    They're hardly going to have turned him down without giving any hint of a reason are they.
    yes. 100% yes. they absolutely are going to have done that.

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to big chris For This Useful Post:

    BigBadBaloo (26-03-2019),shiftypete (26-03-2019)

  6. #80
    Senior Member bernwood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Thame, Oxon
    Posts
    1,681
    Thanks
    241
    Thanked 329 Times in 216 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr_Pepper View Post
    They're hardly going to have turned him down without giving any hint of a reason are they. Once again I feel like we are only being given half the story. So I can't comment on the situation.

    What I can say is that if a leader we didn't know approached my group about running a cub pack, having had trouble elsewhere, I'd have given him a fair chance unless I heard otherwise from people I trusted, not word of mouth from another district. That would probably mean a chat through the reasons, meet the team, and then a stint helping as an OH at an existing section to see how things went. Then consultation with all the other leaders in the group. Then, if we were totally satisfied that the person we were getting was someone we wanted to be part of the group, then, and only then, we'd put them through as our new CSL and there's absolutely no way I'd accept the district turning them down on the back of some previous DCs word - unless it a was a very good reason based in proper fact and that reason was backed up by Gilwell.
    Before applying to the district office I rang Gilwell, they looked up my account and stated there was nothing on it that would bar me from joining. I'm pretty sure its the local vetting that is causing problems they contacted the DC, I also gave them the addresses of some other cub leaders I've worked with over the years fro references, and all three heard nothing from County so I'm sure they are just listening to the vitriol of the DC who must have God status.

  7. #81
    Very Old Member BigBadBaloo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Bracknell, Berkshire
    Posts
    4,515
    Thanks
    1,518
    Thanked 893 Times in 567 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr_Pepper View Post
    They're hardly going to have turned him down without giving any hint of a reason are they......................
    Yes they are and have done. There is a reason that the "local vetting" is called Confidential Enquiries.
    Peter

    Former CSL - 2nd Bracknell


    A journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step. Lao Tzu (600 BC - 531 BC)

  8. #82
    Senior Member Bushfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Huddersfield
    Posts
    15,737
    Thanks
    441
    Thanked 2,986 Times in 1,625 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard T View Post
    One issue that Scouting has is that personal issues/fall outs can cause all sorts of problems, you would like to think that as adults we can put personal issues aside and see things as they are, if a DC or another commissioner doesn't like Leader X on a personal level, but Leader X is providing a good programme, the YP are getting on well, as well as the adult leadership team and the rules+regulations ( ie POR) are being followed with not too much so called line management involved then things should be left to roll.
    Actually spent some time rolling on the floor laughing my head off at that, Richard
    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

  9. #83
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    485
    Thanks
    99
    Thanked 99 Times in 66 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BigBadBaloo View Post
    Yes they are and have done. There is a reason that the "local vetting" is called Confidential Enquiries.
    Maybe but you've ignored my point, which was that a GSL who really wanted to have a person as a new CSL wouldn't take 'no reason' as an acceptable reason for refusal from district if, as is claimed, there's no issues from crb/Gilwell.

  10. #84
    Senior Member Bushfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Huddersfield
    Posts
    15,737
    Thanks
    441
    Thanked 2,986 Times in 1,625 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr_Pepper View Post
    Maybe but you've ignored my point, which was that a GSL who really wanted to have a person as a new CSL wouldn't take 'no reason' as an acceptable reason for refusal from district if, as is claimed, there's no issues from crb/Gilwell.
    I suspect that rather than "no reason" there would be a " confidential reason" why they were not suitable.

    Let's say, hypothetically, an applicant came along and all else being clear, the DC was informed, confidentially and perhaps illegally, of a good reason why that person was unsuitable. They would, in almost all probability, refuse membership, and possibly inform Safeguarding - because that was how it used to work - on the basis that this was confidential and the reason would never be revealed.

    Okay... it isn't hypothetical. It is an actual scenario. It happens that as GSL, I kicked off and went in to bat for the individual. I'm a persistent pain in the backside about things like this. The individual's parent gave me an idea of what the issue was and I questioned the DC on that particular point. The individual had done absolutely nothing wrong. In fact he had been the victim in the incident. I know exactly what the point that the refusal hung on is. The judgement of the DC was hugely unfair, but his role is to protect, and if he were forced to reveal his source then we would have a serious problem. Had I been in the DC's position, at that time, with the same knowledge, in the same circumstances, I would have taken the same decision as the DC, even though I knew the individual and was sympathetic to his situation. I would never have been able to disclose the source of the information though.

    The corollary is that another individual refused a Leader role in one District where he was well known, changed to a District where he was not well known and was granted an appointment. (As I discovered after he was appointed).
    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

  11. #85
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,076
    Thanks
    17
    Thanked 204 Times in 149 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard T View Post

    And if an applicant is turned down, then they should have the right to know why, if there is a mistake with the records and information that groups/districts/countys/TSA hold on an individual then they should have the right to review that data, and correct it where/if required ( i believe this is a right/requirement under the GDPR stuff) As above is there is an error thats causing issues then it could have an effect should that person be required to complete a DBS check ( or similar) in the future
    The Scout Association does not have to give a reason why. The record may just say that there were issues between adults that were not able to be solved. A verbal chat with people in the area for HQ or a new District from the old would turn up a wider picture albeit one sided.

    The issue in this instance is that the poster has been very vocal both on here and facebook saying how good they were compared to others and how badly done to they feel.

    Neither a new District or HQ want people like this as they want people to get on together. The original reason for the 'expulsion' was, I'm sure not the full picture but was viewed from the person on the receiving end that was agrieved.

    I'm sure that if there is a record at HQ showing 'bad service' it will have very little detail on it. I'm also sure that if there was no safeguarding issue that there will be nothing on the DBS record.

    Refer to the reply that Ewan gave re Hamilton - he was given no reason and he protested but HQ still would not let him in.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr_Pepper View Post
    They're hardly going to have turned him down without giving any hint of a reason are they. Once again I feel like we are only being given half the story. So I can't comment on the situation.

    What I can say is that if a leader we didn't know approached my group about running a cub pack, having had trouble elsewhere, I'd have given him a fair chance unless I heard otherwise from people I trusted, not word of mouth from another district. That would probably mean a chat through the reasons, meet the team, and then a stint helping as an OH at an existing section to see how things went. Then consultation with all the other leaders in the group. Then, if we were totally satisfied that the person we were getting was someone we wanted to be part of the group, then, and only then, we'd put them through as our new CSL and there's absolutely no way I'd accept the district turning them down on the back of some previous DCs word - unless it a was a very good reason based in proper fact and that reason was backed up by Gilwell.
    But you would have to accept it.

    If the DC and AAC refuse to appoint there is nothing you can do about it. Well there is but realistically the appeal process is most likely going to back the DC and AAC.

  12. #86
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,076
    Thanks
    17
    Thanked 204 Times in 149 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by bernwood View Post
    Before applying to the district office I rang Gilwell, they looked up my account and stated there was nothing on it that would bar me from joining. I'm pretty sure its the local vetting that is causing problems they contacted the DC, I also gave them the addresses of some other cub leaders I've worked with over the years fro references, and all three heard nothing from County so I'm sure they are just listening to the vitriol of the DC who must have God status.
    The problem with local references whether as someone in your case or a new joiner is that you would not put names forward of someone who would not give you a good reference.

    Whilst it appears that you will not be given the opportunity to give your side of the story to an AAC and new DC, they feel that what they have heard from the person(s) they have contacted is sufficient to make them feel that they do not want to take a chance.

    If you have so much time, knowledge and energy to give, then you are going to have to find something else to give it to.

    Good luck.

  13. #87
    Senior Member Bushfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Huddersfield
    Posts
    15,737
    Thanks
    441
    Thanked 2,986 Times in 1,625 Posts
    Time for Bernwood to move on.

    There will be many areas of interest that will welcome someone with enthusiasm and Bernwood will have interests, current or latent that can be spurred by becoming involved in alternative projects. It is probably imperative for his own mental state of health that he does so.

    I say this from the stance that, this could have been me. I made the decision not to follow any route within TSA because, given my history and that of my Nemesis, I suspect that everything I would try within TSA would be tainted. People would be watching, waiting, and at the first clash, the first mistake, the first question, would refer back to my dispute with my old DC.

    Even today, we still face a backlash, we do our utmost to ignore the pettiness, but it is difficult at times. However, had we not been approached by parents and young people, we would easily have found other outlets for our enthusiasm. Bernwood must be able to do the same.
    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

  14. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Bushfella For This Useful Post:

    ASLChris (27-03-2019),big chris (27-03-2019),BigBadBaloo (27-03-2019),dralphs (28-03-2019)

  15. #88
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    4,383
    Thanks
    1,570
    Thanked 1,198 Times in 871 Posts
    This entire thread is a microcosm of the problem.

    No one here has any substantive information or idea why Bernwood would be unsuitable - except some woolly, subjective views about him being 'boastful' of how he operated his cub pack, and heaven defend anyone that blows their own trumpet on here, I'll certainly be sure not to mention anything that goes well from here on in.

    For what it's worth, this thread disappoints me, and I include myself in that disappointment.

  16. #89
    Senior Member Bushfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Huddersfield
    Posts
    15,737
    Thanks
    441
    Thanked 2,986 Times in 1,625 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by pa_broon74 View Post

    No one here has any substantive information or idea why Bernwood would be unsuitable.
    The reasons have become irrelevant in many ways.
    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

  17. #90
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    South Coast
    Posts
    2,339
    Thanks
    452
    Thanked 532 Times in 328 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by pa_broon74 View Post
    This entire thread is a microcosm of the problem.

    No one here has any substantive information or idea why Bernwood would be unsuitable - except some woolly, subjective views about him being 'boastful' of how he operated his cub pack, and heaven defend anyone that blows their own trumpet on here, I'll certainly be sure not to mention anything that goes well from here on in.

    For what it's worth, this thread disappoints me, and I include myself in that disappointment.
    Because, with the full story we may ask totally agree that he's not suitable for a role. Problem is that the whole process is confidential, probably rightly, and therefore we can't do anything other than advise he moves on. We can no more assume he's suitable than unsuitable. I know our own AAC has declined only 2 candidates in recent years both for excellent reasons and I know and trust them. If we say the OP had been unfairly excluded we are assuming the AAC is not fair and objective.
    Last edited by RisingStar; 27-03-2019 at 04:03 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. [Answered] Daily Wail article on leader shortage
    By Tony Ransley in forum UK Chief Commissioner Questions (CLOSED)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-05-2016, 04:59 PM
  2. Swamped by leaders and young leaders
    By RisingStar in forum Scouting Talk
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 10-12-2013, 09:19 AM
  3. What Leader Shortage?
    By Keith at 2M in forum Scouting Talk
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-10-2011, 09:33 AM
  4. JOTA 2010 - an open invite for Leaders/Young Leaders
    By Dramatist in forum Scouting Talk
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 21-09-2010, 02:17 PM
  5. 'Younger Leaders vs Older Leaders'
    By ClosedAccount in forum Scouting Talk
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 11-03-2010, 10:21 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
  •