Adults only gatherings

[dragonhhjh]

No, not that kind.

During tonight's district team/GSLs meeting, the working party responsible for actioning approval etc of COVID risk assessments mentioned something which didn't sound too right to me.

They suggested that any adult gathering would need to have its own risk assessment completed and sent via the smart sheet process to be approved, as per the section meeting setup.

This was the first I'd heard of it and just wondered if anyone else has come across this or knows where they might have got this from?

There is a page on the website about adult only gatherings but it just says "Premises that have been approved as suitable for section meetings may be considered as COVID-secure" which seems contradictory to what these district people are saying.

Any help (either official or anecdotal) welcome!

[Big George]

Is this approval of a COVID return to scouting RA or an RA for adults meeting together as a scouting activity?

Remember, all scouting activities need an written RA (I hope whoever set up the meeting for tonight had produced and circulated the written RA in advance of the meeting and arrange for a review of it afterwards as per POR).

The last lines on the page you link to suggests a COVID restart RA would be appropriate for the first meeting and after that the “normal/new” written RA for any scouting activity applies. If your district is approving activity RAs and not just restart RAs then each meeting would need to be submitted. I know we have included exec/ leader type meetings in our COVID restart RA so for us we would only have an RA covering all future meetings which our district won’t see.

[dragonhhjh]

Is this approval of a COVID return to scouting RA or an RA for adults meeting together as a scouting activity?

Remember, all scouting activities need an written RA (I hope whoever set up the meeting for tonight had produced and circulated the written RA in advance of the meeting and arrange for a review of it afterwards as per POR).

The last lines on the page you link to suggests a COVID restart RA would be appropriate for the first meeting and after that the “normal/new” written RA for any scouting activity applies. If your district is approving activity RAs and not just restart RAs then each meeting would need to be submitted. I know we have included exec/ leader type meetings in our COVID restart RA so for us we would only have an RA covering all future meetings which our district won’t see.

Sorry I wasn't clear. Our district are not getting involved in activity risk assessments other than reminding people they need to be done.

They are suggesting a COVID restart risk assessment needs to be undertaken and submitted via the national smart sheet approval process before any such adult-only gatherings are to go ahead, despite the fact the guidance on the website states "'Premises that have been approved as suitable for section meetings may be considered as COVID-secure", suggesting to me that another one would not be a requirement as far as Gilwell are concerned.

[Richard T]

Sorry I wasn't clear. Our district are not getting involved in activity risk assessments other than reminding people they need to be done.

They are suggesting a COVID restart risk assessment needs to be undertaken and submitted via the national smart sheet approval process before any such adult-only gatherings are to go ahead, despite the fact the guidance on the website states "'Premises that have been approved as suitable for section meetings may be considered as COVID-secure", suggesting to me that another one would not be a requirement as far as Gilwell are concerned.

Being pedantic, i think the general gist of it is that District, or whoever has called the meeting should have done a risk assessment for the activity ( leaders meeting) which is a separate beast to any Covid assessment, an Activity RA does not need approval , a Covid one does
Reading through this: https://www.scouts.org.uk/volunteers...nvolved-again/ seems to hint that to have an adults only meeting you need to follow whatever the social distancing / meting up rules are so rule of 6 etc when/if it applies , my interpretation of this is that in itself it shouldn't need a separate approved Covid WRA

[Big George]

Sorry I wasn't clear. Our district are not getting involved in activity risk assessments other than reminding people they need to be done.

They are suggesting a COVID restart risk assessment needs to be undertaken and submitted via the national smart sheet approval process before any such adult-only gatherings are to go ahead, despite the fact the guidance on the website states "'Premises that have been approved as suitable for section meetings may be considered as COVID-secure", suggesting to me that another one would not be a requirement as far as Gilwell are concerned.

Ok, we’re not doing that though we have made it clear “meetings” include adult only ones. Maybe suggesting groups in your district do the same would resolve it, either that or resubmit a section meeting one with adults replacing scouts as appropriate. It shouldn’t take more than 15mins to revise one already passed. We have to remember that in some respects Gilwell view does not mean the DC doesn’t have a different view and as long as it’s not not breaking POR the DC view will prevail.

[dragonhhjh]

Being pedantic, i think the general gist of it is that District, or whoever has called the meeting should have done a risk assessment for the activity ( leaders meeting) which is a separate beast to any Covid assessment, an Activity RA does not need approval , a Covid one does
Reading through this: https://www.scouts.org.uk/volunteers...nvolved-again/ seems to hint that to have an adults only meeting you need to follow whatever the social distancing / meting up rules are so rule of 6 etc when/if it applies , my interpretation of this is that in itself it shouldn't need a separate approved Covid WRA

Pedantry is one of my fortes, especially when it comes to questioning apparent local rules which result in more work for my fellow volunteers

I'm talking *purely* a COVID restart risk assessments for adult-only gatherings. I accept that as a Scouting-organised activity we must have a written risk assessment and that is not what I'm questioning.

During the meeting they specifically said they had been told that each group must have a specific adult-only gathering COVID restart risk assessment approved appropriate to the current readiness level in order to allow such gatherings to take place.

All I'm saying is that I can't find such a requirement anywhere in the guidance.

[Richard T]

My take on it would be that if a section has a covid restart RA approved, then any adults meeting should be covered under that.
If you have a separate Covid Ra for each section approved, then whatever RA is mosre apropiate would apply.
One work around would be to query the info centre

[dragonhhjh]

For further context, see this district-issued email sent following last night's meeting.

As promised at tonight’s meeting, please find attached a draft document you to use as a starting point when preparing your RA required to cover any adult meetings over 30 minutes in duration held at your HQ. This is in line with the government guidelines allowing a maximum of 6 persons to meet outside from the 29thMarch 2021. You may add to this as required and the completed RA should initially be sent to your Group’s designated approver in the normal way ahead of subsequent upload via the Smartform.

With group’s planning their restart they are able to undertake essential cleaning of indoor areas such as toilets to ensure the HQ is safe for the return to outdoor meetings, but any unnecessary work such as general repairs/improvements/painting may not be completed until the 17th May at the earliest, or when government guidelines allow meetings inside.

[Simon11]

O dear, what a load of rubbish!

We will keep our leaders/ Exec meetings on zoom for the next few months but I still don't see a need for a specific RA for this!

[pa_broon74]

Is this really surprising? The rules are such a guddle anyway, add in allowing line management to insert their own erroneous interpretations...

We're being throttled by people who are supposed to support us.

This is like the frogs being boiled in the pot thing. Looking at everything lowly, non-line management people are now expected to do - the people who actually deliver scouting - by people who don't deliver scouting.

DC's and other line management people who commiserate with leaders about this influx of onerous bureaucracy - when are you going to stop commiserating and start kicking back on our behalf? Our DC already talks as if they're running our sections, but they don't. Until they do - TSA's existence hinges on leaders, not commissioners.

[dragonhhjh]

It is very surprising for me in this district, our DC doesn't have form for local rules/requirements over and above national ones - quite the opposite in fact which is why I'm asking here if anyone else has come across this or there is some bit of guidance I'm missing as per my opening post.

The whole "30 minutes" thing suggests to me they may have got this information from somewhere else.

I have nothing but praise for our DC who always does their best to support us - which is why this sticks out like a sore thumb.

[pa_broon74]

It is very surprising for me in this district, our DC doesn't have form for local rules/requirements over and above national ones - quite the opposite in fact which is why I'm asking here if anyone else has come across this or there is some bit of guidance I'm missing as per my opening post.

The whole "30 minutes" thing suggests to me they may have got this information from somewhere else.

I have nothing but praise for our DC who always does their best to support us - which is why this sticks out like a sore thumb.

Our GSL has commented, he doesn't know what training or briefings district people may or may not be getting that he/we aren't seeing. On the one hand, you like to think they were getting training or advice on how to deploy all the admin, but on the other, my feeling is, that a lot of it is being run through a big game of Chinese Whispers through the hierarchy. Who knows what bells and whistles are being added on or how you might find that out so it can be queried.

[johnmcmahon]

The whole "30 minutes" thing suggests to me they may have got this information from somewhere else.

30 minutes for a District meeting would be fabulous!

I wasn't a big fan of online meetings, but my experiences over the last 12 months with no travel cost and time have converted me.

Why have a shorter F2F with a WRA when you can do it in the comfort of your own dungeon?

[Richard T]

One of the issues with all the covid regulations, is that in some cases they are extremely wooly .
Add in to that vagueness from HQ in certain areas and you have problems.
As fur repairs to buildings, I would have thought these would be essential, if you don't fix the leaky roof/window etc then it won't be long before a minor issue is serious.

[dralphs]

Agreed, 30 minutes for any meeting would be a bonus. I too don't really want to go back to F2F meetings except where its proven F2F it absolutely necessary. Far prefer not having to drive or sit in a cold hut on a hard chair being bored to tears

As to that District limiting what work can be done until 17th May. My response would be its up to our committee aka trustees to decide what is or is not essential works and repairs. If you really are putting in a restriction please state where in law or elsewhere it is written down and put that restriction in writing (to our committee) for consideration and to give us a good laugh.