Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

14572Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question

Expand Messages
  • A. Dukovic
    Apr 23, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Very true Frank but the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance I'm thinkin??  Yep, we all want the best "program" possible for the boys and nobody really wants to "cancel" an outing for any reason, especially lack of "training" but some Parents unfortunately don't care about getting trained or "helping out" UNTIL Junior comes home complaining that his campout was cancelled for "lack of interest" by Parents?? 
      The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they "require" some training; being prepared also means trained for what MAY happen I'm thinkin??

      "Forced to cancel" is better than "why didn't we think of that before" or OOPS after something has happened!!

      - Art
      --- On Tue, 4/23/13, frank <ftooth@...> wrote:

      From: frank <ftooth@...>
      Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
      To: "scouter_t@yahoogroups.com" <scouter_t@yahoogroups.com>
      Date: Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 10:43 AM


      The difference between "required/must" and "best practice" is decidedly different when the unit is "forced" to cancel their outing due to a leader not having completed the training.


      > From: A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...>

      >I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we've got to know just what the heck we're doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who cares??  If the boys are getting the "best" we can offer, who suffers??

      >Again, we know they're going to suffer from a "bad" experience so why take the chance??  I hate folks that make everything "required" and invent rules that aren't there but for Scouting training I always ask just how "comfortable" folks are with what they're going to do?? If an adult doesn't care about his/her "trained" strip but knows what they're doing, they're ahead of the game but if they hesitate I always suggest "training" so they don't look like dopes in front of other adults or the boys especially.

      >Again sorry, "should" or "have to" aren't much different when it affects "program" right??    
      >- Art
      >--- On Mon, 4/22/13, Connie Knie <mailto:cknie23100%40yahoo.com> wrote:

      >Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.

      >First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.

      > The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........

      >Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........

      >And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......
      >--- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com> wrote:
      >Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  

      >This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??  


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 17 messages in this topic