Sl Trib: Front Page Story. Lds Leader Dismissed.

[KevinG]

It's one thing for. Prophet to encourage scouting it is quite another thing and not the place of YM leader to tell kids their life will be a failure if they do not become an eagle scout .... Yes indeed the philosophy of men

Wow.

I agree that the promise of a single program shouldn't be oversold but I'm not sure telling someone that if they accomplish something they will be successful is quite the same as telling someone that if they don't accomplish that goal they will be a failure!?

[annewandering]

Since when is a scout leader a LDS leader? The headline makes it sounds like one of the GA was booted. Of course its the SLT so what can we expect.

[Scott Lloyd]

Since when is a scout leader a LDS leader? The headline makes it sounds like one of the GA was booted. Of course its the SLT so what can we expect.

He wasn't just a Scout leader; he was a ward Young Men president. That makes him part of the ward council and very much a leader in the ward. It is part of the ecclesiastical structure in the ward.

But I agree with you about the ambiguity of the headline.

Edited October 2, 2011 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

I think I go back even farther than you. I remember the "Gaynotes," and "Merry Hands" in Primary, not to mention the Blazers, Trekkers and Guide Patrol, all three of which constituted the "Trailbuilders."

Is it just a faulty memory or perhaps something unique to my ward at the time, but does anyone else remember if nursery kids used to be called moonbeams or not?

[Calm]

Are you saying I'm a dead horse, DaddyG?

.

Just an old nag.

[Scott Lloyd]

Is it just a faulty memory or perhaps something unique to my ward at the time, but does anyone else remember if nursery kids used to be called moonbeams or not?

Absolutely. In Primary, there were Sunbeams, Moonbeams and Stars.

In fact, I think the song in the "Children's Songbook" that goes, "I am like a star shining brightly" harkens back to those days.

[annewandering]

He wasn't just a Scout leader; he was a ward Young Men president. That makes him part of the ward council and very much a leader in the ward. It is part of the ecclesiastical structure in the ward.

But I agree with you about the ambiguity of the headline.

Since when do Ward Young Men's Presidents get large city headlines? They dont even get headlines in local papers. Yes the headline is misleading. Deliberately I am sure. Anything to grab the antimormons gloating eyes.

[Calm]

Absolutely. In Primary, there were Sunbeams, Moonbeams and Stars.

In fact, I think the song in the "Children's Songbook" that goes, "I am like a star shining brightly" harkens back to those days.

I am pretty sure that was a new one when the new book came out as I remember when it was being taught how much I liked it. I will have to check.

Addon...

Yep, it was copyrighted 81.

I remember walking up an aisle following a moon sign, one of the few memories I have of that ward.

Edited October 2, 2011 by calmoriah

[frankenstein]

Wow.

I agree that the promise of a single program shouldn't be oversold but I'm not sure telling someone that if they accomplish something they will be successful is quite the same as telling someone that if they don't accomplish that goal they will be a failure!?

Look at the orignal statement "you need to do three things for a succesfull life"

A successfully life iscontingent on three things if you do not accomplish all three you will not have a successful life

[ERayR]

In my ward, FOS is handled without any pressure whatsoever HOWEVER I've been in more meetings than I care to mention where being an eagle scout has been described as some kind of spiritual rite of passage akin to going on a mission. One of our YM leaders actually told our cubs at a pack mtg presentation that they needed to do three things for a successful life: be an eagle scout, go on a mission, and marry in the temple.

This philosophy of men mingled with doctrine bothers me more than the obscene salaries of national execs.

It is the high salaries that bother me. Local leaders are expected to give it their all, and that all volunteer, and then families are supposed to support FOS then dig up more hundreds of dollars for their boys to participate in scout camp while these guys draw upper six figure incomes.

The scouting program in and of itself is a good character building program. It bothers me to see some take advantage of the volunteer force and the program itself to in such a greedy way.

Edited October 3, 2011 by ERayR

[Cobalt-70]

Unless I am missing something, the BSA does not get public funding. The government simply recognizes it is a not-for-profit organization and hence has no profits to tax.

American taxpayer money goes to pay for national and world Scout Jamborees. (See Support Our Scouts Act, 2005.) The government also provides millions of dollars of government employee time (mostly in the Department of Defense) and in-kind donations.

[selek1]

We've got 5+ pages now of certain people kvetching about the "exhorbitant" and "sky-high" salaries of the FoS administrators.

What we HAVEN'T seen (that I've been able to detect) are any hard numbers- nor an unbiased comparison of how those salaries compare to those of other organizations. Nor have we seen an accurate summary of the duties and responsibiltiies which those salaries compensate.

Class warfare and the politics of envy are cheap and easy demogoguery- but they only go so far. Facts and reason are infinitely preferable to sloganeering and empty rhetoric.

I don't believe any of those critical of the salaries have actually demonstrated that the salaries are, in fact, either exhorbitant or excessive.

That the salaries are excessive seems to be an accepted conceit within the conversation- but it is not represented in fact or proven in any way that I've been able to discover.

Silvermoon brought this up three pages back and was roundly ignored.

Can any one here correct this oversight?

Or is this thread- like those complaining that the Church doesn't spend tithing money the way the critics would prefer- just an exercise in ill-informed self-congratulation?

Our critics like to complain that the living allowance appointed to our prophets and apostles amount to a salary- while conveniently ignoring the face that they could (and usually HAVE) made far greater fortunes in their chosen professions.

They are very fond of accusing our leaders of "living high on the hog"- at the expense of the regular membership and the poor in our wards and stakes- while ignoring the very real hardships and demands which apostleship makes on the time, energy, and talent of our leadership.

Thus far, I've seen very little difference between the complaints being levied against the Scout leadership and the Church leadership.

Though I am more than happy to have my impressions corrected by something approaching real evidence.

[frankenstein]

Deseretnews did N article on the salaries and one should reightly expect that an organization were thirft and frugality aee main tenants would hire personel who know how to raise revenue other thaan with strongarm guilt ridden tactics. How bsa comparative to othwr orgs is iirelevant

[mercyngrace]

Selek,

Here are some of the articles from both sides of the issue.

http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2008/08/22/the-million-dollar-boy-scout-thrifty-indeed/223/

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/695226688/Scouts-may-be-thrifty-but-some-leaders-are-well-paid.html

http://www.scoutingnews.org/2009/08/05/bsa-listed-in-top-five-highest-ceo-salaries-study/

[selek1]

Deseretnews did N article on the salaries and one should reightly expect that an organization were thirft and frugality aee main tenants would hire personel who know how to raise revenue other thaan with strongarm guilt ridden tactics. How bsa comparative to othwr orgs is iirelevant

First, Frankenstein- let me thank you for carefully avoiding the use of inflammatory, or polemical rhetoric in what is clearly a contentious discussion.

Such restraint can only serve to elevate the discussion.

Ultimately, though, your statement is both a non-sequitor and utterly untenable in light of basic economic realities.

It matters a great deal how the BSA salaries compare to those of other organizations of comparable mission and responsibility- for it is those organizations which are competing with the BSA for a particular pool of talent.

In most respects, this is no different than the NBA or NFL. A team which can offer only so much in compensatio will inevitably be at a recruiting disadvantage compared to a team that can offer far more money and benefits. This explains both the poor performance of the Utah Jazz when compared to the LA Lakers and the arcane and often byzantine rules by which "draft picks" are made

Back to the BSA:

All other things being equal, a qualified candidate with the requisite experience and skills will almost inevitably choose a larger compensation package over a smaller one. If a prospective employee has the choice between a compensation package of $250,000 and one of $500,000 for identical work, you can bet he'll take the $500K package.

For all the pious rhetoric about "doing it for the children", you cannot ignore the shrill screaming which inevitably arises when wages and benefit packages are up for review- Wisonsin, Massachusetts, and a couple of other states being prime examples..

So let's put the altruistic fantasies and pie-in-the-sky "we can pay them with sunshine, lollipops, and rainbows" nonsense to rest.

If the BSA wants to attract the best and brightest administrators, then they'd best offer wage-and-compensation packages that are at least competitive with their rivals.

Finally, the alleged "strongarm guilt ridden tactics" you are so fiercely lamenting are supposedly occuring in the Church, not at the behest or hands of the BSA.

It is unreasonable and unfair to blame one organization for the alleged "sins" of another.

And despite your assertions, you've still not proven that the salaries are either excessive or unreasonable.

The articles linked certainly allege it- but none of them proves them to be so.

Selek,

Here are some of the articles from both sides of the issue.

http://taxdollars.oc...fty-indeed/223/

http://www.deseretne...-well-paid.html

http://www.scoutingn...salaries-study/

Hi MnG,

Thanks for the links- but I find them to be problematic on a number of fronts.

First and foremost, the OC Register link is to the blog of an alleged "watchdog" group- and is clearly an editorial and agenda piece hostile to the BSA. It is not by any stretch of the imagination an unbiased analysis. It also relies (almost exclusively) on the Charity Navigator data- which is revealed to be questionable, at best.

The Charity Navigator information relies on a single year's survey- coincedentally, the year that the deferred compensation is paid out, and also mashes together salary and benefits package- which (by their own admission) they apparently didn't do with the other charities "analyzed".

Also- the assessment of the BSA as a "human services" organization is an arbitrary one, and does nothing to guarantee that we're seeing an apples-to-apples comparison. If memory serves (I checked out their website earlier), they also classify both the United Way and Planned Parenthood as "human services" charities- yet we know that these three organizations have almost nothing in common in terms of purpose, mission, or day-to-day operation.

This has inescapably (and in my opinion) inexcusably skewed the numbers in such a way as to render the "survey" unreliable.

The third link, Scouting News, stands largely as a rebuttal to the Charity Navigator's sloppy methodology, but it, too, is inescapably an agenda piece (albeit for the other side).

Of the three links, I believe the Deseret News piece to be the best, but even then I find it extremely problematic.

Despite the earlier testimonials to the author's integrity and fairness of mind, this piece still comes across as having an agenda bordering on yellow journalism.

The author compares the local council salaries to those of other councils, and admits that - while Utah salaries are higher- they are still grossly comparable to those of other areas and that they could be higher still.

He then goes on to compare the salary of an executive with thirty plus years to those of serial politicians and a beginning physician (an Ob-Gyn, if memory serves).

These are not apples-to-apples comparisons, but rather seem carefully chosen to reinforce a specific notion- that the BSA salaries are grossly exaggerated.

Yes- a physician with a doctorate and eight years of mandatory internships and clinical practice has accomplished a laudable achievement- but does anyone here believe that he or she will have the same salary and benefits as a physician with thirty-plus years of experience?

Again- this is not an apples-to-apples comparison, but one intended to incite a particular visceral reaction.

The author might just have easily compared the compensation of BSA execs to that of local fast-food workers (though the bias would have been far more transparent).

It is, of course, a mark of the reporter's honesty that he faithfully reports the BSA's justification for their salaries- but he also skims lightly over the comparisons of organizations with similar responsibilities.

In point of fact (and as I pointed out earlier), there is a startling dearth of information about what precisely is demanded of the BSA execs in exchange for their salaries.

The article compares the BSA execs to those of the Girl Scouts, the Boys and Girls Clubs (and another, though I forget which)- but does not address the stark differences in mission, operation, and philosophy between the BSA and those organizations, let alone the disparate duties required of their top officials.

Yes, one can argue that they are all executive adminstrators for non-profit organizations- but this is akin to comparing a dentist and a brain surgeon. Both are doctors- but that's where the similarity ends.

Despite their quality (or lack thereof), none of the links posted provides an unbiased comparison of the salaries and duties of the BSA execs compared to those of similar organizations. And despite the heated rhetoric contained therein, none of them establishes as a fact that those salaries are excessive or exhorbitant.

[frankenstein]

And thank you for refraining from personal attacks.........your sarcasm is noted

[mercyngrace]

Despite their quality (or lack thereof), none of the links posted provides an unbiased comparison of the salaries and duties of the BSA execs compared to those of similar organizations.

rotflmbo! Selek, you know better than to have such high expectations of media outlets and activist organizations.

(PS - I was posting the articles to provide a reference point because you asked for one. If you reread the thread, you'll see I'm not one who has been "kveching" about salaries. )

Edited October 3, 2011 by mercyngrace

[california boy]

It matters a great deal how the BSA salaries compare to those of other organizations of comparable mission and responsibility- for it is those organizations which are competing with the BSA for a particular pool of talent.

Perhaps it would be helpful if you would list the other organizations that a young mens president is asked to solicit funds for or be dismissed from his calling? If you can understand the difference than you can understand why people are upset.

When I was serving as young mens president in the ward, I would attend BSA meetings as part of that calling. I was very offended at how the BSA treated the church. They often referred to it as not being real scouting since many of the boys never wore uniforms and simply because they turned 12 were put into the scouting organization. Where as "real scouting" a person had to actually sign up to be a scout. We got very little help from the district and there were incidents where Mormon boys applying for their eagle projects were a bit harassed and routinely denied for such trivial things as misspelling in the application and a project the reviewer just didn't like. It caused a lot of hard feelings within our stake towards BSA. But when FOS drive took place they were all over us. I was not the most aggressive raiser of money. I simply sent out a letter with the donation form. Those who wanted to could respond. But there were no guilt trips. It was a non issue. I still continued to serve as young mens president.

[Ares]

And thank you for refraining from personal attacks.........your sarcasm is noted

If you have an issue with the way someone has addressed you please use the report function. With your posting style you are hardly in a postion to complain about someones tone.

[frankenstein]

First, Frankenstein

And despite your assertions, you've still not proven that the salaries are either excessive or unreasonable.

You might want to re-read this thread and point out to me where I set out to "prove that the salaries are either excessive or unreasonable". So while your statement is correct, I have not "prove that the salaries are either excessive or unreasonable", such a statement lacks any import or relevance; as I have not claimed that I would prove such a thing, nor that I have commented on the amount of the salary for the BSA CEO.

[selek1]

rotflmbo! Selek, you know better than to have such high expectations of media outlets and activist organizations.

Quite true, I'm afraid- but I doubt it's too much to expect of our faithful posters here.

As stated above, my real intent was to illustrate the parallel methodologies being used by those currently kvetching about the BSA salaries and those who kvetch about the GA's "salaries".

In point of fact, the entire thread is based on a visceral and emotional standard of "what's right and fair"- with scant attention paid to whether that standard has anything to do with reality.

While we can cheerfully beat our drums in a vacuum, it will do us little good and possibly a great deal of harm unless we temper the rhetoric with impartial evidence and fact.

More than anything else, it's proven to be little more than an opportunity for certain persons to trot out their favorite hobbyhorses and wail upon them - but it has been delightfully calorie and fact free.

(PS - I was posting the articles to provide a reference point because you asked for one. If you reread the thread, you'll see I'm not one who has been "kveching" about salaries. )

Again, thank you for the links.

And yes, I know you're not the only one "kvetching", which is why (scurrilous charges about personal attacks aside) I carefully refrained from naming any names.

I cheerfully acknowledge that there may be many who feel that the BSA salaries are too high- I simply want to see it established as fact before we break out the tar, feathers, marshmallows, graham crackers, and Hershey bars.

[frankenstein]

.

I cheerfully acknowledge that there may be many who feel that the BSA salaries are too high- I simply want to see it established as fact before we break out the tar, feathers, marshmallows, graham crackers, and Hershey bars.

mnn77 - first brought salary amounts, Lesellers commented on salary amount, Calmoriah and silver moon have commented on dollar amounts. The majority of the thread is about FOS being used to pay salaries, that LDS Membership is left in the dark that FOS "donations" go to the pay those salaries.

So all in all only two people have commented about dollar amounts as being "high".....so I am not sure what you are reading, but I do not see "many" kvetching about the salary.

The kvetching of the YM leader in the story seems also to be that LDS members are left in the dark about FOS funds.

[mercyngrace]

I cheerfully acknowledge that there may be many who feel that the BSA salaries are too high- I simply want to see it established as fact before we break out the tar, feathers, marshmallows, graham crackers, and Hershey bars.

PS Nice to see you back, by the way (waves excitedly!!!)

[cinepro]

Look at the orignal statement "you need to do three things for a succesfull life"

A successfully life iscontingent on three things if you do not accomplish all three you will not have a successful life

So, if he had just said they had to serve a mission and get married in the Temple to have a "successful life", would that have bothered you? How about just getting married in the Temple?

[frankenstein]

If the person speaking is not God, Jesus or the Prophet then no one has the aurhority to tell someone what a successfull life is. As to say "you need to do X to have a successful life", the implication being that if you don't do X you will not have a successful life, this is placing a judgment on a person which no one other than God, Jesus, and perhaps a Prophet can make.

Edited October 4, 2011 by frankenstein