To expect children to move up through scout sections

[FromageFraisOff]

I run a scouting section*, I have children ready to move up to the next section in Oct. I gave the next section up leader 9 months notice. They said it'd be fine. But have now revoked that and are giving priority to their waitlist. Our group leader (who all section leaders report into) is backing this approach.

I had told these parents their children had a place on the basis the next section up leader had told me they did. So I now need to break the news. These children didn't get the chance to put their name down on other groups waiting lists so have now effectively missed out on places elsewhere. I am furious. I am thinking about leaving scouting or at least this group.

AIBU to think this is not on?

*I don't want to name the sections in case it's a bit outing.

YANBU. Tweet Bear Grylls (joking but seriously do escalate this)

Thanks it is reassuring to hear that this is not how it's meant to be but frustrating as there is clearly a problem in this group.

It is not the first area of significant disagreement I've had, I was encouraged to ignore minimum ratios requirements. I refused to do that, which didn't go down well.

@Hankunamatata

Yes the sections are in the same group.

It is not the first area of significant disagreement I've had, I was encouraged to ignore minimum ratios requirements. I refused to do that, which didn't go down well.

I'd mention that in your chat with the GSL too.

Seriously, that is a Safeguarding concern.
The DC will want to know, but, unless someone tells them, would never find out.

Having been on the waiting list for 4 years, I'd totally love the approach to admit off the wait list, BUT it would be totally and utterly unfair on those who have already been in the organisation.
So, I think your view is the correct one, and the leader of thee next group is unreasonable.

@CatsOnTheChair So sorry to hear you’ve waited so long. In our group if you’ve missed out on first section you will get priority on the wait list of the second section from new income (sadly still doesn’t guarantee a place but most do)

Am I the only one that thinks a policy that moves existing children up through every stage of scouts over and above anyone on the waiting list however long they've been waiting doesn't sound fair either though?
Basically if you didn't get in at Beavers then no chance for your entire childhood? That's surely not how it's supposed to work?

My assumption would be something more balanced such as: you automatically go on the waiting list for the next tier up as soon as you start in the current tier. Then anyone who had been on the waiting list longer (e.g. missed out on a place in beavers) would get a place in cubs before you - but you would still get a place before anyone who joined the waiting list after you started beavers. That gives people some chance to get in later and seems much fairer.

No, I think that current members should get priority.

Basically if you didn't get in at Beavers then no chance for your entire childhood? That's surely not how it's supposed to work?

Well, it doesn't work like that.
Firstly, not everyone that starts Beavers stays for the whole of Beavers, let alone moves up to cubs, then Scouts etc.
Secondly, if you don't get a place at the Beavers nearest to you, then the sensible thing to do would be to look at the next nearest group.
Thirdly, virtually every group I know will give priority to the child of a Scout volunteer. It makes sense. If you have more Leaders, then you can (usually) take more children / young people. So there is the option to volunteer, to get more children in.

Volunteer and the problem will be solved.

Pretty much the only thing that stops kids getting places is lack of adults.

The volunteering point is separate. I'm simply questioning whether the process for admissions into higher tiers (for existing places) should always prioritise children moving up over waiting list children irrespective of waiting list times. It seems most people think it should with this way but it's not obvious to me why - the natural consequences of this approach is that fewer children have an opportunity to enter scouts later than Beavers, meaning fewer children overall get a scouts experience, but those who do get as much as they want; children who move into a new area are unlikely to ever have a chance to be part of it etc.

Priority should be given to existing members.

They've already made the commitment and invested time and learning. They shouldn't be turfed out for newbies.

fewer children overall get a scouts experience

This problem diminishes as they get older. The real pressure is on squirrels and beavers. In older sections adult to child ratios are widened meaning more kids can be accepted. And some kids drop out creating spaces. We rarely turn people away from scouts and explorers

But my point in volunteering stands. The primary barrier is lack of adults.

I think the problem varies widely from area to area - in some places the waiting lists are long even higher up.

I'm not arguing that waiting lists should be given priority over existing members either btw - just that a more equal approach could be taken for children who have been on the waiting list for a long time. To me, a system that prioritises a beaver moving up to cubs over a child who was on the waiting list since age 5 and never got a space in beavers is arguably unfair (and this does happen in some areas) - after all it's not that child's fault that they haven't made a commitment and invested time and learning if they were never given the chance.

I understand the volunteering point fully - I'm a PTA committee member so see the issues there first hand.

All of this.

I think the problem varies widely from area to area - in some places the waiting lists are long even higher up.

That would be very unusual. I'm not saying there aren't any 'blips' but census figures don't back up this at all. It is definitely overwhelmingly as @DinnaeFashYersel says.

Our District reflects the issue that it is volunteers we need. We have quite a few Colonies where there is room in the hall for more children to join, but the volunteers who are putting the work in are (understandably) reluctant to take on more dc, without more volunteers. Every group would prioritise the child of someone who is volunteering.

To me, a system that prioritises a beaver moving up to cubs over a child who was on the waiting list since age 5 and never got a space in beavers is arguably unfair (and this does happen in some areas) - after all it's not that child's fault that they haven't made a commitment and invested time and learning if they were never given the chance

But then, what do you do with the children who have aged-out of beavers if the isn't space for them to move up to cubs? Ask them to leave the scout movement? That goes totally against the scout ethos.

I think the problem varies widely from area to area - in some places the waiting lists are long even higher up. It may happen occasionally, but I'd say this is rare. It would be unusual for a child to be on a waiting list for scouts for the whole 3 1/2 years and never get the chance to join. The longest waiting lists are usually for beavers.

children who move into a new area are unlikely to ever have a chance to be part of it etc.
I don't know what happens in other areas, but our scout group never turns away a child who is already in the scout movement, we will squeeze them in somehow. And a child who is new to the area that is not part of the scout movement will likely get a place from the waiting list eventually, although it may take some patience!

Im a cub leader and this is my priority list for allocating spaces

1 beavers moving up from our colony
2 Other cubs or beavers moving up from different groups where it is no longer practical to attend the same group (such as moving house)
3 children of anyone who is willing to help out with the group (regardless of section)
4 siblings of existing members (regardless of section)
5 anyone else

currently i have just cleared out my waiting list - but i only have 1 open space at the moment for brand new starters
I close to new entries when i have more than 24 on the books but can continue to take those moving up with an absolute hard limit of 32