Activity Cost: Cadet vs. SM

[DBlair]

I'm curious as to whether this is a common practice...


For a certain Cadet Programs activity, Cadets are being charged an activity fee of $50, which includes the hotel stay of several nights, food, and all other activity expenses.

SMs who attend (instructors/staff) are required to pay full price for the hotel, food, and everything else, resulting in a total of a few hundred dollars.   

A SM is/was going to drive some Cadets to the activity and ultimately stay at the activity as staff so as to drive them back home. Several SMs who were thinking about driving are complaining that they were under the impression of it being only $50 as the Ops Order did not specify Cadet vs SM activity cost. To be honest, $50 is one thing and isn't so bad, but when the cost surges beyond $200 or $300(+), I can understand the concern.


Any thoughts? Is this a common practice to charge substantially more like this? In my experience, staff rates are usually in the neighborhood of (or the same as) the participant fee. It almost seems like a slap in the face to SMs trying to help the Cadets by driving them or staffing an event- as was actually mentioned to me recently.

[NCRblues]

Its not everywhere, NBB this year cost the cadets $300 and the SM's $100.... *shrug*

[davedove]

Sometimes activities do subsidize cadet participants so that their cost is less, but this should definitely be spelled out up front.

[SARTAC Medic]

I have actually experience this in the opposite...  Encampment around here usually cost the cadets a little more then the seniors. and most activities are slightly more expensive for the cadets too.   The reason I thought that this was is because senior members GENERALLY have to take off from work to attend and are usually a head of household or provider for the family.  Cadets are usually dependents of their parents and while they may still have jobs, they are not the head of household.   

Staff is the same. I am not sure why sometimes cadets staff gets to pay less, but it happens. 

When I have served as activity officer, i generally try to keep the fee's as low as possible and to have all participants pay the same amount.  I have even gone as far as inviting cadets parents and siblings to the event, as well as my fiancee and family so I could get a bigger group discount to make it cheaper for everyone.   

If the activity involves food, lodging, or supplies i think it is reasonable for all participants, cadet or senior, to pay for the actual cost of the event.   Tickets to a park or event, model rocket parts,  dinner or breakfast supplies.....   I also think that if a cadet or senior wants to bring their own food to a bivouac or campout they should have the cost of food removed from their activity fee if possible, although this is not always possible.   

[mmouw]

When ever we plan an activity, we try to do what we can to minimize the cost for all involved. When possible, the use of military facilities or school gyms. It may not always be the most lavish accommodations, but for the most part, it is very inexpensive or free.

The money I invested in that air mattress has payed for itself 100 times over! 

[DBlair]

Several SMs have been discussing this topic locally and many of the points mentioned have been raised. For most SMs, we are taking off from work and realistically going out of our way to help with the activity. We are willing to do it because we believe in the program and in helping the Cadets, but when the cost is a HUGE difference like this for a SM to attend, it either makes it financially impossible to attend or at least makes us think twice about attending.

Supposedly, the $50 activity cost for Cadets is largely subsidized by region funds so that theoretically more Cadets could attend. Fair enough, but what about the SMs who need to attend?

Also, it wasn't covered in the Ops Order that states "Cost this year will be $50.00 per person" and now we have Cadets planning to ride in a van that is supposed to be driven by a SM who just recently learned of it costing a few hundred dollars instead of the $50 for him to attend- all just days before the event. Obviously, the SM isn't happy about this.

This is turning out to be a messy situation, and one that is souring a lot of people into not wanting to participate in activities, not to mention the current situation of what to do about the activity only days away and the Cadets needing transportation.

[lordmonar]

One of the BSA's tricks has always been to pay the way of the adult leaders by the number of scouts they brought with them.

Summer Camp for example....10 scouts=1 adult leader free of charge.

It helps increase the number of scouts participating and insures that units brough alonge enough leaders to ride hurd on them.

[DBlair]

One of the BSA's tricks has always been to pay the way of the adult leaders by the number of scouts they brought with them.

Summer Camp for example....10 scouts=1 adult leader free of charge.

It helps increase the number of scouts participating and insures that units brough alonge enough leaders to ride hurd on them.

Exactly. Considering that SMs are needed to attend, by price gouging the SM, it only hurts the Cadets as that SM then may not be able to attend to drive them, etc.

[davidsinn]

Nobody has brought up the fact that the SMs are already subsidizing cadets just by being members. Our dues are higher and they pay for things like this. So to charge SMs more for an activity is double dipping and is dishonest IMO.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Nobody has brought up the fact that the SMs are already subsidizing cadets just by being members. Our dues are higher and they pay for things like this. So to charge SMs more for an activity is double dipping and is dishonest IMO.

Usually, when staff gives their time and talents, they get a break, not the other way around.

If the SMs aren't subsidizing the cadets, and region is, then the costs to SMs should be posted.

[MIKE]

I wish it was like the ATC... then the seniors would be getting paid to show up, and we would instead be complaining about not being allotted enough paid days.

[Tim Medeiros]

Okay, so charge the cadets, who may or may not have any form of stable income, hundreds of dollars for an activity, and only charge SMs (the folks who likely have a steady income) the 50.

[DBlair]

Okay, so charge the cadets, who may or may not have any form of stable income, hundreds of dollars for an activity, and only charge SMs (the folks who likely have a steady income) the 50.

I'm not necessarily saying we should charge the SMs less, but rather that we should be charged the same.

[Tim Medeiros]

That, I would agree with.

[Eclipse]

All activities have a fixed cost to participate, especially encampments and other in-residence situations.  With few exceptions everyone
should cover their costs.

Some wings, as well as common business sense, dictate that on-going activities build a surplus to account for inconsistent attendance, fuel fluctuations, and unforeseen circumstances.  In most cases the people garnering the opportunity would pay a small extra amount to cover those as well as shared expenses like offices supplies, capital expenses (printers, flags, etc.), awards and the like.  For encampments it would be the cadets, for flight training the students. Instructors, TACs, staff, etc., should cover their meals and billeting, but not the extras that others are paying for the opportunity.

There will always be members who can't afford "x", and those people need to be handled on a 1-off basis.  You don't scale your budget based on an assumption a few needy member will have issues, because with very few exceptions activities are self-supporting and receive no subsidies from outside.

[coudano]

We usually only charge senior members for what they personally consume.
In other words, we split out things like food, billeting, and gas.
From things like instructional materials.

So suppose we're doing a "rocket retreat" (a fairly regularly held event at my squadron)
Seniors will be counted in on the price of food, since they are, after all, eating it.

However, the senior member that is instructing or even just being 'present' as a chaperone is not charged for any portion of the rockets, engines, photocopies, etc.  --unless they wish to participate in the rocketry program, building their own stuff.  (incidentally in cases like this, I for example, bring my own kit, which I procured on my own, and is usually more advanced, and more expensive than what the cadets are doing)

This condition results in cadets paying charges that are higher than seniors.
But I think it's perfectly reasonable.

--especially when you factor in that something like a rocket retreat, I will probably sponsor a cadet who can't afford it, to attend, out of my pocket.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I think the major beef here is that the costs were not advertised properly to the Senior Membership.

[DBlair]

I think the major beef here is that the costs were not advertised properly to the Senior Membership.

Agreed.

There are two main issues:

1) General Issue: SMs having to pay substantially more.

2) Specific Issue: After a SM agreed to drive the Cadets, and the Cadets' applications being based on having this transportation, it was discovered that the SMs have to pay substantially more than the Ops Order dictates. Thus, the SM is essentially in a tough spot as the Cadets are all depending on him to drive, but he wasn't expecting to pay such a high cost when the original plans were made.

[Ohioguard]

I would think they have 4 cadets per room verses the senior member having their own room.  This is a common practice.  If the seniors were willing to room with someone, the room rate would go down.

[DBlair]

I would think they have 4 cadets per room verses the senior member having their own room.  This is a common practice.  If the seniors were willing to room with someone, the room rate would go down.

From what I understand, some SMs are willing to room together, but (at best) this only brings it down somewhat and still not in the range of the rate Cadets are being charged.