Forming GTM beret

[lordmonar]

I always hate it when people just jump in and start dissing people. 

23 posts before I answed the Cadets question.  3 more bashings until you added your advice. 

That was uncalled for.  The Cadet did not create the rules or add the beret to Indiana Wing.  If anyone wants someone to bad mouth and bash and call stupid, that would be the Indiana Wing Commander, not the Cadet who is only following orders (which I think are stupid and may be illegal according to 39-1), but I am not a member of Indiana Wing and cant change things there.

:clap: Thankes Mikelylike.

[lordmonar]

^I'm with you on this one mikey.   :clap:

We might not agree with other wing's policies but then again, we don't have to deal with them normally.  I will answer any question that anyone has.  I'll help any cadet that wants it.  If he has been told to wear it, I just want to make sure that he wears it right regardless of my personal feelings on the matter.

Personal feelings aside, don't we have a duty to try to correct members who may be violating regulations, even if the member (INWG/CC) is being potentially corrected by proxy (CAPTALK member taking it up the chain of command)?

No....unless you are in that persons chain of command "my commander told me to" is a legitimate answer to "why are you wearing that pink tutu?".

We have a duty to report violations to the proper person....so we should all be calling up regional and national telling them what INWG is doing.....but we know how that works.

Jumping on a cadet and saying "you can't do that" does not help at all. 

[mikeylikey]

[hits head on table]

Berets for GTL's ect.....sounds a little too much like PAWG.....

[/hits head on table]

So true!

I find it to be a comfortable alternative to the patrol cap.

Really?  I have worn a beret for the better part of 7 years.  I hate it.  Also, no military branch wears the beret into the field.  We trade out for caps/covers.  

:clap: Thankes Mikelylike.

ya.....the cadet did not need to be bashed.  The idea can be bashed to death, but the Cadet was just looking for help, and all of us most likely just pushed him away from ever coming back to CAPTALK.  

[lordmonar]

^^ Yes, especially a cadet.

The answer hear is two parts:

1) Here's how you form a beret...

2) But as a matter of fact, you are not allowed to wear it because of reg x, y, z.

and you would be wrong to do that.....unless you are the INWG/CC, the Regional CC or the National Commander.

Chain of Command, brother...chain of command.

The proper action by the cadet should then be to discuss this in detail with his unit CC, which one would then hope would bump things up the chain, etc.

It would not be the first time a cadet or senior got things changed because of an off-handed conversation.

We have core values and rules, they should not be subjective because of the actions of others or their perceived reactions.

But this is not an obvious rules violation....it is a reg interpretation difference.  And you don't encourage subordinates to question orders....you take it the origin of those orders and challenge them.  

NVWG used to authorize berets for GTs....we are in the process of doing it again.  The regs are gray on this issue and so.....everyone dissing this cadet is 100% WRONG!  I SAY AGAIN....100% WRONG!

[lordmonar]

We wear it with senior or cadet flight cap insignia only. Could you please provide a cite? If you're correct I'll send it up to the Colonel thru my group CC this weekend and stop wearing my beret on missions.

No, what you should do is send up your concerns (if you have them) and continue to wear it until you are told otherwise by YOUR chain of command.

Some yahoo on the web (and this includes me) cannot countermand a written order (39-1 sup).  His opinions and interpretation of the regulation may....may....be valid, but he is not in your chain of command and he cannot countermand you wing CC's orders.

This particular order is NOT clearly in violation of the regulation.....and it is definitely not illegal....ergo your duty is to challenge up and follow it to the best of your ability.

[isuhawkeye]

I hate to stik my nose in this one,

but I thought that general courter was going to make CAP more professional and accountable.  why do we see more and more cases of

do what I want syndrome from unit commanders?

[davidsinn]

It's not an order, it's an optional piece of gear. So my not wearing it wouldn't be countermanding an order. It would simply be choosing to go with the standard gear.

[lordmonar]

I hate to stik my nose in this one,

but I thought that general courter was going to make CAP more professional and accountable.  why do we see more and more cases of

do what I want syndrome from unit commanders?

I don't think it is an increase in the "do what I want sysndrome"....just more of the same.

As for the National Commander trying to make CAP more professional and accountable........she's been in power a year now.....and PAWG still has orange T-shirts, ascots and pistol belts.

And finally, this is not a violation of the regulations but a difference in interpretation.  Berets are authorised...for special purposes.....we just differ on if ES is special enough.

[JoeTomasone]

Personal feelings aside, don't we have a duty to try to correct members who may be violating regulations, even if the member (INWG/CC) is being potentially corrected by proxy (CAPTALK member taking it up the chain of command)?

No....unless you are in that persons chain of command "my commander told me to" is a legitimate answer to "why are you wearing that pink tutu?".

We have a duty to report violations to the proper person....so we should all be calling up regional and national telling them what INWG is doing.....but we know how that works.

Jumping on a cadet and saying "you can't do that" does not help at all. 

I never said he "can't do that" - I pointed out their supplement isn't 100% in line with 39-1.  If he chooses to do something about it (not wear the beret, question it through the chain of command, etc) that's his decision.    We are supposed to follow legal orders and have a functioning brain to question orders that are not in line with regulations or are unsafe, etc.    CAP does not want robots.   If I encounter someone wearing a pink tu-tu and am told that whatever commander authorized it, I'm going to tell that person that it's not in the regulations and that should be taken under advisement.  If it's at an activity in which I am in the chain of command, I will put a stop to it.   And hey, if a beret looks bad in the field, imagine it with a tu-tu!

[JoeTomasone]

And finally, this is not a violation of the regulations but a difference in interpretation.  Berets are authorised...for special purposes.....we just differ on if ES is special enough.

And no, we don't differ on ES being special enough.  As I said above, berets are authorized for ES mission wear with BDUs per 39-1 when authorized by the WG/CC.   They are NOT authorized for general wear (unless earned at Blue Beret or Hawk Mtn) or for training.

[Major Carrales]

Such discussion...whoa, I wonder where are priorities really are?

Berets and Boonies, the latest subjects here, really serve no purpose in the field for CAP.  They are items that traditionally set aside elite units (in terms of the berets) and long deployments in the field (the boonie hats are really an item designed to protect from the elements and exposure in an environment where one seeks to reduce the effect of rain or in an arid environment).  Since we don't have a true "elite" force of full time CAP Officers and Cadets, nor are we exposed in the field for weeks at a time, having them in CAP is simply a matter of personal preference.

I know that this not a popular thing to write here, but I have read all the remarks on "skin cancer" and the like, these are somewhat specious arguments since, as has been pointed out, we roll our sleeves.  

If you want them because you think they make us look cool, then just go with that and hope for the best.  If a Wing allows for them in their approved supplement, then that is policy, just go with it and hope for the best.

Oh, by the way, I think all that can ever be said on the matter has been written here at CAPTALK.

As for the remarks against squadron commanders and the National Commander, Interim; that is uncalled for.

[D2SK]

I've been a member of CAP for a short time, and a lurker on CAP talk for even shorter.  In this time, I've seen a lot of arm chair commandos gripe about a few issues over and over again.  Do you guys have *anything* better to do?  I just don't get it, but it seems to be contrary to the spirit of CAP.

That's my .02 cents.

[davidsinn]

I'm confused on why it's ok for REDCAPs but not ok for SAREXs and the like.

[JoeTomasone]

I've been a member of CAP for a short time, and a lurker on CAP talk for even shorter.  In this time, I've seen a lot of arm chair commandos gripe about a few issues over and over again.  Do you guys have *anything* better to do?  I just don't get it, but it seems to be contrary to the spirit of CAP.

That's my .02 cents.

In any organization, especially a volunteer one, there will always be clashes, gripes, and issues.  In your unit, you may hear of one per year; on CapTalk, you get a lot more due to the reach of the Internet.

You should read some of the message boards started by employees of large corporations.   You think this is bad?  Imagine if people's livelyhood depended on some of the things we debate on here and you can imagine how bad it gets.

Debate is always healthy; it's derision and divisiveness we should avoid.

[davedove]

I'm confused on why it's ok for REDCAPs but not ok for SAREXs and the like.

I'm a bit confused on that as well.  If it says "Emergency Services Missions" that means all missions, actual and training.  Basically, if you have a mission number, it qualifies.

Now, that would not apply to ES training classes.

[RiverAux]

Just who bashed the cadet or dissed people?  However, many of us did critisize the wing policy which is very fair game for this board.

[JoeTomasone]

I'm confused on why it's ok for REDCAPs but not ok for SAREXs and the like.

I'm a bit confused on that as well.  If it says "Emergency Services Missions" that means all missions, actual and training.  Basically, if you have a mission number, it qualifies.

Now, that would not apply to ES training classes.

That was my take on it. 

The wording is "ES Missions" - last I knew, a training mission was a mission, a class was a class.

[mikeylikey]

And no, we don't differ on ES being special enough.  As I said above, berets are authorized for ES mission wear with BDUs per 39-1 when authorized by the WG/CC.  they are NOT authorized for general wear (unless earned at Blue Beret or Hawk Mtn) or for training.

I would like to see the CAP-USAF approval for berets worn with BDU's.  I think they gave it for Blue Beret and that was it. 

[davidsinn]

And no, we don't differ on ES being special enough.  As I said above, berets are authorized for ES mission wear with BDUs per 39-1 when authorized by the WG/CC.  they are NOT authorized for general wear (unless earned at Blue Beret or Hawk Mtn) or for training.

I would like to see the CAP-USAF approval for berets worn with BDU's.  I think they gave it for Blue Beret and that was it. 

Fortunately that doesn't affect fat guys like me.  However I have a goal of being back in green by August.

[maverik]

WOW! A simple how to question and I get this explosion of people dissing our orders. Well I don't like it anymore than you guys, but it is hard work earning the beret.