Loss of USAF uniforms

[AirAux]

Starfleet, how would you like them referred to?  Since it is all a weight issue that I am discussing I find nothing wrong with it, especially since the Air Force treats them with disdain and less respect than the lean, mean, uniform wearing machines, right?  I am a fatty and I feel like a second class citizen and I have given over 40 years to this organization and I am tired of it.  If you don't want us around, throw us out, but don't keep using us while treating us like red-headed step-children.

[Alaric]

I know this comment is going to get mostly ignored because people like AirAux and others want to push the change for changes sake argument and complain about how anyone who wears the corporate uniform is second class and discriminated against.

Can anybody explain why fatties can't wear the BDU's since they are not an Air Force uniform? 

I don't know, maybe because it's an Army uniform?

The Woodland BDU has not been an Army uniform in years

That depends. Even though they may not wear that particular pattern of camouflage, that does not necessarily mean they do not claim it as a uniform.  The fact it does not appear in a uniform manual, just means that the military does not currently claim it as a standard or currently used uniform.  Nevertheless, they could, in theory, revert back to that particular style of uniform.   

And when they did, we'd have to do something about it.  But that is not very logical, using that argument we could not adopt any uniform, that had ever been used by the US Military since they could "revert back to that particular style of uniform"  If for instance we wanted to change from the Blue BDUs to O.D. fatigues (not that I'm suggesting that) since technically the army could revert

[jeders]

...especially since the Air Force treats them with disdain and less respect than the lean, mean, uniform wearing machines...

You keep saying that, but it doesn't make it true. I've know numerous overweight members who have earned the same respect as a non-overweight person doing the same things. Again, it's the member who makes the second class thing happen, not the uniform.

... I feel like a second class citizen and I have given over 40 years to this organization and I am tired of it.

That sounds like an issue that you need to resolve locally. And if you think that being thin and in an Air Force-style uniform is going to have any measurable effect on that, you're kidding yourself.

If you don't want us around, throw us out, but don't keep using us while treating us like red-headed step-children.

You keep wanting to put words in other people's mouths, but the fact is that NO ONE has advocated getting rid of people who can't or don't wear the AF-style uniform for whatever reason. If you really feel that badly about yourself, then you need to address that locally. Nationwide, everyone is treated equally based on their abilities and willingness to work together to accomplish the mission, not based on their choice of clothing.

[jeders]

I know this comment is going to get mostly ignored because people like AirAux and others want to push the change for changes sake argument and complain about how anyone who wears the corporate uniform is second class and discriminated against.

Can anybody explain why fatties can't wear the BDU's since they are not an Air Force uniform? 

I don't know, maybe because it's an Army uniform?

The Woodland BDU has not been an Army uniform in years

That depends. Even though they may not wear that particular pattern of camouflage, that does not necessarily mean they do not claim it as a uniform.  The fact it does not appear in a uniform manual, just means that the military does not currently claim it as a standard or currently used uniform.  Nevertheless, they could, in theory, revert back to that particular style of uniform.   

And when they did, we'd have to do something about it.  But that is not very logical, using that argument we could not adopt any uniform, that had ever been used by the US Military since they could "revert back to that particular style of uniform"  If for instance we wanted to change from the Blue BDUs to O.D. fatigues (not that I'm suggesting that) since technically the army could revert

That's a reasonable assumption. Of course if we wanted to adopt an O.D. BDU, which is not the same as the O.D. fatigues worn prior to the BDU, then that we could do.

[Holding Pattern]

Starfleet, how would you like them referred to?  Since it is all a weight issue that I am discussing I find nothing wrong with it, especially since the Air Force treats them with disdain and less respect than the lean, mean, uniform wearing machines, right?  I am a fatty and I feel like a second class citizen and I have given over 40 years to this organization and I am tired of it.  If you don't want us around, throw us out, but don't keep using us while treating us like red-headed step-children.

Well, I don't see the AF treating them with disdain and less respect. If the AF said, "MEET THESE REQUIREMENTS OR GET OUT" that would be one thing. And that is the one thing they are not doing.

If you really, really, really don't like the corporate uniform... just don't wear a uniform. Clothes don't make the man, but if you really feel it does, then get yourself a sharp suit and show up to meetings in that.

I'll point out that the next lawsuit will be "freedom of speech" as people demand to wear the uniform everywhere to do anything they want.

To answer your original question, you can choose terms such as "obese" and/or "overweight" which are not nearly as loaded a term as "fatties" is.

Or you can do what I've done in the context of this thread and simply refer to "Those not meeting the weight/grooming standards for the current AF uniform." or a variation thereof.

[LSThiker]

And when they did, we'd have to do something about it.  But that is not very logical, using that argument we could not adopt any uniform, that had ever been used by the US Military since they could "revert back to that particular style of uniform"  If for instance we wanted to change from the Blue BDUs to O.D. fatigues (not that I'm suggesting that) since technically the army could revert

I am not using the argument.  The claim is dependent on what the Air Force wants.  If they view a previously used pattern as still an "Air Force" uniform, then yes we would have to get approval.  This is currently being done with the BDUs.  The Air Force no longer uses them, but they still view the BDUs as an Air Force uniform.  For that reason, as Ned has stated prior, the Air Force continues to reject our free use of BDUs.  However, they hold no claim on Blue BDUs as they have never been an Air Force uniform.  If we wanted to use solid green BDUs, then we could have as OD fatigues were not OD BDUs.  If we want to use the old McConnell service dress, you can bet the Air Force would resist, even though they have not used that uniform for decades now since 1994.  The old 1084s were discontinued in the 1969. 

[abdsp51]

I think we have hit an all time low with this thread.  We've stooped to the threat of a lawsuit, bickering over pc correct terms, and just overall heated opinions. 

AirAux who do you think is going to suffer the most should you pursue this COA?  It won't be the AF that's for sure.  Someone somewhere is going to have to eat that cost and ultimately it may be the membership to include those you are strongly crusading for. 

So should you file suit and win do I send you the bill when the membership fees go up?  Or how about other programs that may suffer due to the legal fees? 

[Ned]

As much as I am reluctant to add life to this thread, let me remind all of us that concerning harsh words directed one way or another:

That kind of war of words is destructive, and violates our Core Value of Respect.  All of our members are valuable.  Indeed, our members are our most important asset.  We must work together to perform our Congressionally imposed missions.  We cannot and should not fling arrows across this divide.

Also, if it helps, I'm fairly sure there is little or no chance for a viable lawsuit on this difficult and divisive issue.

For a viable lawsuit, a plaintiff has to be able to point to an illegal action by the defendant (in most cases that the defendant had violated some duty imposed by law) and that the plaintiff had suffered measurable and specified damages as a direct result of the defendant's actions.

Here, there does not appear to be any law that imposes a duty on CAP to allow large members to wear AF-style uniforms.  The ADA does not apply to CAP in this situation (we are not a "covered entity.")  And if it did, the corporate uniforms would almost certainly be a reasonable accommodation to allow large members to participate on the same basis as everyone else.

There is certainly a DoD Directive and arguably an AFI that may require us to treat members as if the ADA did apply, but you can't sue someone for violating a DoD directive or an AFI.  You're supposed to use the chain of command and IG channels.

The other significant roadblock to a potential lawsuit is the lack of tangible, measurable damages suffered by members wearing corporate uniforms.  I don't dispute that some members feel demeaned by the uniforms.  Heck, I tend to agree with them.  But it is probably hard to assign a measurable amount of damages to such feelings in a organization that the aggrieved party voluntarily joined knowing the rules, voluntarily stayed despite experiencing the disparate treatment, and indeed voluntarily paid dues to the very organization that they believe is treating them badly.

In my business, we call this a "nominal damages" case at best.  Meaning that -- even if the plaintiff proves their case of unlawful discrimination -- she/he would receive a damage award of perhaps $1.  It can be very hard to get a lawyer to take a case without substantial measurable damages.

[LSThiker]

In my business, we call this a "nominal damages" case at best.  Meaning that -- even if the plaintiff proves their case of unlawful discrimination -- she/he would receive a damage award of perhaps $1.  It can be very hard to get a lawyer to take a case without substantial measurable damages.

Well, it sounds like AirAux is willing to take this case as a pro bono work.  Perhaps you can preside over the court.  It would be the first all CAP court hearing, which should make for an interesting discussion on CAPTalk 

[ZigZag911]

I've said it repeatedly:

1) all seniors in corporate -- gray & whites. BBDU, NOMEX flight suit in non-USAF color

2) get a suitable military-style dress jacket for corporate, at least as an option in place of blazer

You got about $800?  Because that how much you would owe me to replace all the USAF uniforms I've got? I won't need money for corporates because i've got those already (well not a blue NOMEX flight suit).

You ready to pick up the slack when all those people (not me) quite because A) You forced another uniform change on them.  B) You are pushing away from the Air Force again.  C) All NHQ cares about is uniforms?

You ready to pick up the recruiting pace...because not only are we going to have to replace all those who quit, we got work against the negetive backlash they will generate and we will not have the allure of the uniform and the connect it gives us with the USAF.

You ready to deal with people bringing it up again and again for YEARS when you ask them questions completely not related to uniforms?  People are still grousing about the CSU going away.

That is the nature of CAP.....right wrong or indifferent. 
That  is why NHQ and the USAF is happy with the Status Quo (finally fixed my auto correct ).

So....before they are going to be ready to push for some big change.....you are going to have to convince them that the benefits out weight the KNOWN butt pain it is going to cause them.

[/rant]

First. I would allow a sufficient phase in period of several years, so that the average member would be replacing worm clothing items anyway.

I would not owe you anything, nor would anyone else...it would simply be a change in uniform regulations.

"Uniform", as we've noted frequently, normally refers to some degree of commonality...which I feel would be worthwhile for CAP as an organization.

I don't agree that this would be pushing away from the Air Force, I think it would be satisfying their preference (perhaps unstated) to avoid having people who can't meet USAF grooming standards wearing their uniform...which I get, and understand, truly...I think a move this radical is needed because enforcement for nearly 30 years has ranged from difficult to impossible...and some of the worst offenders have been senior CAP officers at wing, region, national, including more than a few full colonels.

I've been a CAP member for a long. long time...somebody is always complaining about something... and, frankly, I feel that we're better off without anyone who would quit over a uniform...many of them are probably "paper" members anyway.

I realize you are retired Air Force and feel strongly about this, and you have every right to do so...I just look at it differently, don't see the challenges you've identified (correctly, for the most part) as insurmountable.

[ZigZag911]

I've said it repeatedly:

1) all seniors in corporate -- gray & whites. BBDU, NOMEX flight suit in non-USAF color

2) get a suitable military-style dress jacket for corporate, at least as an option in place of blazer

And you've been ignored repeatedly because your idea is not workable.

Disagree, see my response to LordMonar.

It IS workable, if this is what is best for CAP.

It might not be a lot of fun, will undoubtedly present some problems...but it could very well solve a lot of problems, too.

[AirAux]

Ned, respectfully, I have done discrimination work.  if there is an appearance of discrimination, the defendant has to prove otherwise, and denying obese people the right to wear the Air Force uniform while allowing other disabled people to do so smacks of discrimination.  Trust me, discrimination cases are not nominal.  I have not threatened anything, but when reasonable people can't agree, the Court is the last alternative.  This discrimination can not go on.  As has been mentioned in this thread alone, some members believe fats and fuzzies are not as good as the Air Force blue members.  The feelings that obese members have over this are much more devastating than thought or talked about.  These are damages and not nominal.  Having been a member in Air Force blue and now being relegated to corporate dress, I can tell you that it hurts and makes one feel like a second class member.  If the lean, mean members had any compassion, they would give up the Air Force uniform and support us by all wearing the corporate uniform.  The fact that they won't acknowledges that they do not think the uniforms are equal in perception.

abdsp51, If, as we have been led to believe, that the Air Force is the one setting the uniform terms and the one denying CAP obese members the same privileges to wear the Air Force uniform as other members, due to their disability, the Court will go after them.  The Air Force will be the one facing the defense costs.  CAP will only be incidental.     

[sarmed1]

I feel fairly confident if a bunch of CAP members sued the USAF as the primary defendant the USAF would drop CAP like a bad habit.  There will be no uniform problem, there will of course be no aux status, no missions and no money too.  I'm sure the rest of the organization will be forever grateful to you.....

MK

[abdsp51]

AirAux some of us do have compassion for those who can not wear AF style but honestly why penalize members who have a choice simply due to others not having a choice. 

We get it some people are obeses due to reasons beyond their control but what about those who are obese because of their eating habits and lack of exercise?

Again alcoholism is labeled an illness as well do you want an alcoholic driving a car on your watch? 

Maybe instead of wearing pants everyday I want to sear a kilt instead should I sue for that? 

As someone who has a choice of which style to wear I have compassion for my fellow sm who cant wear the AF style but I should not be penalized in ajy shape or form because I have a choice. 

Would that not count as discrimination as well?

[lordmonar]

I don't agree that this would be pushing away from the Air Force,

It is not how YOU would see it...but how others would see it.   

I think it would be satisfying their preference (perhaps unstated) to avoid having people who can't meet USAF grooming standards wearing their uniform...which I get, and understand, truly...I think a move this radical is needed because enforcement for nearly 30 years has ranged from difficult to impossible...and some of the worst offenders have been senior CAP officers at wing, region, national, including more than a few full colonels.

That will get NHQ on your side.

I've been a CAP member for a long. long time...somebody is always complaining about something... and, frankly, I feel that we're better off without anyone who would quit over a uniform...many of them are probably "paper" members anyway.

I realize you are retired Air Force and feel strongly about this, and you have every right to do so...I just look at it differently, don't see the challenges you've identified (correctly, for the most part) as insurmountable.

I did not say they were insurmountable.    I just said they are not worth the return of investment.   Status Quo vs Everyone in Corporates......has a low Cost/Benefit Ratio...not worth the effort.

If someone was willing to put in the effort, get everyone on board, and be ready to deal with the backlash.....then yeah...sure....it can be done.    I'd rather spend that time and effort of expanding or missions.   But if you feel differently about it that's cool too.

And for the record.....IF I WERE GOD FOR A DAY (IIWGFAD) I would have everyone...including the large and hairy ones in to USAF uniforms tomorrow.....vice that I would have everyone in corporates.   But I know what I want...and I also know the obstacles for getting there....and understand why we don't bother to go in that direction.

[AirAux]

abdsp51, you noted, "but honestly why penalize members who have a choice simply due to others not having a choice."  You are stating that having to wear the corporate uniform is a penalty and that is the whole problem with this situation.  This is the discrimination.  If it wasn't derogatory to have to wear the corporate uniform, if they were both equal, all members would agree to wear the corporate uniform just for a sense of teamwork and uniformity.  BUT, no one is willing to do this as they see the corporate uniform as a penalty, something deserving only for a second class citizen.  Truly, it amazes me that you all can't understand how this hurts individually and collectively.
   

[abdsp51]

abdsp51, you noted, "but honestly why penalize members who have a choice simply due to others not having a choice."  You are stating that having to wear the corporate uniform is a penalty and that is the whole problem with this situation.  This is the discrimination.  If it wasn't derogatory to have to wear the corporate uniform, if they were both equal, all members would agree to wear the corporate uniform just for a sense of teamwork and uniformity.  BUT, no one is willing to do this as they see the corporate uniform as a penalty, something deserving only for a second class citizen.  Truly, it amazes me that you all can't understand how this hurts individually and collectively.

Hey guess what I wear BBDU and have for a little while.  The corp uniforms are not secondary nor meant to be used as such.  I wear the polo as well even though I can't stand it. 

By demanding those who have a choice conform to what you want to create a sense of untiy is bull.  I have a choice and I have never ever treated those who only have the option of the corp as second class. 

If you feel that way then you need to adjust your view on it.  It is equal simply because you fail or choose not to see it is not the orgs issues or mine.

[SarDragon]

Ned, respectfully, I have done discrimination work.  if there is an appearance of discrimination, the defendant has to prove otherwise, and denying obese people the right to wear the Air Force uniform while allowing other disabled people to do so smacks of discrimination.

Where does it say that anyone has a right to wear the Air Force uniform?

CAP membership in and of itself is a privilege. Wearing the uniform is a part of that privilege. I, by personal choice, must wear corporate uniforms, and am comfortable with the situation. I'd like to have a classier looking dress uniform, and the opportunity to wear my Navy ribbons, but neither is a deal killer for maintaining my membership, which totals 45 years at this time.

[PHall]

AirAux, go ahead and try to file your suit. Good luck in finding a court that won't toss it.
I don't even think you could get the ACLU to take this case because you're operating under a false assumption.
But go for it, you're the one paying the filing fees...

[Panache]

From what I've gathered in this entire thread is that a significant amount of the membership in CAP are quite happy with the two-tiered system, and as long as they are allowed to wear the AF-style uniform and the fat-and-fuzzies aren't, well, all the better.