PFT For Seniors

[DrJbdm]

I don't think a test is needed but a physical assessment conducted by a Physician should be in order for those who want to join or to rejoin if your membership has lapsed. And for anyone applying for operational specialties. We have to keep our members safe and we can only do that if we first have health and fitness standards that we apply to everyone.

[DNall]

ES wise, FEMA is in process of setting PFT standards for just about everything we do, and we will be complying with that starting maybe as soon as next year. That right there I'm convinced will change the face of CAP. A lot of people will get pissed & walk, to which I say oh well. A lot of new people will then be recruited knowing full well what the standards are & expecting to be a part of a well trained expert team. That's the background to which we look at this issue.

Clearly there are physical requirements of duties as an officer & ion order to progress or participate in the program. Those should be eval'd w/ a physical up front, and updated every so many years (more often as you get older or if you have a health issue obviously). Clearly we'll also, within reason, accomodate individuals with hadicaps that may limit them in some ways, and to the extent that those maleties do not interfere with efficient energetic execution of those duties they might be assigned to perform... so basically the low end of the ES spectrum that we'd expect of staff. Which is roughly able to do 8hrs standard office work (sit/stand/mobility/lifting/data-entry/etc).

I think it's an excellent thing to have standards to get into CAP. It's called an "application" that you fill out to get in. You should be evaluated phsyically, mentally, professionally, & any other way necessary to determine if you can make a significant contribution to this work, and if not then you should be excluded. Which is within the law.

[DogCollar]

I personally have no problem with a physical fitness standard for senior members, but I also understand the concerns of making it a condition for membership. 

One aspect of this that should be mandatory is a physical assessment for anyone who wishes to participate in ES or Cadet Program funcitions.  If someone wants to be involved, but cannot meet expected physical requirements, then they should sign a medical waiver absolving CAP of any and all liability resulting from injury, illness or death from such participation.

Now, what would I include on a physical fitness test for seniors?

1.  Ability to walk one mile

2.  Ability to demonstrate correct form for lifting 20 lbs.

3.  15 push up below age of 50, 15 modified pushups above 50.

4.  A test of hand-eye coordination and reaction.

I think that these are reasonable expectations for a PF test.  However, taking this test should be voluntary.  Maybe, as an incentive, a special wing award should be awarded to those squadrons who meet, say 60% of senior members participating and passing the test.  Just a thought.

[Dragoon]

Add to that the very real danger of injuring our members by simply conducting a vigorous PT test and you can begin to see the problem here.  And neither the SDF nor CAP has the resources to give every "over 40" member the recommended cardiovascular screening exam prior to giving a vigorous PFT.  Now add to the mix that CAP seniors would normally not be covered by any sort of CAP insurance while taking a routine PFT and you begin to see the scope of the problem.

So true.  Every now and then I read about some reservist dying during their first PT test on active duty.  There's no doubt we'd hurt some folks.

[JohnKachenmeister]

I may be talking through my anus, since I am not an expert in exercise psysiology, but how about a plan that establishes a baseline minimum physical fitness standard as a condition for participation in unit activities?

In other words, if you cannot pass a baseline minimum test, the one the chaplain came up with a post or two above sounds as good as any, you can be a CAP member, you can attand meetings at the units HQ, give classes, work in the office, etc., but any activity requiring a form 60 (Any activity outside the squadron HQ) would be closed to you.

This would exclude field trips to museums, air show operations, as well as ES missions.

If you were an IC, and ran the mission from your house, OK.  If you had to go to a mission base and set up operations there, No.

[Spogden]

While I understand the safety side of things and the desire to make CAP more effective, efficient and safe, i don't think the manner in which this topic has been discussed has truly been in the best interest of CAP. Most of the discussion has been in-directly bashing the larger population of our membership. By larger, I mean in size and in number. I personally am rather appalled at the tone and direction of this thread.

I, myself am on the larger side and although i aspire to lose weight and be among those in AF Blues, I am not now, nor have been during my short tenure of membership. BUT, I bring a lot to the table and would be rather offended to hear a PFT would be required for membership. It is like throwing a stone my direction and asking me to leave.

"Thanks for everything you've done for us, but we don't need you now because you are fat."

Since when did this organization become middle school children?

Just mentioning that CAP would help provide the support needed to get those that don't pass the PFT healthy enough and skinny enough to do so, doesn't truly show compassion. From my stand point, it only makes you all appear "holier-than-thou." And I personally don't have time for that crap. I'm here to serve and lead and see CAP become the organization it aspires to be. Criticizing its members because of their weight won't help it get there.

If fact, if all of you that fit height and weight standards could pass the PFT and were the only ones allowed to remain in CAP, you'd be pretty darn lonely and overworked, even more than you are now. You might even see the vast majority of your units becoming flights or disappearing because of the sudden decrease in numbers.

Requiring a PFT for certain mission positions is a different topic in and of itself. If that is the direction this thread was meant to go, then take it that direction. Stop bashing the larger population of CAP and move forward with what regulations would be required for what positions.

*Stepping down off my soap box....*

[Dragoon]

There's yet another issue - the overhead in administering the test.

Again, we only get so many training hours per month.  If we require an annual PT test, we're going to need to divert some of those hours to the test.  And it's not like once a year is enough - members will need probably 3 make-up dates to accomodate schedule issues.

And then, we'll need an entire system to handle medical waivers to the PT test.  More hours, more overhead.

Plus, we'll need to set up a whole system to review PT test failures, determine disposition, and perhaps give second tests to members who fail after a suitable conditioning period.

It's actually a fair amount of work, and could take on a life of it's own.

Will it really be worth the effort in terms of mission effectiveness?

Personally, I can think of a rather simple test of the few folks who really need it.


For Ground Teams - just set up a road march with a single time standard and a standard gear weight. For example, 4 miles in under an hour with 20 lbs of gear or something.  Then just make it part of the intitial sign off and recert process.  No pass - no rating until you can pass.

For everyone else - I'm not sure it matters.

[davedove]

If CAP were to adopt the President's Challenge, one incentive could be to allow the wearing of the awarded patch as an optional patch.

http://presidentschallenge.org/earn_awards/awards_available.aspx#ala

[davedove]

For Ground Teams - just set up a road march with a single time standard and a standard gear weight. For example, 4 miles in under an hour with 20 lbs of gear or something.  Then just make it part of the intitial sign off and recert process.  No pass - no rating until you can pass.

This type of test would be fairly reasonable.  After all, that's what ground teams do is walk with their gear.  The example you give though is a little fast.  Most people don't walk that fast for very far.  A 3 mile an hour pace is much more reasonable, and that is an average walking rate.  I can personally walk at 4 mph for a couple of miles, but I can do 3 mph for hours.  The 4 mph rate is what the Army uses in the testing for it's expert badges, which I don't think we really need in CAP.  Besides, if the GT walks too fast, it might miss some clues.

[MississippiFlyboy]

I think the fitness qualifications should be required when job related and encouraged if not.  Look at it from a safety standpoint. Would you rather put seriously overweight people in an aircraft or put a lighter aircrew in and have a greater margin of safety by not putting the aircraft close to limits.  Don't get me wrong, i'm not advocating kicking heavier people out of the cockpit, but with all the emphasis CAP has on safety, why don't we tackle this one? There is certainly a way to do it without requiring a hardcore PFT.  There is a way for everyone to participate at different ages, abilities and levels of fitness.  When it comes to ES, if you can't walk a half a mile or knock out 5 jumping jacks without fear of collapsing then i'm not sure i'd feel really warm and fuzzy about going into the field or into the air with you. 

An aircrew or ground team that includes fitness as part of maintaining the ability to respond is a safer team IMHO.

[Dragoon]

Ya know, I thought about weight limits on aircrew (since I've seen what a 300+ lb person can do to weight and balance in a 172), but my guess is that is a political bridge too far.  We'll probably keep doing what we do today - match up the heavy guys with the light guys.

[Pylon]

What problem are you all trying to address here?  Where's the issue?

How many missions have you gone on that CAP was not-mission-ready or unable to perform because of the lack of physical fitness amongst our responding members?

What new missions would the AF suddenly give to us based on the fact that we now ask our adult members to do some form of exercise once a month?

What do you really think you're accomplishing besides making it even more difficult to pay to volunteer your time in this organization?

Have you been on a Ground Team where people were to physically unfit to participate and it hindered the mission?  Uh, okay.  Your GT leader should have put a stop to that before you began.  Been called for a flight where the only available pilot would put the 172 out of weight and balance?  Why haven't you recruited more aircrew members to be available?

I don't see any issue with everybody of varying physical abilities and capabilities being a member of CAP.  If there are tasks that require more physical fitness than others, than the squadron commander, whose responsibility it is to appoint individuals to appropriate duties, should be appointing appropriately capable individuals to those duties.   Have hard terrain around your area for SAR?  You shouldn't be signing off people (aka: Unit Commander's Signature) who can't physically hack the rating their going for.

In every potential "problem" I see, the basis of it isn't the physical fitness of the volunteers themselves, but a failure of the unit in some respect -- either to recruit sufficient volunteers, or to appropriate assign and sign-off people for various things.

I don't need any level of physical fitness to execute my two current duty assignments, and I do a hell of a lot of work for my squadron.  Do I need to work on being more physically fit and toned?  You bet; it's a personal goal of mine for this year.  But do I need CAP to tell me to that?  I don't need that kind of crap.

[DNall]

Holy crap it's a safety issue to make people w/ no handicap be able to move around, lift 15lbs, and work in an office 8hrs? If you can't do that then attending meetings is a serious health risk for you & CAP is pretty neglegent.

Don't quote legal to me, don't quote safety to me. This is one of those damed if you do damed if don't things. We have to look at what our members will routinely be involved with over a CAP career & ask all members to meet a reasonable standard to get & stay in. It's FAR from arduous, and in the form proposed it involves doing it on your own time on the honor system.

Now ES, that's another story. There's one standard regardless of age, it's set by FEMA, & we are ordered to comply. This is still in the pipeline, but it'll hit CAP in the next couple years. All the standards aren't out yet, but IC Staff & GT are:
Physical/ Medical Fitness
Staff: Medical and physical fitness requirements established by the AHJ (Auth Having Jurisdiction - NOT CAP) that include the ability to perform duties under arduous circumstances characterized by working consecutive 12-14 hour days under physical and emotional stress for sustained periods

GT (WSAR)
Completion of the following baseline criteria:
1. Medical requirements established by the AHJ
2. Minimum physical fitness standards as required by the AHJ, such as:
* MRA 105.1 Fitness
* CO WSAR Fitness
* NWCG Pack Test "Arduous"
* MCSOMR/CAMRA Mountain Rescue Specific Physical Ability Test (MRSPAT)
* NIMS WSAR Type II and IV Fitness (this is the default)
3.     CDC/ WHO recommended inoculations

IE- That says we CAN make our own test if we must, but it has to meet the same kind of standards as those recommended. The examples were created for wildland firefighters & such. Comm, UDF & fixed wing will be any time btwn now & Sep (end of FY).

Aircrew:
The standard for fixed-wing pilots/crew I assume will be  to helicopter when that comes out. Standards for helos:
Completion of the following baseline criteria:
1. Medical requirements established by the AHJ
2. Minimum physical fitness standards as required by the AHJ
3. FAA requirements
4.  NFPA 1582, Standard on Medical Requirements for Fire Fighters8, or disaster specific equivalent

[Rangersigo]

I agree with Dennis that we should have an officer PT test.  One which is age and mission appropriate.

I didn't like the PT Test even when I was in the military, when I was in great shape.  Can you imagine how this would be administered?  This is a bad idea - you would lose a lot of good people, unless it was like our organization - voluntary.

[DNall]

ES PFTs will be mandatory from the federal govt or no money & no CAP, no discussion, period. Everyone in the country is being held to the same standards, not just CAP. That fact alone will transform CAP membership. Those people you're scared of seeing go, when they can't do any kind of ES the majority of them will be gone. We'll be recruiting up behind with people that can be legit rescue personnel, we got no choice. Those are published facts. The exact dates aren't set yet, but they're not 2 years away. Now, understand PFT for ES is a COMPLTELY different subject than fitness for membership standards.

Far as fitness for membership... CAP should not allow membership (initial or ongoing) for people that significantly endanger themselves or others by participating in normal activities. We're just talking about a standard sports physical once every few year (additional form to hand to your own doctor), and an on your own time report results online under the honor system fitness program that literally counts playing pool or darts in a bar as legitimate excercise (president's challnenge link above).

AND once again, the reason it was brought up in the first place was something to work on with the AF surgeon general to present in conjunction with requesting that ht/wt standards for the AF-style uniform be relaxed a bit.

[DrJbdm]

I understand that a NIMS specific PFT will be coming down the pipeline within the next couple of years and that CAP will have to comply if it wants in the game. That would be a huge positive moment for CAP.

  I do not think we need a mandatory PFT for all members, a voluntary one I can really agree with. But instead of a mandatory PFT, having a required physical in the same time regards for age as the FAA mandates for pilots would be fine. It is not unreasonable for CAP to require you to re-certify your continued health for CAP.

  You can't just have a member sign a waiver absolving CAP of any liability in order to avoid a physical, those truly do not work and CAP would still be liable, ask any injury/wrongful death attorney.

  It would be extremely difficult to mandate a required PFT for our members, most Police Departments have a standard PFT to get hired but extremely few have any sort of ongoing mandated PFT for it's Officers. If PD's can't do it then what makes anyone think CAP could do it? a very easy fix is a voluntary PF program and a required physical exam that is setup to minimum CAP standards. Yes, some very large members may be too unhealthy to join or maintain their membership but I doubt it would effect very many people. The standard I'm proposing is a pretty basic standard for office type work. (see my original post) If you are too unhealthy for basic office type work in a sometimes hot/cold/dusty/dirty environment then I have to seriously doubt your ability to function in CAP.

Is there anyone who truly believes these standards are completely unreasonable?

[DNall]

Right then, no disagreement on ES, not that it matters cause no one in CAP has a choice anyway. 

Fitness for membership standards... In addition to the basic background check we do now (which I'd like to see a bit stronger at least when you cross into ES leadership positions), and other standard factors, I think most people are going to find it very hard to argue that a basic physical updated every few years is unreasonable. Hell, if nothing else it gets you in for a checkup every so often.

Now the PT being discussed for adults is a bit controversial. For the life of me I can't see why. If I were saying run a mile in 6 minutes or get out, yeah I could understand people freaking out. If say you can choose from 100 different activities adjusted for age & wivered for physical handicaps or medical conditions; do it on your own time & report it on a website using the honor system; none of it is remotely arduous, athletic, or really even active, it's just not couch patato. Walking around the grocery store counts, playing with your kid counts, playing pool in a bar counts. This is the most minimal level of physical activity that can actually be considered a program. So very little is being asked in this standard that it's almost ludicrous. Why make it mandatory though? Well the ones that would do it if it were optional are already doing it. The ones that wouldn't are the ones that desperately need to start.

We do need to actually tell our members that they need to get off the couch & live an active healthy lifestyle, so they can be useful to us rather than devolving into a drag on others before they even know they're doing it.

[RiverAux]

I still haven't seen a convincing argument showing how the majority of non-ES CAP activities put anybody at any greater risk than if they were a member of the Elks Club.  We're talking about going to a meeting room 2-4 times a month for the most part.  Everything else is pretty much very rare special activities. 

[lordmonar]

I still haven't seen a convincing argument showing how the majority of non-ES CAP activities put anybody at any greater risk than if they were a member of the Elks Club.  We're talking about going to a meeting room 2-4 times a month for the most part.  Everything else is pretty much very rare special activities.

There is not any...except the underlying attempt to make the rank and file CAP member more like the AD USAF.

[DNall]

Plus travel to/from activities which will run for 8-12 hours per day over 1-2 days (PD for instance). And they are going to have to hold a staff position w/ duties at least equiv of office work, which must be maintained for a full shift timeframe. They will also be working in rough conditions (the nature of most CAP facilities) & will need to help with facility maint & operations. That excludes going to cadet activities or acting in any kind of leadership capacity locally or at events.

The standard to be set is not what the very minimum anyone can conceivably get by with, it's what is reasonablly expected of an average member over the course of their entire CAP career w/o being a drag on anyone else or allowing their own work to suffer. The physical requirements that answer that question are teh requirements of CAP membership, if we formally admit & enforce it or not. Anything less is harming the program, neglegently endangering people, & dragging down our capability.

There is not any...except the underlying attempt to make the rank and file CAP member more like the AD USAF.

This thread started no where close to that. It started out talking about a tactic to use w/ AF in asking to loosen up the standards so heavier people can wear the uniform if they choose. Everything in this thread is about taking care of our people, not being more like the AF.