CAP Talk

General Discussion => Membership => Topic started by: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 08:27:46 PM

Title: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 08:27:46 PM
Hello everyone.  Just tossing around an idea for thought, and for discussion.


Also, I realize that a very similar thread has already been created... to talk about Civil Air Patrol's NCO corps.  While this is in some ways similar to that tread, I would like to keep the discussion here focused on the single topic presented here =


The idea is as follows...


All of us who have been in CAP for any length of time, understand that there exists a "wide variety of types of people" in the membership.  Some have a great interest in advancing and lots of professional development.  Others are faithful members who are happy to help in any way they can, but just want to show up and do their job... without having much desire for ever becoming an officer. (often times many parents of cadets are included in this group of people... they show up, act as drivers, help manage the office, and do anything else asked of them... but are content to leave it at that).

No one can argue that these types of members help the unit function... because of their hours of selfless volunteer work.  Their contributions are highly valued during the time that they are members.  At the end of the day though, many of them simply choose to remain SM (Senior Members without grade)... for sometimes their whole time in CAP.  Again this is fine, and their service is valuable, but we all know many members fit into this category (most are not former military, so will not be NCOs either.  There is nothing "wrong" with these people.  They are loyal and do great work.  They just have no desire to be officers, and these types of CAP members will probably always continue to exist in a volunteer organization).


So... my idea here today is.  Taking this reality into account, might a slight change to CAP's overall rank structure be more appropriate?

The idea is as follows =


Change the existing structure so that the typical incoming CAP member joins the organization in the rank of CAP Senior Airmen


This might have the potential to be more appropriate, and to work better... because the new members in this rank would then have the following options:


1.)  Remain just as a CAP "Senior Airman" for their whole time in CAP  (since this is what the type of people we have discussed already do anyway... under the current structure, as SM without grade).  They would of course take all the very basic orientations that all members must have, along with Cadet Protection, etc., but that would be all required of them for the basic level of membership they are entering.  The "officer track" would always remain open to them, should their talents, goals, & desires change in the future.  When you consider the type of volunteer service most of them have chosen to give to CAP -- just performing specific jobs and not being at all interested in promotion / leadership roles -- this rank seems to be much more fitting, and a better description of the type of member that they are.

(NCO ranks [Staff Sergeant through the Master Sergeant ranks] could still be reserved for former military members joining CAP.)

2.)  Members who ARE interested in becoming leaders... could all enroll right away into the regular officer (and professional development) track that CAP already has in place.  As soon as they qualify (after 6 months and completing any other requirements... they would have their promotions & 2LT rank pinned on.  During those 6 months of preparing, they will have been already working in the section (Communications, Office, or etc.) with their coming promotion to LT in mind... getting to know the ropes from the other officers/personnel who are already there.


This slight adjustment to the CAP membership structure is pretty simple and straightforward, and the only new patch required on the physical supply side of things, would be the CAP "Senior Airman" stripes... which Vanguard could probably create and produce pretty easily... along with the CAP  NCO stripes that they sell.  It seems like the shift to such a structure would be (relatively) simple and straightforward to do... and simple and straightforward is usually a big plus.  Other than that as I have mentioned, such a membership structure would fit rather well with a membership that usually includes both types of people as members.

Okay ready for comments now.  Try not to rip the idea apart too badly if you don't like it.  After all... it's just an idea.  :)  With that being said, interested in hearing everyone's thoughts and comments.  Could something like this work, and work well... as a way of updating the structure to reflect the CAP adult members of today?
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: PHall on October 24, 2018, 08:35:44 PM
What's wrong with just Senior Member?  Senior Airman is an actual grade in the Air Force and we don't want any confusion, right?
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 08:59:46 PM
Hello PHall.  You are correct, it's not that the current system using "Senior Member without grade" CAN'T work.  Indeed it is the system that we are already working by now.

I suppose the reason for my sharing this idea here today... is could the this idea be a more fitting structure?  (is it more fitting, appropriate, and a better description of the types of members that make up CAP today?)

That's more of the reasons for my curiosity... in throwing the thought out there, for people to reflect on today.  Thanks for the feedback.  Again it's just an idea.  Merely a passing observation... and a bit of food for thought. :)
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Eclipse on October 24, 2018, 09:19:40 PM
New members are "Senior Members" the "Without Grade" is simply shorthand for members who,
for whatever reason haven't been promoted.

Making them an SrA implies a structure that doesn't exist.

To PHALL's point, "Airman" is also a generic for members of the USAF, and an honorary for the
small number of CAP members who are occasionally included in Total Force.

There's no reason to confer an grade, status, or nomenclature change for members who don't want to promote.

They are just "members", frankly they could probably drop the "Senior" as well and just use "members" vs. "Cadets".
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: vorteks on October 24, 2018, 09:48:41 PM
Quote from: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 08:27:46 PM
... With that being said, interested in hearing everyone's thoughts and comments. ...

tl;dr
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 10:14:55 PM

these are all good points.


in regards to the Air Force already using a name / rank (grade or status)...

The only thing that this way of thinking makes me also wonder about is... should CAP therefore also get rid of the following ranks/grades :

Lieutenant
Captain
Major
Lt. Colonel
Colonel

Staff Sergeant
Tech Sergeant
and all
Master Sergeants

??

For me personally... it's would be fine if CAP did get rid of all of them.  CAP would be able to do its job either way.  It's just that... if this was the weakness of the original idea posted... what about the rest of the ranks with identical names to those in the Air Force?

CAP already uses all of these as well, at the same time that Air Force uses them.  Does this also cause undue confusion?  Is CAP wrongfully appropriating all of these ranks / title... status & grades?

I suppose now we're getting into a separate question/issue... about of whether or not CAP needs a rank structure at all.  I have already seen in other threads... people discuss this question too... and disagree about it.  surprise, surprise right?).   :)

Thanks for your feedback guys!  I'm hoping to hear both pros & cons.  Good thoughts so far.  Thanks for sharing these.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: SarDragon on October 24, 2018, 10:34:28 PM
But cadets are members, too, as are the following folks: Fifty Year (Member), Life (Member), Cadet Sponsor, Patron Members, Aerospace Education Members, Retired Members, and Legislative Members.

Senior member seems to be the best we have, and I have yet to see a viable better idea.

The 39-2 uses the term Active Member, but that still isn't totally satisfactory, since "being active" is a part of the cadet program progression.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: SarDragon on October 24, 2018, 10:39:26 PM
Quote from: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 10:14:55 PM

these are all good points.


in regards to the Air Force already using a name / rank (grade or status)...

The only thing that this way of thinking makes me also wonder about is... should CAP therefore also get rid of the following ranks/grades :

Lieutenant
Captain
Major
Lt. Colonel
Colonel

Staff Sergeant
Tech Sergeant
and all
Master Sergeants[elided]

CAP and USAF use the rank structure in exactly the same manner. Your use of Senior Airman is in a different context, and clashes with the AF usage.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 11:51:44 PM
Hi SarDragon,

Wouldn't the rank still be used to denote an individual member... who's rank was not an officer or NCO, and therefore not acting (at least not regularly acting) in a leadership position?

Maybe I am missing something?  Maybe I'm just thinking about this too narrowly, but I don't see the particular difference you're pointing out.  Maybe I have to keep thinking about it more.

Also, does CAP really use the names of officer/NCO ranks... in exactly the same way as the Air Force?  From my understanding, being part of CAP for many years now... rank/grade is different from the way rank works in the AF.  I mean, as just one example... in CAP all members from "enlisted" (those members who wear stripes)  all the way to officers...  all members may salute each other... and all ranks return salutes to whoever gives them.

Would any CAP member who is a Major for example... carry the same authority as an officer in the AF... who actually has authority to compel others to do something, if necessary, that is against their will? (other than on very particular issues, such as safety policy for example... which members of any rank in CAP might also be able to hold people too)

There are other examples I'm sure, but you probably understand what I'm getting at.  Again, maybe I'm just not seeing what other people are mentioning here.  That is possible.

You might be right, I'm just not seeing it yet.

Thanks for helping me think this idea out a bit more.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Eclipse on October 25, 2018, 12:55:41 AM
Quote from: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 11:51:44 PM
Wouldn't the rank still be used to denote an individual member... who's rank was not an officer or NCO, and therefore not acting (at least not regularly acting) in a leadership position?

SrA >is< a grade not a generic.

Quote from: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 11:51:44 PM
Also, does CAP really use the names of officer/NCO ranks... in exactly the same way as the Air Force?  From my understanding, being part of CAP for many years now... rank/grade is different from the way rank works in the AF. 

CAP grade is different from USAF and other military grade in that it carries no commission (i.e. authority directly from the POTUS).  In fact it confers nothing
other then some amorphous indication of service time or ability (many times inappropriately).

As to "enlisted" personnel in CAP, there aren't any, in either philosophy or practical reality.

Quote from: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 11:51:44 PM
I mean, as just one example... in CAP all members from "enlisted" (those members who wear stripes)  all the way to officers...  all members may salute each other... and all ranks return salutes to whoever gives them.

This is incorrect.  CAP adheres to the same customs as the military - you salute superior officers, not "everyone".
Returning salutes, regardless of the grade differential is just politeness, but a CAP Major is not expected to salute a CAP 1st Lt, etc.

Quote from: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 11:51:44 PM
Would any CAP member who is a Major for example... carry the same authority as an officer in the AF...

No.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: supertigerCH on October 25, 2018, 01:11:17 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 25, 2018, 12:55:41 AM
Quote from: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 11:51:44 PM
Wouldn't the rank still be used to denote an individual member... who's rank was not an officer or NCO, and therefore not acting (at least not regularly acting) in a leadership position?

SrA >is< a grade not a generic.

Quote from: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 11:51:44 PM
Also, does CAP really use the names of officer/NCO ranks... in exactly the same way as the Air Force?  From my understanding, being part of CAP for many years now... rank/grade is different from the way rank works in the AF. 


As to "enlisted" personnel in CAP, there aren't any, in either philosophy or practical reality.



Yes, you are correct... it's not generic.  However, would not each individual member who holds that rank individually be that grade?  Maybe I didn't put it into words very well, but that's what I was getting at.

You are correct about the use of the word "enlisted" too.  There are not actually enlisted members in CAP.  That's why I put it in quotes.  (maybe I should instead use the term "non-officer CAP members who wear stripes on their uniform to denote their rank" -- which if the idea I'm suggesting was theoretically enacted... would then include CAP NCOs and CAP Senior Airmen.  I admit I was lazy and just didn't want to type that all out)  :)
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: CAP9907 on October 25, 2018, 01:13:55 AM
Quote from: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 08:27:46 PM



The idea is as follows...









Just.... no.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: supertigerCH on October 25, 2018, 01:26:51 AM
Quote from: CAP9907 on October 25, 2018, 01:13:55 AM
Quote from: supertigerCH on October 24, 2018, 08:27:46 PM



The idea is as follows...









Just.... no.


thanks.  lol... :) , I wanted to hear both pro and con ideas on this...  that's why I brought the idea to this forum.  and I'm definitely getting that.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: CAPLTC on October 25, 2018, 02:27:37 AM
Quote from: PHall on October 24, 2018, 08:35:44 PM
What's wrong with just Senior Member?  Senior Airman is an actual grade in the Air Force and we don't want any confusion, right?

I like just plain Senior Member.
Yes.

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: SarDragon on October 25, 2018, 02:44:05 AM
OK, I get it now. And I still disagree.

Giving our basic senior members the rank/grade of Senior Airman, vice SM, serves no useful function, and will add confusion and an unnecessary administrative burden. It's a solution in search of a problem.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: lordmonar on October 25, 2018, 04:43:06 AM
Well.....if we are talking about radical ideas.

How about everyone who comes off the street and joins CAP is called Airman Basic for six months, Level I gets them Airman, 10 months and a technician rating gets them Airman First Class.  At their three year mark they put on Senior Airman.

At that point if you meet certain criteria (college, advanced skill, professional licenses, etc) you can opt to go to OTS and put on 2d Lt at the 4 year mark or got to NCO School and put on Staff Sergeant if you meet the gate keeper criteria.

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: supertigerCH on October 25, 2018, 04:44:07 AM
In my mind... it was more of a wondering if it was a more fitting term & rank category (for the certain type of CAP members described in the original post)... than Senior Member without grade [and a better way of dealing with the 2 types of people that make up the senior membership of CAP].

Fair enough though.  "Solution looking for a problem",  I realize can be just as valid of an opinion for people who see it that way.

While I cetrainly also don't believe in creating solutions for non-existent problems... there are times when ideas for improvement come along.  Some turn out to be worth it, and some are never useful enough to make it off the drawing board.

Anyway, fair enough.  Thanks for giving honest opinion.  That's why we're here I guess...



Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: SarDragon on October 25, 2018, 07:31:15 AM
senior member = any non-cadet member

Senior Member (SM) = the grade designation used on documents to denote any senior member not having been promoted to a higher grade

senior member without grade = an unofficial referential term used in two publications (M39-1 and R35-5) to talk about non-officer/non-NCO members (generally new members)

In reviewing those publications, it appears that "senior member without grade" is being replaced with "adults without grade", which, IMHO, is still unsatisfactory, since "adult member" may also refer to cadets age 18 and older.

All this may appear pedantic, but that's how the regs read, and what we must work with.
Title: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Mitchell 1969 on October 25, 2018, 08:18:03 AM
Way back in the beginning, there were no ranks in CAP. There were positions. That didn't last long. Ranks were introduced. Everybody in CAP was then simply a member of CAP. But...some members  were officers, some were NCO's, some were Private's.

The need to differentiate membership classes didn't arise until there were two classes. Then there were cadets and members.

Senior Member has always been a poor choice, to me. It only has meaning within CAP. Telling an outsider "I am a Senior Member" makes sense to the SM, but is an odd term to outsiders. "Senior Member?" As in, been around a long time? (With ensuing puzzlement when the 20-year old "Senior Member" I traduces himself). Does "Senior Member" mean a Member over 65?

It's just weird. Might as well say "I'm Poobah Member Jones. I'll be introducing Grand Poobah Smith in a few minutes. Meanwhile while we are waiting, Cadet Snuffy will be drilling some cadets and we can watch. It's actually his time doing that as a cadet. Cadet Snuffy will become Poobah Member Snuffy next week, on his birthday. Yes, CAP is divided into cadets and Poobah Members...

Anyway, "Senior Member" is just weird. It isn't clear as to where the Seniority is and makes no sense without an explanation that might never find an opportunity to happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: SarDragon on October 25, 2018, 08:21:07 AM
Well said, Bernie. I thoroughly agree.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: N6RVT on October 25, 2018, 02:27:05 PM
As it stands SMWOG is a 6 month temporary position out of which appointment to officer grade is essentially guaranteed.

I still think the FO grades should not be limited to a 3 year age range.  Let every senior member start out as an FO

If you want a better sounding title for a new member - we already have it.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: CAP9907 on October 25, 2018, 03:04:10 PM
Quote from: Dwight Dutton on October 25, 2018, 02:27:05 PM


I still think the FO grades should not be limited to a 3 year age range.  Let every senior member start out as an FO

If you want a better sounding title for a new member - we already have it.

I cant disagree with this... it actually makes good sense to me
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: THRAWN on October 25, 2018, 03:28:24 PM
Quote from: Dwight Dutton on October 25, 2018, 02:27:05 PM
As it stands SMWOG is a 6 month temporary position out of which appointment to officer grade is essentially guaranteed.

I still think the FO grades should not be limited to a 3 year age range.  Let every senior member start out as an FO

If you want a better sounding title for a new member - we already have it.

Super idea, and it would have worked well if it hadn't been for those pesky NCOs.

According to 35-3, FO grades outrank NCOs. If a member decides to go the NCO path of rainbows and unicorns, he is essentially getting demoted to do so.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: PHall on October 25, 2018, 03:54:28 PM
Quote from: Dwight Dutton on October 25, 2018, 02:27:05 PM
As it stands SMWOG is a 6 month temporary position out of which appointment to officer grade is essentially guaranteed.

I still think the FO grades should not be limited to a 3 year age range.  Let every senior member start out as an FO

If you want a better sounding title for a new member - we already have it.

SMWOG is NOT a temporary position. You can join and be a member for 50 years and still be a SMWOG if that is your wish.
Promotions to higher grade are not mandatory. We don't have an "Up or Out" policy in CAP like the "real military" has.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Eclipse on October 25, 2018, 04:06:39 PM
Quote from: PHall on October 25, 2018, 03:54:28 PM
SWWOG is NOT a temporary position. You can join and be a member for 50 years and still be a SMWOG if that is your wish.
Promotions to higher grade are not mandatory. We don't have an "Up or Out" policy in CAP like the "real military" has.

Humorously, you can be a unit commander, or for that matter even a Wing or National CC, as a Senior Member,
but not wearing E-9 stripes.

It's not workable in a volunteer paradigm where the majority of the institutional knowledge lives in
the older members with inconsistent, and sometimes nonexistent development, but an "up or out" policy
would at least allow for people to see a natural end.

I've said this before - spend 10 years in the military or a corporate job and separate and it's a "success",
leave CAP after 10 years and you're a "quitter".

Frankly, for most members, that 25-year mark is probably where the cut off should be for everybody.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on October 25, 2018, 04:36:32 PM
PHall, your last post,  :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

I agree there is no need to change Senior Member. I have never, ever met anyone that when told about Senior Member equates that with being old or above 60. And I have been a Senior Member for about 20 years!

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: SarDragon on October 25, 2018, 04:53:39 PM
Again, SMWOG is an invention, a nonentity having NO official basis. You will not find "SMWOG" in any CAP publication. Anywhere.

Sent using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: NovemberWhiskey on October 25, 2018, 05:17:38 PM
There are "adult individuals without grade" referred to in CAPM 39-1 for example. Is there some fine distinction between "adult individuals" and "senior members" you're trying to draw out?
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: SarDragon on October 25, 2018, 05:25:11 PM
Quote from: NovemberWhiskey on October 25, 2018, 05:17:38 PM
There are "adult individuals without grade" referred to in CAPM 39-1 for example. Is there some fine distinction between "adult individuals" and "senior members" you're trying to draw out?
I am trying to point out the uselessness of SMWOG in any discussion.

I did, in fact, come across "adult individuals ...' in my search for SMWOG and its expansion. It appears to be becoming the favored term.

Sent using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: Mitchell 1969 on October 25, 2018, 06:14:40 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on October 25, 2018, 05:25:11 PM
Quote from: NovemberWhiskey on October 25, 2018, 05:17:38 PM
There are "adult individuals without grade" referred to in CAPM 39-1 for example. Is there some fine distinction between "adult individuals" and "senior members" you're trying to draw out?
I am trying to point out the uselessness of SMWOG in any discussion.

I did, in fact, come across "adult individuals ...' in my search for SMWOG and its expansion. It appears to be becoming the favored term.

Sent using Tapatalk

Except "adult individuals" describes anyone who is an adult, whether in CAP or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: SarDragon on October 25, 2018, 07:10:44 PM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on October 25, 2018, 06:14:40 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on October 25, 2018, 05:25:11 PM
Quote from: NovemberWhiskey on October 25, 2018, 05:17:38 PM
There are "adult individuals without grade" referred to in CAPM 39-1 for example. Is there some fine distinction between "adult individuals" and "senior members" you're trying to draw out?
I am trying to point out the uselessness of SMWOG in any discussion.

I did, in fact, come across "adult individuals ...' in my search for SMWOG and its expansion. It appears to be becoming the favored term.

Sent using Tapatalk

Except "adult individuals" describes anyone who is an adult, whether in CAP or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[emoji23]

Sent using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: FW on October 25, 2018, 08:59:56 PM
After reading this very intellectual thread, I've come to the conclusion we must copyright the term "SMOWG", and incorporate this as the initial grade in CAP.  I would have enjoyed being addressed as SMOWG Weiss, back in the day! :o ;D >:D
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Live2Learn on October 25, 2018, 09:00:45 PM
Quote from: PHall on October 24, 2018, 08:35:44 PM
What's wrong with just Senior Member?  Senior Airman is an actual grade in the Air Force and we don't want any confusion, right?

+1

Also, it's very clear that many SM don't really put much weight on the "officer" title.  While some of our members are motivated by prospects of LOOKING like a person who is in the military (complete with uniform and 'rank'), other very productive, very supportive, adult members view it differently.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on October 25, 2018, 11:23:47 PM
I think a lot of members at some time misunderstood the phrase "Senior Member without grade" and started using it that way thinking it was the intention of NHQ. Mistakenly. For the first ten years of my CAP service I was reading on CAP manuals references to "senior members without grade" but never ever heard anyone referring to "SMWOG." It was only about five to eight years that I ever found people literally using the phrase.

"It is in CAPM 39-1." So is Captain bars. So when are we going to read this rank is not "Captain" but "Captain Bars?"

"It is in CAPM 39-1." So is Major's rank. So when are we going to read this rank is not "Major" but "Major Rank?"
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: supertigerCH on October 26, 2018, 12:05:47 AM
Quote from: PHall on October 25, 2018, 03:54:28 PM

SMWOG is NOT a temporary position. You can join and be a member for 50 years and still be a SMWOG if that is your wish.
Promotions to higher grade are not mandatory. We don't have an "Up or Out" policy in CAP like the "real military" has.


Yes to this PHall. 

Well said.  I guess this is the issue that lead to my starting this thread! (and suggesting a possible solution... although certainly there might be other ways to address it... that are even better than my idea).
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: supertigerCH on October 26, 2018, 12:23:00 AM
Quote from: Dwight Dutton on October 25, 2018, 02:27:05 PM

I still think the FO grades should not be limited to a 3 year age range.  Let every senior member start out as an FO

If you want a better sounding title for a new member - we already have it.


I agree very much with what you're saying here.

As a matter of fact, maybe that is an even better solution than the one I originally suggested (which was all members joining CAP as Senior Airman).

As you are pointing out here... an even better answer is right before our eyes... and it would not require creating any new ranks that don't existJust make slight amendment to the Flight Officer ranks that already exist!  Open them up wider than what they are now... & have all new members join as flight officers.

Then, similar to my original suggestion, those members interested in officer track (things like leadership & more professional development) can choose as soon as the time is right, to begin the process for promotion to 2LT.  Those members that are loyal hard workers... but have no interest in leadership positions/advancement... could remain flight officers (with perhaps promotion to Tech Flight Officer and Senior Flight Officer based on years of good service (10 years, 20 years?  or maybe based on something else?).

Cadets who turn 18... could (I assume) continue to become flight officers (with the usual age 21 for pursuing officer track).


This sounds like it could be an even better idea than the one I first posted.  Instead of creating something that is not currently part of CAP, just make slight adjustment to policy... on ranks that we already have (and it takes care of the situation of 2 types of members that I originally talked about -- leader/officer types... and those who just want to serve faithfully without focusing on advancement).

Sounds like an even better possible solution... than the one I first thought of.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Hawk200 on November 07, 2018, 02:08:20 AM
Seems like there is a desire to classify the "non rank" of Senior Member Without Grade as some type of rank. Not really seeing any reason to do this.

What I can understand is wanting a better term for the people joining up that haven't yet earned a rank. Something better than "Senior Member Without Grade Smith." (Doesn't really roll off the tongue smoothly now, does it?)

Maybe a term like "Candidate?"

Personally, I wouldn't have an issue with someone new being addressed as "Airman" (and just "Airman," not "Senior Airman") although I suspect that could be confusing. But, it would probably be more fitting than anything else, and at least it would be a functional term of address.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Eclipse on November 07, 2018, 02:17:08 AM
The proper term for new adult members, up to them being promoted is...

"Senior Member".

While the term "Senior Member without grade" does appear in a few places,
it's really "Senior Member (without grade)".
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: SarDragon on November 07, 2018, 02:21:21 AM
Hawk, I direct you to replies 18 and 27, with my explanation of the non-term  SMWOG.

Sent using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: Hawk200 on November 07, 2018, 11:58:54 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on November 07, 2018, 02:21:21 AM
Hawk, I direct you to replies 18 and 27, with my explanation of the non-term  SMWOG.

Sent using Tapatalk
Saw those. I think the issue is that "Senior Member" seems awkward, and doesn't really describe a placement like "Lieutenant" or "Major" does. It's also a bit of a long winded term.

"Senior Member" can be confusing to outsiders. Most people have heard of lieutenants, captains, majors, or colonels; but "Senior Member" doesn't really say much. I think some folks would like to see a term that has some sense of meaning outside of CAP. What that might be is what is up in the air.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Fubar on November 07, 2018, 06:19:52 PM
I've found that the audience dictates the terminology that I'll use. Internally everyone knows what senior member means and even SMWOG. Externally I'll use "adult members" if the discussion needs to delineate between adults and kids. When talking with outsiders I don't think I've ever used terms like "officer" or one of our grades since they don't translate well externally (especially when working with members of the military).

We do so much and run in so many directions, it doesn't seem surprising to me that we have these types of issues. When you look at other organizations that are even older than CAP such as the Red Cross or Boy Scouts, they don't seem to have these challenges since they are far more focused. I don't say that as a criticism to CAP, only to say we can't fit much of what we do into nice little boxes.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: TheSkyHornet on November 07, 2018, 06:36:33 PM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on October 25, 2018, 08:18:03 AM
Way back in the beginning, there were no ranks in CAP. There were positions. That didn't last long. Ranks were introduced. Everybody in CAP was then simply a member of CAP. But...some members  were officers, some were NCO's, some were Private's.

The need to differentiate membership classes didn't arise until there were two classes. Then there were cadets and members.

Senior Member has always been a poor choice, to me. It only has meaning within CAP. Telling an outsider "I am a Senior Member" makes sense to the SM, but is an odd term to outsiders. "Senior Member?" As in, been around a long time? (With ensuing puzzlement when the 20-year old "Senior Member" I traduces himself). Does "Senior Member" mean a Member over 65?

It's just weird. Might as well say "I'm Poobah Member Jones. I'll be introducing Grand Poobah Smith in a few minutes. Meanwhile while we are waiting, Cadet Snuffy will be drilling some cadets and we can watch. It's actually his time doing that as a cadet. Cadet Snuffy will become Poobah Member Snuffy next week, on his birthday. Yes, CAP is divided into cadets and Poobah Members...

Anyway, "Senior Member" is just weird. It isn't clear as to where the Seniority is and makes no sense without an explanation that might never find an opportunity to happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Member" would suffice, as in "I'm a Civil Air Patrol Member" or "I'm a Member in Civil Air Patrol."

We over-complicate things by trying to provide internal clarity. The result is the outside public that we market to or work alongside has no idea what the heck we're talking about.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: etodd on November 08, 2018, 01:25:10 AM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on October 25, 2018, 08:18:03 AM

Might as well say "I'm Poobah Member Jones. I'll be introducing Grand Poobah Smith in a few minutes. Meanwhile while we are waiting, Cadet Snuffy will be drilling some cadets and we can watch. It's actually his time doing that as a cadet. Cadet Snuffy will become Poobah Member Snuffy next week, on his birthday. Yes, CAP is divided into cadets and Poobah Members...


^^^  Made me think of this:

(http://www.topcartoons.tv/wp-content/uploads/The-Buffalo-Convention.jpg)

Maybe we could go for these hats. The color is good. :)
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on November 08, 2018, 02:03:53 AM
Those hats in that color? Will have to be for the Corporates. The AF will not accept them with the Blues.

In Blue, they match the tie.

In Grey, since the pants are grey.

And another advantage, should be warm in winter.

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: Mitchell 1969 on November 08, 2018, 08:18:55 AM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on November 07, 2018, 06:36:33 PM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on October 25, 2018, 08:18:03 AM
Way back in the beginning, there were no ranks in CAP. There were positions. That didn't last long. Ranks were introduced. Everybody in CAP was then simply a member of CAP. But...some members  were officers, some were NCO's, some were Private's.

The need to differentiate membership classes didn't arise until there were two classes. Then there were cadets and members.

Senior Member has always been a poor choice, to me. It only has meaning within CAP. Telling an outsider "I am a Senior Member" makes sense to the SM, but is an odd term to outsiders. "Senior Member?" As in, been around a long time? (With ensuing puzzlement when the 20-year old "Senior Member" I traduces himself). Does "Senior Member" mean a Member over 65?

It's just weird. Might as well say "I'm Poobah Member Jones. I'll be introducing Grand Poobah Smith in a few minutes. Meanwhile while we are waiting, Cadet Snuffy will be drilling some cadets and we can watch. It's actually his time doing that as a cadet. Cadet Snuffy will become Poobah Member Snuffy next week, on his birthday. Yes, CAP is divided into cadets and Poobah Members...

Anyway, "Senior Member" is just weird. It isn't clear as to where the Seniority is and makes no sense without an explanation that might never find an opportunity to happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Member" would suffice, as in "I'm a Civil Air Patrol Member" or "I'm a Member in Civil Air Patrol."

We over-complicate things by trying to provide internal clarity. The result is the outside public that we market to or work alongside has no idea what the heck we're talking about.

But..."Member" does nothing to delineate that one particular oddity. Because EVERYONE who belongs to CAP is a Member, including Cadet Staff Sergeant, Cadet Colonel, Senior Flight Officer, Lieutenant General or Major General. Not to mention the Patrons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: RiverAux on November 08, 2018, 02:41:52 PM
QuoteSomething better than "Senior Member Without Grade Smith." (Doesn't really roll off the tongue smoothly now, does it?)

Obviously, the proper way to say SMWOG Smith is "Smaug Smith"...
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: TheSkyHornet on November 08, 2018, 02:47:43 PM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on November 08, 2018, 08:18:55 AM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on November 07, 2018, 06:36:33 PM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on October 25, 2018, 08:18:03 AM
Way back in the beginning, there were no ranks in CAP. There were positions. That didn't last long. Ranks were introduced. Everybody in CAP was then simply a member of CAP. But...some members  were officers, some were NCO's, some were Private's.

The need to differentiate membership classes didn't arise until there were two classes. Then there were cadets and members.

Senior Member has always been a poor choice, to me. It only has meaning within CAP. Telling an outsider "I am a Senior Member" makes sense to the SM, but is an odd term to outsiders. "Senior Member?” As in, been around a long time? (With ensuing puzzlement when the 20-year old "Senior Member" I traduces himself). Does "Senior Member" mean a Member over 65?

It's just weird. Might as well say "I'm Poobah Member Jones. I'll be introducing Grand Poobah Smith in a few minutes. Meanwhile while we are waiting, Cadet Snuffy will be drilling some cadets and we can watch. It's actually his time doing that as a cadet. Cadet Snuffy will become Poobah Member Snuffy next week, on his birthday. Yes, CAP is divided into cadets and Poobah Members...

Anyway, "Senior Member" is just weird. It isn't clear as to where the Seniority is and makes no sense without an explanation that might never find an opportunity to happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Member" would suffice, as in "I'm a Civil Air Patrol Member" or "I'm a Member in Civil Air Patrol."

We over-complicate things by trying to provide internal clarity. The result is the outside public that we market to or work alongside has no idea what the heck we're talking about.

But..."Member" does nothing to delineate that one particular oddity. Because EVERYONE who belongs to CAP is a Member, including Cadet Staff Sergeant, Cadet Colonel, Senior Flight Officer, Lieutenant General or Major General. Not to mention the Patrons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, and?

CAP Member --- everything applies
Aerospace Education Member --- sub-category of membership
Patron --- sub-category of membership
Cadet Sponsor Member --- sub-category of membership
Cadet --- sub-category of membership

"The standards set forth in this regulation apply to CAP Members in generality, including cadet members, but exclude all other sub-categories of membership." or "Unless otherwise mentioned, this standard applies to all CAP Members."

Why is this such a difficult thing? Where is the issue with distinctly identifying a membership group in the regulations?

The oddity isn't the 'senior member;' the oddities are the other sub-categories that really don't fall under most of the regulatory guidelines for the many texts we have. Identify them in specificity when applicable, and ignore them for the remainder of the standard.

"Senior Member" is only a problem in one single area of CAP....public relations.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: Eclipse on November 08, 2018, 02:53:07 PM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on November 08, 2018, 02:47:43 PM
"Senior Member" is only a problem in one single area of CAP....public relations.

Honestly, is it there either?  HWSRN decided it was, that was when most of the "concern" about
the term started, before then, no one cared.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: TheSkyHornet on November 08, 2018, 04:30:56 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on November 08, 2018, 02:53:07 PM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on November 08, 2018, 02:47:43 PM
"Senior Member" is only a problem in one single area of CAP....public relations.

Honestly, is it there either?  HWSRN decided it was, that was when most of the "concern" about
the term started, before then, no one cared.

Well, I do think that under public perception, "senior member" is not an attractive term, especially for younger CAP members who were not formerly cadets. It's a term I can somewhat talk to parents whilst using, but it's not appealing to the person who is interested in joining because it doesn't describe what it is that a "senior member" is: Is it an older person? Is it a higher-ranking person? Why is it 'senior?'

I can tell someone I'm a member of CAP. They get what that means. I tell someone that I'm a senior member of CAP, and I get asked "Oh, what's that?" All the time.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: etodd on November 08, 2018, 05:21:17 PM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on November 08, 2018, 04:30:56 PM

I can tell someone I'm a member of CAP. They get what that means. I tell someone that I'm a senior member of CAP, and I get asked "Oh, what's that?" All the time.

Thinking back, I can't remember many times even saying member. I will usually say something like "I do some volunteer work with the Civil Air Patrol". While yes, I'm very active, thats how I think of it. I'm a volunteer that helps out when I can.

I tell folks we are a volunteer org that can always use more "help". Come check us out.  That seems to get a better initial reaction and interest than to say "I'm a member and we are looking for new recruits".
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: SarDragon on November 08, 2018, 07:11:57 PM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on November 08, 2018, 02:47:43 PM
"Senior Member" is only a problem in one single area of CAP....public relations.

Almost.

A major issue, IMHO and that of others, is the rank/grade block on forms. That field MUST be filled in the database. SM has been chosen as the appropriate filler for those members not having a different/higher grade.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on November 08, 2018, 08:07:24 PM
In my 20 or so years in CAP, I have never had a problem when explaining that adults are referenced as senior members and cadets as those members under 18, while those between 18 and 21 can be cadets or senior members. The people that I talked to understand that senior member is only a category. Nor I have been concerned or felt a put-down  when I had to look at me as a senior member.

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: TheSkyHornet on November 08, 2018, 08:43:56 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on November 08, 2018, 07:11:57 PM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on November 08, 2018, 02:47:43 PM
"Senior Member" is only a problem in one single area of CAP....public relations.

Almost.

A major issue, IMHO and that of others, is the rank/grade block on forms. That field MUST be filled in the database. SM has been chosen as the appropriate filler for those members not having a different/higher grade.

And, in that case, we're back at square one on the OP:
What do we call people who are senior members who do not have a grade?

SM(WOG) does not seem to be inappropriate. "Officer Candidate" is inappropriate for NCO-bound members.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: CAP_truth on November 08, 2018, 11:40:33 PM
We have Cadet Basic why not Senior Basic.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: TheSkyHornet on November 09, 2018, 03:02:56 PM
Quote from: CAP_truth on November 08, 2018, 11:40:33 PM
We have Cadet Basic why not Senior Basic.

We don't have "Cadet Basic." We have Cadet Airman Basic, just as we have C/Amn, C/A1C, and so forth.

"Basic" cadets was a term used for Encampments, which has been done away with after the revised Encampment program was introduced to refer to them as "Students."

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Holding Pattern on November 09, 2018, 06:18:31 PM
I can't believe I missed this thread!

One of the rare opportunities to plug my favorite military grade that would be so perfect for CAP:

Temporary Third Lieutenant
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: TheSkyHornet on November 09, 2018, 06:25:43 PM
Quote from: Holding Pattern on November 09, 2018, 06:18:31 PM
Temporary Third Lieutenant

Staff Rear Vice Petty Lance Master Gunnery Third Lieutenant Specialist, Chief Second Class
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: CAPOfficer on November 09, 2018, 07:35:45 PM

Why not call them what they are, Senior Recruit or Senior Trainee; after all, both can be defined as; an apprentice, a learner, a novice or a beginner.  Isn't that what exactly how we view and new personnel.

As far a how to address them, it's still Mr./Ms. (last name).

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Color Guard Rifleman on November 09, 2018, 07:52:26 PM
Quote from: CAPOfficer on November 09, 2018, 07:35:45 PM

Why not call them what they are, Senior Recruit or Senior Trainee; after all, both can be defined as; an apprentice, a learner, a novice or a beginner.  Isn't that what exactly how we view and new personnel.

As far a how to address them, it's still Mr./Ms. (last name).

Recruit wouldn't work due to CAP being volunteer service, not a part of the armed forces. How about "Senior Associate"? Most anything but "recruit" would work.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: PHall on November 09, 2018, 07:55:55 PM
Quote from: Color Guard Rifleman on November 09, 2018, 07:52:26 PM
Quote from: CAPOfficer on November 09, 2018, 07:35:45 PM

Why not call them what they are, Senior Recruit or Senior Trainee; after all, both can be defined as; an apprentice, a learner, a novice or a beginner.  Isn't that what exactly how we view and new personnel.

As far a how to address them, it's still Mr./Ms. (last name).

Recruit wouldn't work due to CAP being volunteer service, not a part of the armed forces. How about "Senior Associate"? Most anything but "recruit" would work.


Recruit is a Navy/Coast Guard thing.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Color Guard Rifleman on November 09, 2018, 08:00:11 PM
Quote from: PHall on November 09, 2018, 07:55:55 PM
Quote from: Color Guard Rifleman on November 09, 2018, 07:52:26 PM
Quote from: CAPOfficer on November 09, 2018, 07:35:45 PM

Why not call them what they are, Senior Recruit or Senior Trainee; after all, both can be defined as; an apprentice, a learner, a novice or a beginner.  Isn't that what exactly how we view and new personnel.

As far a how to address them, it's still Mr./Ms. (last name).

Recruit wouldn't work due to CAP being volunteer service, not a part of the armed forces. How about "Senior Associate"? Most anything but "recruit" would work.


Recruit is a Navy/Coast Guard thing.

Exactly my point. we aren't even close to being related to the Navy or Coast Guard. (Other than asked to help in the GLR region with SAR)
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on November 09, 2018, 11:11:50 PM
Referring to "senior associates" would cause confusion with the member category "associate member."

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Eclipse on November 10, 2018, 01:16:05 AM
"Recruit" has a specific meaning in those contexts as well, as in "not a full member",
which isn't the case with SM(WOG).  Once they are done with L1 they can do anything
except some of the Distance Learning classes without any grade ever.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: FW on November 10, 2018, 02:24:18 AM
Can't we just discuss uniforms?? LOL ;D
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Gunsotsu on November 10, 2018, 04:09:34 AM
Short of adopting a structure similar to the CGAux, this thread is pointless.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: SarDragon on November 10, 2018, 04:25:40 AM
Quote from: Gunsotsu on November 10, 2018, 04:09:34 AM
Short of adopting a structure similar to the CGAux, this thread is pointless.
Lighten up, Francis.

Actually, this has been an interesting discussion, albeit without any solution. "Senior member" has been a problem for a long time, yet none of the great minds in our organization have managed to come up with an acceptable alternative.

Sent using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Lord of the North on November 10, 2018, 05:12:32 AM
Well you could always call them Officer Candidate
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Eclipse on November 10, 2018, 05:39:23 AM
Quote from: Lord of the North on November 10, 2018, 05:12:32 AM
Well you could always call them Officer Candidate

But they aren't necessarily.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Lord of the North on November 10, 2018, 07:03:56 AM
Until the new members choses to go to the NCO grade structure, he is an Officer Candidate (either "commissioned or Non-Commissioned).
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: Mitchell 1969 on November 10, 2018, 08:36:34 AM
Quote from: CAP_truth on November 08, 2018, 11:40:33 PM
We have Cadet Basic why not Senior Basic.

Besides not being accurate (we do not have "Cadet Basic"), that still doesn't address the problem of using the word "Senior" in the rank title. "Senior" could mean somebody of high rank (which it does not, in this case), or it could mean somebody who is older, especially leading to denote somebody of retirement age, both of which may be true in specific cases but which are likely to be otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: Mitchell 1969 on November 10, 2018, 08:42:00 AM
Quote from: CAPOfficer on November 09, 2018, 07:35:45 PM

Why not call them what they are, Senior Recruit or Senior Trainee; after all, both can be defined as; an apprentice, a learner, a novice or a beginner.  Isn't that what exactly how we view and new personnel.

As far a how to address them, it's still Mr./Ms. (last name).

But, can't you see how "Senior Recruit" is an oxymoron? How does somebody with less than six months in become a "Senior" anything? Yes, we use it to distinguish between cadet members and non-cadet members, but it is still meaningless and confusing to outsiders (especially when approaching them for recruiting purposes) and to outside agencies.   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: Hawk200 on November 10, 2018, 01:11:59 PM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on November 10, 2018, 08:42:00 AM
But, can't you see how "Senior Recruit" is an oxymoron? How does somebody with less than six months in become a "Senior" anything? Yes, we use it to distinguish between cadet members and non-cadet members, but it is still meaningless and confusing to outsiders (especially when approaching them for recruiting purposes) and to outside agencies. 

Emphasis added. I think this is part of the problem when it comes to outside view. "Senior Member" doesn't mean anything to anyone outside.

Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on November 10, 2018, 08:36:34 AM
Quote from: CAP_truth on November 08, 2018, 11:40:33 PM
We have Cadet Basic why not Senior Basic.

Besides not being accurate (we do not have "Cadet Basic"), that still doesn't address the problem of using the word "Senior" in the rank title. "Senior" could mean somebody of high rank (which it does not, in this case), or it could mean somebody who is older, especially leading to denote somebody of retirement age, both of which may be true in specific cases but which are likely to be otherwise.

This is a salient point. Any cadet that joins is an "Airman Basic" the day they get their ID card. "Airman Basic" is a known rank in the Air Force.

We don't have anything similar for senior members. In an organization with a paramilitary rank structure, the concept just doesn't compute to people with even vague knowledge of the military. "How can you not have any rank?" or "What rank is that?" are probably the most common thoughts if they don't outright ask the questions.

Most people that join would probably like to be able to say that they're something (anything) that non members would recognize in some way. Until they make lieutenant, they don't have a designation that is recognizable to anyone outside. They probably don't have the background to really explain why either. The non member is probably a little lost as to what the person's purpose or place is, and could stifle any further interest in the program, too. When it comes to recruiting, not being able to clarify the organization really hurts that endeavor. (Then again, what else do we do that doesn't make sense to those outside, and hurts us in that regard as well?)

This is probably not an issue for those becoming NCOs. If asked as far as their rank goes, the answer is probably something along the lines of "Oh, I'm going to be a Sergeant, just getting some training out of the way first." They have the kind of background where they can be succinct in their explanation, and most of the people asking will understand.

Maybe the answer is to not focus on the new individual being a "Senior Member," but focus more on the "You're going to be a lieutenant." More of our own cultural adapting than creating something new.That would probably satisfy the outsiders, and wouldn't blunt their potential interest in the program.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: etodd on November 10, 2018, 06:01:54 PM
Whats wrong with Senior Member? I was going to be quite happy being one, and still call myself one sometimes. I never asked to be a 2nd Lt, but my Commander announced I was one at a meeting one day, after I hit the six month mark. Being a MP, meant I had checked off all the boxes for 2nd Lt, but I didn't ask for the "promotion". I didn't argue at the meeting that night and let it slide. But I still just think of myself as a Senior Member Volunteer.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: PHall on November 10, 2018, 07:01:09 PM
Quote from: etodd on November 10, 2018, 06:01:54 PM
Whats wrong with Senior Member? I was going to be quite happy being one, and still call myself one sometimes. I never asked to be a 2nd Lt, but my Commander announced I was one at a meeting one day, after I hit the six month mark. Being a MP, meant I had checked off all the boxes for 2nd Lt, but I didn't ask for the "promotion". I didn't argue at the meeting that night and let it slide. But I still just think of myself as a Senior Member Volunteer.

You know, you don't have to stay a 2d Lt if you don't want to. You can request a demotion back to Senior Member with no ill effects.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Gunsotsu on November 10, 2018, 07:24:59 PM
Quote from: etodd on November 10, 2018, 06:01:54 PM
Whats wrong with Senior Member? I was going to be quite happy being one, and still call myself one sometimes. I never asked to be a 2nd Lt, but my Commander announced I was one at a meeting one day, after I hit the six month mark. Being a MP, meant I had checked off all the boxes for 2nd Lt, but I didn't ask for the "promotion". I didn't argue at the meeting that night and let it slide. But I still just think of myself as a Senior Member Volunteer.

CAP grade structure for SENIOR MEMBERS (just drop this nonsensical notion that the title for adults in the program needs to change) is meaningless.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: etodd on November 10, 2018, 07:31:22 PM
Quote from: PHall on November 10, 2018, 07:01:09 PM
Quote from: etodd on November 10, 2018, 06:01:54 PM
Whats wrong with Senior Member? I was going to be quite happy being one, and still call myself one sometimes. I never asked to be a 2nd Lt, but my Commander announced I was one at a meeting one day, after I hit the six month mark. Being a MP, meant I had checked off all the boxes for 2nd Lt, but I didn't ask for the "promotion". I didn't argue at the meeting that night and let it slide. But I still just think of myself as a Senior Member Volunteer.

You know, you don't have to stay a 2d Lt if you don't want to. You can request a demotion back to Senior Member with no ill effects.

I started to, but then just didn't want to have to explain it to everyone there. Felt it would be better politically, just to let it go.  :)
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Hawk200 on November 10, 2018, 09:20:10 PM
Quote from: Gunsotsu on November 10, 2018, 07:24:59 PM
Quote from: etodd on November 10, 2018, 06:01:54 PM
Whats wrong with Senior Member? I was going to be quite happy being one, and still call myself one sometimes. I never asked to be a 2nd Lt, but my Commander announced I was one at a meeting one day, after I hit the six month mark. Being a MP, meant I had checked off all the boxes for 2nd Lt, but I didn't ask for the "promotion". I didn't argue at the meeting that night and let it slide. But I still just think of myself as a Senior Member Volunteer.

CAP grade structure for SENIOR MEMBERS (just drop this nonsensical notion that the title for adults in the program needs to change) is meaningless.

Gee, uptight much?  ::)
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Fubar on November 11, 2018, 01:36:56 AM
How about "probationary member" until a grade is conferred?
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: etodd on November 11, 2018, 02:07:29 AM
Quote from: Fubar on November 11, 2018, 01:36:56 AM
How about "probationary member" until a grade is conferred?

So you could be a 20 year probationary member if you didn't want a grade?  :o I'd rather stick with Senior Member.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Hawk200 on November 11, 2018, 01:11:21 PM
Quote from: etodd on November 11, 2018, 02:07:29 AM
Quote from: Fubar on November 11, 2018, 01:36:56 AM
How about "probationary member" until a grade is conferred?

So you could be a 20 year probationary member if you didn't want a grade?  :o I'd rather stick with Senior Member.

That throws a monkey wrench into things.  It discounts the use of "candidate," since the individual doesn't have a desire to promote.

Now what?  ;D

Maybe "Poobah" is the way to go.... :D
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: PHall on November 11, 2018, 05:21:37 PM
How about "None of the Above"? This whole question is a solution in search of a "problem" to solve.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on November 11, 2018, 06:02:00 PM
Candidate would be a bad choice. People mostly understand to be a candidate someone that is applying to an organization. Still a candidate after waiting for 20 years? If (s)he was worthy of admission, (s)he would have been accepted immediately. Why is (s)he still being considered?


Having said that, "senior member as a category is perfectly acceptable. Have you talked with anyone outside the organization that can verify whether there is confusion? No? Stop worrying!


Just like PHall and others have stated, "senior member" is good enough, there is no need to be concerned!



Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: OldGuy on November 12, 2018, 02:37:51 AM
Quote from: Fubar on November 11, 2018, 01:36:56 AM
How about "probationary member" until a grade is conferred?
Temporary third lieutenant?
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: NC Hokie on November 12, 2018, 05:13:14 PM
I may regret weighing in on this thread, but...

I have always disliked addressing new senior members as Senior Member, and I agree that SM(WOG) is a clumsy attempt to force something into the established rank structure that simply does not fit.  So, if we want to give new senior members a rank (to make addressing them less clumsy, keep eServices from choking on a blank rank field in some database somewhere, etc.), I suggest that we use Airman.

You may now proceed to tear my suggestion apart.

>:D
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: PHall on November 12, 2018, 05:38:40 PM
Quote from: NC Hokie on November 12, 2018, 05:13:14 PM
I may regret weighing in on this thread, but...

I have always disliked addressing new senior members as Senior Member, and I agree that SM(WOG) is a clumsy attempt to force something into the established rank structure that simply does not fit.  So, if we want to give new senior members a rank (to make addressing them less clumsy, keep eServices from choking on a blank rank field in some database somewhere, etc.), I suggest that we use Airman.

You may now proceed to tear my suggestion apart.

>:D

Airman is an actual grade. The opportunity for confusion is great. Why make more problems trying to solve this non-problem?
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: hfriday on November 12, 2018, 07:15:40 PM
If I'm not mistaken, "airman" is also a catch-all for Air Force personnel, as "soldier" is in the Army, and "Marine" in the USMC. By that logic, "airman" is actually a less cumbersome cognate to our "senior member" terminology anyhow as the USAF Auxiliary. It would be, in my opinion, more comprehensible to outsiders, which is the most compelling issue with SM that I have seen on this thread.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: hamburgee on November 12, 2018, 07:41:23 PM
I remember "Officer Candidate" being tossed around in a previous post like this one. However, Senior Member works just fine as stated before... It's been used for years with minimal confusion. I view it as, while all officers are senior members, most have a title: Lieutenant, Captain, et cetera... However, should you not have a title, you're referred to simply as "Senior Member." Just my two cents though.

Additionally: Mr./Ms./Mrs. works fine as well.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Gunsotsu on November 12, 2018, 07:42:18 PM
Quote from: NC Hokie on November 12, 2018, 05:13:14 PM
I have always disliked addressing new senior members as Senior Member

So call them by their name.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: CAPLTC on November 12, 2018, 08:29:35 PM
I think Senior Member works just fine.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: TheSkyHornet on November 12, 2018, 08:44:34 PM
Quote from: Gunsotsu on November 12, 2018, 07:42:18 PM
Quote from: NC Hokie on November 12, 2018, 05:13:14 PM
I have always disliked addressing new senior members as Senior Member

So call them by their name.

"Senior Member Jones"

That's the appropriate address. --- See CAPP 151, page 16
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Shuman 14 on November 14, 2018, 08:44:50 PM
Quote from: Gunsotsu on November 10, 2018, 04:09:34 AM
Short of adopting a structure similar to the CGAux, this thread is pointless.

Well if an USCGAux Member is referred to as an Auxiliarist, could a CAP Member be referred to as a Patroller?

In example, "Lieutenant Jones, allow me to introduce Patroller Smith, he is a new Member to our Squadron."
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: THRAWN on November 14, 2018, 08:58:14 PM
5 pages of solutions looking for problems. Instead of changing the title, how about coming up with some kind of insignia? That's the most important thing....
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Eclipse on November 14, 2018, 09:13:27 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on November 14, 2018, 08:58:14 PM
5 pages of solutions looking for problems. Instead of changing the title, how about coming up with some kind of insignia? That's the most important thing....

I suggest a beret.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Shuman 14 on November 14, 2018, 09:16:57 PM
QuoteI suggest a beret.

Somebody shoot that man!  :P
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: vorteks on November 14, 2018, 09:51:38 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on November 14, 2018, 08:44:50 PM
Quote from: Gunsotsu on November 10, 2018, 04:09:34 AM
Short of adopting a structure similar to the CGAux, this thread is pointless.

Well if an USCGAux Member is referred to as an Auxiliarist, could a CAP Member be referred to as a Patroller?

In example, "Lieutenant Jones, allow me to introduce Patroller Smith, he is a new Member to our Squadron."

No.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: NovemberWhiskey on November 15, 2018, 12:22:29 AM
Quote from: vorteks on November 14, 2018, 09:51:38 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on November 14, 2018, 08:44:50 PM
Well if an USCGAux Member is referred to as an Auxiliarist, could a CAP Member be referred to as a Patroller?

In example, "Lieutenant Jones, allow me to introduce Patroller Smith, he is a new Member to our Squadron."

No.

I would myself find "Patroller Smith" somewhat painful. What's wrong with "Mr Smith", in that case? It's appropriate to use grade when there is one; but if a member doesn't have one then it would also be appropriate to use their title for a formal introduction.

A reasonable response to a form asking for a member's grade would be "none", etc.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: TheSkyHornet on November 15, 2018, 04:47:40 PM
Quote from: NovemberWhiskey on November 15, 2018, 12:22:29 AM
Quote from: vorteks on November 14, 2018, 09:51:38 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on November 14, 2018, 08:44:50 PM
Well if an USCGAux Member is referred to as an Auxiliarist, could a CAP Member be referred to as a Patroller?

In example, "Lieutenant Jones, allow me to introduce Patroller Smith, he is a new Member to our Squadron."

No.

I would myself find "Patroller Smith" somewhat painful. What's wrong with "Mr Smith", in that case? It's appropriate to use grade when there is one; but if a member doesn't have one then it would also be appropriate to use their title for a formal introduction.

A reasonable response to a form asking for a member's grade would be "none", etc.

They have a grade. It's "Senior Member."

Let's go back and reads the books, folks.

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: TheSkyHornet on November 15, 2018, 04:49:46 PM
Fixing problems that are already solved

(http://i63.tinypic.com/v8pu9d.png)
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: vorteks on November 15, 2018, 04:51:48 PM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on November 15, 2018, 04:47:40 PM
Quote from: NovemberWhiskey on November 15, 2018, 12:22:29 AM
Quote from: vorteks on November 14, 2018, 09:51:38 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on November 14, 2018, 08:44:50 PM
Well if an USCGAux Member is referred to as an Auxiliarist, could a CAP Member be referred to as a Patroller?

In example, "Lieutenant Jones, allow me to introduce Patroller Smith, he is a new Member to our Squadron."

No.

I would myself find "Patroller Smith" somewhat painful. What's wrong with "Mr Smith", in that case? It's appropriate to use grade when there is one; but if a member doesn't have one then it would also be appropriate to use their title for a formal introduction.

A reasonable response to a form asking for a member's grade would be "none", etc.

They have a grade. It's "Senior Member."

Let's go back and reads the books, folks.

But that's not a grade it's a title. Thus the often referred to "SMWOG".
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Color Guard Rifleman on November 15, 2018, 05:45:50 PM
Quote from: vorteks on November 15, 2018, 04:51:48 PM
But that's not a grade it's a title. Thus the often referred to "SMWOG".

SMWOG? What's that?
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Eclipse on November 15, 2018, 05:49:41 PM
Quote from: Color Guard Rifleman on November 15, 2018, 05:45:50 PM
Quote from: vorteks on November 15, 2018, 04:51:48 PM
But that's not a grade it's a title. Thus the often referred to "SMWOG".

SMWOG? What's that?
Senior Member (Without Grade)

All adult members of the Civil Air Patrol are "Senior Members", that's the generic term for a member/

Adding the "Without Grade" is simply non-standard shorthand for members who have not yet (of may never),
be promoted, appointed, or equivalenced to a military-style grade in the CAP.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Color Guard Rifleman on November 15, 2018, 05:50:18 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on November 15, 2018, 05:49:41 PM
Quote from: Color Guard Rifleman on November 15, 2018, 05:45:50 PM
Quote from: vorteks on November 15, 2018, 04:51:48 PM
But that's not a grade it's a title. Thus the often referred to "SMWOG".

SMWOG? What's that?
Senior Member (Without Grade)

Oh. That makes since.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: SarDragon on November 15, 2018, 05:54:56 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on October 25, 2018, 04:53:39 PM
Again, SMWOG is an invention, a nonentity having NO official basis. You will not find "SMWOG" in any CAP publication. Anywhere.

Sent using Tapatalk
A reminder, folks.

Sent using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: Color Guard Rifleman on November 15, 2018, 05:59:29 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on November 15, 2018, 05:54:56 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on October 25, 2018, 04:53:39 PM
Again, SMWOG is an invention, a nonentity having NO official basis. You will not find "SMWOG" in any CAP publication. Anywhere.

Sent using Tapatalk
A reminder, folks.

Sent using Tapatalk

I just assumed that the books were old. Not that SWOG wasn't an official thing
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: Eclipse on November 15, 2018, 06:08:04 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on November 15, 2018, 05:54:56 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on October 25, 2018, 04:53:39 PM
Again, SMWOG is an invention, a nonentity having NO official basis. You will not find "SMWOG" in any CAP publication. Anywhere.

Sent using Tapatalk
A reminder, folks.


39-1 uses the more appropriate verbiage of "adults without grade" (or a derivative),
however the term "senior member without grade" does, in fact, appear in the Senior Member Welcome booklet.

At the end of the day "Senior Member" is the generic term for adult members.

CAP has two member classes:

Cadets

Senior Members

Trying to place a grade or other term in place of this is a silly waste of time that won't work logically
for all the reasons already cited, which include...

New members are not "recruits", they are already members. 

They haven't attained any grade, not will they ever be required to, so they are not due the courtesy of that type
of address.

Mr., Ms., or their first name is completely appropriate and works in all cases.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: SarDragon on November 15, 2018, 06:22:43 PM
When I joined the Navy, and went to boot camp, I was a recruit, and committed for four years, so your analogy fails in that respect.

Also, my commentary regarding SMWOG was, and is, restricted to the five letter initialism. I am fully aware of the occurrence of the spelled out phrase in the regs, as noted above.

Sent using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: vorteks on November 15, 2018, 07:23:43 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on November 15, 2018, 06:22:43 PM
When I joined the Navy, and went to boot camp, I was a recruit, and committed for four years, so your analogy fails in that respect.

Also, my commentary regarding SMWOG was, and is, restricted to the five letter initialism. I am fully aware of the occurrence of the spelled out phrase in the regs, as noted above.

Sent using Tapatalk

This of course in no way changes the point I was making when using "SMWOG" in my previous post.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: SarDragon on November 15, 2018, 07:26:41 PM
vorteks, my comment was not aimed at you, but rather Eclipse.

Sent using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: Eclipse on November 15, 2018, 07:34:20 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on November 15, 2018, 06:22:43 PM
When I joined the Navy, and went to boot camp, I was a recruit, and committed for four years, so your analogy fails in that respect.

Assuming I read this right, of course it does.

Navy recruits do not become "seaman" until they complete BMT.

CAP members have nearly full privileges, including use of CAP aircraft, as soon as their background checks
clear and regardless of completing Level 1, which is the nearest thing conversationally to BMT CAP has for adults.

CAP "recruits" are people who haven't written a check yet.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 07:45:30 PM
It is NOT "SMWOG."

This is a misreading of some members!

It IS plainly "SM." Or "Senior Member."



Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 07:47:10 PM
Yes. Let's have a beret.

A pink beret with a blue pompom on top.

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: SarDragon on November 15, 2018, 07:47:40 PM
In that context, you are essentially correcct.

FWIW, I was never a seaman/Seaman. I joined as an Airman Apprentice.

Sent using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 07:50:42 PM
Patroller will cause confusion among some non-members.

"Patroller?"

"Yes."

"Do you have police powers?"

"No."

"So why a patroller?"

Senior Member causes no problems, in 20 years I have told non-members I am a Senior Member I have not seen any puzzled looks, not heard any questions!


Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change &quot;SM without grade&quot; members into &quot;Senior Airmen&quot
Post by: vorteks on November 15, 2018, 08:17:20 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on November 15, 2018, 07:26:41 PM
vorteks, my comment was not aimed at you, but rather Eclipse.

Sent using Tapatalk

copy that
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: vorteks on November 15, 2018, 08:21:02 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 07:45:30 PM
It is NOT "SMWOG."

This is a misreading of some members!

It IS plainly "SM." Or "Senior Member."

In a context SMWOG is an informal but effective way of saying "senior member without grade". As you know. Since when does everything we say here have be right out of a reg? (that's a rhetorical question BTW)
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: vorteks on November 15, 2018, 08:21:50 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 07:50:42 PM
Patroller will cause confusion among some non-members.

Plus it just sounds silly-- as I'm sure it was meant to.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: THRAWN on November 15, 2018, 08:22:13 PM
Quote from: vorteks on November 15, 2018, 08:21:02 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 07:45:30 PM
It is NOT "SMWOG."

This is a misreading of some members!

It IS plainly "SM." Or "Senior Member."

In a context SMWOG is an informal but effective way of saying "senior member without grade". As you know. Since when does everything we say here have be right out of a reg? (that's a rhetorical question BTW)

Senior Member IS a grade. Scroll up.

It's like "airman". A rank, as was pointed out numerous times, and title as in "Air man! Like somethin' out of a dang funny book! Air man! How you gonna like it when somebody calls you "Air man"?"....
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: vorteks on November 15, 2018, 08:32:50 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on November 15, 2018, 08:22:13 PM
Quote from: vorteks on November 15, 2018, 08:21:02 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 07:45:30 PM
It is NOT "SMWOG."

This is a misreading of some members!

It IS plainly "SM." Or "Senior Member."

In a context SMWOG is an informal but effective way of saying "senior member without grade". As you know. Since when does everything we say here have be right out of a reg? (that's a rhetorical question BTW)

Senior Member IS a grade. Scroll up.

It's like "airman". A rank, as was pointed out numerous times, and title as in "Air man! Like somethin' out of a dang funny book! Air man! How you gonna like it when somebody calls you "Air man"?"....

LOL
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 08:42:12 PM
This last message quoting me is the reason how "Senior Member Without Grade" was born.

Where I clearly post it is plainly "SM" or "Senior Member" someone answers "Senior Member IS a grade."

As if I said something different!

The regulation  said "Senior Member without grade" to mean "these members do not have officer grades" and someone interpreted it or read it as "Senior Member Without Grade."

Again, and I am going to make my point increasing the size to make it more visible and readable to everyone.

It is not "Senior Member Without Grade." It is plainly Senior Member!


Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: vorteks on November 15, 2018, 08:43:01 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on November 15, 2018, 08:22:13 PM

Senior Member IS a grade. Scroll up.


Yeah I saw that but it's bogus. Check out CAPR 35-5 section 1.4 for example:

Quote
Initial Grades. All members will be enrolled as CAP members without grade, unless they are specifically exempt from Level I of the Professional Development Program and immediately qualify for an officer grade in consideration of previous CAP experience, as set forth in section 3.

So a CAP member without grade is called "Senior Member" or SM. Makes no sense to have a grade called "Senior Member". It's a title that's all. It's simply meant to differentiate us from cadets for lots of  practical and logistical reasons.

But whatever.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: vorteks on November 15, 2018, 08:44:27 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 08:42:12 PM
This last message quoting me is the reason how "Senior Member Without Grade" was born.

Where I clearly post it is plainly "SM" or "Senior Member" someone answers "Senior Member IS a grade."

As if I said something different!

The regulation  said "Senior Member without grade" to mean "these members do not have officer grades" and interpreted it to mean  "Senior Member Without Grade."

Again, and I am going to make my point increasing the size to make it more visible to everyone.

It is not "Senior Member Without Grade." It is plainly Senior Member!

You seem frustrated.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 08:49:30 PM
Yes I am.

For my first 10 or 15 years I always heard, and used "Senior Member" to differentiate me from cadets. All of a sudden after that I hear people add the moniker "without grade" to that. It is frustrating as hell!

;D

Anyway your last two messages are on point!


Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: vorteks on November 15, 2018, 08:59:47 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 08:49:30 PM
Yes I am.

For my first 10 or 15 years I always heard, and used "Senior Member" to differentiate me from cadets. All of a sudden after that I hear people add the moniker "without grade" to that. It is frustrating as hell!

;D

Anyway your last two messages are on point!


(https://www.roxstarfitness.com/wp-content/uploads/let-it-go.gif)
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Eclipse on November 15, 2018, 09:05:31 PM
She's wearing a non-standard hairstyle...just sayin'...
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 09:07:01 PM
Sorry, I DO NOT watch cartoons!

;D

Cannot dance, either! Have operations on both knees!

:angel:


Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 09:08:03 PM
Yup, she is.

Do Are you thinking asking her to become a member?

8)


Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Eclipse on November 15, 2018, 09:16:00 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 09:08:03 PM
Yup, she is.

Do Are you thinking asking her to become a member?

8)

She'd never pass the background check.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 09:22:18 PM
You must know things about her that I do not know...


Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Eclipse on November 15, 2018, 09:46:46 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 09:22:18 PM
You must know things about her that I do not know...

In addition to the very public act of destroying the environment in Arendelle,
she also passes a >lot< of bad checks, which is odd for a Princess with seemingly limitless wealth.
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 09:51:33 PM
Then I must agree with you. She would not pass the FBI check.

Still, what is her name?

Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: Eclipse on November 15, 2018, 11:45:03 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on November 15, 2018, 09:51:33 PM
Then I must agree with you. She would not pass the FBI check.

Still, what is her name?

One of here many alias' is "Elsa".
Title: Re: Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"
Post by: jeders on November 16, 2018, 01:16:57 AM
While this topic has certainly generated some valuable discussion, but at this point we are circling 'round and 'round with nothing new being added. If anyone has something of value to add, let a mod know and we'll consider it.

(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/689/709/481.jpg)