CAP Corporate Working Uniform

[grunt82abn]

Is the CAP Corporate Working Uniform just for pilots, and only allowed during flight operations?

[Eclipse]

Which one are you referring to?

Corporate Field Uniform, CFU, = Blue BDU

Corporate flight Duty Uniform - CFDU = Blue flight suit in either material

Corporate Working Uniform = Golf shirt

All can be worn by all seniors, pretty much any time within the bounds of an UOD specified by someone with the authority.

[grunt82abn]

Which one are you referring to?

Corporate Field Uniform, CFU, = Blue BDU

Corporate flight Duty Uniform - CFDU = Blue flight suit in either material

Corporate Working Uniform = Golf shirt

All can be worn by all seniors, pretty much any time within the bounds of an UOD specified by someone with the authority.

Specifically the Corporate Working Uniform, The Polo with Gray pants

[Eclipse]

That is authorized for anyone, at any time UOD allows for it.

Many members believe it is the "minimum basic uniform", which it is not (that's the whites or blues).

[Chappie]

The corporate working uniform (blue polo/gray trousers) has been approved for wear (at least from my experience) - at SARXs for HQ staff, squadron meetings, wing/region staff meetings, pre-encampment staff meetings, training events, etc.   The commander or activity director does approve what will be worn for the UOD.  For example: I never have worn the CAP polo/gray trousers when staffing the NSC (they had their own polo) or for the CCRSC (wasn't an approved UOD)  - it was either blues or the corporate (white aviator/gray trousers).

[grunt82abn]

Thank you both!!!

[etodd]

The corporate working uniform (blue polo/gray trousers) has been approved for wear (at least from my experience) - at SARXs for HQ staff, squadron meetings, wing/region staff meetings, pre-encampment staff meetings, training events, etc.   The commander or activity director does approve what will be worn for the UOD.......

Every 'event' I've seen thus far in my area the "corporate working uniform (blue polo/gray trousers)" has been approved for wear by Senior members at all positions. My guess is they want as much participation as possible, and there is a large number of Senior members who own the polo uniform and nothing else. Some will jump in with regs saying those folks are suppose to own more than that. And its true ... But the reality is .... many do not possess anything else ... so it becomes a participation issue. Sometimes 'practicality and pragmatism' has to factor in if one wants a successful SAREX or other event.

[SarDragon]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue. You took that oath when you signed up, and this is one of those situations it applies to. In the end, you will be the one missing out, not me, or the event.

I, myself, almost got sent home from an event for a not-quite-right uniform, but since I was on staff, we fudged it, and "got 'er done". Had I been a student, I would have had to correct the uniform, or go home.

[Lord of the North]

I, myself, almost got sent home from an event for a not-quite-right uniform, but since I was on staff, we fudged it, and "got 'er done". Had I been a student, I would have had to correct the uniform, or go home.

Ahh yes... the infamous "fudged it" integrity play.....

[SarDragon]

Belt buckle on G/W issue.  Just disguised it a bit.

[Lord of the North]

Still an integrity issue since you stated that had you been a student it would have to be corrected or sent home.  But maybe it was just a double standard at play.  Your call.

[SarDragon]

Taken to PM.

[Ned]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue.

Global Moderator Dave (hee-hee),

I know you left out some details here, because this statement standing alone might be misleading to other leaders in the organization.  While there are certainly times and circumstances where there may be no alternatives to "sending a member home" for uniform violations, I would suggest that that would be a fairly rare occurrence in the Grand Scheme of CAP. 

I'd like to think that actual deliberate disobedience is rare; outnumbered by honest mistakes and the ever-present instances of good-faith miscommunication in CAP.  Good commanders don't hammer members for the occasional honest mistake.  Making a cadet or senior miss vital training because of an honest mistake may be overkill considering that other options to correct the problem may be available.

In an ancient thread I used a hypothetical where a commander had specified the UOD as BDU/BBDU for the meeting night because the unit was going to do some ES training in the woods adjacent to the unit.  And the senior Admin Officer showed up in her grey & whites.  I know that you would not "send her home" because she a) reasonably didn't think the admin crew needed to be in BDU since they weren't going to the field, and / or b) don't even own BDI/BBDU since it is an optional uniform.

Obviously, if the member cannot safely perform duty or training without changing into the UOD, or if you reasonably suspect the member of willful disobedience or insubordination that is a different story.  There may be no safe alternative and the member may need to go home.

But I hope that all leaders are guided by the principle that "accomplishing our Congressionally-mandated missions is more important that what we wear while doing it."

Ur buddy,

Ned

[Eclipse]

I would suggest that that would be a fairly rare occurrence in the Grand Scheme of CAP.

Many believe it is too rare, especially for people who can't read the regulations, or have superiors who refuse to enforce them.

But I hope that all leaders are guided by the principle that "accomplishing our Congressionally-mandated missions is more important that what we wear while doing it."

Is that CAP's new motto? "Exitus acta probat?"  The above is not mutually exclusive, and the attitude that "some regulations are more 'reggy' then others" is what causes a
great deal of problems in CAP.

What's wrong with just setting the standard and enforcing it?

[Ned]

The above is not mutually exclusive, and the attitude that "some regulations are more 'reggy' then others" is what causes a
great deal of problems in CAP.

What's wrong with just setting the standard and enforcing it?

Nothing of course.  But not every regulation violation deserves the death penalty.  Commanders, when reasonably possible, should employ a form of progressive discipline starting with on-the-spot corrections, verbal counselings, re-trainings, etc. and progressing to sterner measures like reprimands, written counselings, restrictions, demotions, and only after all lesser and suitable methods have been exhausted, the dreaded 2B.

My point here is "sending a member home" for a uniform violation is only one tool in the discipline tool box, and should be among the last used.

[arajca]

The above is not mutually exclusive, and the attitude that "some regulations are more 'reggy' then others" is what causes a
great deal of problems in CAP.

What's wrong with just setting the standard and enforcing it?

Nothing of course.  But not every regulation violation deserves the death penalty.  Commanders, when reasonably possible, should employ a form of progressive discipline starting with on-the-spot corrections, verbal counselings, re-trainings, etc. and progressing to sterner measures like reprimands, written counselings, restrictions, demotions, and only after all lesser and suitable methods have been exhausted, the dreaded 2B.

My point here is "sending a member home" for a uniform violation is only one tool in the discipline tool box, and should be among the last used.

Ned,
  Sometimes, most often that I have seen, it takes sending someone home to get the point across. To those who say the mission come first regardless of what uniform the member is wearing, bull-pucky! Having had a commander who made the decision that if you weren't in the proper uniform (mostly h/w issues with aircrew and flightsuit color), you would be sent home. He did this on a real mission, which resulted in a different unit getting the mission accomplished, and drove the point home in way nothing else could. The next mission, the crew showed in golf shirt uniform instead of green flightsuits (they were well outside h/w standards). The commander even followed the rules himself, wearing the g/w instead of blues during the holidays when, as he put it, his "midsection management" slipped.

[Eclipse]

+1 ^^

The above is not mutually exclusive, and the attitude that "some regulations are more 'reggy' then others" is what causes a
great deal of problems in CAP.

What's wrong with just setting the standard and enforcing it?

Nothing of course.  But not every regulation violation deserves the death penalty.  Commanders, when reasonably possible, should employ a form of progressive discipline starting with on-the-spot corrections, verbal counselings, re-trainings, etc. and progressing to sterner measures like reprimands, written counselings, restrictions, demotions, and only after all lesser and suitable methods have been exhausted, the dreaded 2B.

My point here is "sending a member home" for a uniform violation is only one tool in the discipline tool box, and should be among the last used.

I don't disagree - CC's should be establishing the expectations, publishing and discussing the minimum requirements
and insuring their members have what they need to be successful.

The problem is that CAP as a whole allows for far too much self-actualization " I feel I was successful / accomplished the mission,
therefore I was and I did".

When my members tell me they could not change for a meeting due to occasional work considerations, or made a mistake
regarding the UOD, that's one thing, the latter may well be my poor or non-existent communication, assuming they normally comply.

But we have far too many members who feel free to say "meh, not my bag", with no CC who is properly enforcing the expectations
and requirements.  In many cases these are the same members who get indignant when a CC or activity POC simply enforces the
regulations, or they exhibit a "aw shucks, I'm just here for the kids" attitude as if that is justification.

Neither of those is acceptable.

it's also somewhat amazing and gratifying how people step up when expectations are properly provided and enforced evenly.

[Eclipse]

There are also patterns which emerge which people who have been around for a while see.

Those who don't show up for regular training but say "I'll be there in a real-world." Either
don't, or are nearly useless if they do.

Those who think uniform regulations are "for those kids playing Army", are also, remarkably,
more likely to take off with a tow-bar attached, incur hangar rash, seem unable to process
paperwork properly, or exhibit other "mission first, regulations later" behaviors.

Best quote ever:  "I don't read regulations, I read FARs."

[Damron]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue. You took that oath when you signed up, and this is one of those situations it applies to. In the end, you will be the one missing out, not me, or the event.

If my deputy commander sent a member  home from a weekly meeting for a uniform issue, he wouldn't be my deputy commander any longer. 

[Майор Хаткевич]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue. You took that oath when you signed up, and this is one of those situations it applies to. In the end, you will be the one missing out, not me, or the event.

If my deputy commander sent a member  home from a weekly meeting for a uniform issue, he wouldn't be my deputy commander any longer.

Ok, so how do you deal with a member who consistently doesn't get it right, after repeat corrections?

[THRAWN]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue. You took that oath when you signed up, and this is one of those situations it applies to. In the end, you will be the one missing out, not me, or the event.

If my deputy commander sent a member  home from a weekly meeting for a uniform issue, he wouldn't be my deputy commander any longer.

You're right. He should be the commander.

[Damron]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue. You took that oath when you signed up, and this is one of those situations it applies to. In the end, you will be the one missing out, not me, or the event.

If my deputy commander sent a member  home from a weekly meeting for a uniform issue, he wouldn't be my deputy commander any longer.

Ok, so how do you deal with a member who consistently doesn't get it right, after repeat corrections?

Is that the scenario you presented in your post?

[Chappie]

The above is not mutually exclusive, and the attitude that "some regulations are more 'reggy' then others" is what causes a
great deal of problems in CAP.

What's wrong with just setting the standard and enforcing it?

Nothing of course.  But not every regulation violation deserves the death penalty.  Commanders, when reasonably possible, should employ a form of progressive discipline starting with on-the-spot corrections, verbal counselings, re-trainings, etc. and progressing to sterner measures like reprimands, written counselings, restrictions, demotions, and only after all lesser and suitable methods have been exhausted, the dreaded 2B.

My point here is "sending a member home" for a uniform violation is only one tool in the discipline tool box, and should be among the last used.

Had a situation where one of our students at a CCRSC was a bit over the height/weight standards for the blues...so much so that he had two belts sewn together and his trousers altered for the girth.   Due to the distance of travel...he was not sent home, but received "counseling/training".  He assured us that his squadron commander had "approved" his wear of the altered uniform.   When it was pointed out that the regs were the final word and not the local squadron commander, he was dumbfounded.  No one had taken the time to acquaint him with the reg.   Not sending him home and providing counsel was a good thing...for the rest of his CAP career, he wore the white/gray or blazer combo -- and did so with dignity.   I admired his integrity.

[Damron]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue. You took that oath when you signed up, and this is one of those situations it applies to. In the end, you will be the one missing out, not me, or the event.

If my deputy commander sent a member  home from a weekly meeting for a uniform issue, he wouldn't be my deputy commander any longer.

You're right. He should be the commander.

Tonight, I'm attending a meeting that will be attended by three cadets that had their home burn to the ground this week.  I'll be happy to see them in any attire.  There are any number of good excuses that I'd accept. 

I didn't even need a hypothetical example to make you look like a pedant. 

[Eclipse]

Tonight, I'm attending a meeting that will be attended by three cadets that had their home burn to the ground this week.  I'll be happy to see them in any attire.  There are any number of good excuses that I'd accept. 

I didn't even need a hypothetical example to make you look like a pedant.

Seriously?  You ignore the question and then try and make an excuse with a tangential non-example?

A. With no home they probably have more important things to do then be at a CAP meeting (though the return to normalcy is a valid position).

B. Few CC's would have any issue with that stance, though activities like flying wouldn't care, however that does not
address the actual question you were asked, nor the general discussion.

[Eclipse]

The above is not mutually exclusive, and the attitude that "some regulations are more 'reggy' then others" is what causes a
great deal of problems in CAP.

What's wrong with just setting the standard and enforcing it?

Nothing of course.  But not every regulation violation deserves the death penalty.  Commanders, when reasonably possible, should employ a form of progressive discipline starting with on-the-spot corrections, verbal counselings, re-trainings, etc. and progressing to sterner measures like reprimands, written counselings, restrictions, demotions, and only after all lesser and suitable methods have been exhausted, the dreaded 2B.

My point here is "sending a member home" for a uniform violation is only one tool in the discipline tool box, and should be among the last used.

Had a situation where one of our students at a CCRSC was a bit over the height/weight standards for the blues...so much so that he had two belts sewn together and his trousers altered for the girth.   Due to the distance of travel...he was not sent home, but received "counseling/training".  He assured us that his squadron commander had "approved" his wear of the altered uniform.   When it was pointed out that the regs were the final word and not the local squadron commander, he was dumbfounded.  No one had taken the time to acquaint him with the reg.   Not sending him home and providing counsel was a good thing...for the rest of his CAP career, he wore the white/gray or blazer combo -- and did so with dignity.   I admired his integrity.

He had the option of changing his clothes - if he didn't it might be a different story.  Imagine the damage it does
to CAP's optics with someone like that walking around a military base, or even just in public.  Also "integrity" aside,
at the point you're literally sewing belts together, it would strike the average person that "something isn't right here".

In either case, phone calls by higher HQ to that CC should have been made, if not immediately, then right after the activity.
Maybe start with the Wing CC and let it work it's way down naturally.

[Damron]

Tonight, I'm attending a meeting that will be attended by three cadets that had their home burn to the ground this week.  I'll be happy to see them in any attire.  There are any number of good excuses that I'd accept. 

I didn't even need a hypothetical example to make you look like a pedant.

Seriously?  You ignore the question and then try and make an excuse with a tangential non-example?

A. With no home they probably have more important things to do then be at a CAP meeting (though the return to normalcy is a valid position).

B. Few CC's would have any issue with that stance, though activities like flying wouldn't care, however that does not
address the actual question you were asked, nor the general discussion.

Slow down.

Somebody posted that they would send a member home for being in the wrong uniform.  Absolutely no context was provided other than they were not wearing the UOD.  He didn't say that he would eventually send home somebody that wouldn't respond to repeated  corrective action. 

When I point out that is a bunch of  pedantic crap, somebody wants to have a reasonable conversation.   No, why don't we address the silly crap before we have a conversation about members that refuse to comply with repeated corrective measures.

[Eclipse]

Somebody posted that they would send a member home for being in the wrong uniform.  Absolutely no context was provided other than they were not wearing the UOD.

Fair enough.

What other "context" is needed?

"UOD is "x", you don't have it.  You now have some free time."

The person somehow knew about the activity enough to show up, figured out the when and where of it, may have paid
some money to attend, yet it's OK to ignore "that detail"?

We're talking about adults here, adults who are signing up to either guide and mentor youth, or save life and property.
Neither of those things are well supported by members with either so little attention to detail they don't know the proper dress
for the day, or feel some regulations or directives don't apply to them because "who has time for uniforms when people are dying?!"

Jobs have uniforms, some formal, some informal.  Show up out of the proper lane, you're sent home.
We'd be much better off if people stopped treating CAP like a PTA meeting and treated it more like a job, because that's
what it ultimately is, enjoyable, rewarding, or not.

You're there to serve the country and accomplish a mission, not show everyone you're special and unique.

The uniform is part of that, if only as an outward acknowledgement you are part of something bigger then yourself and absorbed
into the team.  This is why the multiform is such a problem.  CAP can't even look like a team, let alone act like one most days.

[Chappie]

<snip> He had the option of changing his clothes - if he didn't it might be a different story.  Imagine the damage it does
to CAP's optics with someone like that walking around a military base, or even just in public.  Also "integrity" aside,
at the point you're literally sewing belts together, it would strike the average person that "something isn't right here".

In either case, phone calls by higher HQ to that CC should have been made, if not immediately, then right after the activity.
Maybe start with the Wing CC and let it work it's way down naturally. <snip>

Unfortunately, he did not have the option of uniform change.  He only had his blues -- he wore his uniform to class but was quick to change to civvies.  Fortunately the location of the classes, etc. limited the optics.

It did get handled by the Wing Chaplain/Wing CC and the local commander at the conclusion of the activity.   As stated, he was compliant to the uniform regs from that activity on the rest of his CAP career.  Always wore either the g/w or blazer combo.

On another note...lessons were learned by the activity director.   After that event, the CAPM 39-1 was sent to each participant upon registration...with the warning that the h/w would be enforced so have a back-up uniform handy -- or if you have doubts about wearing the blues, wear the corporate instead.  At CCRSC there were daily uniform inspections (announcement was part of the participant's manual) based on the approved UOD for the event.   When I served as the Director of the CCRSC...both the Dean and I would alternate wear of the blues and corporate during the course of the week (I did the same thing when on NSC staff).  Glad to report that though the initial incident occurred in the late 90's, the practice of providing the CAPM 39-1 and a Participant's Manual with all the items covered for the event proved to be an effective way of dealing with the uniform issues that may have been encountered in the years that followed.   There were a couple of issues that did occur but were easily resolved...which is another story

[Damron]

A couple of years ago, media darlings started using the word "optics" in place of "appearance" - let's respect the language.

[Damron]

Somebody posted that they would send a member home for being in the wrong uniform.  Absolutely no context was provided other than they were not wearing the UOD.

Fair enough.

What other "context" is needed?

"UOD is "x", you don't have it.  You now have some free time."

The person somehow knew about the activity enough to show up, figured out the when and where of it, may have paid
some money to attend, yet it's OK to ignore "that detail"?

We're talking about adults here, adults who are signing up to either guide and mentor youth, or save life and property.
Neither of those things are well supported by members with either so little attention to detail they don't know the proper dress
for the day, or feel some regulations or directives don't apply to them because "who has time for uniforms when people are dying?!"

Jobs have uniforms, some formal, some informal.  Show up out of the proper lane, you're sent home.
We'd be much better off if people stopped treating CAP like a PTA meeting and treated it more like a job, because that's
what it ultimately is, enjoyable, rewarding, or not.

You're there to serve the country and accomplish a mission, not show everyone you're special and unique.

The uniform is part of that, if only as an outward acknowledgement you are part of something bigger then yourself and absorbed
into the team.  This is why the multiform is such a problem.  CAP can't even look like a team, let alone act like one most days.

Command is about promoting and enforcing the rules.  Command is also about using good judgement when rules are broken.   Context matters. 

If my finance officer is forced to work late at his job, the one that feeds his family and pays his bills, and doesn't reach the dry-cleaners in time to pick up his blues, I still expect my finance officer at our finance committee meeting. 

Context matters.  Instead of thinking about the infinite good excuses why somebody might have a uniform issue, you want to point out the case where the member doesn't give an eff? 

[Eclipse]

Context matters.  Instead of thinking about the infinite good excuses why somebody might have a uniform issue...

! No longer available

[DakRadz]

Also "integrity" aside,
at the point you're literally sewing belts together, it would strike the average person that "something isn't right here".

Meh. Volunteer fire departments, police and sheriff department volunteers, EMS, Boy Scouts, Coast Guard Aux, etc.

Just a few groups that can, depending on location, be far more familiar to a new member and have no weight standards for anyone at all. Some do, but many do not.

ESPECIALLY as a chaplain, because those same public safety groups don't always make the Ch do PT entrance exams, or meet H/W, if it exists.

And I have seen surprisingly large structural turnout gear. Don't think "the average person" doesn't notice either way, even if they don't have an issue with it.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

[Майор Хаткевич]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue. You took that oath when you signed up, and this is one of those situations it applies to. In the end, you will be the one missing out, not me, or the event.

If my deputy commander sent a member  home from a weekly meeting for a uniform issue, he wouldn't be my deputy commander any longer.

Ok, so how do you deal with a member who consistently doesn't get it right, after repeat corrections?

Is that the scenario you presented in your post?

Given that this was my first dip into the topic...yes?

[etodd]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else ....

That is disobedience, and yes, should have repercussions.

My post above was that for every event I've seen in the last year, the uniforms for an event, for example,  might be listed as A, B, C or D "in that order", with polo being usually being D.  So members always have had a choice and none left out. The planners of the events wanted it opened up to all, without limitations of attendance due to uniforms.

But sure ... its up to the discretion of the planners, and some Squadrons/Wings are more stringent on these types of things than others. This is a very large country, and there are always regional differences. The event planners I'm sure learn what works with their groups.

[Garibaldi]

To me, the expectation is this:

1. We have a uniform to wear while performing CAP activities/missions. These are fairly specific to whatever it is we are doing. In some cases, we can wear more than one combination to a given activity, but it's up to the project officer or commander to dictate which uniform will be worn where. I mean, I'm not going to set the expectation that we show up to a SAREX in blues, but it may be suitable for some mission base work.

2. Wear of the uniform is mandatory, and it is expected that we wear the UOD to whatever activity. Schools, FTXs, meetings, whatever.

3. Especially where cadets are involved, we need to adhere to the commander's dicta of the UOD.

4. If you are given the dicta that the UOD for Sam Spade's "Divining the POD for the LKP of the Maltese Falcon" as being blues or the CAP equivalent, and you show up in BDUs, expect to be given the stink eye and sent home.

5. Whoever said that we should treat CAP as a work environment is correct. It is a working environment and our uniform is dictated by the activity. Especially if cadets or other agencies are involved.

6. Anyone who has an issue with being told that they are being sent home because they didn't follow the rules needs to find some other place to spend their time. I will accept reasons for not showing up to the meeting in uniform (people often come to meetings right after work and don't always have time to change), but the activities are usually planned well in advance. There is no excuse for not knowing what the UOD is and wearing the incorrect combination.

I would not expect to show up in civvies or blues on a mission. I know what uniforms are required each week at our meetings. I know what we plan to wear on a trip to the USS Yorktown.

Having people flaunt the required UOD is just bad business, and hearing excuses day in and day out really gets tiresome. We have rules, and they need to be followed. If you have an issue with the rules, there's the door. If you can't follow a simple directive regarding uniform wear, I really have my doubts as to your ability or desire to follow other orders.

And on that subject, if you are finding that you have to suck in that gut in order to button your BDUs or blues uniform and you end up looking like a stuffed sausage, maybe it's time you took a look at the CAP equivalent. I made a solemn vow not to wear the AF style uniform until I lose the 50 or so pounds I need to. It's just my opinion, but adult members who constantly flout the laws of physics and gravity by wearing the AF style seventy pounds beyond CAP regs really need to be corralled by their local leadership and counseled on the other options available.

Just my 2 centavos.

[SarDragon]

Wow, did I poke the hornet's nest.

Thanks for the sanity check, Ned. Yes, I did leave out some details, which, on retrospection, probably should have been included. I'll think harder on that next time.

As others pointed out, circumstances do matter, and I do take these into account. The fact remains that an established UoD should be adhered to as closely as possible. There are usually enough options offered that there shouldn't be any difficulty in showing up in a proper uniform.

[Luis R. Ramos]

SAR,

I have known you long enough in these boards. Although reading and "meeting" you in this way is nothing like working in person with someone, I do trust that you would have been just and fair before sending that person home. Even if you did not post the context or circumstances here.

[FW]

Somebody posted that they would send a member home for being in the wrong uniform.  Absolutely no context was provided other than they were not wearing the UOD.

Fair enough.

What other "context" is needed?

"UOD is "x", you don't have it.  You now have some free time."

The person somehow knew about the activity enough to show up, figured out the when and where of it, may have paid
some money to attend, yet it's OK to ignore "that detail"?

We're talking about adults here, adults who are signing up to either guide and mentor youth, or save life and property.
Neither of those things are well supported by members with either so little attention to detail they don't know the proper dress
for the day, or feel some regulations or directives don't apply to them because "who has time for uniforms when people are dying?!"

Jobs have uniforms, some formal, some informal.  Show up out of the proper lane, you're sent home.
We'd be much better off if people stopped treating CAP like a PTA meeting and treated it more like a job, because that's
what it ultimately is, enjoyable, rewarding, or not.

You're there to serve the country and accomplish a mission, not show everyone you're special and unique.

The uniform is part of that, if only as an outward acknowledgement you are part of something bigger then yourself and absorbed
into the team.  This is why the multiform is such a problem.  CAP can't even look like a team, let alone act like one most days.

Command is about promoting and enforcing the rules.  Command is also about using good judgement when rules are broken.   Context matters. 

If my finance officer is forced to work late at his job, the one that feeds his family and pays his bills, and doesn't reach the dry-cleaners in time to pick up his blues, I still expect my finance officer at our finance committee meeting. 

Context matters.  Instead of thinking about the infinite good excuses why somebody might have a uniform issue, you want to point out the case where the member doesn't give an eff?

All true, except we forget commanders really have no "command authority".  If a commander can't motivate a member to wear the UOD, there are more problems than uniform wear.... I was once told; "not having the time to do something just means a lack of interest in doing it".  As a commander, I would insure my unit membership is interested enough to wear the proper uniform when "ordered".  The expectation should be the unit's; not the commander's. 

One of the reason's, IMHO, we have these continued discussions is due to a lack of "Esprit de Corps".  These discussions are just a symptom of a larger problem.  Once you send a member home for improper uniform wear, you've lost the conversation. 

[etodd]

If a commander can't motivate a member to wear the UOD, there are more problems than uniform wear....

Is this a frequent problem in some Squadrons? In the instances I mention, members were given enough options to where I've never seen anyone not in 'some type' of uniform that was on the approved list for the day.

[Майор Хаткевич]

If a commander can't motivate a member to wear the UOD, there are more problems than uniform wear....

Is this a frequent problem in some Squadrons? In the instances I mention, members were given enough options to where I've never seen anyone not in 'some type' of uniform that was on the approved list for the day.

We always wear G/Ws and Blues first meeting of the month for promotions, safety, etc. So assuming you were in our unit...we'd have an issue since you say you only have a polo...and don't think you need anything else.

[Eclipse]

All true, except we forget commanders really have no "command authority".  If a commander can't motivate a member to wear the UOD, there are more problems than uniform wear.... I was once told; "not having the time to do something just means a lack of interest in doing it".  As a commander, I would insure my unit membership is interested enough to wear the proper uniform when "ordered".  The expectation should be the unit's; not the commander's. 

One of the reason's, IMHO, we have these continued discussions is due to a lack of "Esprit de Corps".  These discussions are just a symptom of a larger problem.  Once you send a member home for improper uniform wear, you've lost the conversation.

I would tend to agree, and it's part of the greater conversation and problem.  Your Esprit de Corps comment is salient - there is no such thing as "one CAP", despite the rhetoric.
Units don't operate in the same way within the same Group or Wing, let alone nationally.  Every SAREx pretends they were the first one ever, every encampment is different,
every NCSA is different.

In the USAF, for the most part, every guy doing any job, has sat in the same classroom and heard the same thing, as every other guy doing the same job.
Same BMT, same tech schools, mostly same duty stations and roles. (Quick! Reply about that one time you knew a guy who didn't! That really moves things along!)

If they choose to ignore it, that's on them, but in CAP, we allow members to fly our airplanes for years, including with cadets in them, without even a Level I - and NHQ is
perfectly fine with that - "encourage pilots to join" is a direct quote from the Powers^©.  Then CAP wonder why we aren't a "team"?

Some of it is motivation, some of it is training, most of it is the setting baseline expectations of a paramilitary auxiliary on Day 0, but unless there is top-down
pressure to enforce with consequences (and not just uniform issues), the problems will persist, and I would argue the "corps" will continue to shrink
as people doing the heavy lifting disengage.

"A house divided will not stand...", somebody said that once, I think it was a Gorn or Surak or somebody.

Anyone whose ever built a house knows that no matter how fancy the top is, if the foundation is compromised, it will eventually fail.
Generally slowly, over a period of years, as mold and decay grow inside the compromised structure...hm...

Why NHQ continues to look the other way on baseline "foundational" issues is beyond me - any organization of mentionable scale looking to
grow and stay viable in the face of the kinds of challenges CAP has (and has coming) needs to get its house in order from the ground up.

Can everything be fixed?  Maybe, maybe not, but when the fruit hangs so low, and glows so brightly as these issues, the cost to fix is zero,
is mandated by the regs being ignored, and too high a risk to leave on the ground (where inevitably someone will trip on them).

[etodd]

If a commander can't motivate a member to wear the UOD, there are more problems than uniform wear....

Is this a frequent problem in some Squadrons? In the instances I mention, members were given enough options to where I've never seen anyone not in 'some type' of uniform that was on the approved list for the day.

We always wear G/Ws and Blues first meeting of the month for promotions, safety, etc. So assuming you were in our unit...we'd have an issue since you say you only have a polo...and don't think you need anything else.

No. If required for a meeting I needed to attend, I would.   Its just never been required of me yet. Of course I've only been in for less than a year. But I've flown in SAREX's, O-Ride days, and more ... gone to all types of meetings with Seniors and Cadets as well. I'm very involved. The uniform issue just never gets talked about. It was only after finding CAPTalk that I realized uniforms were a big deal in other areas of the country.

[FW]

Some of it is motivation, some of it is training, most of it is the setting baseline expectations of a paramilitary auxiliary on Day 0, but unless there is top-down
pressure to enforce with consequences (and not just uniform issues), the problems will persist, and I would argue the "corps" will continue to shrink
as people doing the heavy lifting disengage.

"A house divided will not stand...", somebody said that once, I think it was a Gorn or Surak or somebody.

Anyone whose ever built a house knows that no matter how fancy the top is, if the foundation is compromised, it will eventually fail.
Generally slowly, over a period of years, as mold and decay grow inside the compromised structure...hm...

Why NHQ continues to look the other way on baseline "foundational" issues is beyond me - any organization of mentionable scale looking to
grow and stay viable in the face of the kinds of challenges CAP has (and has coming) needs to get its house in order from the ground up.

Can everything be fixed?  Maybe, maybe not, but when the fruit hangs so low, and glows so brightly as these issues, the cost to fix is zero,
is mandated by the regs being ignored, and too high a risk to leave on the ground (where inevitably someone will trip on them).

Most of our "problems" in CAP are very fixable, and most easily addressed by sticking to our "Core Values".  "Excellence in all we do" shouldn't be just a phrase we like to parrot when talking to cadets or customers....
That said, NHQ is not the problem.  I don't see anyone participating at a Command Council or CSAG meeting in anything other than the "UOD".  Wing, Region, and National command staff are motivated, and they do the best they can within their span of control.  They, for the most part, do set the example, and do it well, however maybe the "word" isn't getting thru down to the squadron level.  Yes, all members should pass level 1 before full participation is allowed. Yes, all members should fully understand what is required for continued participation in our varied missions. Yes, all of our membership should fully understand that we sometime need to wear a uniform other than the CWU...

[THRAWN]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue. You took that oath when you signed up, and this is one of those situations it applies to. In the end, you will be the one missing out, not me, or the event.

If my deputy commander sent a member  home from a weekly meeting for a uniform issue, he wouldn't be my deputy commander any longer.

You're right. He should be the commander.

Tonight, I'm attending a meeting that will be attended by three cadets that had their home burn to the ground this week.  I'll be happy to see them in any attire.  There are any number of good excuses that I'd accept. 

I didn't even need a hypothetical example to make you look like a pedant.

Charming. Yep, I'm stuck on details. Remember that when your SUI comes up. There are rules. They are written down, and all that you need to do is follow them if you want to be a member of this organization. Spend more time looking at them, and less time looking for excuses on how to avoid them and CAP will be a stronger organization.

[Alaric]

If a commander can't motivate a member to wear the UOD, there are more problems than uniform wear....

Is this a frequent problem in some Squadrons? In the instances I mention, members were given enough options to where I've never seen anyone not in 'some type' of uniform that was on the approved list for the day.

We always wear G/Ws and Blues first meeting of the month for promotions, safety, etc. So assuming you were in our unit...we'd have an issue since you say you only have a polo...and don't think you need anything else.

Not to mention that the G/W (or the blues) is the minimum required uniform per the regulations

[THRAWN]

If a commander can't motivate a member to wear the UOD, there are more problems than uniform wear....

Is this a frequent problem in some Squadrons? In the instances I mention, members were given enough options to where I've never seen anyone not in 'some type' of uniform that was on the approved list for the day.

We always wear G/Ws and Blues first meeting of the month for promotions, safety, etc. So assuming you were in our unit...we'd have an issue since you say you only have a polo...and don't think you need anything else.

Not to mention that the G/W (or the blues) is the minimum required uniform per the regulations

That's a point that some people are failing to grasp.

[Damron]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue. You took that oath when you signed up, and this is one of those situations it applies to. In the end, you will be the one missing out, not me, or the event.

If my deputy commander sent a member  home from a weekly meeting for a uniform issue, he wouldn't be my deputy commander any longer.

You're right. He should be the commander.

Tonight, I'm attending a meeting that will be attended by three cadets that had their home burn to the ground this week.  I'll be happy to see them in any attire.  There are any number of good excuses that I'd accept. 

I didn't even need a hypothetical example to make you look like a pedant.

Charming. Yep, I'm stuck on details. Remember that when your SUI comes up. There are rules. They are written down, and all that you need to do is follow them if you want to be a member of this organization. Spend more time looking at them, and less time looking for excuses on how to avoid them and CAP will be a stronger organization.

So, you think that a failure to wear the correct uniform should automatically result in a trip home without any consideration of the circumstances or history? That was the statement I was responding to.

Beyond that, you think my failure to agree with such a statement suggests that I fail to understand the rules or unwilling to effectively enforce the rules in my unit?

You suggest I'm looking for excuses not to follow the rules when I'm able to provide examples where sending a member home for a uniform violation would be inappropriate and unwarranted?

I understand the rules, enforcement of the rules is what we are talking about.  If the rules said automatically send somebody home as a result of a uniform issue, I would follow the rule.  For good reason, CAP regulations rarely mandate specific means of enforcement. Why? Because context matters and unit commanders are expected to use good judgment and effective strategies to enforce the rules.

Last night, three of my members that lost their home on Sunday showed up in new BDU and boots. Their uniforms lacked required items.   No, I didn't send them home for their uniform violations.  Context matters. 

[Somewhat surprised that mention of a family with four members losing their home didn't yield a reaction from anybody.]

[PHall]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue. You took that oath when you signed up, and this is one of those situations it applies to. In the end, you will be the one missing out, not me, or the event.

If my deputy commander sent a member  home from a weekly meeting for a uniform issue, he wouldn't be my deputy commander any longer.

You're right. He should be the commander.

Tonight, I'm attending a meeting that will be attended by three cadets that had their home burn to the ground this week.  I'll be happy to see them in any attire.  There are any number of good excuses that I'd accept. 

I didn't even need a hypothetical example to make you look like a pedant.

Charming. Yep, I'm stuck on details. Remember that when your SUI comes up. There are rules. They are written down, and all that you need to do is follow them if you want to be a member of this organization. Spend more time looking at them, and less time looking for excuses on how to avoid them and CAP will be a stronger organization.

So, you think that a failure to wear the correct uniform should automatically result in a trip home without any consideration of the circumstances or history? That was the statement I was responding to.

Beyond that, you think my failure to agree with such a statement suggests that I fail to understand the rules or unwilling to effectively enforce the rules in my unit?

You suggest I'm looking for excuses not to follow the rules when I'm able to provide examples where sending a member home for a uniform violation would be inappropriate and unwarranted?

I understand the rules, enforcement of the rules is what we are talking about.  If the rules said automatically send somebody home as a result of a uniform issue, I would follow the rule.  For good reason, CAP regulations rarely mandate specific means of enforcement. Why? Because context matters and unit commanders are expected to use good judgment and effective strategies to enforce the rules.

Last night, three of my members that lost their home on Sunday showed up in new BDU and boots. Their uniforms lacked required items.   No, I didn't send them home for their uniform violations.  Context matters. 

[Somewhat surprised that mention of a family with four members losing their home didn't yield a reaction from anybody.]

Probably because the subject of the family was not relevant to the subject being discussed.

[abdsp51]

If my deputy commander sent a member  home from a weekly meeting for a uniform issue, he wouldn't be my deputy commander any longer.

Say the guy who got butt hurt about a patch coming off and would change the reg to suit him....

[Damron]

Say the guy who got butt hurt about a patch coming off and would change the reg to suit him....

You're an idiot if that's what you extracted from that thread. 

T

[THRAWN]

Say the guy who got butt hurt about a patch coming off and would change the reg to suit him....

You're an idiot if that's what you extracted from that thread. 

T

Nice personal attack and juvenile name calling. Very constructive demonstration of core values.

[Damron]

Say the guy who got butt hurt about a patch coming off and would change the reg to suit him....

You're an idiot if that's what you extracted from that thread. 

T

Nice personal attack and juvenile name calling. Very constructive demonstration of core values.

Not an attack.  Words have meaning and I chose those appropriate for the context.   

[etodd]

Not to mention that the G/W (or the blues) is the minimum required uniform per the regulations

Yes. The minimum required to be in one's possession. But is perfectly ok with regs to stay in the closet until the UOD requires it to be worn. I'm always in an acceptable uniform per what is specified for UOD.

Thats still my point for my area. Its just never been required of me yet to only have one choice of UOD for an event and it be something I do not own.  The uniform issue just never gets talked about in my area. It was only after finding CAPTalk that I realized uniforms were a big deal in other areas of the country.

(Edited to add that I'm talking about Senior members. Our local Cadet program is wholly different with its emphasis on different UOD for each meeting of the month, inspections, etc. Our Seniors are always in an acceptable UOD for 'them' so that we are a good example for the Cadets. But we may not be wearing the same as the Cadets.)

[Chappie]

Say the guy who got butt hurt about a patch coming off and would change the reg to suit him....

You're an idiot if that's what you extracted from that thread. 

T

Nice personal attack and juvenile name calling. Very constructive demonstration of core values.

^ ^ ^ Haven't had so much fun on a Friday since I was in the 4th grade when Dan G. hit Ben A. over getting hit really hard during a game of 4 Square at Blanchard School -- circa 1959.

[abdsp51]

Say the guy who got butt hurt about a patch coming off and would change the reg to suit him....

You're an idiot if that's what you extracted from that thread. 

T

Your own words not mine.  And if you are a commander I feel sorry for your folks.

[vorteks]

Not to mention that the G/W (or the blues) is the minimum required uniform per the regulations

Yes. The minimum required to be in one's possession. But is perfectly ok with regs to stay in the closet until the UOD requires it to be worn. I'm always in an acceptable uniform per what is specified for UOD.

Thats still my point for my area. Its just never been required of me yet to only have one choice of UOD for an event and it be something I do not own.  The uniform issue just never gets talked about in my area. It was only after finding CAPTalk that I realized uniforms were a big deal in other areas of the country.

(Edited to add that I'm talking about Senior members. Our local Cadet program is wholly different with its emphasis on different UOD for each meeting of the month, inspections, etc. Our Seniors are always in an acceptable UOD for 'them' so that we are a good example for the Cadets. But we may not be wearing the same as the Cadets.)

+1

FAQS FOR ADULTS

Do I have to wear a uniform?
Senior members may be required to wear a uniform during some activities - such as when flying in CAP aircraft. Senior members may wear the USAF style blue uniform or one of the distinctive CAP uniforms.  However, some members choose to serve quietly without wearing a uniform.  You can purchase uniform items from Vanguard.  www.civilairpatrolstore.com.

[Damron]

Say the guy who got butt hurt about a patch coming off and would change the reg to suit him....

You're an idiot if that's what you extracted from that thread. 

T

Your own words not mine.  And if you are a commander I feel sorry for your folks.

Your feelings are duly noted.

[Alaric]

Not to mention that the G/W (or the blues) is the minimum required uniform per the regulations

Yes. The minimum required to be in one's possession. But is perfectly ok with regs to stay in the closet until the UOD requires it to be worn. I'm always in an acceptable uniform per what is specified for UOD.

Thats still my point for my area. Its just never been required of me yet to only have one choice of UOD for an event and it be something I do not own.  The uniform issue just never gets talked about in my area. It was only after finding CAPTalk that I realized uniforms were a big deal in other areas of the country.

(Edited to add that I'm talking about Senior members. Our local Cadet program is wholly different with its emphasis on different UOD for each meeting of the month, inspections, etc. Our Seniors are always in an acceptable UOD for 'them' so that we are a good example for the Cadets. But we may not be wearing the same as the Cadets.)

+1

FAQS FOR ADULTS

Do I have to wear a uniform?
However, some members choose to serve quietly without wearing a uniform.  You can purchase uniform items from Vanguard.  www.civilairpatrolstore.com.

This is not borne out by the CAPM 39-1 clearly states the requirements clearly

1.2. Wear of the CAP Uniform.

1.2.1. Individual members will obtain and maintain for wear either of the minimum basic uniforms described here. These combinations meet the requirements of most CAP events. A commander may require cadets to wear other optional uniform items only if the purchase is voluntary (such as requiring a specific uniform for participation in a National Cadet Special Activity) or if the uniform is supplied without expense to the cadet.

1.2.1.1. Minimum USAF-style Uniform: The minimum basic USAF-style uniform is the Blue Service Uniform (Class B) with short sleeve shirt (male) or blouse (female) as appropriate. Cadets authorized to wear the USAF-style uniform are required to maintain this uniform.

1.2.1.2. Minimum Corporate-style Uniform: The minimum basic CAP Corporate-style uniform is the Aviator Shirt Uniform with short sleeve shirt or blouse as appropriate. Cadets aged 18 and older who meet weight standards for wear of the USAF-style uniform must maintain the USAF-style Class B uniform as noted in the previous paragraph

[vorteks]

Not to mention that the G/W (or the blues) is the minimum required uniform per the regulations

Yes. The minimum required to be in one's possession. But is perfectly ok with regs to stay in the closet until the UOD requires it to be worn. I'm always in an acceptable uniform per what is specified for UOD.

Thats still my point for my area. Its just never been required of me yet to only have one choice of UOD for an event and it be something I do not own.  The uniform issue just never gets talked about in my area. It was only after finding CAPTalk that I realized uniforms were a big deal in other areas of the country.

(Edited to add that I'm talking about Senior members. Our local Cadet program is wholly different with its emphasis on different UOD for each meeting of the month, inspections, etc. Our Seniors are always in an acceptable UOD for 'them' so that we are a good example for the Cadets. But we may not be wearing the same as the Cadets.)

+1

FAQS FOR ADULTS

Do I have to wear a uniform?
However, some members choose to serve quietly without wearing a uniform.  You can purchase uniform items from Vanguard.  www.civilairpatrolstore.com.

This is not borne out by the CAPM 39-1 clearly states the requirements clearly

1.2. Wear of the CAP Uniform.

1.2.1. Individual members will obtain and maintain for wear either of the minimum basic uniforms described here. These combinations meet the requirements of most CAP events. A commander may require cadets to wear other optional uniform items only if the purchase is voluntary (such as requiring a specific uniform for participation in a National Cadet Special Activity) or if the uniform is supplied without expense to the cadet.

1.2.1.1. Minimum USAF-style Uniform: The minimum basic USAF-style uniform is the Blue Service Uniform (Class B) with short sleeve shirt (male) or blouse (female) as appropriate. Cadets authorized to wear the USAF-style uniform are required to maintain this uniform.

1.2.1.2. Minimum Corporate-style Uniform: The minimum basic CAP Corporate-style uniform is the Aviator Shirt Uniform with short sleeve shirt or blouse as appropriate. Cadets aged 18 and older who meet weight standards for wear of the USAF-style uniform must maintain the USAF-style Class B uniform as noted in the previous paragraph

There's no contradiction. "[W]ill obtain and maintain for wear" does not mean "shall wear". Fact is, for senior members, wearing a uniform is optional except for certain types of activities or situations.

[vorteks]

Not to mention that the G/W (or the blues) is the minimum required uniform per the regulations

Yes. The minimum required to be in one's possession. But is perfectly ok with regs to stay in the closet until the UOD requires it to be worn. I'm always in an acceptable uniform per what is specified for UOD.

Thats still my point for my area. Its just never been required of me yet to only have one choice of UOD for an event and it be something I do not own.  The uniform issue just never gets talked about in my area. It was only after finding CAPTalk that I realized uniforms were a big deal in other areas of the country.

(Edited to add that I'm talking about Senior members. Our local Cadet program is wholly different with its emphasis on different UOD for each meeting of the month, inspections, etc. Our Seniors are always in an acceptable UOD for 'them' so that we are a good example for the Cadets. But we may not be wearing the same as the Cadets.)

+1

FAQS FOR ADULTS

Do I have to wear a uniform?
However, some members choose to serve quietly without wearing a uniform.  You can purchase uniform items from Vanguard.  www.civilairpatrolstore.com.

This is not borne out by the CAPM 39-1 clearly states the requirements clearly

1.2. Wear of the CAP Uniform.

1.2.1. Individual members will obtain and maintain for wear either of the minimum basic uniforms described here. These combinations meet the requirements of most CAP events. A commander may require cadets to wear other optional uniform items only if the purchase is voluntary (such as requiring a specific uniform for participation in a National Cadet Special Activity) or if the uniform is supplied without expense to the cadet.

1.2.1.1. Minimum USAF-style Uniform: The minimum basic USAF-style uniform is the Blue Service Uniform (Class B) with short sleeve shirt (male) or blouse (female) as appropriate. Cadets authorized to wear the USAF-style uniform are required to maintain this uniform.

1.2.1.2. Minimum Corporate-style Uniform: The minimum basic CAP Corporate-style uniform is the Aviator Shirt Uniform with short sleeve shirt or blouse as appropriate. Cadets aged 18 and older who meet weight standards for wear of the USAF-style uniform must maintain the USAF-style Class B uniform as noted in the previous paragraph

There's no contradiction. "[W]ill obtain and maintain for wear" does not mean "shall wear". Fact is, for senior members, wearing a uniform is optional except for certain types of activities or situations.

Also there's this in 39-1:

1.2.4.2. Members are normally required to wear a CAP uniform (either USAF- or Corporate-style) when working with cadets, when flying in a CAP aircraft (Corporate or member owned aircraft used in a CAP flight activity), or when conducting business under a CAP mission number (A, B, or C). Region commanders, wing commanders, and activity directors may stipulate appropriate civilian clothes while traveling to and from events by ground, or during events not involving flight where it is appropriate to wear civilian clothes.

Should be no problema to show up at your weekly squadron meetings in civvies so long as you're not working with cadets.

[Pace]

Enough. The personal attacks are getting out of control. Personal comments need to always go through PM.