Clarification of Officer Rank Qualifications For "New" CAP

[Hoser]

Geez you people are crazy!!!!  I got involved in CAP to do something useful for my community that involved aviation. If I wanted to play the "all these requirements for this or that and this class that class" game I'd have stayed in the Coast Guard!!! This is a volunteer organization for Pete's sake!!! You can't be placing all these arcane strings on people who are willing to give of their time, effort and money for no pay. We are manpower short as it is without creating a maze of bureaucratic hoops that would alienate most rational people. Those who would be willing to suffer these inane hoops and scrutiny fall into the category that professional EMS peopel call "street squirrels" If they were a volunteer firefighter their car would be so festooned with radio and scanner antennas it would look like a bloody porcupine!! I understand the need for quality people and training as well as professionalism in what we do, but as I said in another post, professionalism CANNOT be mandated, legislated or demanded. It is an intrinsic quality that can be taught, albeit with some effort and occasional head banging, but is usually present in an individual before they choose to give of their time, money effort, expertise. Only by fostering the need for professionalism  and demonstrating it's qualities by example can an organization steep itself in that quality. My experience has been that people who do not care about professionalism will go the way of the dodo.
That is my opinion, I could be wrong.

Hoser

[RiverAux]

Somewhere in the depths of this thread or maybe even back on CAPportal it was mentioned that Flight Officer was a common senior member rank back during WWII and quite a few of the subchasers who earned Air Medals were Flight Officers.  I have found a newspaper reference (so who knows how reliable it is) to a CAP Warrant Officer as well.  I don't know if the Army was regularly using Warrant Officers at that time or not, but it may provide some precedent to those who would rather use Warrant Officer than Flight Officer as part of their rank restructuring schemes. 

[ZigZag911]

professionalism CANNOT be mandated, legislated or demanded. It is an intrinsic quality that can be taught, albeit with some effort and occasional head banging, but is usually present in an individual before they choose to give of their time, money effort, expertise. That is my opinion, I could be wrong.

Hoser

Let me be the first to respectfully disagree with you.

Professionalism most certainly CAN, and indeed MUST be demanded......failure to do so, turning a bling eye to regulations and procedures, "pencilo whipping" training, is what has broguht this organization to its state, which, beyond wing level, is rather sorry.

Those who do not choose to do the right thing in the right way ought to find some other, less structured, way of serving the community!

The best way to teach professionalism, I would suggest, is by the personal example of those filling leadership roles.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Somewhere in the depths of this thread or maybe even back on CAPportal it was mentioned that Flight Officer was a common senior member rank back during WWII and quite a few of the subchasers who earned Air Medals were Flight Officers.  I have found a newspaper reference (so who knows how reliable it is) to a CAP Warrant Officer as well.  I don't know if the Army was regularly using Warrant Officers at that time or not, but it may provide some precedent to those who would rather use Warrant Officer than Flight Officer as part of their rank restructuring schemes. 

"Flight Officer" in the Air Corps was the same as "Warrant Officer" in the ground forces.  It was pretty common in World War II because of the tender age of the officers who were pilots, navigators, and bombardiers.  Until they were 21, they could not be appointed as lieutenants.  They were given "Flight Officer" rank until they turned 21, then they were promoted to 2nd Lt.  My dad was one, as a bombardier on B-29's.  He made 2LT with little fanfare and no change of duties.

Flight Officer is just what a Warrant Officer of the Air Corps was called.  A Marine warrant is called "Gunner."  A Navy warrant is called "Boatswain."  (Pronounced "BO-sun")

[Dragoon]

- Nature of the work? We both work hard to serve our country in our designated specialties. Less than 4% of the AF are rated pilots, and most of them aren't the trigger pulling kind. The ONLY real difference in CAP & in exchange for a paycheck the reseerves can be forced to duty & shipped overseas for months at a time. Everything else is attitude.

You really  believe there are no differences in the scope and responsibility of the work?

Remember you've got CAP Lt Col's acting as assistant testing officers in squadrons with 5 active cadets.

Yes, that situation does happen.  That doesn't mean it shuld be the norm, not does it mean that we should have a LtCol in that duty who is "Being all he can be."

Yup.  But it IS rather common now.  And the comment was made against the ludicrous comment that CAP Service is Equivalent to military service.  It ain't.

Now if you want to ask "CAN it be made equivalent?"  Sure, it's possible.  I don't think it's likely, because of the different dynamics when no one's getting paid.  But yes, it's possible.

Part of the deal would be firing the Lt Col who doesn't want to do Lt Col work anymore.  Up or out, that's the USAF way.