Uniform(s) worn most frequently?

[johnnyb47]

Polo should never be a starting uniform. It is against regulations. Also, members should never be encouraged to get a polo.

Where in CAPM 39-1 does it say that you can't purchase the polo uniform FIRST?
"Members will equip themselves with the basic uniform."

I don't see the word FIRST in there anywhere.

Brand new senior member is given a polo at meeting #1 after joining and owns grey slacks. He wears it to meeeting #2 during which he discusses everything that is required for the minimum basic uniform. Over the next 3 weeks he waits for the order to be delivered, then an additional week for the tailoring to be completed.
By your interpretation of the regulation/manual he has been out of compliance with the regulations for more than a month.

Don't mean to split hairs here but I HAVE seen this very case more than once.
By the letter of CAPM 39-1 if the member shows a good faith effort then he is in compliance by equipping himself with the basic uniform even if it takes him some time to do so AND he owns a polo shirt that did not take any time to obtain.

[JeffDG]

How exactly is someone to be made to prove they have a "basic service uniform"?

Is the squadron commander going to get a search warrant and come to your house to see if it's in the closet?

[Luis R. Ramos]

If it is not in 39-1, it is not permitted. Plain and simple!

Instead of making your own regulations, follow what is written!

This is the number 1 problem.

I do not like the answer, I will do what I like.

If people do that, why the heck do we have laws?

I do not like how long that red light lasts, my interpretation is I will obey it for 10 seconds then I will treat it like a yellow light.  Etc.

Flyer

[vento]

Uniform wear varies greatly from squadron to squadron. In my short 5 years as CAP member, I've worn the "basic" uniform a grand total of 7 times in order to attend SLS and later on CLC and conferences, one time was when the squadron commander decided to have everybody dress up a bit and made the UOD "basic" and 90% showed up in the white and grey and two showed up in the USAF style. Our UOD is always the Golf shirt with the basic as an option.

[Eclipse]

How exactly is someone to be made to prove they have a "basic service uniform"?

Have UOD once a month of that combo, and / or require it be worn before level I is approved.

The very fact that thousands of members are completely unaware of the MBU, or think it's the golf shirt, and
that a large percentage of units never publish a UOD or wear anything but the golf shirt, shows just how disconnected
we are as an organization, and how far we have to go before we'll even get to baseline in this regard.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Polo should never be a starting uniform. It is against regulations. Also, members should never be encouraged to get a polo.

Where in CAPM 39-1 does it say that you can't purchase the polo uniform FIRST?
"Members will equip themselves with the basic uniform."

I don't see the word FIRST in there anywhere.

Brand new senior member is given a polo at meeting #1 after joining and owns grey slacks. He wears it to meeeting #2 during which he discusses everything that is required for the minimum basic uniform. Over the next 3 weeks he waits for the order to be delivered, then an additional week for the tailoring to be completed.
By your interpretation of the regulation/manual he has been out of compliance with the regulations for more than a month.

Don't mean to split hairs here but I HAVE seen this very case more than once.
By the letter of CAPM 39-1 if the member shows a good faith effort then he is in compliance by equipping himself with the basic uniform even if it takes him some time to do so AND he owns a polo shirt that did not take any time to obtain.

No one HAS to have a polo. They DO need blues or G/Ws. Thus, you're going to tell a member to buy TWO uniforms. If I need to get G/Ws, then why would I get a polo first? Get the aviator shirt, call it a day. If a member later wants a polo, fine. But treating the polo as the go to right off the bat is a disservice to the member.

[Eclipse]

What unit is "giving" a member a golf shirt at the first meeting?

And seriously, the issue isn't "I ordered it." This issue is "no one told me", or "told me the golf shirt was all I needed".

The golf shirt is an optional item, the MBU isn't.

Also, what kind of tailoring is happening on the MBU, especially if they already have gray slacks?  Cuffing the pants?
That's a couple-day proposition.

[EMT-83]

To join, it doesn't matter.  A uniform is required if working with cadets or in a corporate vehicle.

Corporate aircraft yes; vehicles, no.

[johnnyb47]

What unit is "giving" a member a golf shirt at the first meeting?

And seriously, the issue isn't "I ordered it." This issue is "no one told me", or "told me the golf shirt was all I needed".

The golf shirt is an optional item, the MBU isn't.

Also, what kind of tailoring is happening on the MBU, especially if they already have gray slacks?  Cuffing the pants?
That's a couple-day proposition.

My unit has had and given away polo shirts.
I wouldn't have mentioned it if there wasn't an instance I knew of offhand.
And we are changing the issue here.
The statement was made that starting with the polo shirt combination was against regulations.
I challenge that it is not. While it is clearly stated that it is the members responsibility to equip themselves with the MBU there is no set time limit, no order of required purchase and nothing that says a member can't spend their first 6 months (should they want to) in a Polo Shirt combo..... even longer if they don't mind holding up their own first promotion.
I've always been told that a MBU is required to pass Level 1.
Honest question; Can someone point me to a regulatory source as a cite for that requirement?
I don't see anything more than "Should be able to wear the uniform properly" in the completion of Level 1 section of 50-17.

[Eclipse]

Seriously?

If you walk the regs, the only thing a new member should be aware of is the MBU, anything else is injecting yourself in the process.

No time limit?  Really?

This is why we're in such a mess, because people get themselves all wrapped around the axle trying to find 12 ways to avoid just
doing what they know they are supposed to.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I don't see anything more than "Should be able to wear the uniform properly" in the completion of Level 1 section of 50-17.

And units skipping this step is why so many SMs looks so jacked up in uniform.

[johnnyb47]

Seriously?

If you walk the regs, the only thing a new member should be aware of is the MBU, anything else is injecting yourself in the process.

No time limit?  Really?

This is why we're in such a mess, because people get themselves all wrapped around the axle trying to find 12 ways to avoid just
doing what they know they are supposed to.

Am I wrong?
If so, please provide proof.

Telling a member that they can not buy a polo shirt combo, an optional - approved uniform, BEFORE they complete either approved MBU is injecting yourself into the process.

This is why we are in such a mess, because people get themselves all wrapped around regulatory requirements that do NOT exist.

[johnnyb47]

I don't see anything more than "Should be able to wear the uniform properly" in the completion of Level 1 section of 50-17.

And units skipping this step is why so many SMs looks so jacked up in uniform.

That section of my post was an honest question.
I'm looking for a completed basic uniform, in the regulations, as a requirement for completing level 1.
I believe it to be the case.... I truly do.
I just couldn't find it.
If it isn't then it should be and hopefully will be in upcoming reg revisions.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I don't see anything more than "Should be able to wear the uniform properly" in the completion of Level 1 section of 50-17.

And units skipping this step is why so many SMs looks so jacked up in uniform.

That section of my post was an honest question.
I'm looking for a completed basic uniform, in the regulations, as a requirement for completing level 1.
I believe it to be the case.... I truly do.
I just couldn't find it.

And I'm honestly wondering why that line alone isn't enough. It's going to be mighty hard to "wear the uniform properly" for their level 1 if they don't have it.

[johnnyb47]

I don't see anything more than "Should be able to wear the uniform properly" in the completion of Level 1 section of 50-17.

And units skipping this step is why so many SMs looks so jacked up in uniform.

That section of my post was an honest question.
I'm looking for a completed basic uniform, in the regulations, as a requirement for completing level 1.
I believe it to be the case.... I truly do.
I just couldn't find it.

And I'm honestly wondering why that line alone isn't enough. It's going to be mighty hard to "wear the uniform properly" for their level 1 if they don't have it.

You do not have to own a uniform to describe it's correct wear.
Also... "Should Be" is an awfully wishy-washy way for a regulation to say "must"

[Майор Хаткевич]

I don't see anything more than "Should be able to wear the uniform properly" in the completion of Level 1 section of 50-17.

And units skipping this step is why so many SMs looks so jacked up in uniform.

That section of my post was an honest question.
I'm looking for a completed basic uniform, in the regulations, as a requirement for completing level 1.
I believe it to be the case.... I truly do.
I just couldn't find it.

And I'm honestly wondering why that line alone isn't enough. It's going to be mighty hard to "wear the uniform properly" for their level 1 if they don't have it.

You do not have to own a uniform to describe it's correct wear.
Also... "Should Be" is an awfully wishy-washy way for a regulation to say "must"

It's not asking to describe uniform wear, it's asking for uniform wear.

As for should, I'm not a native born English speaker, but this is how I see this word in my day to day use:

should  (shd)aux.v. Past tense of  shall
1. Used to express obligation or duty: You should send her a note.
2. Used to express probability or expectation: They should arrive at noon.
3. Used to express conditionality or contingency: If she should fall, then so would I.
4. Used to moderate the directness or bluntness of a statement: I should think he would like to go.

[johnnyb47]

I don't see anything more than "Should be able to wear the uniform properly" in the completion of Level 1 section of 50-17.

And units skipping this step is why so many SMs looks so jacked up in uniform.

That section of my post was an honest question.
I'm looking for a completed basic uniform, in the regulations, as a requirement for completing level 1.
I believe it to be the case.... I truly do.
I just couldn't find it.

And I'm honestly wondering why that line alone isn't enough. It's going to be mighty hard to "wear the uniform properly" for their level 1 if they don't have it.

You do not have to own a uniform to describe it's correct wear.
Also... "Should Be" is an awfully wishy-washy way for a regulation to say "must"

It's not asking to describe uniform wear, it's asking for uniform wear.

As for should, I'm not a native born English speaker, but this is how I see this word in my day to day use:

should  (shd)aux.v. Past tense of  shall
1. Used to express obligation or duty: You should send her a note.
2. Used to express probability or expectation: They should arrive at noon.
3. Used to express conditionality or contingency: If she should fall, then so would I.
4. Used to moderate the directness or bluntness of a statement: I should think he would like to go.

Usage Note: Like the rules governing the use of shall and will on which they are based, the traditional rules governing the use of should and would are largely ignored in modern American practice. Either should or would can now be used in the first person to express conditional futurity: If I had known that, I would (or somewhat more formally, should) have answered differently. But in the second and third persons only would is used: If he had known that, he would (not should) have answered differently. Would cannot always be substituted for should, however. Should is used in all three persons in a conditional clause: if I (or you or he) should decide to go. Should is also used in all three persons to express duty or obligation (the equivalent of ought to): I (or you or he) should go. On the other hand, would is used to express volition or promise: I agreed that I would do it. Either would or should is possible as an auxiliary with like, be inclined, be glad, prefer, and related verbs: I would (or should) like to call your attention to an oversight. Here would was acceptable on all levels to a large majority of the Usage Panel in an earlier survey and is more common in American usage than should. · Should have is sometimes incorrectly written should of by writers who have mistaken the source of the spoken contraction should've. See Usage Notes at if, rather, shall.

Read CAPR 50-17, Section 3-3, Item C for context.

[Eclipse]

Or just do what you know is intended and for the better of everyone and move on.

Mental gymnastics should be an NCC event for Seniors.

[Майор Хаткевич]

So...because you don't feel like they need the uniform, you skip this: "Should is also used in all three persons to express duty or obligation (the equivalent of ought to)", and go to wishy washy? But its not common sense, for a member to know how to wear an organizations uniforms, or to actually have it to demonstrate that knowledge. Much more fun to get wrapped up in whether Should should have been a Will. Should is past tense of Shall. Will is a lot like Shall. At least to this Eastern European mutt.

[Panache]

Well, this degenerated into a regulation-quote skirmish soon enough.

I might as well muddy the waters a bit:

CAPR 50-17         19 AUGUST 2013
3-1.   Participation.   CAP requires senior members to complete Level I training prior to receiving any assigned duty position in the unit, directly supervising cadets on their own, being allowed to wear the Air Force-style CAP uniform, becoming eligible for promotion, or enrolling in AU A4/6 courses.

As such, according to regs, they're not even allowed to wear Blues until completing Level I.