SLS Uniform

[Eclipse]

...and if you don't? (wear one)

There's no liability card to be played, so the stick ain't real big.

[A.Member]

What does liability have to do with it?  The stick is, if someone shows up at my meeting/class, especially something like SLS, without the specified uniform there's a pretty good chance they're going home (or at least not staying at the meeting - I actually don't really care all that much where they go after that).

[SarDragon]

I believe this particular double standard is due to a lack of quality training.  From what I've seen, uniforms and their terminology just aren't taught to officers the same way they are taught to cadets.  What I mean is, less time and effort is spent in this area for officers.

And you've been to how much officer (SM) training?

It doesn't take all that much training. For the new folks, you tell them what the combinations are, and where to look to refresh their knowledge. For the more seasoned members who use the wrong terminology, you tell them the right term, and where it is defined. The problem is getting the latter group to change their ways and get with the program.

[Eclipse]

And if they don't own the "specified uniform"?

[SarDragon]

And if they don't own the "specified uniform"?

Most of the activities I've attended where there's a "specified uniform" have had sufficient lead time to acquire said items. You wanna play, come prepared.

[Gunner C]

As a group commander, I was director of an SLS.  From the time we advertised it, we told people what the uniform was going to be and made sure they knew it was required.  We had a HUGE turn out with several out of state students and no one complained in the least. 

We always tried to get away from the "minimum standard" attitude and fostered the "professional as possible" tack.  When the standards are set and set high, the members will rise to them.  If there are no standards, the members will meet every one of them.

BTW, the emphasis of uniforms (we required short-sleeved blue shirts or aviator shirts without ties) really made a difference in the whole atmosphere.  I've run into a couple of students lately (now 4 and a half years later) and they commented on how professional the atmosphere was and how much they enjoyed it.

Most everyone wants to be a part of something special.  When the standards are high, people know that they're associating with a group apart - doing something that everyone else can't or won't take the effort for.  I believe that all of the students were better off for the experience.  I know that I was.  We all formed a bond that lasts to this day, all during a lowly SLS course.

GC

[A.Member]

As a group commander, I was director of an SLS.  From the time we advertised it, we told people what the uniform was going to be and made sure they knew it was required.  We had a HUGE turn out with several out of state students and no one complained in the least. 

We always tried to get away from the "minimum standard" attitude and fostered the "professional as possible" tack.  When the standards are set and set high, the members will rise to them.  If there are no standards, the members will meet every one of them.

BTW, the emphasis of uniforms (we required short-sleeved blue shirts or aviator shirts without ties) really made a difference in the whole atmosphere.  I've run into a couple of students lately (now 4 and a half years later) and they commented on how professional the atmosphere was and how much they enjoyed it.

Most everyone wants to be a part of something special.  When the standards are high, people know that they're associating with a group apart - doing something that everyone else can't or won't take the effort for.  I believe that all of the students were better off for the experience.  I know that I was.  We all formed a bond that lasts to this day, all during a lowly SLS course.

GC

Agree with this 100%!  It's all about setting expectations...and then living up to and exceeding them.

[Maj Ballard]

Question about the "uniform chart" in 39-1, etc... Do you all take "wear" to mean "can wear" or "shall wear"? In other words, is the manual specifying where it is appropriate to wear a uniform, or rather where it is mandatory?

Also, where is it stated that a member "cannot get past Level 1" without a proper uniform?

[davedove]

Question about the "uniform chart" in 39-1, etc... Do you all take "wear" to mean "can wear" or "shall wear"? In other words, is the manual specifying where it is appropriate to wear a uniform, or rather where it is mandatory?

I have taken it to read it's mandatory.  There is a problem though.  Despite the regs, National is still putting out that "some members choose to serve without wearing a uniform" in recruiting info, FAQ's, etc. 

Also, where is it stated that a member "cannot get past Level 1" without a proper uniform?

There is no such requirement anywhere in the regs.  The requirement does exist for cadets to get their first achievement, but nothing for seniors.

[JayT]

Question about the "uniform chart" in 39-1, etc... Do you all take "wear" to mean "can wear" or "shall wear"? In other words, is the manual specifying where it is appropriate to wear a uniform, or rather where it is mandatory?

Also, where is it stated that a member "cannot get past Level 1" without a proper uniform?

That was confusion on my part. See, I came up through the cadet ranks before college ruined everything good and pure about my life and I had to jump over to the SM side. I assumed that SM's had to have a basic uniform. My mistake.

[Maj Ballard]

Question about the "uniform chart" in 39-1, etc... Do you all take "wear" to mean "can wear" or "shall wear"? In other words, is the manual specifying where it is appropriate to wear a uniform, or rather where it is mandatory?

I have taken it to read it's mandatory.  There is a problem though.  Despite the regs, National is still putting out that "some members choose to serve without wearing a uniform" in recruiting info, FAQ's, etc. 

In the past, in light of the "some members choose to serve..." verbiage, I've taken the chart to mean "may wear" and not "shall wear." I've always been of the impression that the only *mandatory* uniform situations are when flying and when conducting/participating in the cadet program. That does need some clarification.

With that said, members *should* definitely wear a uniform to a professional development activity. I think that's kinda the point.

[jimmydeanno]

I have taken it to read it's mandatory.  There is a problem though.  Despite the regs, National is still putting out that "some members choose to serve without wearing a uniform" in recruiting info, FAQ's, etc. 

I always took that statement to mean members that are Patrons or AEMs or Cadet Sponsors...YMMV.

[JayT]

I have taken it to read it's mandatory.  There is a problem though.  Despite the regs, National is still putting out that "some members choose to serve without wearing a uniform" in recruiting info, FAQ's, etc. 

I always took that statement to mean members that are Patrons or AEMs or Cadet Sponsors...YMMV.

Yeah, but does a Patron, AEM, or Cadet Sponsor 'serve' in CAP? I've alwasy felt they 'support.'

We have had members of this forum who complain that they have to buy/wear a uniform for ES and flying due to that palmlet.

[dwb]

My wife (1st Lt Brodsky) is pregnant.  She doesn't fit into her uniforms anymore.  There is no such thing as maternity aviator shirts (as far as I know).

So, pop quiz... if she wanted to attend SLS, should she:

1. Drop a bunch of coin for maternity dress uniforms she will likely only wear once, or

2. Wear appropriate civilian attire

The business dress option is there to allow for a little flexibility.  At all of the professional development stuff I've been to, most people wear uniforms, but every now and then for various reasons, people can't wear a uniform.

So, should we deny them the professional development opportunity under the auspices of being more "military"?  Or should we be a little flexible?

(BTW, I really wanted my wife to attend this SLS, but she's going to be out of town, so this is all a moot point in our case)

[captrncap]

The business dress option is there to allow for a little flexibility.  At all of the professional development stuff I've been to, most people wear uniforms, but every now and then for various reasons, people can't wear a uniform.

I think they put up that option also to make sure no one that doesn't have a uniform shows up in jeans and a t-shirt.

That way they can't say "No one told me I couldn't were this"

[A.Member]

I have taken it to read it's mandatory.  There is a problem though.  Despite the regs, National is still putting out that "some members choose to serve without wearing a uniform" in recruiting info, FAQ's, etc. 

I always took that statement to mean members that are Patrons or AEMs or Cadet Sponsors...YMMV.

Correct.  As indicated earlier, the regulations on wear are clear on the wear of uniforms to activities such as this.  Furthermore, the last I checked recruiting brochures or pamphlets do not dictate wear.

[jimmydeanno]

My wife (1st Lt Brodsky) is pregnant.  She doesn't fit into her uniforms anymore.  There is no such thing as maternity aviator shirts (as far as I know).

So, pop quiz... if she wanted to attend SLS, should she:

1. Drop a bunch of coin for maternity dress uniforms she will likely only wear once, or

2. Wear appropriate civilian attire

The business dress option is there to allow for a little flexibility.  At all of the professional development stuff I've been to, most people wear uniforms, but every now and then for various reasons, people can't wear a uniform.

So, should we deny them the professional development opportunity under the auspices of being more "military"?  Or should we be a little flexible?

(BTW, I really wanted my wife to attend this SLS, but she's going to be out of town, so this is all a moot point in our case)

She's not allowed to serve in CAP because maternity alternatives aren't authorized in 39-1 [/sarcasm]

[A.Member]

My wife (1st Lt Brodsky) is pregnant.  She doesn't fit into her uniforms anymore.  There is no such thing as maternity aviator shirts (as far as I know).

So, pop quiz... if she wanted to attend SLS, should she:

1. Drop a bunch of coin for maternity dress uniforms she will likely only wear once, or

2. Wear appropriate civilian attire

The business dress option is there to allow for a little flexibility.  At all of the professional development stuff I've been to, most people wear uniforms, but every now and then for various reasons, people can't wear a uniform.

So, should we deny them the professional development opportunity under the auspices of being more "military"?  Or should we be a little flexible?

(BTW, I really wanted my wife to attend this SLS, but she's going to be out of town, so this is all a moot point in our case)

How about using some common sense?  Call the leader of the session and request an exception if there is a question or mitigating circumstances.   

However, not having a uniform because a person is too lazy to get one or wear one is not an excuse.  In that case, the question would be, why are you here and why did you join the organization?  The goal should be to exceed expectations whenever possible, not figure out ways to skirt the minimum requirements.

[JayT]

My wife (1st Lt Brodsky) is pregnant.  She doesn't fit into her uniforms anymore.  There is no such thing as maternity aviator shirts (as far as I know).

So, pop quiz... if she wanted to attend SLS, should she:

1. Drop a bunch of coin for maternity dress uniforms she will likely only wear once, or

2. Wear appropriate civilian attire

The business dress option is there to allow for a little flexibility.  At all of the professional development stuff I've been to, most people wear uniforms, but every now and then for various reasons, people can't wear a uniform.

So, should we deny them the professional development opportunity under the auspices of being more "military"?  Or should we be a little flexible?

(BTW, I really wanted my wife to attend this SLS, but she's going to be out of town, so this is all a moot point in our case)

I won't disagree with you Major, but then that should be noted in the orginal letter.

[JoeTomasone]

That was confusion on my part. See, I came up through the cadet ranks before college ruined everything good and pure about my life and I had to jump over to the SM side. I assumed that SM's had to have a basic uniform. My mistake.

Took me a while to recall where I had read that a uniform was not mandatory.   Turns out it was in the Knowledge Base:

KB Article

"Question
     Do I have to wear a CAP uniform to be a senior member?
     Answer
     Members are required to wear a uniform when participating in or conducting the cadet program or when flying in CAP aircraft (corporate and member-owned aircraft used CAP flight activity), but not necessarily the AF style service uniform."


I have submitted the following suggested correction since I am a member of the Barracks Bar:

---------


Remove the portion that implies that uniform wear is not required when not engaged in flight or cadet activities as it conflicts with CAPM 39-1:

1-5: "Members will equip themselves with the basic uniform.... It is the member's personal responsibility to equip himself/herself with a proper uniform."

Table 1-1: Indicates to WEAR the uniform "when engaged in normal duties as a CAP member or attending local, wing/region, or national CAP functions."


1-2: "All commanders will ensure that all members, individually and
collectively, present a professional, well-groomed appearance, which will reflect credit upon CAP as the auxiliary of the United States Air Force. They will ensure all members are uniformed in accordance with
the provisions of this manual, uniform violations are promptly corrected, and that members are continually informed as to the proper wear of the uniform."

1-1: COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY. Any variation from this publication is not authorized."