Air Force gets fecally amalgamated on new policies!

[Major Lord]

Oh, if only CAP could be so clear.......

http://www.military.com/news/article/af-clarifies-dress-code-grooming-standards.html?col=1186032325324

Major Lord

[Dad2-4]

Oh, if only CAP could be so clear.......
Major Lord

Amen.  :clap:
But how would it get enforced?

[SPD6696]

It's about time.  Ambiguity in unform regulations only causes problems.  As far as enforcement for CAP, well, comply, or be ejected.  Period.  If you don't want to play by big boy rules, don't join the organization.

[JC004]

I was speaking with Col Weiss and he plans to begin dealing with the uniform issue right out of the gate if elected, so be prepared for a push to get member input on clarifying things in this way. 

It is particularly important to clarify things for CAP members who may not have any military experience and know, for instance, how to set up their mini-medals or something like that.  It would probably be helpful if members reviewing this AFI now could make some notes for what should be added to 39-1.

There is supposed to be something coming on the Questions and Answers page about uniforms but it isn't there yet and I am not sure how much detail there will be until the whole issue is examined in depth. 

If Col Weiss is elected, I expect there will be some HILARIOUSLY BITTER fights over the uniform change proposals right here on CAPTalk, so stay tuned!     I can't wait to see how much more crazy CAPTalk uniform threads can get.

[Spaceman3750]

You know, something tells me the promise of radical change won't be earning him any votes from the "old guard".

[JC004]

I guess it depends on how it is executed.  A lot of the things, like resolving the uniform issues in this case, are wanted by basically everyone.  A lot of people would like to see the uniform issue and the like put to rest after being dealt with because the uniform stuff has a very real financial impact on people.  I don't see anything like some of the stuff people propose here that is waaaay out there.

It seems to me it's about making the organization work better and in a modern way for its traditional missions and additional missions that come with time.

I was thinking the other day of what CAPTalk would probably look like with the uniform issues.  It should be quite fun.

[titanII]

If Col Weiss is elected, I expect there will be some HILARIOUSLY BITTER fights over the uniform change proposals right here on CAPTalk, so stay tuned!     I can't wait to see how much more crazy CAPTalk uniform threads can get.

Oh gosh... I can't wait.

[JC004]

At first, I was thinking it couldn't possibly get any worse, but as I thought more about various scenarios, I figured it could be a great drama.   

So I just found this.  I think we should have something like this for CAP under the new regime:

http://www.afpc.af.mil/dress/index.asp

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Amen, JC.

We need a new 39-1, but frankly, we just need to scrap that book, adopt the AFI and write a CAP supplement. The Air Force book, even before the new one, was so much more clear.

[Tim Medeiros]

Amen, JC.

We need a new 39-1, but frankly, we just need to scrap that book, adopt the AFI and write a CAP supplement. The Air Force book, even before the new one, was so much more clear.

Here is something to consider with that thought.


Why would one organization write a supplement to a publication published by another (arguably, completely independent) organization?  Where else is this done?  What sort of precedent is there for something like this?

[SarDragon]

The CAP drill manual is the AF pub with a CAP cover. Does that count? There are also joint issue military pubs that have USAF, USA, USN, and USMC identifiers on the same pub. I don't think a supplement to the AF uni reg is too far a stretch.

[JC004]

I considered this but I was thinking that for simplicity and ease of use for people without a military background, a dedicated CAP manual would be best.  That way you can see, for example, the specialty badges that are very different from the AF or you don't have to look at the supplement to find out that a former CC doesn't wear the badge under the nameplate - they wear a ribbon instead.  Of course, I don't know if I'm going to be on a uniform committee or not.

Colonel Weiss always says "simple is good" (and variations thereof).  I expect if he wins in a few weeks, he will wish the committees to take that approach.

On a side note, this is why I think the uniform drama will be craaaaazy: the number 1 topic on CAPTalk was NHQ Uniform Committee (Read 62738 times, with 1,121 replies).  Many of the other top topics are also uniform related.  That doesn't include the threads that become uniform threads.

[RiverAux]

Amen, JC.

We need a new 39-1, but frankly, we just need to scrap that book, adopt the AFI and write a CAP supplement. The Air Force book, even before the new one, was so much more clear.

I think that CAP has so many different uniforms that it wouldn't be practical to try to do it as a supplement and it would make it somewhat difficult to figure out when everything isn't in the same place.   That being said, we should stick to the AF-way as much as practical.

[Grumpy]

Amen, JC.

We need a new 39-1, but frankly, we just need to scrap that book, adopt the AFI and write a CAP supplement. The Air Force book, even before the new one, was so much more clear.

Here is something to consider with that thought.


Why would one organization write a supplement to a publication published by another (arguably, completely independent) organization?  Where else is this done?  What sort of precedent is there for something like this?

The fact that the Air Force is our PARENT organization.  Would that help?

[Tim Medeiros]

The CAP drill manual is the AF pub with a CAP cover. Does that count? There are also joint issue military pubs that have USAF, USA, USN, and USMC identifiers on the same pub. I don't think a supplement to the AF uni reg is too far a stretch.

The "CAP Drill Manual" is not technically a supplement in that regard.  As for joint issue pubs, one could argue that USAF, USA, USN, and USMC are sister organizations, who also report to the parent organization in DoD.


Who is our parent organization?  One could argue that it is NOT the USAF, that we are a separate and are only affiliated to a degree with the USAF.




Before people get hot and bothered over what I'm saying, I'm merely playing devils advocate and trying to see the view point from the other side of the coin.

[arajca]

Amen, JC.

We need a new 39-1, but frankly, we just need to scrap that book, adopt the AFI and write a CAP supplement. The Air Force book, even before the new one, was so much more clear.

If it the uniform differences were minor, that approach could work. However, the differences are not minor and there are a number of AF uniforms that CAP is not authorized to use. Additionally, there are a number of CAP specific uniforms that are not covered in the AFI.

If CAP adopted the AFI + a supplement, we all know members who would forget about the supplement and just try to follow the AFI. Unfortuantely, the AF would be the first ones to see this and this would cause more major fits.

[zonaman]

[EDIT]

Wrong place for my question so I'll throw in my two cents.

CAP really does need its own manual. The 39-1 DESPERATELY needs to be "cleaned up". The AF manual could be a great guide for CAP on how to conduct and UPDATE the manual. Like badge placement and other small things like the crease on the arm sleeve. Why is it like that. If some AF person approaching a CAP person says " oh I thought you were AF but I saw your crease is approximately one inch off, so you must be CAP". I don't see that happening. I'm pretty sure that AF person will be blinded by the name tapes or see the full color patches. Maybe there really is some good reason for it, in that case somebody please fill me in. Otherwise do we (CAP) really need to be that much of a nitpick on how different we are?. IMHO.

It sounds like Col. Weiss (if elected) will help clean up some of the 39-1 mess.

[RADIOMAN015]

Oh, if only CAP could be so clear.......

http://www.military.com/news/article/af-clarifies-dress-code-grooming-standards.html?col=1186032325324

Major Lord

Last time I looked, AF personnel are getting pay & benefits for being in that organization and there should be an expectation of professional image both in personal appearance (both on and off duty) as well as uniform wear.  IF they don't like it when their contact is up they should get out and become a civilian.   BTW, if a person looks like a freak with many tattoos (visible) and body piercings and goes looking for work in the civilian sector, I don't think the high end paying jobs are going to put them on the top of the selection list.  Even for lower paying jobs, one is going to take a good look so to speak at that individual, especially IF there's a possibility of gang ties.       

Regarding CAP, we are the Civil Air Patrol and can only regulate members while they are performing/attending CAP duties/functions.   I think the visible tattoos on some members, even in corporate uniform are a "distraction" to professionalism (the beards & long hair, including pony tails if neat are what they are) as well as having a properly fitting uniform.  I don't think a CAP senior (and cadet) male member with wearing earrings do much for us also, even if they are not in any uniform but are entering the military base using their CAP ID card. 

Once, one of our younger senior members brought his girl friend (at the time) to one of our meetings to consider joining.  She had some lip & nose piercings.  Surely we would want that person as a member    Another former squadron senior member female would wear a very short civilian skirt  :angel: to some of our squadron meetings.  I think the leadership actually talked to her about it.  Interesting the same former member popped up as wanting to join another volunteer emergency services agency and someone I know at that agency (who knew I was in CAP) talked to me about her since apparently the same non conservative dress was being worn, and she had mentioned about her former relationship with CAP.   This did not make a good impression on that organization's leadership either.   

We can argue all day long about hats for the white/grey , BDU's, ACU's, etc, BUT the number of visible tattoos, body piercing, proper fit of ANY CAP uniform is also very important to our image.

RM 

[jeders]

Oh, if only CAP could be so clear.......

http://www.military.com/news/article/af-clarifies-dress-code-grooming-standards.html?col=1186032325324

Major Lord

Once, one of our younger senior members brought his girl friend (at the time) to one of our meetings to consider joining.  She had some lip & nose piercings.  Surely we would want that person as a member    

Not to take a uniform thread off topic, but I was in a squadron with a young lady who had numerous ear piercings and a nose piercing. She was the best Admin Officer I've ever seen and she never had a problem being in regs when she wore the uniform.

[Hawk200]

Oh, if only CAP could be so clear.......

http://www.military.com/news/article/af-clarifies-dress-code-grooming-standards.html?col=1186032325324

Major Lord

Once, one of our younger senior members brought his girl friend (at the time) to one of our meetings to consider joining.  She had some lip & nose piercings.  Surely we would want that person as a member    

Not to take a uniform thread off topic, but I was in a squadron with a young lady who had numerous ear piercings and a nose piercing. She was the best Admin Officer I've ever seen and she never had a problem being in regs when she wore the uniform.

We have an avionics technician in our battalion that wears plenty of piercings out of uniform (to the point that some guys call her "Tacklebox" because she looks like she fell face first into one). I didn't know she wore such things or even had tattoos for almost a year after I first saw her in uniform.  Didn't change my opinion of her at all. I'd be happy to have her in CAP, and would highly recommend her if I was asked. She is a perfect example of getting to know the person not her appearance.

I still think that rejecting someone based on their appearance is lazy. Get to know the person. If they feel that they don't need to show professionalism in uniform, then that is someone that should not be encouraged to join. Military recruiters do this regularly. But if they don't have problems with "fitting in" on the job, there is no need to judge them.