Promotion system needs guidelines, dates, and followup

[JeffDG]

What Eclipse is saying, that I squarely disagree with, if a Wing/CC does this (without saying the why he's doing it), that's OK, but if he declares the policy out loud, he's violating the regulations.  I disagree.  I would rather have him tell folks why he's denying their promotion requests, as he has every right to do as the approving authority.

Which part of this is unclear?

CAPR 35-5, December 2012
"1-1. General.   Criteria for promotion of CAP senior members will be applied uniformly
throughout Civil Air Patrol.  CAP unit supplements to this regulation in the form of publications
or oral instructions that change the basic policies, criteria, procedures and practices prescribed
herein are prohibited."

Defining what you think "exemplary manner meriting promotion to the grade" is not changing the "basic policies, criteria, procedures and practices", it's letting folks know how you will implement it.

You may think that phrase has no meaning, but it's in there, and as such, it provides wide discretion to the approving authority to interpret.  It is incumbent upon someone exercising that authority to tell folks how he intends to exercise that discretion.

[JeffDG]

As I proposed earlier -- make all promotions up to Captain automatic (and lets get rid of the advanced promotion system while we're at it) and have really tough, but incredibly clear and specific, standards for Maj. and Lt. Col.

Where do I sign?

Why not just eliminate Lt's and FO's if everyone is guaranteed Captain. Better to require completion of OBC for initial appointment to officer grades, a formal promotion board at every level, and the requirement of a sit down session with the Commander to review membership every six months with a CAPF 40 or written review for the record.

That's a fantastic way to get more people to step up for command, add more paperwork and time requirements for this "membership review" twice a year for every senior member in the unit.  If there's one thing commanders don't have enough of right now is paperwork.

[RiverAux]

As I proposed earlier -- make all promotions up to Captain automatic (and lets get rid of the advanced promotion system while we're at it) and have really tough, but incredibly clear and specific, standards for Maj. and Lt. Col.

Where do I sign?

Why not just eliminate Lt's and FO's if everyone is guaranteed Captain. Better to require completion of OBC for initial appointment to officer grades, a formal promotion board at every level, and the requirement of a sit down session with the Commander to review membership every six months with a CAPF 40 or written review for the record.

Who said anyone was guaranteed Captain?  They would still need to complete the same requirements as we have now.  Heck, my proposal, by linking in elimination of advanced promotions, would probably result in fewer people reaching Captain than is now the case. 

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

That's a fantastic way to get more people to step up for command, add more paperwork and time requirements for this "membership review" twice a year for every senior member in the unit.  If there's one thing commanders don't have enough of right now is paperwork.

If, by the time someone gets to the point where they're thinking of command, they should know that CAP, or any grouping associated with the military, has shineola-loads of paperwork as part of the job.  That paperwork can have as much of a benefit for the commander as the subordinate, even if only as a CYA move on behalf of the commander to establish a paper trail in case someone makes a formal enquiry.  Is it not much better to say "I denied a promotion, and here is the documentation as to why," rather than to just say "Captain Railroadtracks isn't ready.  S/he may never be.  End of story," and leave it at that?

:POf course, it would be much simpler to deal with incompetent/unwilling/unethical higher-ups according to the Klingon way:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rApjT3iWU_E#

However, since we live in the real world, and not that of Roddenberry, we must use other methods.  However, those methods are at least as subjective, if not moreso, than the "exemplary" wording that this seems to turn on.

[Eclipse]

What Eclipse is saying, that I squarely disagree with, if a Wing/CC does this (without saying the why he's doing it), that's OK, but if he declares the policy out loud, he's violating the regulations.  I disagree.  I would rather have him tell folks why he's denying their promotion requests, as he has every right to do as the approving authority.

Which part of this is unclear?

CAPR 35-5, December 2012
"1-1. General.   Criteria for promotion of CAP senior members will be applied uniformly
throughout Civil Air Patrol.  CAP unit supplements to this regulation in the form of publications
or oral instructions that change the basic policies, criteria, procedures and practices prescribed
herein are prohibited."

Defining what you think "exemplary manner meriting promotion to the grade" is not changing the "basic policies, criteria, procedures and practices", it's letting folks know how you will implement it.

You may think that phrase has no meaning, but it's in there, and as such, it provides wide discretion to the approving authority to interpret.  It is incumbent upon someone exercising that authority to tell folks how he intends to exercise that discretion.

I'm not going to defend a broken process, nor define the undefinable.

This situation >is<.

The rules say you cannot add objective criteria, formally or verbally.

Requiring staff service, etc., is an objective requirement.  Ergo.

[RogueLeader]

Command or staff duty is required for Levels 3-5.  Not to mention that in order to earn a tech rating in any specialty track, staff duty is required.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Command or staff duty is required for Levels 3-5.  Not to mention that in order to earn a tech rating in any specialty track, staff duty is required.

The level of command/staff duty is not specified.

I have a Master rating in Administration.  I was an Administration Officer for six years at one unit, two years at another, and a year at another.

I have a Technician rating in Safety.  I was a Safety Officer for six years at one unit (concurrent with my DA stint), and two years at another.

I was Deputy Commander of my first unit for roughly three years.

All were at the squadron level.

[Eclipse]

Command or staff duty is required for Levels 3-5.  Not to mention that in order to earn a tech rating in any specialty track, staff duty is required.

The level of command/staff duty is not specified.

Cyborg makes a key point in this discussion.

Someone serving quietly as a Unit FM fulfills the Finance Specialty requirements (or did last time I looked), simply by doing the job.
Master is essentially a matter of time, not any extra effort. 

Since no mandate for higher HQ appointment is in the regs, does this make them "less" eligible to be promoted?

[RogueLeader]

That depends on the specialty track.  Finance (CAPP 202) requires Wing or Region staff in order to complete a Master Rating.

[Eclipse]

That depends on the specialty track.  Finance (CAPP 202) requires Wing or Region staff in order to complete a Master Rating.

Whoops, you're right.

[RogueLeader]

There might be others, but Finance happened to stick with me.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Someone serving quietly as a Unit FM fulfills the Finance Specialty requirements (or did last time I looked), simply by doing the job.
Master is essentially a matter of time, not any extra effort. 

Anyone who can do that has my vote for promotion, anyway.  I can barely do basic math.

Should how long ago the duty status was have bearing?  I did both DA and SE positions for quite a number of years, but all I have now are assisting positions (in both), and due to breaks in service, those duty positions were a few years ago.  They are, however, documented in E-Services.

[Eclipse]

We've basically got two threads here and no clean place to split them.

What is allowed as subjective rejection is separate from the basic common courtesy of acting on requests in a timely manner.

Both are legit issues, both continue to cost use members and motivation, but we need to make sure they are seperated discussion-wise.

But with that said, far too many promotions are left with no response because the approver has no legitimate reason for disapproving, but doesn't want to have the discussion.

[FARRIER]

We've basically got two threads here and no clean place to split them.

What is allowed as subjective rejection is separate from the basic common courtesy of acting on requests in a timely manner.

Both are legit issues, both continue to cost use members and motivation, but we need to make sure they are seperated discussion-wise.

But with that said, far too many promotions are left with no response because the approver has no legitimate reason for disapproving, but doesn't want to have the discussion.

     You're actually hitting it on the head. Your example of the 1LT promoted based on his FAA rating then is commanding the squadron. That isn't just CAP, but a real world situation. You have younger people out of college promoted to a supervisory slot over older and more experienced workers. While some corporations are great at mentoring, some have nothing in place.

     At one point I was personnel officer for a wing and on the wing awards and promotion board. But, I haven't had the Unit Commanders Course, to be honest, so if I miss something my apologies. The new unit commanders, is there a system in place for mentoring, regardless of age? CAP is different from some of the major corporations and has some differences with the military. Is there someone to walk them through those differences.

     What does this have to do with the topic? How they handle the promotions, one of the few rewards that CAP can give to a member. As Eclipse and Rouge Leader pointed out, with the exceptions of Finance, and probably a few of the others, there is no command or staff level requirement to get your master rating. Complete the rest of the requirements for the grade, what is there to hold a member back? A commander if he/she uses discretion, in rejecting a promotion, must have a logical reason or be able to reference the regulations. That's where the experience level and mentoring to/advice to the new unit commander would be helpful.

[CAP_truth]

I have always been an advocate an annual performance reports using CAPF-40. In this way a paper trail is available to promotion boards and new commanders or staff when needed.

[Private Investigator]

I have a Master rating in Administration.  I was an Administration Officer for six years at one unit, two years at another, and a year at another.

I have a Technician rating in Safety.  I was a Safety Officer for six years at one unit (concurrent with my DA stint), and two years at another.

As I recall if you hit all the check boxes in Admin you can have "Master" in two years. But Safety use to take five years to rate "Master". (Reviewing CAPP 217 now it looks like you can get it quicker now)

You would hope a CAP Lt Col would have knowledge on a broader scale than just what happens at Petticoat Junction Squadron.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

As I recall if you hit all the check boxes in Admin you can have "Master" in two years. But Safety use to take five years to rate "Master". (Reviewing CAPP 217 now it looks like you can get it quicker now)

It takes a little more than that to be a good DA.  I first took on the job because my first squadron's deputy CC (later CC) presented it to me that Administration was not a popular job in CAP due to all the paper-pushing.  Back then there was a lot more of it because nothing was online.  I remember many Saturday mornings and afternoons in the floor of my living room with the big blue binder taking obsolete regs out, putting new ones in, etc.

I would never willingly be a Safety Officer again, which is why I never pursued it beyond Technician rating.  That was the biggest headache of a job I ever had in CAP.

You would hope a CAP Lt Col would have knowledge on a broader scale than just what happens at Petticoat Junction Squadron.

Is the only way to do so to have a position on Wing staff?  I disagree.  My knowledge of CAP is not encyclopaedic, but having served in all three types of squadrons (one of which produced a Spaatz), in two wings, I believe I have a little bit of knowledge about the way the cookie crumbles in the organisation as a whole, both good and bad.

I came in right after the berry boards and lived through John McCain's attempt to disestablish us.  I was in during part of the reign of the Generalissimo.  I then saw the milestones of the first female National CC and the first African-American National CC.  That's a little sampler of both the bad and the good that has happened in CAP.