Proposal 2: CAP Professional Development and Rank/Grade

[Dragoon]

Sadly, our grade system is NOT working as it was intended to work.

In the original grade system, grade was based on position.  The squadron CC's rank was based on size of the unit.  Staffers were commissioned officers.  Pilots were flight officers. Everybody else was enlisted.

In other words, we looked pretty much like the Army Air Corps, and functioned in a similar fashion.  The guy with the most rank was in charge.  He has the responsiblity and the authority that should go with the grade on his epaulets.

So how the heck did we get from such a common sense system to the messed up, rank inverted, "my grade is really just a symbol of my CAP education level" system?

Simple - we don't do "up or out."

So the squadron CC is a major, but he doesn't want to be a squadron CC anymore.  So what now?  We decided demotions were too insulting. So we let him keep his grade.

Then, somewhere in the 50s (old timers can fill in the details) we had some sort of a quota based system where each unit got X number of officer grades.  But the same problem occured - the old Lt Col would step down and keep the rank, so now the new guy commander couldn't get promoted due to the quota being filled by the old commander!

So, we went to a "check the block, get promoted" system.  Everyone gets to be a Lt Col, as long as they sit through the classes.


And this would be fine, except that our grade still looks just like real military grade.  And, as several have pointed out we aren't in the military.  If we got rid of the oak leaves and railroad tracks, and replaced them with some CAP specific system, we'd be making it clear that our rank is nothing like the real military's.

Which would be truth in advertising.

[Hawk200]

When CAP started to run rough over financial stuff, one suggestion was to make CPA's Majors.  The coolest thing is, once they have the grade they get to keep it even if they never do work in their specialty, or useful work at all.  

I'm betting you don't know what 35-5 is, do you?

Been up one side and down the other and for all the time I've been in CAP I've never seen anyone hand back their probationary grade or get called to the carpet for not doing whatever job they signed up for.

Obviously you haven't read it lately. Read the emphazised portion. Then, if you want some credibility, tell us how the statement is wrong in accordance with 35-5. Because your statement and the reg don't jive.

[ddelaney103]

When CAP started to run rough over financial stuff, one suggestion was to make CPA's Majors.  The coolest thing is, once they have the grade they get to keep it even if they never do work in their specialty, or useful work at all.  

I'm betting you don't know what 35-5 is, do you?

Been up one side and down the other and for all the time I've been in CAP I've never seen anyone hand back their probationary grade or get called to the carpet for not doing whatever job they signed up for.

Obviously you haven't read it lately. Read the emphazised portion. Then, if you want some credibility, tell us how the statement is wrong in accordance with 35-5. Because your statement and the reg don't jive.

Yes, for the whole half dozen or so officers who fall into the "region vice but never been NB/NEC" category, they have to hand back their eagles.  I didn't bother including that because a) that event almost never happens and b) I never discussed O-6's and above.

I must admit, though, it's a great rule - we just need to extend it to the vast preponderance of officers who are either not in a staff slot or in one far below their current grade.

Again, I ask you to show me times when a member was demoted for not doing his job - since it clearly says:

9. Demotions. If an officer fails to perform the duties satisfactorily or conducts himself/herself in a manner unbecoming his or her grade, the unit commander will recommend demotion to an appropriate grade.

[Hawk200]

When CAP started to run rough over financial stuff, one suggestion was to make CPA's Majors.  The coolest thing is, once they have the grade they get to keep it even if they never do work in their specialty, or useful work at all.  

I'm betting you don't know what 35-5 is, do you?

Been up one side and down the other and for all the time I've been in CAP I've never seen anyone hand back their probationary grade or get called to the carpet for not doing whatever job they signed up for.

Obviously you haven't read it lately. Read the emphazised portion. Then, if you want some credibility, tell us how the statement is wrong in accordance with 35-5. Because your statement and the reg don't jive.

Yes, for the whole half dozen or so officers who fall into the "region vice but never been NB/NEC" category, they have to hand back their eagles.  I didn't bother including that because a) that event almost never happens and b) I never discussed O-6's and above.

I must admit, though, it's a great rule - we just need to extend it to the vast preponderance of officers who are either not in a staff slot or in one far below their current grade.

Again, I ask you to show me times when a member was demoted for not doing his job - since it clearly says:

9. Demotions. If an officer fails to perform the duties satisfactorily or conducts himself/herself in a manner unbecoming his or her grade, the unit commander will recommend demotion to an appropriate grade.

Not what I'm talking about. Read 35-5 again on professional appointments. You'll see what I mean.

As long as we follow the reg, we don't get "shooting stars".

[ddelaney103]

When CAP started to run rough over financial stuff, one suggestion was to make CPA's Majors.  The coolest thing is, once they have the grade they get to keep it even if they never do work in their specialty, or useful work at all.  

I'm betting you don't know what 35-5 is, do you?

Been up one side and down the other and for all the time I've been in CAP I've never seen anyone hand back their probationary grade or get called to the carpet for not doing whatever job they signed up for.

Obviously you haven't read it lately. Read the emphazised portion. Then, if you want some credibility, tell us how the statement is wrong in accordance with 35-5. Because your statement and the reg don't jive.

Yes, for the whole half dozen or so officers who fall into the "region vice but never been NB/NEC" category, they have to hand back their eagles.  I didn't bother including that because a) that event almost never happens and b) I never discussed O-6's and above.

I must admit, though, it's a great rule - we just need to extend it to the vast preponderance of officers who are either not in a staff slot or in one far below their current grade.

Again, I ask you to show me times when a member was demoted for not doing his job - since it clearly says:

9. Demotions. If an officer fails to perform the duties satisfactorily or conducts himself/herself in a manner unbecoming his or her grade, the unit commander will recommend demotion to an appropriate grade.

Not what I'm talking about. Read 35-5 again on professional appointments. You'll see what I mean.

As long as we follow the reg, we don't get "shooting stars".

If a direct appt to Captain qualifies for the "promote to Major after one year as Captain" option, having to wait the full time to promote still means silver oak leaves at about 5 years.  That's about 5 years faster than the minimum for military officers and about 10 years faster than your average O-5. http://usmilitary.about.com/od/promotions/l/blofficerprom.htm

Granted, it's not the "Magic wand prang" the Legislative Liaison guys get, but that's still pretty dang fast.

[Hawk200]

If a direct appt to Captain qualifies for the "promote to Major after one year as Captain" option, having to wait the full time to promote still means silver oak leaves at about 5 years.  That's about 5 years faster than the minimum for military officers and about 10 years faster than your average O-5. http://usmilitary.about.com/od/promotions/l/blofficerprom.htm

Granted, it's not the "Magic wand prang" the Legislative Liaison guys get, but that's still pretty dang fast.

What's the date on the 35-5 that you're looking at? You haven't addressed what I'm talking about yet. I'm wondering if you have an older version.

[ddelaney103]

If a direct appt to Captain qualifies for the "promote to Major after one year as Captain" option, having to wait the full time to promote still means silver oak leaves at about 5 years.  That's about 5 years faster than the minimum for military officers and about 10 years faster than your average O-5. http://usmilitary.about.com/od/promotions/l/blofficerprom.htm

Granted, it's not the "Magic wand prang" the Legislative Liaison guys get, but that's still pretty dang fast.

What's the date on the 35-5 that you're looking at? You haven't addressed what I'm talking about yet. I'm wondering if you have an older version.

21 Aug 04 - I'm looking at the one of the cap.gov site...

[Hawk200]

What's the date on the 35-5 that you're looking at? You haven't addressed what I'm talking about yet. I'm wondering if you have an older version.

21 Aug 04 - I'm looking at the one of the cap.gov site...

Read pages 8 and 9. You should see what I'm talking about.

[ZigZag911]

Here's a couple of examples of 'accelerated promotion' for you:

Captain for about 8-10 years; major for several months; colonel (wing CC)

1Lt for taking a squadron for about 6 months; then major for taking a group for less than 6 months; then lt col for reasons no one has been able to discern thus far.

Oh, and instant captain to lt col for 'legislative sqdn CC' (I wish they'd get rid of that appointment, it's almost always a polite fiction/excuse for promoting a crony), followed by col (you guessed it, another wing CC!), in the space of about 9 months

By the way, I'm not sure any of the region vices who weren't wing CCs actually had to turn in their birds; in any case, they revert to lt col (regardless of prior grade....imagine, a region CC could make a SMWOG a temporary col who would at worst end up as a lt col!!!) unless approved by the NEC for permanent colonel....any bets on how small a number is not approved?!?

Finally, the difference between CAP & Real Military (tm) regarding professional appointments is that the candidate for a military commission as doctor, lawyer, chaplain, nurse and so forth is required to get some actual grounding in the customs, procedures, operations and regulations of their service.

Professional appointments are OK, but two changes are needed:

1) the rank should be awarded after Level II
2) further promotion should require completion of CAP PD program for the rank in question

[Hawk200]

Here's a couple of examples of 'accelerated promotion' for you:

Captain for about 8-10 years; major for several months; colonel (wing CC)

1Lt for taking a squadron for about 6 months; then major for taking a group for less than 6 months; then lt col for reasons no one has been able to discern thus far.

Oh, and instant captain to lt col for 'legislative sqdn CC' (I wish they'd get rid of that appointment, it's almost always a polite fiction/excuse for promoting a crony), followed by col (you guessed it, another wing CC!), in the space of about 9 months

By the way, I'm not sure any of the region vices who weren't wing CCs actually had to turn in their birds; in any case, they revert to lt col (regardless of prior grade....imagine, a region CC could make a SMWOG a temporary col who would at worst end up as a lt col!!!) unless approved by the NEC for permanent colonel....any bets on how small a number is not approved?!?

Finally, the difference between CAP & Real Military (tm) regarding professional appointments is that the candidate for a military commission as doctor, lawyer, chaplain, nurse and so forth is required to get some actual grounding in the customs, procedures, operations and regulations of their service.

Professional appointments are OK, but two changes are needed:

1) the rank should be awarded after Level II
2) further promotion should require completion of CAP PD program for the rank in question

So there are people that buck the system, and cheat fellow members. Why should the system change? Anyone that finds a way to cheat it at present will find a way to cheat a different system.

Our current culture is one of entitlement. Kids out of high school think they should have 9 and $10 an hour jobs with no prior experience. How does changing our rank system deal with the underlying problem in our society? There are schools nowdays that don't even have tests. Cheating the promotion structure is a symptom, not the underlying problem.

Look at our top level leaders that are getting fired and replaced. Do you think they all were poor leaders? What about the fact that many of them were replaced with personnel having law enforcement background? Does that look totally innocent to everyone? Problems at the top. Even if a proposed system would supposedly fix that, there would still be cheaters. Many at the top levels.

[Dragoon]

So there are people that buck the system, and cheat fellow members. Why should the system change? Anyone that finds a way to cheat it at present will find a way to cheat a different system.   

But some systems are way more resistant to cheating than others. 

[Hawk200]

So there are people that buck the system, and cheat fellow members. Why should the system change? Anyone that finds a way to cheat it at present will find a way to cheat a different system.   

But some systems are way more resistant to cheating than others. 

Maybe so, but there is always a potential for abuse. And there are people that just ignore the rules. Unfortunately, in some of the systems that have been proposed, it would be harder to challenge a violation of rules.

This proposed FO for everyone, command slots get officer grade would present issues as well. There are people higher up that ignore anyone but unit commanders or people with more rank. It would make it even easier with FO for everyone. Higher level staff could just say: "Oh, he or she is just a Flight Officer, they don't have any input worth considering. Let me know when that unit commander calls." May or may not happen, there is only one way to know. Implement it and see. But do you really want to roll those dice? Are you willing to accept the repercussions if it does actually turn out that way? Will your conscience be clear if it does?

So far no one has answered one question that I have posed: Does anyone really think that an FO for everyone system would get passed if sent up? Honestly? Ignoring the question doesn't make it go away.

Making a ProDev system that would present more challenges is probably far more likely than throwing out our current system, and creating a new one. Wouldn't you rather be a better officer than getting reduced to a less important one?

[ColonelJack]

So far no one has answered one question that I have posed: Does anyone really think that an FO for everyone system would get passed if sent up? Honestly? Ignoring the question doesn't make it go away.

Well, I've answered it.  I believe my answer went something like this:

...Hell will freeze over ... the Cubs will win the World Series after a thrilling seven games with the Tampa Bay Devil Rays ... the Cincinnati Bengals will win the Super Bowl with Michael Vick at quarterback and Pacman Jones carrying the ball for him -- with betting by NBA referees ...

Something like that.

In other words, a proposal to change grade in CAP -- any proposal that changes grades in CAP -- is most likely dead on arrival.

This is a fun exercise in semantics and "what if," but in reality, that kind of change is not going to happen.  Not in this lifetime, anyway.

Jack

[Hawk200]

So far no one has answered one question that I have posed: Does anyone really think that an FO for everyone system would get passed if sent up? Honestly? Ignoring the question doesn't make it go away.

Well, I've answered it.  I believe my answer went something like this:

...Hell will freeze over ... the Cubs will win the World Series after a thrilling seven games with the Tampa Bay Devil Rays ... the Cincinnati Bengals will win the Super Bowl with Michael Vick at quarterback and Pacman Jones carrying the ball for him -- with betting by NBA referees ...

Something like that.

In other words, a proposal to change grade in CAP -- any proposal that changes grades in CAP -- is most likely dead on arrival.

This is a fun exercise in semantics and "what if," but in reality, that kind of change is not going to happen.  Not in this lifetime, anyway.

Jack

My apologies, Colonel, you did answer, I wasn't paying attention. But I do like the way you have reinforced your answer. Certainly drives the point home.

I guess I should keep in mind that a lot of these concepts are "What if" flights of fancy. Maybe they won't irritate me so much.

[ColonelJack]

I guess I should keep in mind that a lot of these concepts are "What if" flights of fancy. Maybe they won't irritate me so much.

That's okay, my friend.  I have to make myself remember the "what if" aspects as well, 'cause some of this stuff is really irritating.  As you said in another thread, the basic proposal amounts to little more than "change for the sake of change."  Not a good idea, ever -- in any situation.

Jack

[ZigZag911]

Cheating the promotion structure is a symptom, not the underlying problem.

Look at our top level leaders that are getting fired and replaced. Do you think they all were poor leaders? What about the fact that many of them were replaced with personnel having law enforcement background? Does that look totally innocent to everyone? Problems at the top. Even if a proposed system would supposedly fix that, there would still be cheaters. Many at the top levels.

Agreed...which is why I feel a system involving some sort of checks & balances is needed....something that does not repose all appointment or promotion authority in the hands of one or two individuals, at any level.

[ZigZag911]

So far no one has answered one question that I have posed: Does anyone really think that an FO for everyone system would get passed if sent up? Honestly? Ignoring the question doesn't make it go away.

Sorry, I thought I had replied....you are absolutely right, no way no how would it have a snowball's chance in hell of passing!

[Hawk200]

So far no one has answered one question that I have posed: Does anyone really think that an FO for everyone system would get passed if sent up? Honestly? Ignoring the question doesn't make it go away.

Sorry, I thought I had replied....you are absolutely right, no way no how would it have a snowball's chance in hell of passing!

I may have missed it, you probably did. I get frustrated with these concepts, because instead of actually working something that might possibly work, some folks engage in those flights of fancy. I think we ought to put our energies into actually making an attempt to improve what we have.

[ColonelJack]

I may have missed it, you probably did. I get frustrated with these concepts, because instead of actually working something that might possibly work, some folks engage in those flights of fancy. I think we ought to put our energies into actually making an attempt to improve what we have.

I would agree with that 100%, but for one thing ... the only people who actually have the power to make any changes at all to what is there are absolutely uninterested in doing so.  As far as they are concerned, the system works just fine.  It did for them, didn't it?

Until one of us here on CAPTalk gets into a wing/region/national command slot or sits on the BoG, all of this is just an exercise in typing skills.  There will be no changes, because those in charge don't want the system changed.  And certainly not in the radical ways mentioned here.

End of reality check ... we now return you to your previously scheduled program.

Jack

[ZigZag911]

"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is that good men should do nothing."
Edmund Burke

CAP Talk has made clear to a lot of us that we are not alone; that we, and our like-minded close CAP friends, are not a bunch of isolated crackpots, no matter what the 'in' crowd says or thinks.

In my 35 plus years in CAP, I've seen the politics revolve round and round....in became out, and vice versa.

For most of that time, there was a basic respect in both directions....when one group replaced another, there was an understanding that:

1) those on the way 'out' still had skills to contribute
2) they needed to be treated with dignity (if for no other reason than that fortunes would undoubtedly swing back again!)
3) our differences were in methods & philosophies rather than goals

Today we are seeing the ascendancy of the inexperienced and sketchily trained cronies of some who have come to significant positions of authority. They have little time in CAP, no command experience, sparse understanding of the program or the people....yet command wings & regions and serve on the national staff.

Do you need to be an 'old timer' like me to National CC? Of course not.

But I do think 10 years in CAP, with a complete term as wing or region CC, ought to be a minimal expectation.

Getting somewhat back on point, we need to keep communicating -- discuss, disagree, develop ideas.

Sooner or later all this talk will bear fruit.

It's how this nation was born!