CAP Rank structure

[MIKE]

The Aux has the same problem we do... In my flotilla I have a past Division Captain (Lt Col) doing the job of a Flotilla Staff Officer (2d Lt).  He gets to keep his oak leaves/stripes.

Being a butter bar amuses me.    I get to wear metal "rank" on my jacket and hat too. 

[BillB]

I asked this once before and nobody bothered about expounding on their "get rid of 2Lt through LTC".  What happens when you have a member that has completed level 5 INCLUDING Air War College? Assume he has been a Squadron and Group CC, the on-again, off-again appointment as LCol to FO6 or whatever you're calling them would shoot morale to small bits. And where are you going to find the insignia for six grades of FO? Follow the AFROTC metod of adding stripes to the shoulder sleeves? Or does a FO4 with four stripes on the shoulder sleeve look to much like a Navy Captain?
The system of officer grade was approved by the War Department during WW II, why all of a sudden after 65 years does the system need to change? 

[Hawk200]

I asked this once before and nobody bothered about expounding on their "get rid of 2Lt through LTC".  What happens when you have a member that has completed level 5 INCLUDING Air War College? Assume he has been a Squadron and Group CC, the on-again, off-again appointment as LCol to FO6 or whatever you're calling them would shoot morale to small bits. And where are you going to find the insignia for six grades of FO? Follow the AFROTC metod of adding stripes to the shoulder sleeves? Or does a FO4 with four stripes on the shoulder sleeve look to much like a Navy Captain?
The system of officer grade was approved by the War Department during WW II, why all of a sudden after 65 years does the system need to change? 

Maybe there are a number of people that can't handle the expectations of them while wearing officer rank insignia. After all, people wearing those ranks are expected to act as Ladies or Gentleman. For some, that's a lot to ask.

[Pylon]

I asked this once before and nobody bothered about expounding on their "get rid of 2Lt through LTC".  What happens when you have a member that has completed level 5 INCLUDING Air War College? Assume he has been a Squadron and Group CC, the on-again, off-again appointment as LCol to FO6 or whatever you're calling them would shoot morale to small bits. And where are you going to find the insignia for six grades of FO? Follow the AFROTC metod of adding stripes to the shoulder sleeves? Or does a FO4 with four stripes on the shoulder sleeve look to much like a Navy Captain?

Vanguard is really good at making insignia.  They've been doing it for quite a few years.  If we do it right, we could have one set of insignia for all of our uniforms.  One line of soft shouldermarks/epaulet sleeves, one set of embroidered, and one line of metal pin on insignia.  Covers just about every uniform.  Actually eliminates all the myriad of crazy insignia we've got out there now. 

I kinda like some of the other proposals for a FO insignia, like Tedda's, which resemble a quasi-warrant officer appearance but clearly distinctive from any other existing insignia.  Gold or silver bars with enamel blue lines or squares on them, is just one option.

The point is not to just use somebody else's grade system and once again create undue parallels.  The point is to create our own distinctive insignia, just like we do for awards and decorations.

The system of officer grade was approved by the War Department during WW II, why all of a sudden after 65 years does the system need to change? 

That's no reason to say that the system could not use improvement, as it does generate a great deal of controversey, questions, and issues.  It may have worked in WWII, but just about everything else about CAP has changed since then.   "Years of tradition umhampered by progress!" should not be our banner cry.

[ZigZag911]

any thoughs of having a unit manning document for all levels of CAP?  How many of each rank do we really need?

Until about 1985-1990 that was the regulation, at least on paper.....it was largely ignored by that time, for several reasons:

1) commanders did not want to hold back contributing staff members because there was no open 'slot' in their specialty or area of assignment

2) commanders did not want to demote people relinquishing a job that 'rated' a specific rank

In other words, BTDT, and it did not work well the first time!

[Sgt. Savage]

You're saying that you want the current system in which only prior service NCOs become CAP NCOs, but that there should be some system under which they can advance in enlisted rank?

Not so much as I'm saying that there are too many chiefs and no indians to speak of. An "enlisted" corp provides a subordinate level that will never be in command. Why make everyone FOs or temporary grade... just thin out the officer pool and everything becomes easier.

Yeah but.

1.  Having an NCO corps in theater creates a class system.  This works fine in the military, but not so well in CAP.  Every member is valuable, or at least they think they are.  Having to call a certain class of people "sir" forever just doesn't sit well with folks that haven't grown up in the military.  The NB discussed this issue a few years back, and came to the same conclusion.  It's a civilian thing.

2.  Today's CAP "officer" is tomorrow's NCO.  I may be the squadron commander for a year, but then decide to kick back and just be the squadron testing officer for a few years while I'm busy coaching my kid's little league.  Our roles are too flud in CAP to be stuck in caste or another.

3.  The flight officer thing is a nice compromise - it makes every one an officer, so no one feels slighted.  But, just like real Warrant Officers, FOs won't be expected to be particularly military (which many of our members don't want to be, like it or not.  And, since FOs would be a CAP only grade, it would eliminate any confusion with active duty guys.

Then if they want to lead or staff they get temporary commissioned grade which they give back when the job is done, created an incentive to apply for the tough jobs if you really want to be an officer and get the prestige and courtesies that come with it.  More people applying for the tough jobs = better quality folks IN the tough jobs, which helps us all.

Your point is well taken, but lacks foundation.

I am an NCO. I was a 2Lt. I call the same people Sir now as I did then. I think that if there are limited numbers of officer positions and the bar was set high enough, new members wouldn't even know the difference. How can you be PO'd for not being an officer if you don't meet the requirements? It could be handled much like Army promotions; each achievement has points. The needs of the unit dictate the cutoff points for promotion. This encourages members to strive to achieve if they want to promote.

As far as fluid position... It only matters if your looking to be CC, otherwise you can staff the same position, just like I do, as ESNCO instead of ESO.

The FO thing is just another way of doing it. You have a different thing to sew to your collar but, your still not a REAL officer. Understanding that the USAF doesn't use Warrants anymore, every other branch still does. This allows the parallel to exist that reinforces that you are not an officer. Don't fool yourself regarding real warrant officers... they're held to the same military standard as every other service member. I flew with a number of WO's as a door gunner and they are consumate professionals made up of prior enlisted with an associates degree.

[Dragoon]

Your point is well taken, but lacks foundation.

I'm not sure if "foundation" is the right word.  My points are "founded" in over 25 years of CAP service including leadership positions all the way to the Wing level, as well over 20 years of active duty Army commissioned service. 

In other words, my points may lack validity or truth, but they do have a foundation.  :-)

I am an NCO. I was a 2Lt. I call the same people Sir now as I did then.

Not completely true.  Now you call 2d Lt's sir.  And no matter far you progress you always will.

As a real NCO, you understand and accept that.  But civilians don't always share that understanding.  They'll wonder why, after 10 or 15 years of CAP service, they have to salute and defer to a new guy just because he's a pilot.

I really don't think we have the the training time it would take to breed the correct culture.

I think that if there are limited numbers of officer positions and the bar was set high enough, new members wouldn't even know the difference. How can you be PO'd for not being an officer if you don't meet the requirements?

As long as the requirements were all things like taking tests, no one would argue.  But that would only ensure our officers were good test takers, not good leaders or staffers.

The minute the requirements included serving in certain positions, people would complain that the "good old boys" club was discriminating against them and keeping them from joining the elite ranks of the salute recievers.  :-)

It could be handled much like Army promotions; each achievement has points. The needs of the unit dictate the cutoff points for promotion. This encourages members to strive to achieve if they want to promote.

The problem is based in that "needs of the unit" stuff.  That means if you've already got your quota of captains, you aren't allowed any more!  No one could promote.  Same thing happens in the Army for NCOs - no matter how good you are or how many schools you've got, you don't get promoted until the Army needs more NCOs and drops the cutoff score.

And the problem remains that today's captain may choose not to do a captain's job tomorrow.  Heck, he may choose to do durn near nothing, and yet he would keep the rank.

As far as fluid position... It only matters if your looking to be CC, otherwise you can staff the same position, just like I do, as ESNCO instead of ESO.

But if you had a staff assistant, correct use of rank would mean he shouldn't be an officer.  He should be a more junior NCO or EM.  So....if a new 2d Lt wants to be the asst ES officer, you've only got three choices

1.  Demote him
2.  Promote you
3.  Just accept the fact that rank means nothing.

The FO thing is just another way of doing it. You have a different thing to sew to your collar but, your still not a REAL officer. Understanding that the USAF doesn't use Warrants anymore, every other branch still does. This allows the parallel to exist that reinforces that you are not an officer. Don't fool yourself regarding real warrant officers... they're held to the same military standard as every other service member. I flew with a number of WO's as a door gunner and they are consumate professionals made up of prior enlisted with an associates degree.

I've got a fair amount of experience with warrants - even led and rated a few.  The aviation guys are extremely professional, but about 75% less "military" than commissioned officers.  More use of first names, less customs and courtesies.  Less concern over rank among the various grades of warrant.  Their basic "vibe" would be a lot easier for CAP civilians to handle.  Plus, most warrants aren't supervisors - just like most CAP "officers."  It's a good fit, culture wise.  And by using Flight Officer rather than the DoD grade of warrant officer, along with our own unique grade insignia, we make it perfectly clear that these are not USAF officers, but rather something unique to the auxiliary.

There are, by the way, a fair number of "high school to flight school" aviations warrants out there.  They go through basic, then straight to WOCS, then to flight school.  No NCO time.
[/quote]

[Sgt. Savage]

Point well take. By founded I meant to imply that there was a great deal of supposition that is best described anecdotally, rather than based on studied fact.

That aside, the product is the same. We will be adding another rank structure to that which exists and creating another class of CAP member instead of fostering the systems we have and making them more efficient. Under that plan, we wind up with 3 different rank systems, two that can promote and one that can not, regardless of achievement.

I honestly don't see that there is a huge problem confusing CAP officers or NCOs with their AD counterparts. We wear the big blue badges of bastard-om to distinguish us from them.

In regards to promotion points I think that all things should be tangibles. Awards, decorations, achievement levels, ES ratings... everything that has a standard. The formula would need to be worked out but, it prevents favoritism and promotes self motivated achievement.

All things considered, I see the CAP and its lack of well defined rank and authority as lacking efficiency. I can only really speak to my own unit but what typically happens is someone say "Hey, let's do this!" the other officers agree. It doesn't get done or takes forever due to the fact that there is no tactical arm to compliment the strategic arm that the officers represent.

[arajca]

All things considered, I see the CAP and its lack of well defined rank and authority as lacking efficiency. I can only really speak to my own unit but what typically happens is someone say "Hey, let's do this!" the other officers agree. It doesn't get done or takes forever due to the fact that there is no tactical arm to compliment the strategic arm that the officers represent.

And changing the grade structure would effect that how?

I have had a similar experience and usually the commander tells the origniator to take charge and make it happen. Sometimes it happens and sometimes it doesn't depending on the originator's workload. Assigning a task to someone who doesn't have the time to carry it out, not uncommon in CAP, means the task won't get done, or will be poorly done.

[RiverAux]

You know, one of the reasons I've taken to adding a poll to most discussions I've started lately is the obvious vast difference in opinions between those adding comments and those who choose not to comment.  Almost every time you would get a very different view of what the consensus view is among the CAP-Talk community.  

Take this discussion where over 50% of poll voters either said keep the system the way it is or keep the basic system, but make it tougher to promote.  However, if you had only read the comments you would get the idea that everybody wants whole-scale radical change to the system, which obviously isn't the case.  Only a few have stuck up for the status quo more or less. 

[Hawk200]

Take this discussion where over 50% of poll voters either said keep the system the way it is or keep the basic system, but make it tougher to promote.  

I voted for tougher to promote. I'm learning to take on more challenges, move out of my comfort zone. I think it would improve me as a person.

Taking a system, and just changing the grade names and insignia is change for its own sake. That's garbage.

[Sgt. Savage]

All things considered, I see the CAP and its lack of well defined rank and authority as lacking efficiency. I can only really speak to my own unit but what typically happens is someone say "Hey, let's do this!" the other officers agree. It doesn't get done or takes forever due to the fact that there is no tactical arm to compliment the strategic arm that the officers represent.

And changing the grade structure would effect that how?

I have had a similar experience and usually the commander tells the originator to take charge and make it happen. Sometimes it happens and sometimes it doesn't depending on the originator's workload. Assigning a task to someone who doesn't have the time to carry it out, not uncommon in CAP, means the task won't get done, or will be poorly done.

I believe that by supporting a corp of "do-ers" you eliminate that issue of who is going to do it. It doesn't always become a matter of having time, sometimes it's a matter of just plain not wanting to. Not to mention that I'm not advocating a change in grade structure as much as I am promoting an alternative path for those who don't want to be officers and would rather handle the operational aspects of the unit.

I can speak only from my personal experience but, the Commander says we need to do BLANK. The first sergeant makes that happen. He delegates the tasks to NCO's that use their people to accomplish the mission.

In the current world, the Commander says BLANK. Who makes sure it happens? Where does that person get help from? If subordinate individuals are assigned to that persons section, he/she will have resources to utilize; an ability to disperse the work load so that no one person has to do it all.

Frankly, I had a year as a 2Lt and hated it. I belong in the trenches with my hands in the mix. I don't want to deal with MOU's and planning... I want to train, focus on cadets, and respond when needed. If everyone really wanted to be an officer, we wouldn't have ANY NCOs in CAP.

[davedove]

That's no reason to say that the system could not use improvement, as it does generate a great deal of controversey, questions, and issues. 

Does it really, or is it just the members of CAP Talk that raise the issues?  I'm not doubting you, but are there real world examples where some other service, civilian or military, was terribly confused about our grade system?  I can see it causing an issue at first glance for military folks, but wouldn't they soon adopt the attitude of "That's just the way CAP does it?"

Now, as far as raising the standards, perhaps we should just tinker with the professional development program, or increase the requirements to achieve the different ratings in the specialty tracks, which would directly relate to making the Level achievements tougher.

[arajca]

All things considered, I see the CAP and its lack of well defined rank and authority as lacking efficiency. I can only really speak to my own unit but what typically happens is someone say "Hey, let's do this!" the other officers agree. It doesn't get done or takes forever due to the fact that there is no tactical arm to compliment the strategic arm that the officers represent.

And changing the grade structure would effect that how?

I have had a similar experience and usually the commander tells the originator to take charge and make it happen. Sometimes it happens and sometimes it doesn't depending on the originator's workload. Assigning a task to someone who doesn't have the time to carry it out, not uncommon in CAP, means the task won't get done, or will be poorly done.

I believe that by supporting a corp of "do-ers" you eliminate that issue of who is going to do it. It doesn't always become a matter of having time, sometimes it's a matter of just plain not wanting to. Not to mention that I'm not advocating a change in grade structure as much as I am promoting an alternative path for those who don't want to be officers and would rather handle the operational aspects of the unit.

And the officers currently don't handle to operational aspects of the units? I take offense at your comments that officers aren't "do-ers". Perhaps in the military, it may be that way, but in CAP the officers ARE the do-ers.

What can you do as an nco that you cannot do as an officer? The only difference I have seen between CAP ncos and CAP officers is the insignia. They do the same jobs. The make the units run.

I can speak only from my personal experience but, the Commander says we need to do BLANK. The first sergeant makes that happen. He delegates the tasks to NCO's that use their people to accomplish the mission.

That's the military way. It isn't the CAP way. What are you going to do to the CAP member who is assigned a task, but does not have the time to complete it? The lack of time will hamper ncos as much as it hampers officers.

In the current world, the Commander says BLANK. Who makes sure it happens? Where does that person get help from? If subordinate individuals are assigned to that persons section, he/she will have resources to utilize; an ability to disperse the work load so that no one person has to do it all.

Again, making your changes will affect this how? How many senior members do you have in your unit? Dump the military mindset for a minute and consider that CAP members have alot more going on than CAP. There's the time spent earning money to afford our CAP habits. There are family issues. There are other activities. In the military, the enlisted/nco/officer structure works because IT IS THEIR JOB. They don't have the same distractions of real life to take up most of their time. The military come FIRST and FOREMOST. BTDT.

Frankly, I had a year as a 2Lt and hated it. I belong in the trenches with my hands in the mix. I don't want to deal with MOU's and planning... I want to train, focus on cadets, and respond when needed. If everyone really wanted to be an officer, we wouldn't have ANY NCOs in CAP.

The only NCO's we have in CAP are those military ncos who cannot give up their stripes and fit in the the organization. They claim they are special. Bull-pucky. I have yet to see anything an nco has done that cannot be done by an officer in CAP.

[Hawk200]

The only NCO's we have in CAP are those military ncos who cannot give up their stripes and fit in the the organization. They claim they are special. Bull-pucky. I have yet to see anything an nco has done that cannot be done by an officer in CAP.

Funny, you talk about taking offense, but you assign a viewpoint that you don't even know whether or not is factual. It probably isn't. Many of them are just comfortable being an NCO. It's "bull-pucky" to make that statement when you don't even have the facts on why some of them do it.

And I think that there are a few NCO's here that will probably be rather irate over your diminishing their accomplishments. They spent a lot more time and effort earning their stripes than you did earning your bars or leaves.

[Sgt. Savage]

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Hawk.

arajca, I'm not going to take offense to the comments you made. In my two years in CAP, I have seen a great deal of good ideas flushed down the crapper because the people assigned to the task couldn't get it done. Of the officers I've dealt with, few are do-ers. Those that are are an asset to the organization. Those that aren't have proved to me that they just want to be in CAP.

I had a CAP 1Lt tell me to stand at Parade Rest when I spoke to him. I politely informed him in a discreet tone that if he ever disrespected me in front of a cadet again, I would make sure that he knew where my stripes came from and what it took to earn them. This guy was 6 months in and a CFI, got his rank the easy way and just came to fly. Is that what a CAP officer should be?

As far as being special... I'm not special because I wear stripes. They may make me a oddity but with 4 NCO's in my unit, not much of an oddity. Though NCO's must have some place in the organization, as the CG has appointed the first Command Chief Master Sergeant that CAP has ever had. Only after that point did I turn back to NCO. I think history will show that NCOs are going to play a big role in the future of CAP. None the less, I'll let CCMSgt Chiafos know that some people think he doesn't want to fit in.

[arajca]

The only NCO's we have in CAP are those military ncos who cannot give up their stripes and fit in the the organization. They claim they are special. Bull-pucky. I have yet to see anything an nco has done that cannot be done by an officer in CAP.

Funny, you talk about taking offense, but you assign a viewpoint that you don't even know whether or not is factual. It probably isn't. Many of them are just comfortable being an NCO. It's "bull-pucky" to make that statement when you don't even have the facts on why some of them do it.

And I think that there are a few NCO's here that will probably be rather irate over your diminishing their accomplishments. They spent a lot more time and effort earning their stripes than you did earning your bars or leaves.

I know several military NCO's who are in CAP. Only two are CAP nco's. The others are officers (Capt - Lt Col). What unique role do nco's play in CAP that they cannot play as officers? So far, no one has been able to answer that question. 

[Sgt. Savage]

arajca,

Sir you seem determined to stay on offense and I challenge you. Von Schtuben created the NCO corp and turned the Continental Army from a losing fistful of disorganized failures into a force capable of defeating the greatest army in the world. The NCO has been an integral part of every military since, and adapted by the civilian world as "middle management". Are you telling me that this organization operates so well and so efficiently that it could never benefit from having a layer of individuals whos entire job revolves around making things run efficiently?

If you don't see a need for NCOs in your unit, thank God you have such a great group of OFFICERS. I personally see a great need for such a corp and it's attitudes like yours that make me despise the idea of being an officer and very proud to have served the NCO corp as it has served me very well.

Read the NCO creed, it may enlighten you. Then search for the Officers Creed...

[arajca]

Again, I raise the question:
What unique role do nco's play in CAP that they cannot fill as CAP officers?

In the miltary, they are a valuable asset serving an important role. In CAP they do not serve in the same - or vaguely similar - manner.

[SarDragon]

I don't see Andy being dierespectful towards NCOs. I see a valid quesion that I will echo - What unique role do NCOs play in CAP that they cannot fill as CAP officers?

I spent 21 years in the Navy, 20 of it as an NCO. I have been in CAP since 1964, with a couple of periods of non-participation. Given the structure of CAP, and its system of job assignments, I see little need for an NCO segment. As much as some folks think so, the system isn't broken.

What it does need is better enforcement of the existing rules, and a better indoctrination of new members about the system. The latter is easy; the former not so much. As long as there are people in charge (declining to call them leaders) who abuse the system for the gain of individuals, there will be problems. Adding an NCO corps will not solve that problem.

YMMV.