Change for change sake... CAP grades apart from what we have now

[PHall]

Could someone tell me where in the regulations the NCO duties are listed I have been watching this forum for awhile now and have to say that I have not meet a CAP NCO in my almost 9 Years in the program.  I was just wondering how big of a program it was, because it sounds like its bigger than I thought.  Just was wondering about the details of it.  Thanks.

There aren't that many Senior Member NCO's in CAP because of the requirement that you have to be a current or former NCO in the military.
Senior Members who are current or former military NCO's have the option of retaining their NCO grade instead of becoming an officer.
As an example, in the whole of California Wing, there are just three NCO's. Two CMSgt's and one SMSgt. All three are retired military.
As for duties, they're the same as any other senior member. Do what you want to do.

[DNall]

^ Some Wings should be a SQD or Flight. 

I don't think there's a state with under a hundred members, much less under 45. If there were, it'd be completely non-functional, we should fire everyone & start over from scratch.

[mikeylikey]

^ Not AF here....can you tell me how many people make up an AD AF flight.  Then I guess 4 AF flights make a SQD? 

A flight is comparable to an Army Platoon?  A SQD to an Army Company? 

[mikeylikey]

All I'm trying to say is if you're going to get into a discussion about grade in CAP, & NCOs in particular, you have to look at a total revamp of the program, cause that's the only thing that makes any kind of sense. 

There it is!  Spot on!  I can not agree more with you, that we need to change the current program.  Loosing rank/grade may actually be the best thing to happen to CAP.  It seems to work well for the CG AUX.  Members join, and they are simply a member.  Then you have those that have taken on extra responsibilities and we can call them; SQD CC, Group CC, Wing CC, etc.  Since we are loosing rank and grade in the new VSAF program, NOW would be the best time to get rid of it altogether. 

Our organization is hugely different than it was in the 40's and 50's.  Then there was a clear cut rank system, and development program.  In today's CAP we try to blend rank and grade with an outdated development system, and positional structure.  IF NHQ would invest resources into changing the climate and program to better emulate other Federal Agencies, (like FEMA) we would all be better off in the long run.  Instead we are sitting here discussing why we need NCO's when they make up what, like .06 PERCENT of our total membership?

I understand we may loose people if we took away their oak leaves, but I bet we would gain those numbers back in a few years.  Perhaps now is the time to "trim the fat".

[DNall]

Roughly yes. Det/Element = Sqd > Platoon = Flight > Sq=Co > Bn=Gp. However, the exceptions in the AF are kind of hard to understand. It's based more on span of authority. So you may have one Sq w/ 200 but fewer resources, versus another with 50 but lots of officers & shiney planes. It's pretty standardized within functional areas though. The above crosswalk is pretty solid if you take the modifiers out.

[mikeylikey]

^ Cool, thanks!

[RogueLeader]

Please note that this is about a big change from what it is now, to what it could be.  This is a not about who can do what NOW, but about what CAP NCO's would do if we had a CAP NCO Corps that do not have to have prior service.

If you want to talk about what they do now, please take it elsewhere.

If you want to make it a viable program, please contribute.

Thank you.
RL.

[Dragoon]

Here's why it won't work, at least without major problems.

Let's say you come up with specific positions for NCOs.  So, each squadron is supposed to have a Supply NCO and a Leadership NCO.

Now, suppose a unit doesn't have any NCOs handy.  Guess what - they will have an officer perform those tasks.

Suppose the unit has an NCO, but he decides (and everyone agrees) that he should be the next Deputy Commander for Cadets - an officer's job?  Do we deny him that slot, even if he's the most qualified?

How about the former squadron commander who is cutting back on his CAP due to family obligations and volunteers to help out in the vacant Supply NCO slot?  Do we say "you can't do that - you're an officer.  So thanks - but go sit in the corner."



Here's the problem - our members move up and down the chain depending on their talents and the where the need is.

Today's "NCO" is tomorrow's "Officer" and visa versa.  I can't see it being any other way in a volunteer organization.

The only way we could have NCOs and Officers with any kind of meaning would be if the insignia of grade was tied to the job, and as you changed jobs you changed what you wore to reflect the position.  And most folks egos are, frankly, too delicate to accept that kind of system.

[DNall]

The CG Aux does have enlisted rank structure. The officer grades are temp & related to positions, usually unit command billets.

All civilian fed agencies also have a rank system. It may not be some insignia on a shirt, but it is VERY meaningful.

Our organization is hugely different than it was in the 40's and 50's.  Then there was a clear cut rank system, and development program.  In today's CAP we try to blend rank and grade with an outdated development system, and positional structure.  IF NHQ would invest resources into changing the climate and program to better emulate other Federal Agencies, (like FEMA) we would all be better off in the long run.  Instead we are sitting here discussing why we need NCO's when they make up what, like .06 PERCENT of our total membership?

I understand we may loose people if we took away their oak leaves, but I bet we would gain those numbers back in a few years.  Perhaps now is the time to "trim the fat".

I understand what you're saying here, but I take just the opposite tact. That is that we should return to an effective & updated proven mil system similiar to what we once had before the corporate movement came along & standards passed us by.

However, I also agree that I'm not concerned about member losses in such a case because they will be replaced quickly with a new crop of high quality people drawn to the new program & turned off by what we have now.

I think that end state more effectively accomplishes our mission set than civilianizing the program.

[Dragoon]

All civilian fed agencies also have a rank system. It may not be some insignia on a shirt, but it is VERY meaningful.

Not as meaningful as you might think.

Under NSPS, the vast majority of DoD civilians are transitioning to one of  3 "pay bands" - no more GS rating. 

Positions will be by band, but it's very possible that a Band 3 boss will be actually making less than some of his Band 3 subordinates.

The key will be "what is your current position?" not "what is your pay grade."

When Military and Civilian intersect an 0-5 might supervise some Band 3s, or a Band 3 might supervise some 0-5s.  It's all about position, not grade.


CAP is best suited, I think, by focusing on position and not grade.

We still need PD, because when people apply for a position, PD should matter - maybe even be mandatory.

But it's all about the position.  That way, if you move up or down, you get the authority you need to do the job.

We could reflect that authority in temporary officer grade, or in position titles/badges.  I think there are advantages to each.  But permanent grade doesn't make sense in an organization where a persons scope of authority and responsibility can grow or shrink drastically from job to job. It's what makes us fundamentally different from the U.S. military.

[mikeylikey]

^ We should perhaps take cue from the NSPS, and do similar. 

[RiverAux]

1.  Currently, all of our NCOs have BTDT.  As long as this is true, they gain instant "street cred" when dealing with the RM.

This makes the huge leap of faith that people currently in the military have any clue that a CAP NCO is wearing the rank that they earned in the actual military.  General recognition of CAP is so low that I will bet you that fewer than 1% of any sample you'd care to take would know anything about the difference between CAP NCO rank and CAP officer rank. 

I am 100% certain that they will assume that a CAP NCO earned that rank through some CAP specific training program and will probably wonder why this is the one person in the whole unit not an officer and will assume that something is wrong with them. 

[Hawk200]

1.  Currently, all of our NCOs have BTDT.  As long as this is true, they gain instant "street cred" when dealing with the RM.

This makes the huge leap of faith that people currently in the military have any clue that a CAP NCO is wearing the rank that they earned in the actual military.  General recognition of CAP is so low that I will bet you that fewer than 1% of any sample you'd care to take would know anything about the difference between CAP NCO rank and CAP officer rank. 

I am 100% certain that they will assume that a CAP NCO earned that rank through some CAP specific training program and will probably wonder why this is the one person in the whole unit not an officer and will assume that something is wrong with them. 

Everybody in the military knows the difference between officer and NCO rank, the color of it doesn't matter. Military members may not be familiar with the how they came by it, but they will know the difference. And military personnel usually only assume there is an issue if the member is low ranking, but has a lot of time in. As long as they are professional, most military personnel won't care.

But, it's a reason why we should allow prior military NCO's to progress. Someone could come in as a 1LT and they have the opportunity to progress up to higher grades, why shouldn't NCO's?

As far as those not in the military, it doesn't matter, they rarely know the difference, and aren't worried about how long someone has been in, how old they are, or if most of the other members of CAP are officers. The NCO will be introduced as "Sgt Joe Blow", and they'll work from there. If someone asks, they'll be properly informed.

[mikeylikey]

But, it's a reason why we should allow prior military NCO's to progress. Someone could come in as a 1LT and they have the opportunity to progress up to higher grades, why shouldn't NCO's?

Thats the whole question!  They should not come in as an NCO.  They should be advanced to a CAP Officer commensurate with their enlisted grade. 

We are allowing NCO's to keep NCO grade in CAP, to appease them.  We are so desperate for such a small group of individuals, that we continue to bow to an outdated system.  This is what needs to change.  We should either make everyone an Officer or get rid of the system alltogether. 

Many here believe that an NCO is bringing in something special to CAP.  Well, CAP is it's own animal (only slightly similar to the AF).  The basis that an NCO has more knowledge is ridiculous.  The A1C who wants to join CAP, has to be a CAP Officer, why can't the SSGT?  Because of that reasoning on my part, I have to dismiss the theory that NCO's will bring more to the CAP table.

[RiverAux]

Everybody in the military knows the difference between officer and NCO rank, the color of it doesn't matter.

My point is that someone in the military will recognize that the person is a CAP NCO, but just how would they know that the CAP NCO rank was given to them based on their own past experience as a military NCO? 

They won't.  They will just see another CAP member and give them the same amount of "legitimacy" as they would to a CAP Lt. Col.

The real military has no idea how CAP people earn their rank, and probably don't care. 

[afgeo4]

I think the real question is:

Do we change the grade system to fit our current organization or do we change our current organization to fit the grade system?

We obviously don't feel satisfied in it the way it is.

Should we eliminate all NCO's and make them all officers while keeping the program as it is or do we change the program to make room for enlisted job positions?

I think the latter will require a much stronger grassroots movement and also a lot of re-thinking about how we work and train. It will also need a lot of debate. I've seen many training requirements, but I've never seen anyone say that while military NCOs and Officers get paid to train that hard, we do not. It is a very valid point though.

Is there enough benefit expected from such a change to justify it? I don't know. What do you think about specifically that question?

[RiverAux]

Or we could leave the program as it is.  The people who want to be an NCO can be one without any skin off anyone's nose.  I don't think there is anything really wrong with that either. 

[Eeyore]

^ I agree, leave it how it is.

I have only been in a squadron with one NCO before, and he seemed pretty happy with how things were. He didn't have a real desire to promote to anything else, still did his job, and still completed PD.

I think with NCO's, that if they can do the PD then the whole rank thing doesn't really matter. Really, across the board with CAP, the PD levels are more of an indication of accomplishment than rank is anyway.

[brasda91]

^^  Thank you.  Leave things alone.  If you don't like the way the system is set-up, you can always find another organization to join.  This system has been working just fine for quite a few years now.  If people would quit trying to change it and go with it, you will see it's fine the way it is.

[mikeylikey]

^^  Thank you.  Leave things alone.  If you don't like the way the system is set-up, you can always find another organization to join.  This system has been working just fine for quite a few years now.  If people would quit trying to change it and go with it, you will see it's fine the way it is.

OUCH!

Has it really been working fine these past years?  Then why are there so many proposals and suggestions to add to it, or change things about it?