This one smells to high heaven boys and girls

[birdog]

INDIANA WING CIVIL AIR PATROL COMMANDER TERMINATES TWO MEMBERS

November 12, 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Indiana Wing Civil Air Patrol Headquarters
Indianapolis, IN -- Colonel Mark Reeves, Indiana Wing Civil Air Patrol commander, terminated the Civil Air Patrol membership of two Indiana Wing Civil Air Patrol officers, Capt Chris Curdes and Lt Col John Bryan, on November 11, 2008. Curdes was the commander of the Valparaiso Composite Squadron and both he and Bryan were qualified incident commanders within Civil Air Patrol's emergency services program.
The membership terminations came after the completion of an internal review of Indiana Wing Civil Air Patrol mission activities. This routine review revealed violations of Civil Air Patrol safety and operational response policies. These violations could have placed volunteers or assets at risk during emergency services operations under Bryan and Curdes' leadership.
"I take the safety and security of our volunteers, especially of our teenaged cadets, and of our taxpayer-provided ground and air assets very seriously," said Reeves. "A review of mission activities on two separate occasions showed violations of CAP policy of a nature that I felt that these two individuals could no longer participate in the Civil Air Patrol program."
1st Lt Mark Whitman, previously commander of the Civil Air Patrol unit in Rensselaer, has been appointed commander for the Valparaiso Composite Squadron, Civil Air Patrol's presence in the Porter County community.
Indiana Wing Civil Air Patrol consists of almost 1200 adult and youth volunteers active in more than 30 communities across the state of Indiana. Nationally, CAP performs 95 percent of continental U.S. inland search and rescue missions as tasked by the Air Force Rescue Coordination Center, and was credited by the AFRCC with saving 103 lives in 2007. Its volunteers also perform homeland security, disaster relief and counterdrug missions at the request of federal, state and local agencies. The members play a leading role in aerospace education and serve as mentors to the more than 22,000 young people currently participating in CAP cadet programs. CAP has been performing missions for America for almost 65 years.

I know details but will not share as things are still in motion. I will say that this is pure political Bravo Sierra.

[JC004]

Is it really necessary for them to do a news release?

[Flying Pig]

Wow.....terminated?  Wheeew.

[RiverAux]

What in the world possessed them to put out a news release?  The only scenario where I can see that this would make sense would be if the "terminated" members contacted the media and tried to whip up some negative press coverage of CAP, which might then force the Wing to put out a formal statement. 

[Pumbaa]

Slow news day In Indiana???  Talk about a lack of class in regards to a release!!!!

[davidsinn]

What in the world possessed them to put out a news release?  The only scenario where I can see that this would make sense would be if the "terminated" members contacted the media and tried to whip up some negative press coverage of CAP, which might then force the Wing to put out a formal statement. 

No. I know these guys. That's not how it went down. I'll keep my theories to myself but John Bryan was the wing commander before Col. Reeves and he wouldn't do that. He'd run the appeals process out and then call it a day.

[lordmonar]

I don't know what's wrong with a press announcement.

If nothing else it gets the official word out to everyone all at once.

I'm still correcting people that I am not the squadron commander of my squadron and it has been two months.

[Nathan]

If we're playing politics, then a news release is the perfect give-away.

I mean, I don't know ANYONE involved (not sure I actually know anyone from Indiana wing...), but to release a press release seems to be... odd. All it really serves to do is to embarrass the terminated members to all of CAP, which seems to ensure that any subsequent investigation has a slight spin...

But, like I said, I'm just musing. Who doesn't love a good conspiracy theory?

[SARCAP]

I agree, why the hurry for a press release unless the intention was to embarass and smear the officers involed. 

I have known John Bryan for years and have met Chris Curdes at an ES function.  I have found both to be excellent professionals who are very safety minded.  As RiverAux points out, there are alot of politics involved in this.  John Bryan was the former Wing Commander.  He relieved Mark Reeves (current Wing Commander) from a wing staff position.  With the press release and all that, this definitely sounds like political reprisals.  I have not heard either of the two, Bryan or Curdes, speak any ill of CAP.  In fact, I have heard from friends in the know, neither has even spoken about it unless directly asked.  And when asked, all they do is encourage their former fellows to continue serving their community and keep up the good work with CAP.  From what I hear, these two are showing the dignity and professionalism truly befitting our values and ideals.  If they are getting hosed, and I think they are, they are taking it like men. 

Too bad the author of the press release didn't have even half their class.

[Flying Pig]

I think its unfortunate that in an organization like ours, where we a sacrifice to be here, if your going to take the time to put out a press release, TELL THE WHOLE STORY or nothing at all.
Putting out an article that basically says "Two senior and life long dedicated members were terminated for violating policy."  Does nothing but raise the BS flag.

[desertengineer1]

I know I'm really speaking out of line here, but regardless of the situation, this kind of public "release" should be restricted to Maxwell AFB approval.  They have little or no utility from my casual perspective, and gives the impression that we are a bunch of loose cannons that require CEO-similar press releases to do damage control.

I don't know any of these folks, and am sure there are several sides of it all.  But I am very disappointed in CAP leadership.  At all points in the time continuum from start to finish, someone in the chain should have had someone else standing with them to say "umm, let's think about this for a second"

So, I'll get myself into trouble here (again) with a small diatribe regarding a pet peeve of mine...

Leaders in today's generation do a LOT of talk about "wingman", but we have failed miserably in it's execution.  THIS is a perfect example of why EVERYONE should spend a little less time talking about it and start doing it.

Where was XXXX's wingman in the incident(s) that started this all?

Where was YYYY's wingman when someone decided to transmit this press release?

In 99% of the incidents I've watched from initial act to final mitigation, had anyone in the chain actually had a partner (i.e. professional teamwork) actively watching out for them, none of the time and expense would have been needed.

I'm very disappointed with this press release.  It was not necessary.  if someone screws up and needed a 2B, you take care of it with professionalism as priority.

Is there anyone at NHQ watching the flock here?  They are making a lot of wingman noise.

[desertengineer1]

Caveat -

I suspect (or really hope) we'll be seeing a policy letter or even an update to 190-1 over this.

If any of you new folks have done the "what the h is that rule for?" game while reading regs, this is a perfect example.  Someone did something like this that caused a big mess and the rules had to be tightened accordingly.

I thought there was a restriction somewhere on press releases regarding member terminations or disciplinary actions, but I was wrong.  Lots of latitude in the 190-1.

There's a recommendation for the CAPR 190-1 review.  These should be approved by NHQ before release.

[spaatz1488]

I will speak only briefly on this as I am very closely tied to this situation and to say much would be inappropriate. I have known both of these gentlemen for some time now and both have made the choice to take the high road and handle this with all the dignity that we should expect from our members. I sincerely hope that their example will encourage more to do the same.

[RiverAux]

I don't know what's wrong with a press announcement.

If nothing else it gets the official word out to everyone all at once.

I'm still correcting people that I am not the squadron commander of my squadron and it has been two months.

While it is certainly appropriate to send out an internal email to announce the new commander of a unit there is no real need to air any dirty laundry with a release to the press about it. 

Now, if the people involved had violated a bunch of regulations, especially those involving safety, some might argue that making an example out of them like this might act as a way of making others think before doing something similar.  But, even then I would not have done a press release about it as again, internal email would have been a better way to go.   

[DogCollar]

I don't know what's wrong with a press announcement.

If nothing else it gets the official word out to everyone all at once.

I'm still correcting people that I am not the squadron commander of my squadron and it has been two months.

While it is certainly appropriate to send out an internal email to announce the new commander of a unit there is no real need to air any dirty laundry with a release to the press about it. 

Now, if the people involved had violated a bunch of regulations, especially those involving safety, some might argue that making an example out of them like this might act as a way of making others think before doing something similar.  But, even then I would not have done a press release about it as again, internal email would have been a better way to go.   

I think that even though we are a "volunteer" organization that terminations or any other punitive consequences should be communicated ONLY to those with a need to know.  That's how it is handled in the state that work in.

I don't know the motives for sending out a press release for a membership termination, but it doesn't seem like an appropriate action for the wing to take. 

[lordmonar]

I don't know what's wrong with a press announcement.

If nothing else it gets the official word out to everyone all at once.

I'm still correcting people that I am not the squadron commander of my squadron and it has been two months.

While it is certainly appropriate to send out an internal email to announce the new commander of a unit there is no real need to air any dirty laundry with a release to the press about it. 

Now, if the people involved had violated a bunch of regulations, especially those involving safety, some might argue that making an example out of them like this might act as a way of making others think before doing something similar.  But, even then I would not have done a press release about it as again, internal email would have been a better way to go.   

I think that even though we are a "volunteer" organization that terminations or any other punitive consequences should be communicated ONLY to those with a need to know.  That's how it is handled in the state that work in.

I don't know the motives for sending out a press release for a membership termination, but it doesn't seem like an appropriate action for the wing to take. 

I think anytime you remove a commander from his position.....everyone needs to know that information.   No need to go into detail about why he was removed, but everyone needs to know....just so you cut his access off from things a "civilain" does not need access to.

In the military when the remove a commander they usually send a press release that has a stock phrase "Col Soandso has lost conficdance in LtCol Squadleader's ability to fulfil his duties as commander".   They may or may not mention that was the result of an investigation or an incident.


Again....bottom line there is a general need to know that someone was removed from command and/or terminated.......but not necessarily a need to go into details.

On the other there is also the group message that needs to be sent out to the whole unit.

"Hey everyone......Col Daredevil got canned because he is unsafe and will not change.....take this a warning to anyone who emulates his actions".

-----Please NOTE-------

I have no details on this issue...I don't know if the terminations were politically motivated, proper or inproper....I am only commenting on the the press release.

If someone is terminated....that fact needs to be transmitted to everyone.   It is called transparancy.   Otherwise you end up with back room firings and it allows the leadership to pass what ever story they want to via the rumor mill.....and that is not the way to do buisness.

Is it embarising?  Sure is.....but it is better for both parties to get the word out in an offical release then to have to deal with the rumor mill.

[DogCollar]

I don't know what's wrong with a press announcement.

If nothing else it gets the official word out to everyone all at once.

I'm still correcting people that I am not the squadron commander of my squadron and it has been two months.

While it is certainly appropriate to send out an internal email to announce the new commander of a unit there is no real need to air any dirty laundry with a release to the press about it. 

Now, if the people involved had violated a bunch of regulations, especially those involving safety, some might argue that making an example out of them like this might act as a way of making others think before doing something similar.  But, even then I would not have done a press release about it as again, internal email would have been a better way to go.   

I think that even though we are a "volunteer" organization that terminations or any other punitive consequences should be communicated ONLY to those with a need to know.  That's how it is handled in the state that work in.

I don't know the motives for sending out a press release for a membership termination, but it doesn't seem like an appropriate action for the wing to take. 

I think anytime you remove a commander from his position.....everyone needs to know that information.   No need to go into detail about why he was removed, but everyone needs to know....just so you cut his access off from things a "civilain" does not need access to.

In the military when the remove a commander they usually send a press release that has a stock phrase "Col Soandso has lost conficdance in LtCol Squadleader's ability to fulfil his duties as commander".   They may or may not mention that was the result of an investigation or an incident.


Again....bottom line there is a general need to know that someone was removed from command and/or terminated.......but not necessarily a need to go into details.

On the other there is also the group message that needs to be sent out to the whole unit.

"Hey everyone......Col Daredevil got canned because he is unsafe and will not change.....take this a warning to anyone who emulates his actions".

-----Please NOTE-------

I have no details on this issue...I don't know if the terminations were politically motivated, proper or inproper....I am only commenting on the the press release.

If someone is terminated....that fact needs to be transmitted to everyone.   It is called transparancy.   Otherwise you end up with back room firings and it allows the leadership to pass what ever story they want to via the rumor mill.....and that is not the way to do buisness.

Is it embarising?  Sure is.....but it is better for both parties to get the word out in an offical release then to have to deal with the rumor mill.

Captain Harris, we will have to agree to disagree.  I believe that any and all negative personnel decisions should be communicated on an absolutely need to know basis.  Sending out a press release to anyone and everyone just stokes the possibility of litigation.

In the denomination of the church I serve, whenever a clergy member is removed from pastoral office, the announcement is something like "Pastor so and so has been removed from the role of clergy by the office of the Bishop."  I think it is a practice that would be in CAP's interest to emulate

[Duke Dillio]

I can't believe that this made it past the Indiana Wing Legal Officer...

I think I have seen one of those guys in here and I have to say I was more than impressed by his demeanor.  This seems like a good pile of dog poo to me but I've seen stuff like this before, unfortunately.  There was no need to publish names and I agree that this was totally need to know.  Something bad is about to happen I think...

[lordmonar]

Captain Harris, we will have to agree to disagree.  I believe that any and all negative personnel decisions should be communicated on an absolutely need to know basis.  Sending out a press release to anyone and everyone just stokes the possibility of litigation.

In the denomination of the church I serve, whenever a clergy member is removed from pastoral office, the announcement is something like "Pastor so and so has been removed from the role of clergy by the office of the Bishop."  I think it is a practice that would be in CAP's interest to emulate

I understand where you are coming from...but as you say....I guess we will agree to disagree.

Sure there are times when the rest of the world does not need to know the "why" of a personel change or termnation...but sometimes you may need to send a message to everyone 'needs to know".

Again....playing devil's advocate...in this situation, wing may have wanted to send the message that "we are getting tough on safety".
Therefore a general press announcement...get's that message out.
On the other hand....again playing devil's advocate....I don't need to worry about litigation if everything in the press release is true.
If these gentlemen were fired for lax safety standards discovered during a routine review of past operations....what are they going to sue about?

Sure I can understand the concept of allowing the "defeated to leave the field with their honor intact".....I think that our leadership owes us some explaination to us when they do this.....just so we know what not to do, if nothing else.

[RiverAux]

Saying somebody is being kicked out of the organization or removed from command for violating safety-related regulations (or any regulations) will have little actual use as a preventative scare tactic unless you also get fairly specific about what exactly they did. 

Because when you start going down this road you are also leaving yourself open to being judged by the membership about whether or not ther termination was justified given the specific nature of the offense(s) that were committed.

For example, if I was an Indiana Wing member, I would want to know whether they got fired for not sending in a safety report (not terribly serious) or for doing or authorizing an incredibly dangerous and stupid activity.  If it is the latter, then there is some value to telling the membership exactly what they did.