Requiring COMMAND experience for Level III completion

[Lt Oliv]

Frankly, I see this as a sort of compromise between those who generally like our check the boxes and get promoted system and those who favor some sort of quota system whereby you don't get promoted unless your unit needs someone in a particular rank.

For those who say the military doesn't do things this way, am I wrong that promotion is often slowed in National Guard units because open positions in a unit don't come around very often?  Unlike the active military, you don't really have the option of going to an open slot anywhere in the world.

You are correct, sir.

My best friend was a specialist in the National Guard for 10 years before he made sergeant. He did so because the sergeant was retiring and "arranged" for him to take over.

Promotion is not, and should never been considered an entitlement in a non-profit, a for-profit or a government service.

[PHall]

Frankly, I see this as a sort of compromise between those who generally like our check the boxes and get promoted system and those who favor some sort of quota system whereby you don't get promoted unless your unit needs someone in a particular rank.

For those who say the military doesn't do things this way, am I wrong that promotion is often slowed in National Guard units because open positions in a unit don't come around very often?  Unlike the active military, you don't really have the option of going to an open slot anywhere in the world.

You are correct, sir.

My best friend was a specialist in the National Guard for 10 years before he made sergeant. He did so because the sergeant was retiring and "arranged" for him to take over.

Promotion is not, and should never been considered an entitlement in a non-profit, a for-profit or a government service.

More like your friend was stuck in an E-4 slot and got the E-5 slot when the other guy retired and opened up the slot.
Happens all the time in the Guard/Reserve.

[Lt Oliv]

Frankly, I see this as a sort of compromise between those who generally like our check the boxes and get promoted system and those who favor some sort of quota system whereby you don't get promoted unless your unit needs someone in a particular rank.

For those who say the military doesn't do things this way, am I wrong that promotion is often slowed in National Guard units because open positions in a unit don't come around very often?  Unlike the active military, you don't really have the option of going to an open slot anywhere in the world.

You are correct, sir.

My best friend was a specialist in the National Guard for 10 years before he made sergeant. He did so because the sergeant was retiring and "arranged" for him to take over.

Promotion is not, and should never been considered an entitlement in a non-profit, a for-profit or a government service.

More like your friend was stuck in an E-4 slot and got the E-5 slot when the other guy retired and opened up the slot.
Happens all the time in the Guard/Reserve.

Absolutely. Now, if the Guard/Reserve had a check box promotion system like we do, I imagine every unit would have no officers below the grade of Captain and no enlisted below the grade of Staff Sergeant.

You take a person who is an awesome communications officer. They want to play with radios all day long. Tell them from the start that they'll advance to Captain (say they came in as 1LT with an FCC license), but after that, they need to step up and take the reigns if they want to make Major. If they don't, maybe they are happy doing what they do. Maybe they are content with Captain and are willing to leave the clusters to those who are in command.

I would support it in a heartbeat.

[dwb]

For those who say the military doesn't do things this way, am I wrong that promotion is often slowed in National Guard units because open positions in a unit don't come around very often?  Unlike the active military, you don't really have the option of going to an open slot anywhere in the world.

One very critical difference: You can only remain a member of the Guard for so long.  You can be a Lt Col in CAP until you're 90, does that mean you rob an entire generation of Majors from receiving a promotion?

I don't support the manning document idea.  The active military is the way it is because that's what suits the mission.  Ditto for the Reserve and Guard.  Also, in the armed forces, rank goes along with pay grade, so in addition to customs/history, the chain of command, and division of labor, there are financial reasons for the rank structure.

CAP as an entity has its own requirements and culture, and the rank and professional development should reflect that.  It's okay to look to analogous organizations to see how they handle their concept of rank, but the armed forces aren't always the most similar model.

(Edit: woo hoo!  900th post!)

[Lt Oliv]

For those who say the military doesn't do things this way, am I wrong that promotion is often slowed in National Guard units because open positions in a unit don't come around very often?  Unlike the active military, you don't really have the option of going to an open slot anywhere in the world.

One very critical difference: You can only remain a member of the Guard for so long.  You can be a Lt Col in CAP until you're 90, does that mean you rob an entire generation of Majors from receiving a promotion?

I don't support the manning document idea.  The active military is the way it is because that's what suits the mission.  Ditto for the Reserve and Guard.  Also, in the armed forces, rank goes along with pay grade, so in addition to customs/history, the chain of command, and division of labor, there are financial reasons for the rank structure.

CAP as an entity has its own requirements and culture, and the rank and professional development should reflect that.  It's okay to look to analogous organizations to see how they handle their concept of rank, but the armed forces aren't always the most similar model.

(Edit: woo hoo!  900th post!)

OK fine....the Red Cross doesn't make you a Director because you sat around long enough.

Your statement would be fine if CAP made NO connection whatsoever between rank and responsibility. But we do. That's the reason why if you become a Squadron Commander, you can be promoted to First Lieutenant. If you become a Group Commander, you can be promoted to Major.

CAP has drawn the parallel. You have no business putting on clusters if you have no desire to ever be a leader. Period. Fortunately, there are Groups and Squadrons that are getting that and not advancing individuals (who are eligible) but cannot or will not accept greater responsibility.

[lordmonar]

Frankly, I see this as a sort of compromise between those who generally like our check the boxes and get promoted system and those who favor some sort of quota system whereby you don't get promoted unless your unit needs someone in a particular rank.

For those who say the military doesn't do things this way, am I wrong that promotion is often slowed in National Guard units because open positions in a unit don't come around very often?  Unlike the active military, you don't really have the option of going to an open slot anywhere in the world.

You forget about the third group...who think we should do away with uniforms and ranks all together.

[Lt Oliv]

It would simplify quite a bit.

I ran into someone the other day who thinks we should get rid of uniforms and rank and cut the cadets loose.

I think at a certain point, you need to consider joining another organization. But that is a discussion for another day....

[lordmonar]

Promotion is not, and should never been considered an entitlement in a non-profit, a for-profit or a government service.

They are not an entitlement......the organisation says do A, B, C and you will be promoted.  So Member does A, B, C and he should get promoted.

What people are really mad about is that they think A, B, and C should be "harder" so that the rank they are already wearing will "mean" something.

Well.....okay....we go a proposal to make the A,B, and C harder. 

But here's the rub....what's harder....being a wing staff officer for say CAWG or being a squadron commander for a 20 person cadet squadron?

Requiring "Command Experince" to complete your level III sounds good on paper but what it will do is to choke off all progression in PD.  No one will bother to move up because of the bottle neck at Level III.  I will not make out Majors any better because there is no garentee that they will actually learn anything at their command position.  We may also get a boat "commanders by name" who hold the position for the required time but in actualuality their is a deputy commander running things but allowing his buddy to ride the job to get the rank (think Deptuty Region Commanders).

The real solution for the "problem" is to just eliminate rank.  If you must have rank then you tie it to your command position.  Anyone not holding a command position will be a flight officer equal to their PD level i.e. FO-1, FO-2, FO-3.  When you step down from your command position you revert back to you FO "rank".

[Spike]

Some Wings already limit promotion to Major for Commanders or Group Staff. Lt Col for Wing Staff, or something along those lines.

Maybe that has changed, but I know/ knew of three that had such a policy.   

[adamblank]

The idea has some merit.  I would say you have to be a little more flexible with the command service.  If it were truly on the table I would say:

- Consider changing it to Level IV
- Opening the requirement for DCC or DCS positions.  As mentioned earlier, they essentially have command within their respective cadet or senior arena.
- Changing the timeframe to 1 year in the CC, DCC, or DCS positions. 

This could allow enough flexibility and give enough opportunities for members to leave in some capacity. 

[Michael M]

I know CAP isn't the Army or the Air Force, and from what I have heard is rapidly becoming more corporate than Air Force, but as a newbie to CAP Talk, I will weigh in probably because I don't know better yet.  I served both active duty in the Army and in the Air Force, as well as NROTC in college. 

Army officers have to become "Branch Qualified" which means lieutenants are required to rotate among core jobs in the company and has required professional military leadership and development activities.  Core jobs included finance, supply, transportation, and operations.  By time we successfully completed and rotating between the jobs, we were considered "Branch Qualified" to become a Captain.  Captains required a different set of core jobs which required rotating between them to develop a higher level of competency, which included serving as a company commander.  The same with Majors for branch qualification. 

In the Air Force I saw limited qualifying of officers for command unless an officer held an administrative position to be the "Section Commander" in charge of the dormitories and functioned as the Squadron's admin and personnel processing point before sending documents to the CBPO or Finance.  Command usually didn't come until an officer was a Lt Col and that was far an few since most Lt Cols I met never had a command, they were functional or technical experts in their AFS. 

My limited CAP exposure and observations shows that CAP has a hybrid of the Army and the Air Force.  but if a person wants to be a Squadron Commander, there is nothing that qualifies a person other than volunteering for the position.  CAP follows the Air Force command structure that "most" command positions are at the squadron level with Lt Col as a commander.  I know there are exceptions based upon the size of the squadron, and in CAP the highest ranking may be a Captain or a Major willing to be the Squadron Commander.  I know of two squadrons that have Lt Cols in them, but they have never held a command position and one has a Major and the other a Captain as the Squadron Commanders.

What am I getting at?  Since it appears that CAP is marketing the organization away from a U.S. Air Force Auxiliary to a nonprofit organization, an opportunity exists to restructure professional development, staff positions, and command requirements. 

Some may disagree and think I am off base on this, or may think it is a great idea.  The choice is yours.  My thoughts on this are based upon hearing the frustrations and most often motivated new senior members who would like to get something better out of CAP but seemed stifled by conflicting or unequal professional development policies.

I read where a poster said that some Squadron Commanders would die out of the position.  You must be in my squadron, because ours has been the in the position for 15 years now and doesn't every plan to give it up. 

[lordmonar]

The Organisational Excellance Specialty Track is supposed to fix the problem of not having qualified commanders.  If they ever get it off the ground.

[heliodoc]

^^^^

What?  More online tests to make one a leader in CAP,,,Is that what organizational excellence is all about?

[Eclipse]

My limited CAP exposure and observations shows that CAP has a hybrid of the Army and the Air Force.  but if a person wants to be a Squadron Commander, there is nothing that qualifies a person other than volunteering for the position.

That's where the whole command paradigm and grade structure breakdown. 

CAP follows the Air Force command structure that "most" command positions are at the squadron level with Lt Col as a commander.  I know there are exceptions based upon the size of the squadron, and in CAP the highest ranking may be a Captain or a Major willing to be the Squadron Commander.  I know of two squadrons that have Lt Cols in them, but they have never held a command position and one has a Major and the other a Captain as the Squadron Commanders.

Lt. Col's as unit CC's was not uncommon a decade ago, but far less so today.  Many wings and even Regions have enacted term limits which has done away with the lifetime unit cc's.

In a volunteer paradigm where members are allowed to basically do what ever job they want, raising the bar on PD generally just makes it harder for those already doing a good job, while shrinking the already too small pool.

Until you can incentivize membership beyond free time and altruism, its hard to turn the carrier.  On this board you can find discussions regarding the CIC which grants reserve military grade, some financial renumeration, and military benefits to its members.  The trade off is higher expectations.

Many on this board would move to that model without pause.

Perhaps a hybrid of the model would work, with CC's and some staff fitting the reserve commission route, or perhaps flight-officer-style grades, while the general membership would be left as volunteers.
That seems to work fairly well for the ARC.

[Short Field]

On this board yo can find discussions regarding the CIC which grants reserver military grade, some financial renumeration, and military benefits to its members.  The trade off is higher expectations.

What is CIC?  I searched on "CIC" and got no hits.

[Eclipse]

On this board yo can find discussions regarding the CIC which grants reserver military grade, some financial renumeration, and military benefits to its members.  The trade off is higher expectations.

What is CIC?  I searched on "CIC" and got no hits.

Sorry, the Cadet Instructor Cadre in Canada  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Cadet_Instructors_Cadre

http://www.cadets.forces.gc.ca/support/intro_e.asp

http://cadets.ca/about-nous/instr/instr_e.asp

Its basically a combination of CAP, the ACA, and the Sea cadets.  It has no operational mission, and few airplanes, but much higher expectations of its leaders and staff.

We received a very thorough briefing at RSC.  Its not all roses and sunshine, but has some ideas that would work well in CAP.

[lordmonar]

^^^^

What?  More online tests to make one a leader in CAP,,,Is that what organizational excellence is all about?

No...actually it is a pretty well thought out program to take a new potential commander through prepatory training and mentoring.

http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/P229_E7F67784B89EF.pdf

[Eclipse]

^^^^

What?  More online tests to make one a leader in CAP,,,Is that what organizational excellence is all about?

No...actually it is a pretty well thought out program to take a new potential commander through prepatory training and mentoring.

http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/P229_E7F67784B89EF.pdf

The challenge is that it's not required for command, so I see a lot of sitting and recent CC's considering it because they've already checked a lot of the boxes, while the up and comers don't know about it or think its important (assuming they are even identified).

[lordmonar]

^^^^

What?  More online tests to make one a leader in CAP,,,Is that what organizational excellence is all about?

No...actually it is a pretty well thought out program to take a new potential commander through prepatory training and mentoring.

http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/P229_E7F67784B89EF.pdf

The challenge is that it's not required for command, so I see a lot of sitting and recent CC's considering it because they've already checked a lot of the boxes, while the up and comers don't know about it or think its important (assuming they are even identified).

As the program has not even be launched I agree with you....but it is an attempt to put some meat into our command program.

Once it is launched....we can then look at requiring it as a prereq for command. 

[heliodoc]

I could launch into this one

Prep Training?  Regional or Wing level

Is is going to have the SAME MEAT is US Armed Forces NCO, Officer, ROTC, Academy prep type courses

Until CAP can meet those STANDARDS in both resident and non resident course, then it just another CAP RSC or Mational Staff college with A LOT of sitting around shooting the CAP bulll

This (OE) I gotta see.  Welll thought out let the educators and former miltary folks who ad to endure all those leadership courses be the judge of that!!  CAP's mentoring of Squadron commanders and the reqs with CLC, SLS, and UCC BARELY make the grade.

AND there were a lot of excellent teachers teaching those classes.  Thinking that those course were foundation in leadership..........yeah let's see how much meat and potatoes this so called OE has got and the one getting "grandfathered" so to speak ought to be invited back for refresher training........AT CAP's expense!!

We will see how "organizational Excellence " stands up.  Like the CSU...hopefully it won't be another flash in the pan operation CAP likes to hammer together as "a new idea."