Main Menu

Re: Tac Officers

Started by Briski, December 02, 2007, 07:57:32 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Briski

Quote from: DNall on November 29, 2007, 08:29:08 PM
10-12 man flts, which is a waste of my time - I command 90 in the guard.
Oh yeah, because the opportunity to have a greater, more direct impact on the growth and development of 10-12 cadets and their flight staff since you won't be distracted by 78-80 others is such a menial task. Pails in comparison to commanding 90. ::)
JACKIE M. BRISKI, Capt, CAP
VAWG Cadet Programs Team

...not all those who wander are lost...

DNall

Quote from: Briski on December 02, 2007, 07:57:32 PM
Quote from: DNall on November 29, 2007, 08:29:08 PM
10-12 man flts, which is a waste of my time - I command 90 in the guard.
Oh yeah, because the opportunity to have a greater, more direct impact on the growth and development of 10-12 cadets and their flight staff since you won't be distracted by 78-80 others is such a menial task. Pails in comparison to commanding 90. ::)
Distracted?!? Go easy there, Captain, talking about my soldiers that way. You take take a company commander & assign them to a squad leader position & see how bored they are.

I'm not a junior NCO that's only capable of leading small groups. I know all 90 of my soldiers, and I take care of every one of them. I know about their personal lives, their education, their civilian jobs, their finances, and of course their military development. I'm not their friend & I don't lead by fear, but if I stand up under fire and say follow me, I don't have to look back. My people aren't a distraction, they are the mission.

I joined CAP 14 years ago as a cadet programs officer, and I've impacted hundreds and hundreds of cadets in that time. I've sent I think it's 16 or 17 to service academies, dozens thru ROTC, and many times that to enlisted or civilian success. This'll be my 5th encampment, 6 or 8 CTEPs, couple NCASEs, national activities... pretty much everything out there. All that's nice, but the reason I'm in CAP are the bad kids I've turned around. I've taken kids from juvenile probation for gangs & drugs, from at-risk referrals, you name it, and changed their lives. I hate all the BS that is CAP. The only thing that keeps me here is knowing the impact I have on where those young people end up.

I'm happy to be on TAC staff, but 12-15 cadets, a flt sgt & CC... That's not much of a challenge. It's also not very rewarding to have such a small impact for my time & effort. I don't like lowering my standards, I don't like being bored, I don't like babysitting, and I don't like being taxed for the frustration.

However, I look forward to the encampment. From what I've seen on the command level, it should be a good one. I haven't been able to make one in a while, and I won't be able to make another for a few more years, so I'm happy to fit this one in.

jb512

[sarcasm]Sounds like the command staff should be forever in your debt that you've so graciously decided to take one for the team...[/sarcasm]

mikeylikey

Quote from: DNall on December 10, 2007, 01:15:44 AM
I'm not a junior NCO that's only capable of leading small groups. I know all 90 of my soldiers, and I take care of every one of them. I know about their personal lives, their education, their civilian jobs, their finances, and of course their military development. I'm not their friend & I don't lead by fear, but if I stand up under fire and say follow me, I don't have to look back. My people aren't a distraction, they are the mission.

Aren't you an Officer?  Junior NCO?? 
What's up monkeys?

DNall

Quote from: jaybird512 on December 10, 2007, 01:59:33 AM
[sarcasm]Sounds like the command staff should be forever in your debt that you've so graciously decided to take one for the team...[/sarcasm]
Hey whatever, CAP is all about taking one for the team, over & over again.

I really do like being a cadet programs officer & working events like encampment. I agree with why we're keeping the flights small, and I'm in the position I asked for because that's where I want to be.

That said... If you continue to improve yourself as an officer, and get better and better at one level, eventually you're not going to get the same fulfillment as you did when it was more challenging. Now, I've been doing this for a long long time, and I don't feel fulfilled in an entry level position. I've done just about everything, and I've kind of topped out at this point as a CP officer. The next level is less interaction with cadets, less direct impact, and lots more politics... in other words, much less rewarding. So yeah, I'm just a little frustrated that CAP doesn't have more to offer me at this point in my career.

I do appreciate greatly all that CAP has done for me. It really has shaped and changed my life. It's been very frustrating at times, but also very fulfilling. It's also taught me a whole lot about being an officer, which has in turn made given me the tools to be successful in the real military. I'd like to be able to repay the organization for that, and that's why I stay semi-active & take assignments like this. That doesn't mean I like it, and it doesn't mean that's the best use of the skills this org has helped me attain.

Briski

#5
Quote from: DNall on December 10, 2007, 01:15:44 AM
I don't like lowering my standards,
I'm not trackin' on this one... why do you have to lower your standards?

Also,
Quote from: DNall on December 10, 2007, 08:09:47 AM
I really do like being a cadet programs officer & working events like encampment. I agree with why we're keeping the flights small, and I'm in the position I asked for because that's where I want to be.
Why did you ask for the job if your skills and experience would be better used elsewhere?

I'm not trying to pick a fight, just trying to better understand your situation.
JACKIE M. BRISKI, Capt, CAP
VAWG Cadet Programs Team

...not all those who wander are lost...

jb512

Quote from: Briski on December 13, 2007, 05:54:33 PM
Quote from: DNall on December 10, 2007, 01:15:44 AM
I don't like lowering my standards,
I'm not trackin' on this one... why do you have to lower your standards?

Also,
Quote from: DNall on December 10, 2007, 08:09:47 AM
I really do like being a cadet programs officer & working events like encampment. I agree with why we're keeping the flights small, and I'm in the position I asked for because that's where I want to be.
Why did you ask for the job if your skills and experience would be better used elsewhere?

I'm not trying to pick a fight, just trying to better understand your situation.

I didn't quite understand it either.  All due respect, but it did sound a bit condescending.

lordmonar

If your flights are so small....do they really need a SM TAC officer for each one?

Your flight commanders and flight sergeants are on staff right?

I would cut the number of TAC's to the match the number of squadrons you are running and use the rest as additional instructors.

I agree with DNall.  Being in charge of just 12 basic cadets would be boring.  Give me 48 thank you.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

jb512

Quote from: lordmonar on December 15, 2007, 08:42:43 AM
If your flights are so small....do they really need a SM TAC officer for each one?

Yes

QuoteYour flight commanders and flight sergeants are on staff right?

Yes

QuoteI would cut the number of TAC's to the match the number of squadrons you are running and use the rest as additional instructors.

No

QuoteI agree with DNall.  Being in charge of just 12 basic cadets would be boring.  Give me 48 thank you.

TACs aren't in charge of cadets.  Flight Commanders and their Flight Sergeants are in charge.  We merely look out for safety issues.  If you're a former cadet or military then there is a bit of information you can offer if asked...

lordmonar

Even worse....so you need a Baby Sitter for 12 cadets and 2 staff members.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

Eclipse

Quote from: lordmonar on December 15, 2007, 03:44:46 PM
Even worse....so you need a Baby Sitter for 12 cadets and 2 staff members.

If you believe a TAC is a babysitter, you're missing the point...

"That Others May Zoom"

jb512

Yeah, there's not much babysitting involved if you've seen most of these cadet officers...

lordmonar

Quote from: Eclipse on December 15, 2007, 04:09:07 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on December 15, 2007, 03:44:46 PM
Even worse....so you need a Baby Sitter for 12 cadets and 2 staff members.

If you believe a TAC is a babysitter, you're missing the point...

Read Jaybird's post...and tell me that is not babysitting.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

Eclipse

Quote from: lordmonar on December 15, 2007, 07:56:30 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 15, 2007, 04:09:07 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on December 15, 2007, 03:44:46 PM
Even worse....so you need a Baby Sitter for 12 cadets and 2 staff members.

If you believe a TAC is a babysitter, you're missing the point...

Read Jaybird's post...and tell me that is not babysitting.

I have, its not. 

"That Others May Zoom"

mikeylikey

Quote from: jaybird512 on December 15, 2007, 11:22:28 AM
TACs aren't in charge of cadets.  Flight Commanders and their Flight Sergeants are in charge. 

Really?

Because if a Cadet gets hurt, or there is a hazing issue, or any other issue, the TAC is responsible.  Adults are always responsible for the children under their care.

Last time I looked there might be a Cadet Chain of Command, but the Officers are most assuredly in charge.
What's up monkeys?

Eclipse

#15
TAC officers are a safety valve, however they are not in the cadet's chain of command.

"That Others May Zoom"

jb512

Quote from: mikeylikey on December 15, 2007, 10:48:52 PM
Quote from: jaybird512 on December 15, 2007, 11:22:28 AM
TACs aren't in charge of cadets.  Flight Commanders and their Flight Sergeants are in charge. 

Really?

Because if a Cadet gets hurt, or there is a hazing issue, or any other issue, the TAC is responsible.  Adults are always responsible for the children under their care.

Last time I looked there might be a Cadet Chain of Command, but the Officers are most assuredly in charge.

Nope.  TACs are not supposed to be in charge of the flights, that is the job of the cadet staff.  A TAC is not responsible for injury or hazing (unless apparently preventable by the TAC).

There's a TAC handbook here that has everything listed:

http://www.texascadet.org/resources/archives/encampment/200506_summer05/tacbook.pdf

lordmonar

Quote from: TAC Hand book Para 1-1You are mentor, safety officer, chaperone, and parent all in one and all at once.

Chaperone, safety officer, parent.  Three out of the four things are babysitter jobs.

10-12 cadets do not need three staff members directly assigned to them to keep them safe.

Not saying there should not be any adult supervision....but it should be at the "squadron" level not the flight level.  Otherwise you are just wasting your resources.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

DNall

#18
Quote from: lordmonar on December 16, 2007, 06:56:32 AM
Chaperone, safety officer, parent.  Three out of the four things are babysitter jobs.
I am not in this program to babysit. Cadet programs officers do not exist to babysit. I'm an officer. My job is to apply leadership in its many forms to ensure my subordinate leaders meet expected standards in completing the assigned tasks.

Beyond teh scope of encampment, I think this might make for an interesting read:
http://level2.cap.gov/documents/P052_015.pdf

ZigZag911

I think for a senior officer such as DNall it is not unreasonable to take a 'been there done that' attitude to serving as a TAC officer for an encampment flight.
There comes a point in one's CAP career when the individual needs to make decisions based on personal taste as well as the mission requirements.

I've dealt with this as an IC. There are members that don't want to participate in a mission in any role other than aircrew. Generally we have limited aircraft, people who need the flights for training, qualification, or renewal, and a limited number of sorties due to weather and other factors.

The training (SET) folks fly to validate the trainees' performance.

The vast group of observers and scanners who fall into the midst of the pack are generally told that if they want to train or serve in another area (mission management or GT), they should come to the SAREX...and, if the opportunity arises, we will get some of them an air sortie, but no guarantees.

If not, we encourage them not to attend until they are in need of renewal.

The point is, as a general rule, volunteers should not have to perform tasks that don't interest them.

However, neither should they attend the activity and just hang around criticizing.

On the matter of TACs' responsibility -- true, CAP does not consider them in the cadets' chain of command -- however, if something goes really wrong (such as a hazing incident) and the adult on scene fails to take all possible action to prevent or mitigate the situation, if it turns into legal action, you'd better believe that adult is going to be held liable to some degree.

As a final observation, I find it extremely odd that an officer of DNall's experience and longevity can not be put to some better use than as a flight level TAC officer.


RiverAux

QuoteAs a final observation, I find it extremely odd that an officer of DNall's experience and longevity can not be put to some better use than as a flight level TAC officer.
I'd been thinking the same thing.  Why isn't he running it?

Monty

I don't really have a pony in this race, but I have found some of the points of view very counter to my own.

Consider a situation...

While dropping some equipment off at a neighboring squadron's activity on one Saturday morning (sidenote: I wasn't participating, but wanted to drop some stuff off for their use), some CAP 1st Lt Cadet Programs Officer spotted my civilian clothes-clad, baby-faced, junior-weight self.

"You there...dropping off the CAP radios?  Put those down for a second and get over here to help."

"Yes Sir, El-Tee" (perish the thought, I called a subordinate rank "sir') and went straight to the task.

I ended up moving about 14 pretty heavy boxes while several other able-bodied senior ranking cadets and quite a few other cadet programs officers sat their with a bulldog face, crossed arms, and contempt to do work that was beneath them or their self-perceived level of status in the "Air Force Auxiliary."

I had no problem doing it.  Aside from the fact that my USAF and CAP resume is for me to know and not them, as well as the fact that I'm above nothing or nobody in terms of what I can and can't do....I thought it was interesting.

Shoot, I guess I forgot to "gorilla beat" my chest, flash my credentials, pull pseudo-rank on these guys, and make them look like the fools they were.  "Meh, life's too short to fight people's egos," I thought.

For me, it's an upbringing thing...and upon the end of my AFROTC experience, a wise sage of a SMSgt reminded me that I'm not above anybody or anything, and to never rest on my laurels when tackling any situation where I'm needed - EVER.

"Remember where you've come from, and visit often."

Interesting how others' points of view - while not wrong, given the nature of a personal opinion - are very different from my own.

RiverAux


PHall

Quote from: Active Monty on December 16, 2007, 06:01:32 PM
I don't really have a pony in this race, but I have found some of the points of view very counter to my own.

Consider a situation...

While dropping some equipment off at a neighboring squadron's activity on one Saturday morning (sidenote: I wasn't participating, but wanted to drop some stuff off for their use), some CAP 1st Lt Cadet Programs Officer spotted my civilian clothes-clad, baby-faced, junior-weight self.

"You there...dropping off the CAP radios?  Put those down for a second and get over here to help."

"Yes Sir, El-Tee" (perish the thought, I called a subordinate rank "sir') and went straight to the task.

I ended up moving about 14 pretty heavy boxes while several other able-bodied senior ranking cadets and quite a few other cadet programs officers sat their with a bulldog face, crossed arms, and contempt to do work that was beneath them or their self-perceived level of status in the "Air Force Auxiliary."

I had no problem doing it.  Aside from the fact that my USAF and CAP resume is for me to know and not them, as well as the fact that I'm above nothing or nobody in terms of what I can and can't do....I thought it was interesting.

Shoot, I guess I forgot to "gorilla beat" my chest, flash my credentials, pull pseudo-rank on these guys, and make them look like the fools they were.  "Meh, life's too short to fight people's egos," I thought.

For me, it's an upbringing thing...and upon the end of my AFROTC experience, a wise sage of a SMSgt reminded me that I'm not above anybody or anything, and to never rest on my laurels when tackling any situation where I'm needed - EVER.

"Remember where you've come from, and visit often."

Interesting how others' points of view - while not wrong, given the nature of a personal opinion - are very different from my own.

Monty, you're just too nice of a guy!  I would have pointed out the slackers and asked "what's wrong with them, they hurt or something". Probably would have still helped the poor guy, but the slackers would have either been shamed into helping or they would have left.

Monty

Quote from: PHall on December 16, 2007, 07:47:48 PM
Quote from: Active Monty on December 16, 2007, 06:01:32 PM
I don't really have a pony in this race, but I have found some of the points of view very counter to my own.

Consider a situation...

While dropping some equipment off at a neighboring squadron's activity on one Saturday morning (sidenote: I wasn't participating, but wanted to drop some stuff off for their use), some CAP 1st Lt Cadet Programs Officer spotted my civilian clothes-clad, baby-faced, junior-weight self.

"You there...dropping off the CAP radios?  Put those down for a second and get over here to help."

"Yes Sir, El-Tee" (perish the thought, I called a subordinate rank "sir') and went straight to the task.

I ended up moving about 14 pretty heavy boxes while several other able-bodied senior ranking cadets and quite a few other cadet programs officers sat their with a bulldog face, crossed arms, and contempt to do work that was beneath them or their self-perceived level of status in the "Air Force Auxiliary."

I had no problem doing it.  Aside from the fact that my USAF and CAP resume is for me to know and not them, as well as the fact that I'm above nothing or nobody in terms of what I can and can't do....I thought it was interesting.

Shoot, I guess I forgot to "gorilla beat" my chest, flash my credentials, pull pseudo-rank on these guys, and make them look like the fools they were.  "Meh, life's too short to fight people's egos," I thought.

For me, it's an upbringing thing...and upon the end of my AFROTC experience, a wise sage of a SMSgt reminded me that I'm not above anybody or anything, and to never rest on my laurels when tackling any situation where I'm needed - EVER.

"Remember where you've come from, and visit often."

Interesting how others' points of view - while not wrong, given the nature of a personal opinion - are very different from my own.

Monty, you're just too nice of a guy!  I would have pointed out the slackers and asked "what's wrong with them, they hurt or something". Probably would have still helped the poor guy, but the slackers would have either been shamed into helping or they would have left.

Well, I appreciate the sentiment...

But, FWIW, I think one of my cadets who did attend the event clued them in after the fact.  Maybe the guys felt like the fools they were...and maybe they didn't.  It didn't matter to me; I was long gone with my "juvenile" self, at home watching my Saturday morning cartoons...'cause that's what we "children" apparently do when not moving boxes for a few narcissists.

;D

Ned

Quote from: ZigZag911 on December 16, 2007, 04:40:44 PM
As a final observation, I find it extremely odd that an officer of DNall's experience and longevity can not be put to some better use than as a flight level TAC officer.

Strong non-concur.

As a veteran of over 30 encampments, I can think of no better position for an experienced CP officer than as a flight TAC.

The year after I served as the CAWG encampment commander, I was happy to serve as a "mere" flight TAC.

Ditto for the year after I served as commandant.

When I was the CAWG DCP, I was lucky to serve as a flight TAC.

Flight TAC is THE best CP job at encampment, bar none.  I hope to serve as a flight tac again.

Sure, you can spin the position description and slanderously call it "babysitting."

Just like every teacher and parent in the world.  And sometimes teachers and parents do little more than a mere babysitter.

But sometimes teachers (and flight TACS) mentor their charges and touch them in ways that profoundly affect the student, and make a real difference in their future.

You, me, and DNall should be so lucky.

Ned Lee
Director of Cadet Programs, Pacific Region


CadetProgramGuy

Having the benefit of a caouple of encampments under my belt, and planning on a NCSA this year, I have served as a TAC and as a COC of a basic Encampment.

I am planning on being a TAC for the NSCA...  Why?

Because I had much more fun as a TAC than as the COC.  I spent more time in the office as the COC, I missed ALOT of the encampment doing emcampment paperwork, certificate signing, helping with admin, ect....

Give you some advice?  Be a TAC......

DNall

Quote from: RiverAux on December 16, 2007, 05:56:50 PM
QuoteAs a final observation, I find it extremely odd that an officer of DNall's experience and longevity can not be put to some better use than as a flight level TAC officer.
I'd been thinking the same thing.  Why isn't he running it?
I appreciate that sentiment. The current encampment commander is the former Wg CC that stepped down just in the last year, and he's doing a good job from what I've seen.

I like that we are going with the smaller flights for a couple reasons. First, we had more adults apply for staff than we could accept. This way we can get more of them experience at TAC, with quality supervisors/mentors, and still not overburden them - ie give them less to mess up. Secondly, the smaller span of control gives better opportunity to engage each basic cadet in driving the standard for the individual experience.

That said... I am not a babysitter, a parent figure to other people's kids, or a school teacher, nor do I have any desire to be anything of the sort. I do not believe a TAC should be engaged with basic cadets. I do believe a TAC should be highly engaged with cadet line staff & applying leadership on a relatively constant basis, albeit in a way that'd be almost invisible to basic cadets.

Quote from: Active Monty on December 16, 2007, 06:01:32 PM
...Interesting how others' points of view - while not wrong, given the nature of a personal opinion - are very different from my own.
I appreciate your position. I would caution however not to interpret my view as an overabundance of pride. The issue is not that I'm too good to be a TAC. Again, I asked to be a flight TAC. I agree with the reasons we're going with small flights. It just happens that the situation is not as fulfilling nor does it provide a challenge against which I can further develop as an officer.

Remember now, this is not jumping out of the truck & helping out. This is my primary specialty. And not only that, since the guard now monopolizes most of my time, all I do in CAP is a half dozen events per year - no mtgs, no missions, nothing else - so there is no other opportunity for me to better myself, which is a primary responsibility of officership. I'm disappointed it couldn't work out for a more productive experience.

Stonewall

I've been a tac and I've been commandant.  Me, I'd rather be the guy setting up and coordinating the activities or a tac officer.

As a tac, I felt that I adjusted accordingly and while I didn't lead the flight, I offered guidance, encouragement, a watchful eye of the 2 cadet leaders and in some cases stepped in to make a few corrections, on the side of course.  I enjoyed running PT with the flight and being in the background to watch them evolve.  The year I was a tac I got the AFA Senior Member of Encampment.

I'd be a tac again and I'd be encampment commander.  But it seems like too many people need that position who probably shouldn't be in that position.  I'd rather have a guy running the show that was selected and had to almost be persuaded than the young 30-something major who just_has_to_be_encampment_commander.

And no, I'm not saying anyone here who has posted regarding this topic is the latter.
Serving since 1987.

DNall

Concur there. I don't have anything like that kind of time, but if I did, it'd still be one of those things (like wing CC) to walk the other way on. There's a degree of politics in such things that I have no desire to toy with.

Slim

Quote from: Stonewall on December 17, 2007, 03:28:27 PM
I'd rather have a guy running the show that was selected and had to almost be persuaded than the young 30-something major who just_has_to_be_encampment_commander.

And no, I'm not saying anyone here who has posted regarding this topic is the latter.

I didn't post in this thread, but I am a 30-something (38 in a couple of weeks, actually) major who is an encampment commander.  And it represents the culmination of sixteen years of hard work to get here.

Would I have been disappointed if I didn't get it?  Yeah, in all honesty, I would.  But that's only because I spent a lot of years taking one for the team and doing the not-so-glamorous jobs to get here.

My favorite encampment position?  Training officer, the guy who really makes things happen.  Think I did that job for about six years, and just had a ball with it.  XO was ok, but I really enjoyed being the commandant and vice commander.  Not because the cadet's eyes would pop out of their heads when I would pick a table to sit down and have lunch with, but when they realized that the big cheese isn't too big to sit down and talk to them.


Slim

Stonewall

Come on, Chris, you know I wasn't talking to you.  8)

I've seen several folks in more than a couple wings that had to be encampment commander or it was nothing at all.  And I'm not talking the mature 37.8 year old, I'm talking about the guy that still thinks he's a cadet.  I'm 35 and would be encampment commander if circumstances in my life were a little different (child, back surgery, no more leave, possible deployment with ANG, etc).  But when  being encampment CC trumps someone's personal life and they'd either give up a job, miss a school semester, or fake an injury to be encampment CC rather than go to their ARNG 2-week training requirement, that's just lame.

I've got a story that made me think of this but I won't share it here.
Serving since 1987.

Slim

Quote from: Stonewall on December 18, 2007, 01:23:32 PM
Come on, Chris, you know I wasn't talking to you.  8)

I've seen several folks in more than a couple wings that had to be encampment commander or it was nothing at all.  And I'm not talking the mature 37.8 year old, I'm talking about the guy that still thinks he's a cadet.  I'm 35 and would be encampment commander if circumstances in my life were a little different (child, back surgery, no more leave, possible deployment with ANG, etc).  But when  being encampment CC trumps someone's personal life and they'd either give up a job, miss a school semester, or fake an injury to be encampment CC rather than go to their ARNG 2-week training requirement, that's just lame.

I've got a story that made me think of this but I won't share it here.

We're straight, bro 8)

Being an ENC/CC has been one of my long time ambitions, but not for the glory or any of the other BS.  I want to be the commander standing on the reviewing stand at the end of the week with tears in my eyes, while watching MY cadets perform a flawless pass in review.

In all seriousness, my goal was almost taken from me last year, due to political wrangling by others.  Yeah, I was pretty disappointed, almost walked out on the commander the morning of our cadet staff selection (which is when they told me), and gave up on the idea.  I sometimes think the fact that I sucked it up, soldiered on, and did a good job changed a few minds.


Slim