Quote from: Eclipse on June 15, 2011, 06:27:01 PM
Showing up in an Aux uniform to a CAP activity is disrespectful to CAP

You should have finished that statement, "in my opinion." I'm a CAP member, and I don't view it that way. I've also never run across anyone who DOES view it that way except for the few of you here.

Quote from: Eclipse on June 15, 2011, 06:27:01 PM
is not, in any way, the "same" as someone in the military showing up ni their uniform after a day of work (which most of us here think is a bad idea as well).

Again, its attitudes like that that push people away from CAP. Sorry, we don't want your support if you can't support us the way we think you should. Now that statement I have heard people in CAP say that they've felt. I've seen many parents and SMs who no longer attend meetings and drop off the rolls because people like you are more worried about the wearing the uniform than just showing up to support the organization.

And it is very much the same. I have made a commitment to the USCG to perform Academy partner missions. I am required to be in Trops to do that mission when I show up to high schools and universities as a recruiter. Just because you don't value the CGAUX doesn't mean its less of a job than anything anyone else does.

You can think its a bad idea all you want, but my GA squadron, with all of its SMs wearing ACUs, ABUs, the polos, civilian clothes an all consistently has been rated (and awarded) one of the top squadrons in GA. So, my squadron is fine with it, the group is fine with it, the wing is fine with it and even the region has been fine with it. I'm sorry, but who are you that you think you rate to contradict all of them? Oh, I'm guessing you're the person who is a regulation hound. I'm also guessing you didn't serve in the military. My experiences coming out of the Marine Corps is that mission comes first, everything else is secondary. I've seen instances of Marines who's uniform wasn't up to Marine Corps standards. Was it addressed? Yes. Did the Corps say you can't perform the mission until you look the part? Nope. I can just see it now... hey Marine, sorry, you can't fight in today's battle... you're wearing the wrong uniform items.... or you're missing a rank pin.

So sad that you're priorities are in the wrong place.

Quote from: Eclipse on June 15, 2011, 06:27:01 PM
It is simply you wanting to show off your CGAux uniform to be "different".

And that is an assumption you've made because you dislike my post, and dislike me wearing the uniform. Its an assumption you've made in spite of me stating otherwise. p.s. Its CGAUX. If you're going to speak about "disrespect" than you shouldn't do the same. CGAux is comparable to CAp.

Quote from: Eclipse on June 15, 2011, 06:27:01 PM
Yes, CC is a standard military office symbol for "Commander".

Well, standard CAP and maybe USAF. Never once seen it before in all my time in the Marines and dealings with the Navy and Coast Guard.

I had aguy who was dual memeber and he would wear his CG AUX blues. Whne I took over the squadron I told him very nicely to stop waering it.  Come to find out, he hadnt been a memeber of the AUX in years.  I haave meet some good people associated with the AUX.   

Quote from: Eclipse on June 15, 2011, 06:34:01 PM
I love how "certain people" have "jobs" and are too busy to change in the bathroom, yet everyone else seems to be able to figure out this complex problem.

Everyone else? Really? So the fact that I constantly run into squadrons with people not wearing the CAP uniform because they don't have time change is just ignored. Yeah, everyone else... except for all the rest of the people who don't wear the uniform. In fact, the squadron I attended last night both the CO and the PAO were in civilian clothes. So, maybe you should stop with the absolutes an veiled attack on me.

I'd love to see you walk up to the Army 1Lt, Army Lt Col, AF MSgt or multitude of others and say your smart*** remark to them. Not only would they laugh you out of the building, but they'd give you an earful while doing it.

Quote from: Eclipse on June 15, 2011, 06:34:01 PM
Please feel free to post or cite the study that indicates the growth of the NSCC (oh, you'll have to cite the growth as well), is in any way related to CAP units expecting members to wear proper uniforms.

What is it with you people and citing? Did I miss the academic standards at the door? Oh that's right. People who only learned to debate on the internet think demanding citation of any statement is a trump card that wins any argument. Please. Have you ever heard of anecdotal evidence. I just cited my evidence. My experience from what I've seen and heard is evidence.

Quote from: honolulugold on June 15, 2011, 07:18:47 PM
I'd love to see you walk up to the Army 1Lt, Army Lt Col, AF MSgt or multitude of others and say your smart*** remark to them. Not only would they laugh you out of the building, but they'd give you an earful while doing it.

No problem, been there, done that.  This is CAP, not the Army, USAF, or Navy.  A commander not wearing a proper uniform to a unit meeting is part and parcel of the problem, not justification of your behavior. 

Quote from: honolulugold on June 15, 2011, 07:18:47 PM
What is it with you people and citing? Did I miss the academic standards at the door? Oh that's right. People who only learned to debate on the internet think demanding citation of any statement is a trump card that wins any argument. Please. Have you ever heard of anecdotal evidence. I just cited my evidence. My experience from what I've seen and heard is evidence.

Citing is where you support your made-up argument with actual facts.  People say a lot of things to support their positions, we call them on it when those statements are not supportable by reality, make no sense in context, or connect anecdotal or circumstantial situations in a way which doesn't actually make the argument.

No one is "attacking you" beyond having an issue with the hole you're digging.  You've now indicated that everyone through the Region CC is
unconcerned regarding proper uniform wear, highly doubtful, then you make the statement that the NSCC is growing because of "people like me"
who have the unreasonable expectation that CAP members will wear CAP uniforms.  Again, highly doubtful, and irrelevant to the discussion, since
even if it were a fact, which it isn't, that doesn't change the requirements.

Bottom line, you've decided it is too much trouble to go from one volunteer organization to another and change your clothes, and are reaching all
over the place for justification of a bad idea.  Your excuses are the same ones we've been hearing for years from other members "too busy" to
put on a golf shirt, use proper terminology, or otherwise "just belong" to CAP without it being important to the rest of the world that they are in
some other, unrelated organization.

I think some of you may have mininterpreted what he meant by "CG orders".  It is usually not "orders" in the sense that someone in the CG took the time to write them up and specifically approve some activity.   Usually it is "orders" in the sense that someone in the Aux has been told and at least tacitly approves what you are going to do that day thereby making it an official Aux activity and providing whatever legal cover is necessary to undertake it.

For example, if I want to go do boat safety exams I tell the flotilla staff officer over that activity and now I'm "under orders". 

That being said, there are some Aux activities for which specific "orders" are actually issued by the CG, mostly related to boat and air patrols.  Some Auxies are put under orders to respond to various disasters and the like as well. 

Quote from: Eclipse on June 15, 2011, 06:34:52 PM
Aw OK. I'd seen it used occasionally but never thought to ask before. Its just easier to use CO for me anyway.

Clearly.

So here's where we stand based on your statements - either you are so new to CAP that you haven't had time to clearly understand the
culture, dynamic, and organization, or you have chosen to favor the CGAux, which is fine, but wholly inappropriate and disrespectful to
CAP if you carry yourself that way in person at CAP activities.
[/quote]

"We?" So, I find it rather presumptuous that you feel you can speak for everyone, but on the other hand it does go along with your posts.

I've been an SM for two years, and I spent three as a cadet in the late 80's and early 90's. So, relatively speaking I am new. Relatively being the operative word.

However, I have noted differences between CAP, CGAUX and the NSCC. On the occasion that I showed up wearing ACUs to an AUX meeting, never once did anyone say anything, nor was it ever deemed disrespectful. Yes, I'm sure SOMEONE didn't like it, but that's because NOTHING in life is an absolute except maybe paying taxes and death. Our CGAUX flotilla sponsors two of the local NSCC units and we wear our AUX uniforms to their events. Some of us have even joined the NSCC to help support them. Never once has the CG uniform been an issue. The person responsible for the move to sponsor these units is retired Army and a member of CAP, CGAUX and now the NSCC. He brought up the issue of our uniforms, and the NSCC unit commander told us he had no issue with it whatsoever. So, apparently, the only people with an issue is CAP... and not even CAP but you particular guys here.

However, here's one thing I've noticed in dealing with the different organizations as well. The concerns, issues and focus of the organizations tend to mimic that of the parent, military branch. NSCC tends to be more concerned with getting the kids involved in the organization, experiencing life in the Navy and Marines by constant trips to Navy/Marine bases, ships and aircraft. There seems to be focus on wearing the uniform properly, but not so much on what goes on the uniform. Haven't seen much in the way of a negative yet.

The CGAUX is primarily concerned with meeting the mission. Wearing the uniform correctly when someone does wear it, but wearing of the uniform to a meeting is not required. Encouraged for sure, but not required. Again, the CGAUX recognizes that while wearing the uniform is the optimal choice, there are exceptions and people do have lives outside of a volunteer organization. Now, there are certain negatives in the CGAUX, but those tend to be old-timers who refuse to change or would rather sit around and tell war stories.

CAP. CAP has two distinct directions: Cadets, and Senior Squadrons. CAP is very good at getting cadets involved, and helping them come out of their shell. CAP is very good at having senior squadrons who are well trained for SAR. The negatives are that CAP tends to get bogged down in the minutia just like the AF does. All last year, all you ever read about in the AF times were Airman complaining about the PT uniform, complaining about not getting enough ribbons, complaining about the ABU and so on. I don't need to cite it. You can go back and read the letters and commentary for yourself. If you look at the other branches you'll see that wasn't the case. Yeah, you'll some complaining. Human nature. No service is perfect, and no one is perfect. Its just that AF seems to have so much time on their hands that they can have a full-scale issue of whether to tuck in the PT shirt or not. Whether to salute in PT gear or not. Weather everyone should wear the same shoes in PT gear or not. As a Marine I looked at that in dismay. Of all the possible things a service could be complaining about today, how in the world is PT gear your hottest argument?

CAP has gotten wrapped up in that. Arguing about stupid stuff that doesn't really matter. The arguments you guys have stated here today. You'd rather see the mission suffer than have someone show up in civilian clothes, or work clothes (whether it be military or another Auxiliary). Absolutism tends to lead to the death of a movement. Ask any history or cultural anthropology professor.

Sad thing is, while I view the AUX as my primary focus, I believe that of all three CAP has the most potential. Not only for CAP, but for the AF. CAP has the capability to continually recruit people into the AF, as well as to augment the AF in more ways for more time. The AF is in every state with multiple installations. The possibilities greatly outweigh those of the AUX or NSCC. Yet rather than come together as CAP members, you guys would rather bicker and have infighting because someone doesn't meat YOUR approval, YOUR opinion and so forth.

Oh sorry about the quoting mistake. The website was having loading issues and I got focused on that and forgot to change some of the marks. Sorry.

Quote from: eaker.cadet on June 15, 2011, 06:48:12 PM
I had aguy who was dual memeber and he would wear his CG AUX blues. Whne I took over the squadron I told him very nicely to stop waering it.  Come to find out, he hadnt been a memeber of the AUX in years.  I haave meet some good people associated with the AUX.

Now see that one doesn't make sense. Why not just make the switch? If you're not using the other uniform anymore, just switch it over to CAP.

QuoteOATH OF MEMBERSHIP
(READ CAREFULLY BEFORE SIGNING)
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that:
I understand membership in the Civil Air Patrol is a privilege, not a right, and that membership is on a year-to-year basis subject to recurring renewal by CAP. I further understand failure to meet membership eligibility criteria will result in automatic termination at any time.
I voluntarily subscribe to the objectives and purposes of the Civil Air Patrol and agree to be guided by CAP Core Values, Ethics Policies, Constitution & Bylaws, Regulations and all applicable Federal, State, and Local Laws.
I understand only the Civil Air Patrol corporate officers are authorized to obligate funds, equipment, or services.
I understand the Civil Air Patrol is not liable for loss or damage to my personal property when operated for or by the Civil Air Patrol. I further understand that safety is critical for the protection of all members and protection of CAP resources. I will at all times follow safe practices and take an active role in safety for myself and others.
I agree to abide by the decisions of those in authority of the Civil Air Patrol.
I certify that all information on this application is presently correct and any false statement may be cause to deny membership. I understand I am obligated to notify the Civil Air Patrol if there are any changes pertaining to the information on the front of this form and further understand that failure to report such changes may be grounds for membership termination.
I fully understand that this Oath of Membership is an integral part of this application for senior membership in the Civil Air Patrol and that my signature on the form constitutes evidence of that understanding and agreement to comply with all contents of this Oath of Membership.

http://capnhq.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/capnhq.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=613

QuoteSee Table 1-1 below from CAPM 39-1 CAP Uniform Manual  23 Mar 2005 

Table 1-1. Wearing the CAP Uniform
Wear the uniform while participating in or conducting the cadet program or flying in CAP aircraft (corporate and member-owned aircraft used in CAP flight activity). The service uniform, BDU, utility uniform, field uniform, CAP or AF-style flight suit, CAP blazer, aviator shirt, or knit shirt uniform combinations are all authorized. The wing commander, or designee, will prescribe the type clothing to be worn by members while flying or engaging in organized recreational activities. The region commander will prescribe wear policy for members of the region headquarters.

It doesn't say that the uniform is required for meetings. But  common sense dictates that a CAP meeting calls for a CAP uniform. Not ACUs, tropicals, whites, Marpat, etc, etc.

I suppose I'm safe in assuming that you couldn't care any less about cadets and prefer SM only units?

Quote from: Eclipse on June 15, 2011, 07:26:39 PM
No problem, been there, done that.  This is CAP, not the Army, USAF, or Navy.  A commander not wearing a proper uniform to a unit meeting is part and parcel of the problem, not justification of your behavior.

And yet, from what I've seen, no one in the squadron has an issue with it, the group commander doesn't have an issue with it, the Wing commander hasn't had an issue and the region commander (who's attended a meeting or two) also did not have an issue with it. Funny how they don't but you do. Guess they aren't as professional or motivated as you, current positions in CAP notwithstanding.

Quote from: Eclipse on June 15, 2011, 07:26:39 PM
Citing is where you support your made-up argument with actual facts.  People say a lot of things to support their positions, we call them on it when those statements are not supportable by reality, make no sense in context, or connect anecdotal or circumstantial situations in a way which doesn't actually make the argument.

Yes, I know what citation is. I have two college degrees. My argument isn't anymore "made-up" than yours. In everything you've said today I've not seen one citation to back up your statements other than your opinion. Thing is, I don't have a problem with that. I'm not that insecure that I believe everyone who disagrees with me must be lying and that I demand citation to prove otherwise.

Take the request for me to cite evidence to support my statement that CAP members aren't required to wear the uniform (except certain events such as flying, etc) but encouraged to do so. Asking someone to disprove a negative is generally not a good, academic idea. Now, if you can show me CAP regulations requiring the wearing of the uniform I'll admit I was wrong.

Quote from: Eclipse on June 15, 2011, 07:26:39 PM
No one is "attacking you" beyond having an issue with the hole you're digging.  You've now indicated that everyone through the Region CC is
unconcerned regarding proper uniform wear, highly doubtful, then you make the statement that the NSCC is growing because of "people like me"who have the unreasonable expectation that CAP members will wear CAP uniforms.  Again, highly doubtful, and irrelevant to the discussion, since even if it were a fact, which it isn't, that doesn't change the requirements.

So, the fact that I've seen it and heard it from members of both the CGAUX and NSCC means nothing right? I mean, someone telling me their reasons for no longer being in CAP isn't valid. Unless they can prove why, and how, they feel than its false? That's just retarded. I'm digging a hole? Really? Why? Because you disagree with me? So, when did you become the end all of CAP regulations and how CAP, as a whole, feels about my statements? Just because you presume to speak for everyone doesn't mean you do. I know people who've made the comments you doubt. I've felt that way myself at times. So, are my own feelings false and in doubt as well? You can doubt something all you want because it doesn't fit your perception, but just because you disbelieve doesn't make it not so. The problem here is that you're taking my statements as some grand thing. Stating that NSCC is growing because of people like you isn't mean to infer that its huge numbers or exponential. Even one person who leaves CAP for NSCC because attitudes like yours is the truth of the statement.

Also, I didn't state the reason to be "the unreasonable expectation that CAP members will wear CAP uniforms." Those are your words. I said your attitude. Making the statement you did shows your utter contempt for me and your willingness to overreact and get defensive by using sarcastic phrases such as "unreasonable expectation" when that wasn't my statement at all. I don't think your expectation is unreasonable at all. I think the DEGREE of your expectation is.

Also, until people through the region commander comes and says you can no longer show up to a CAP meeting unless you're in a CAP uniform than you have no standing on that issue. The most I've ever seen at my squadron show up in uniform was four people out of 35 or so. Four. Me in BDUs, an older member in the polo and two in flight suits. Everyone else was in work clothes (civilian and military) or just civilian attire.

So let me put it this way... you can complain all you want about it but that's the way its done in many squadrons including ours and ours has a wall full of awards showing that getting the job done is more important than looking the part.

Quote from: Eclipse on June 15, 2011, 07:26:39 PM
Bottom line, you've decided it is too much trouble to go from one volunteer organization to another and change your clothes, and are reaching all over the place for justification of a bad idea.  Your excuses are the same ones we've been hearing for years from other members "too busy" to put on a golf shirt, use proper terminology, or otherwise "just belong" to CAP without it being important to the rest of the world that they are in some other, unrelated organization.

Again, another assumption on your part. Seriously, did you learn how to debate on the internet? You'll sarcastically reply about what a citation is, vaguely direct the comment at me, but than you'll assume all over the place? Have you looked up the definition of hypocrite?

Here's the point. You don't know me. I've stated multiple times now my reasons for wearing of the AUX uniform, yet you continue to state your assumptions that are the complete opposite. So, essentially you're calling me a liar without having the courtesy to actually call me a liar. While we're at it, I'd like to know exactly how you know my heart, my mind? How is it that you have such deep insight into the true meaning of my statements?

Now, moving on... I've worn both my AUX uniform and my ACUs to squadron meetings. I wear what I'm in. You don't like it? Don't attend my squadron. Someone stated earlier its not the same thing to wear an AUX uniform as a military uniform. Really? Why? I wasn't implying that AUX service equates to military service. So if that's what you're thinking... move on. Now, let me tell you from my experience... on days I've worn the AUX uniform I did about five times more work than the days I wore the ACUs. The last time I wore ACUs was because I didn't get released until late. We didn't do anything that whole day by sit around bs'ing and going to chow. I busted my butt, though, doing the Academy partner mission for the CGAUX. So, clearly the amount of work couldn't have been what was being implied either. So tell me... why is it different?

Quote from: RiverAux on June 15, 2011, 07:28:12 PM
I think some of you may have mininterpreted what he meant by "CG orders".  It is usually not "orders" in the sense that someone in the CG took the time to write them up and specifically approve some activity.   Usually it is "orders" in the sense that someone in the Aux has been told and at least tacitly approves what you are going to do that day thereby making it an official Aux activity and providing whatever legal cover is necessary to undertake it.

For example, if I want to go do boat safety exams I tell the flotilla staff officer over that activity and now I'm "under orders". 

That being said, there are some Aux activities for which specific "orders" are actually issued by the CG, mostly related to boat and air patrols.  Some Auxies are put under orders to respond to various disasters and the like as well.

Correct. Thank you. Although, if I remember right, I did have orders issued by DIRAUX. Can't remember though.

Quote from: honolulugold on June 15, 2011, 08:11:07 PM
Now, moving on... I've worn both my AUX uniform and my ACUs to squadron meetings. I wear what I'm in. You don't like it? Don't attend my squadron. Someone stated earlier its not the same thing to wear an AUX uniform as a military uniform. Really? Why?

Neither is acceptable, but at least the military is understandable.

Both auxiliaries are volunteer organizations separate from professional engagements, meaning you have choice in your schedule, clothing, and level of involvement.  That is not always the case with jobs or the military, though again, neither is an acceptable excuse.

You can dodge the issue all you want, but you will never find an acceptable excuse for wearing a Coast Guard Aux uniform to a CAP activity.  You've already indicated your unit CC's uniforms are lax, so his attitude is not going to fly, and the fact that upstream CC's haven't said anything to you, doesn't mean
they don't have an issue with it.  You simply lost credibility points when they arrived.

Quote from: USAFaux2004 on June 15, 2011, 07:50:54 PM
It doesn't say that the uniform is required for meetings. But  common sense dictates that a CAP meeting calls for a CAP uniform. Not ACUs, tropicals, whites, Marpat, etc, etc.

I suppose I'm safe in assuming that you couldn't care any less about cadets and prefer SM only units?

Aw, so what we have so far is that you're admitting... at least from what you can tell so far... is that CAP doesn't have an absolute requirement. I wonder why that is. Just postulating here, but could it be that CAP recognizes that there are exceptions? Could it be that CAP recognizes that members will not always be capable of putting the uniform on, and to expect 100% uniform wear or not attendance allowed, is unreasonable?

No, you are wrong in your assumption, but I will give you credit (and say thank you for being honest about it being an assumption where others don't) for stating it was an assumption. I started as a cadet. When I rejoined CAP, I joined a cadet squadron specifically to work with cadets. Over the last two years I have migrated towards the senior side. Why? Because I prefer the mission more. I have a degree in Homeland Security, and work as an emergency management specialist. Its not that I don't like working with cadets, by I get more out of CAP on the senior side based on my personal interests. Nothing wrong with that. We all perform functions within CAP based on our personal interests. Heck, joining CAP was for our personal interests. Anyway, I still work with cadets a lot. Usually its only military bearing and drill since I have a lot of experience in those areas versus teaching aerospace and so on.

Uniforms are required for all CAP activities, including meetings, as has been pointed out and cited here
innumerable times.  The fact that commanders and members choose to ignore that requirement does not change it.

Quote from: Eclipse on June 15, 2011, 08:18:21 PM
Both auxiliaries are volunteer organizations separate from professional engagements, meaning you have choice in your schedule, clothing, and level of involvement.  That is not always the case with jobs or the military, though again, neither is an acceptable excuse.

Wrong. I made a commitment (both verbally and in writing) that i would perform a certain number of hours a week for the Academy program. I have to do it on a weekday as that's when secondary schools are in session. The only day of the week I have time off from my job is Monday. One of the two squadrons I attend is on a Monday night. If I do not perform my duties are required, than I am dropped from the Academy partner program. Therefore, it IS an obligation that I am required to meet unless I am no longer interested.

However, what we've determined is that you don't like it, and I don't have a problem with it. No one has yet to show me requirements to wear the CAP uniform, nor regulations forbidding the attendance of a meeting while NOT wearing a CAP uniform. So, clearly your problem is with the CGAUX rather than people just showing up not in a CAP uniform. I frankly don't care what your beef is, but its your beef. Not mine.

Quote from: Eclipse on June 15, 2011, 08:18:21 PM
...the fact that upstream CC's haven't said anything to you, doesn't mean they don't have an issue with it.  You simply lost credibility points when they arrived.

Really? Interesting. So, the fact that the wing and group commanders have shown up to the squadron in civilian clothes sort of puts a little kink in your logic though. How is it that I'd lose credibility points with someone for not wearing the CAP uniform when they weren't wearing it either? Or is this just another cause of you presuming to know what other people think?

Quote from: Eclipse on June 15, 2011, 08:26:46 PM
Uniforms are required for all CAP activities, including meetings, as has been pointed out and cited here
innumerable times.  The fact that commanders and members choose to ignore that requirement does not change it.

And yet I'm now asking for a third time in this thread to show me the regulation stating uniforms are required for squadron meetings by attendees. Any reason you've chosen not to post them?

Quote from: CAPM 39-1 Table 1-1. Wearing the CAP Uniformwhen engaged in normal duties as a CAP member or attending local, wing/region, or national CAP functions (see note 1).

Note that the X is in the Wear column.

CAPM 39-1 Table 1-1 Line items 1 & 6

Quote from: MIKE on June 15, 2011, 08:31:20 PM

Quote from: CAPM 39-1 Table 1-1. Wearing the CAP Uniformwhen engaged in normal duties as a CAP member or attending local, wing/region, or national CAP functions (see note 1).

Note that the X is in the Wear column.

Thank you Mike. One person who has sense. So yes, as I read the manual my squadron, and hundreds of others across the nation, are incorrect. I'm adult enough to admit it; however, I do think that regardless of the manual, exceptions can be made (and obviously are).

Yes, a CAP unit that routinely has most of its members at meetings not wearing uniforms is incorrect and in my experience would be unusual.