Time in grade

[RiverAux]

Notwithstanding the other issues that people have in regards to CAP's senior member training, awards and progression system, should we consider changing the minimum time-in-grade requirements before promotion. 

Here are the current requirements
2LT - 6 months as a senior member
1LT - 1 year as a 2LT or TFO
CAPT - 1.5 years as a 1LT
MAJ - 3 years as a CAPT
LTC - 4 years as a MAJ

So, if one were really dedicated and chose the right senior member specialty track (those without extended time-in-position requirements), a CAP member could rise to Lt. Col. in 10 years if they started from scratch.  Those that come in with advanced grade under one of the many exceptions to the general rule could potentially do it in much less. 

In my opinion, it is a little too fast, especially early in the program.  In my real world experience it usually takes me about a year or two to feel totally comfortable in a new job and/or agency and really understand its structure and how it works.

One added benefit to the CAP member is reducing the need to change rank insignia all the time, especially early in your CAP career. 

By the way, I'm saying all this in full recognition that the stereotype of CAP being all Lt. Cols. is not true.  Stats in my wing demonstrate that there basically is a pyramid-like structure of ranks.  So, I know this isn't a major problem. 

I would propose the following which would increase the total time to become a Lt. Col. to 15 years.
2LT - 1 year as a senior member
1LT - 2 years as a 2LT or TFO
CAPT - 3 years as a 1LT
MAJ - 4 years as a CAPT
LTC - 5 years as a MAJ

If nothing else it presents a logical progression of time in grade requirements in comparison to the hodgepodge we have now. 

Now, to some extent this would probably be recognizing reality since not many people get to Lt Col. in 10 years under the current system and those that do promote usually take longer than the minimum time anyway.  So, it may not slow those folks down much at all.

However, it would do a little to keep the special appointments folks from skipping up the ladder faster than warranted.  I think making them gain a little more time in CAP prior to promotion is a very good thing. 

Please, do not digress into discussions of whether we should have rank at all, whether we should be all enlisted ranks, etc.  Stick to time in grade and assume everything else about CAP's system will stay the same. 

[arajca]

Is there a basis for the TIG's you suggest other than your opinion?

Out of curiousity, what are the typical AF officer TIG requirements? Slightly off topic, but potentially useful for resetting CAP's TIG requirements.

[Eclipse]

I think 1st Lt to Capt are fine, but would be in favor of 4 to Major and 5 to Lt. Col.

[Camas]

However, it would do a little to keep the special appointments folks from skipping up the ladder faster than warranted.  I think making them gain a little more time in CAP prior to promotion is a very good thing. 

You might have something there.  Perhaps dropping most if not all the grades by one grade so that a CFI-rated pilot, an attorney or other professionally- appointed officer would get 1st Lt.  Military personnel would get one grade below their grade upon leaving the service so that a retired lieutenant colonel would be eligible for major. And so on down the line.

And, of course, I'm speaking of eligibility; nothing more.  No guarantees on promotions.

[Eclipse]

I can see the CFI's coming lower - that would keep the ones not interested in progressing below Captain,
but I personally have not seen much issue with RealMilitary® types assuming current grade.

[RiverAux]

Is there a basis for the TIG's you suggest other than your opinion?

Not specifically.  It just seems logical to me to add a year additional time in each rank rather than skipping around like we do now. 

When it comes down to something like this, it is always going to be a judgement call. 

AF time in grade isn't really applicable.  That is based on someone doing a full-time job available for service 365 days a year.  Our folks only spend a fraction of their actual time in grade really doing CAP work.

If you want CAP's time in grade to match, you would need to multiply the AF time-in-grade by a large factor to make actual average CAP service time match up (i.e., 2 years AF time might equal 10 years CAP time). 

That being said, perhaps AF Reserve or Air National Guard time-in-grade might be a half-way decent comparison. 

[arajca]

I was just looking at the numbers, not equivilent amount of work. If it takes an AF officer two years (average) to promote from 2d Lt to 1st Lt then it is easier to make the argument that we should use two years. If Capt to Maj averages five years, why shouldn't we use the same?

The idea is that using something like this as a basis for changing TIG requirements would probably have a better chance than random numbers based on one person's opinion.

[RiverAux]

Well, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that there are probably not many people who make Lt. Col. in the Air Force in 10 years as they could in CAP under the current system and that the 15 years under my system is probably about right. 

Keep in mind that we're talking peacetime here.  Major wars tend to drastically speed up promotions. 

[KFreeman]

We have very little to reward our hard working senior members, so why not recognize them with advancement in rank?

Besides, everyone appreciates a pay raise.

By the way, I made LtCol in 1972. Haven't had a CAP pay increase since. Oh well........

Regards,
Ken

[RiverAux]

There are plenty of ribbons to use to reward people for what they've done in the senior member program.  Personally, I don't think of rank as a reward. 

[Eclipse]

Ribbons reward past accomplishments.

Grade promotion is an expectation of increased responsibility, not a reward for past work.

[pixelwonk]

Ribbons reward past accomplishments.

Grade promotion is an expectation of increased responsibility, not a reward for past work.

What he said.


So to swing this back on topic, here's a few questions...
Is the point to match active duty/NG/Res officer progression?
Or rather, do we want the TIG system to provide more adequate experience levels (ie: BTDTness) to warrant the promotions we give out?

[RiverAux]

My personal point was that I don't think there is enough time in grade to adequately learn what needs to be learned, and I'm not just talking about the official requirements.  I'm not personally advocating trying to match the military, but if that sort of comparison is what it takes to get it done, I wouldn't object.

[Short Field]

I just did a grade distribution of the SMs in our squadron and it seems a decent distribution - even a little light on the high end. (numbers are rounded up so they will not add up to 100%)  Most people are not slowed up by the TIG requirement but by the need to complete the other requirements.  Please note we only have 35% in the field grade ranks.

12% - SM
18% - 2nd Lt
16% - 1st Lt
21% - Capt
19% - Maj
15% - Lt Col
  1% - Col

[Gunner C]

Here are the current requirements
2LT - 6 months as a senior member
1LT - 1 year as a 2LT or TFO
CAPT - 1.5 years as a 1LT
MAJ - 3 years as a CAPT
LTC - 4 years as a MAJ

So, if one were really dedicated and chose the right senior member specialty track (those without extended time-in-position requirements), a CAP member could rise to Lt. Col. in 10 years if they started from scratch.  Those that come in with advanced grade under one of the many exceptions to the general rule could potentially do it in much less. 

In my opinion, it is a little too fast, especially early in the program.  In my real world experience it usually takes me about a year or two to feel totally comfortable in a new job and/or agency and really understand its structure and how it works.

One added benefit to the CAP member is reducing the need to change rank insignia all the time, especially early in your CAP career. 

By the way, I'm saying all this in full recognition that the stereotype of CAP being all Lt. Cols. is not true.  Stats in my wing demonstrate that there basically is a pyramid-like structure of ranks.  So, I know this isn't a major problem. 

I would propose the following which would increase the total time to become a Lt. Col. to 15 years.
2LT - 1 year as a senior member
1LT - 2 years as a 2LT or TFO
CAPT - 3 years as a 1LT
MAJ - 4 years as a CAPT
LTC - 5 years as a MAJ

Personally, I'd rather see a change in the relationship of grade and professional development:

2 Lt - Level 1
1st Lt - Level 2
Capt - Level 3
Maj - Level 4
Lt Col - Level 5

One of CAP's problems is that there's too many officers at the executive level of command and/or staff that haven't completed the executive level of training.  Right now, a one-eyed dog with a note in its mouth can make Lt Col.  Let's leave that grade to those who are willing to do the full program.  Since that's the highest that most of us will go, let's make that rank a bit harder to get to.  If you raise the PD requirements, the TIG will take care of itself.

Hopefully, that will keep more junior majors from becoming wing (then quickly) region commanders.  I know that there's one of those out in the east who is running their region into the dust, mostly due to only having 9 years CAP experience.

Gunner

[arajca]

While the discussion of the grade/PD level relationship is a drift from the topic, I think both need to be reviewed together.

[Eclipse]

While the discussion of the grade/PD level relationship is a drift from the topic, I think both need to be reviewed together.

I agree - it was very shocking to me when I found Level 5 was not attached to any grade - pretty much disincentives even the most motivated members.

[RiverAux]

I sanction the drift -- but only if we assume that making Level 5 count for something goes along with time in grade requirements (either mine or the current). 

[MIKE]

No free rides.  Go directly to jail, do not pass Go, do not collect 200 dollars.

[CadetProgramGuy]

No free rides.  Go directly to jail, do not pass Go, do not collect 200 dollars.

I feel cheated.....