Senior CAP Organizational Culture

[lordmonar]

As I said before....just look at an active duty wing...and see how they are organise.  You have squadrons that provide security, some that do comm, squadrons that do personnel, finance, logistics, maintenance, roads/power/sewer/building maintenance, feed and house the troops, medical.....oh and we have squadrons that fly and fight.

Not really the same thing.  Those people are assigned duties, and then deploy wherever they need to go.

Basically the exact opposite of CAP.

I understand.

My point was that it is the WING's mission to fly and fight......just as it is OUR WING's mission to do CP, ES, AE.
Not all the USAF squadrons fly and fight....but they do their part to get the pilots on target......just as in CAP each squadron should be doing their piece of the pie to get all the missions done.  Just because CAP is made up of volunteers who can't be moved around....does not negate the value of unit specialization......nor does it negate my primary point that units who do specialize are not failing.

[Eclipse]

How do you specialize when you can't force anyone to do anything except what they want, and you are not offering multiple units in
each members proximity?

[lordmonar]

How do you specialize when you can't force anyone to do anything except what they want, and you are not offering multiple units in
each members proximity?

The unit commander sets the goals and objectives of the unit.....you either contribute to those goals and objectives...or you go away.

In my squardron...we are a Cadet Heavy composite squadron....everyone works on a CP rateing....in addition to what they want and what their job assignment requires.

It's that simple.

Now...I can't make someone go out and do external AE events.....just like I can't make anyone do personnel, supply, trans....what ever.  But I can make their CAP experince unenjoyable if they don't do their bit.

Same goes from the wing/group level.  They should be tasking units with specific goals...based on the wings OPLANS.  Unit X will have 10 qualified aircrew, they will have 5 AOBDs, 2 PSCs, 1 IC, 5 MROs......they WILL conduct and/or patricpate in 4 exercises per year.  They will report monthy on their readiness stats (i.e. how close they are getting to the ES goals).  There...that unit has specialised in ES flight ops.  The unit in the next town may have similar requirments but a Ground Ops focus.  Another squadron my be tasked with Comms functions. 

The same thing can happen on the CP side.  Squadron Y will have a cadet corps strenth of 30.  They will produce X number of WB, Y number of Mithcells, Z number of Earharts.

Squadron Z may have a AE focus....you will conduct a fly-a-teacher program....flying 10 sorties.  you will conduct X number external AE presentations per quarter.

All of this is predicated on whether wing has a any idea of what an OPLAN is and how to communicate that down to the squadron.  Which I don't see very much.

As it is now......A squadron does not have to do anything other than keep their paperwork in order.  No ES, no CP, no AE....they really can be a club.

Your heart burn with the "menu shopping" squadrons is directed at the wrong people.  It is not the Homer J. Simpson's Senior Squadrons fault that they have not Cadet Program....no one told them they had to.
Same story for the Fred Rodgers Cadet Squadron who does not do ES.  No one told them they had to.

[Eclipse]

Like a gig line, those things should be self-evident.

[lordmonar]

Like a gig line, those things should be self-evident.

No they are not.

Not all squadrons have the man power to do all three missions.

[Eclipse]

Not all squadrons have the man power to do all three missions.

Thank you!  I see we agree.

Then they need to get the manpower.

[lordmonar]

Not all squadrons have the man power to do all three missions.

Thank you!  I see we agree.

Then they need to get the manpower.

No....they don't....that's my point.

[Private Investigator]

Like a gig line, those things should be self-evident.

No they are not.

Not all squadrons have the man power to do all three missions.

If they are a Composite SQ they should. A Senior SQ should provide O-rides to Cadets. A Cadet SQ should have at least a working knowledge or at least knowledge of the ES and/or SAR side too.

AE from my experiences is really weak in 90% of the Units I have visited.

[bflynn]

some CC's see the mission as a menu, not a mandate, and without command imperative, nothing will change.

....

How do you specialize when you can't force anyone to do anything except what they want, and you are not offering multiple units in each members proximity?

Ok, I'm confused again by what you're trying to say - do you think Squadron Commanders pick the missions or do individual members choose what they want to do?

As I see it, individuals choose what they're interested in...for example, I have a strong interest in the service aspects of aviation based Emergency Services, but not so much on Aerospace Education or Cadet programs.

If others in my squadron have similar interests, is that because the individuals are choosing to specialize in ES or because our commander is picking and choosing what the squadron will do?

[RiverAux]

It seems to me that the purpose of the cadet squadron is quite simple -- implement the cadet program (which includes a lot of AE).  The purpose of the senior squadron isn't quite as obvious (since we don't really have a senior program), but the "default" setting of a senior squadron is to do ES. 

It is really in the composite squadron that you seem to get the wild variation in squadron focus.  You get some composite squadrons that are really cadet or really senior squadrons in everything but name.  Then you have others which are actually fairly balanced and do everything.

[jimmydeanno]

Commander's don't get to pick the mission, they are responsible for them by virtue of being commanders in CAP.

Locally, it is most important for units to not be specialized, unless there is an abundance of units within a close proximity to each other.  Our job is to provide the three mission of CAP to our communities.  Our individual members may like certain missions better, but our commanders don't have that choice, it is their job to ensure that our missions are being met.

I have a senior program despite having a senior squadron 5 minutes down the road.  We conduct ES training, we reach out and do AE with the local community, and we have a cadet program as well.  As the unit commander, it is my responsibility to ensure that we offer those missions, despite what my personal preferences are.

[lordmonar]

I agree in theory.

But......where is the guidance for that?

Where does it say YOU MUST have an ES program?
Where does it say YOU MUST have a CP program?
Where does it say YOU MUST have an AE program?

The Senior Program exists solely to train and prepare your officers to do your missions....but what missions?

Now...I understand...and agree with the concept that the mandate is there in the spirit of our regulations.  But that is a far cry from accusing those units that don't have a CP or don't have an ES and all of us that put AE on the back burner.....are some how failing or are just being lazy.

That is my point.

You can be like me,  I recognise that CAP is not really meeting the spirit of the organisation.  That wings and groups should be actively working with the units to get all three missions done.

There need to be real OPLANS....with real tasking to the units in how they are supposed to be trained, equiped and manned to meet those OPLAN requirments.
There needs to be real community assessments on CP needs/pentration to task units with specific CP goals....i.e. number of cadets, and clear progression goals.
AE needs to be moved off the back burner and real goals set for units and follow up to meeting those goals.

How those goals are met.....from a wing perspective....should be up to the wing and to the situation.
If a community can support more then one unit.....then there is no reason why we can't have a ES squadron and a CP squadron.....and an AE squadron.
If the community does not have a lot of population AND IT MAKES sense to consolidate the taskings into one unit...then we should.

But with out this guidance.....a squadron is simply 15 people who have paid thier dues.  No one has ever told me what my squadron's mission should be.  No one has ever told me how many GTM I need to have trained and equiped.  No one has ever tasked my squadron to train MROs, or any other specialty.  No one has ever told me how many cadets I should have.  How many of them are expected to get thier Wright Brothers, Mitchell or Earhart each year.  The Quality Unit program went a long way is giving us some idea of what NHQ wants....but not real tasking numbers.

That is all that I am saying......My unit does all three missions....because we beleive we are supposed to......but I don't say the senior squadron down the road is failing because they don't have a cadet program.  Nor is the other cadet squadron down the road who does not have any ES program failing.  They are simply focusing their attentions on one aspect of CAP's big picture mission.

If the units are not meetings CAP's or more specfically Wing's expectations.....it is incumbant on WING to make those expectations know and to support the units in acheiving them.

[abdsp51]

Let's not forget as well there are some units due to their location can not have an ES program.

[jimmydeanno]

Let's not forget as well there are some units due to their location can not have an ES program.

Any unit can have an ES program, it just depends on what your definition is.  Sure, there are locales that prohibit CAP from participating in SAR, but that doesn't mean that they can't do something else.

The Red Cross offers training in shelter management and disaster relief.  HLS offers CERT training, etc.  In fact, I think that CERT is probably a more useful skillset for our membership with the decline in SAR missions and increase in DR stuff, at least here locally.  Emergency Services is a broad scope, it just takes some focus to figure out what your local community needs or wants.

[jeders]

I believe he meant the overseas units which are strictly forbidden from doing ES.

[abdsp51]

I believe he meant the overseas units which are strictly forbidden from doing ES.

Yup

[Extremepredjudice]

That is like 3 units... Not a lot in the grand schema.

[SarDragon]

I believe he meant the overseas units which are strictly forbidden from doing ES.

Well, Pat and I were both in the same OS unit, at different times, and while I was there, we did as much of the GT training as we could get away with in our AOR. The curriculum was significantly different back then, but to carry it into today's training, we did about half of the GTM3 tasks, and most of the GTM2 tasks. Anything to do with radios and airplanes was not done.

Our trainer was an AF Security Forces guy with significant Scout experience, and we had a blast. We did summer and winter camp outs, and whatever else we could cook up that fit into the existing curriculum. No one got any certifications, but there was good training, and a lot of fun.

Something else we did was act as victims for AF exercises, with the moulage kits. The cadets loved that.

[abdsp51]

That is like 3 units... Not a lot in the grand schema.

Numbers are not the point.  Due to certain legalities some units can not have an ES mission and focus more on the other two. 

[ol'fido]

When I hear someone say that all units should do all the missions, I get a picture in my mind of that guy on the variety shows trying to keep 20 plates spinning on top of 20 poles. He's running from one to another as they start to wobble and threaten to fall. OTOH, when someone says that a unit should focus on just one thing, I remember how I joined to do one thing(fly) and ended up embracing and enjoying the GT aspect of the ES mission.

I think that units that have enough members who have diverse interests will find a way to accomplish all three of our core missions. One may get more attention than another at times but if it's done right all members will get to do the activities that they enjoy. Unit's tend to "specialize" or not depending on tradition, intra-unit dynamics, and the interests of the individual members. I don't think that a wing or group OPLAN is going to change that. You can't tell a unit whose members are committed to the ES mission that they are now the AE unit because "we've" decided that that's what you will be. "But we're focused on ES?" "Too bad. Unit XX down the road is the ES unit for your area." If you do that, the members of that unit that are in the program for ES will either go down the road to Unit XX or hit the door.

It's situations like this, I believe, that are exemplars of why you can't write regs to the point of micromanagement. Units in CAP are just too diverse in makeup and personality. And yes, units do have personality. To try and make a unit a cookie cutter copy of the one down the road takes something away from the program that makes it special to a lot of people.