November 2012 CSAG Meeting Draft Agenda

[AirDX]

I'm surprised I haven't seen more discussion of of the draft agenda for the November CSAG meeting, especially considering the CAP Talk hot button issues that are in it.  The Agenda is here:

http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/CSAG_2012_11_Agenda_5444F58D94A96.pdf

It includes revamping the grade progression criteria in CAP (and references the soon to be approved NCO Corps in that item), and unit commander term limits.  I'm interested to see what the collective mind thinks of the grade progression proposal in particular.

I think it's a good idea, but needs some tweaking, particularly since it does not address the mission-related skill grade assignments.  If we tighten up the one, we need to tighten up all. 

[jimmydeanno]

I suppose that it's interesting that the guy that's recommending that non-priors should take longer to promote is a non-prior himself who, IIRC, skipped a few CAP grades as well.  Who also hadn't completed Level V before assuming command of MEWG, but wants people to have it to be a Lt Col.

I also hope that any agenda item pertaining to the standing up of an NCO corps doesn't go forward.  Our current structure works fine, and it is just adding something that doesn't have a defined need or direct benefit to the organization.

[RiverAux]

Gee, you would think that CAP would want to be setting a good example for the general public by keeping a small first aid kit and fire extinguishers in our ground vehicles (item 3 & 4).   Since we're not a service station maybe we should get rid of the spare tires also. 

item 6 - unit commander term limits.  States that the average unit commander term is 10-13 years.  How can anyone think that is a good idea?  I like the idea of a three year term with an optional 4th year.  Maybe a tad longer than I would like, but good enough. 

Item 7 -- drastic revision of CAP officer promotion criteria -- making all non-prior service seniors start as flight officers.  I agree that the initial promotions are too easy to get, but I don't see this proposal making a big difference.  We already have a rank structure that is just as pyramid shaped as the real military. 

[Garibaldi]

Gee, you would think that CAP would want to be setting a good example for the general public by keeping a small first aid kit and fire extinguishers in our ground vehicles (item 3 & 4).   Since we're not a service station maybe we should get rid of the spare tires also. 

item 6 - unit commander term limits.  States that the average unit commander term is 10-13 years.  How can anyone think that is a good idea?  I like the idea of a three year term with an optional 4th year.  Maybe a tad longer than I would like, but good enough. 

Item 7 -- drastic revision of CAP officer promotion criteria -- making all non-prior service seniors start as flight officers.  I agree that the initial promotions are too easy to get, but I don't see this proposal making a big difference.  We already have a rank structure that is just as pyramid shaped as the real military.

I can see where there would be trouble with having a unit CC for more than 5 years in command. Things stagnate, ideas don't happen, etc etc etc. Too easy to keep the OBN (old boy network) going, you know?

I have issues with our rank/grade structure but I can't articulate it well enough to make a cogent argument. It mainly has to do with age and professional/life experience.

As far as the fire extinguisher/first aid kits go, I have a feeling it's gonna be one of those things where we get rid of them because we don't need them, then need them, and a new reg will be issued mandating their use. I don't know. As far as I know, we aren't authorized to change a tire on a CAP van, either. I could be wrong.

[Private Investigator]

Item #6. The good old boys will not like term limits. Being in a Wing that has already imposed term limits what happens is you get the classic CAP couple. He has termed out so he puts his wife in as CC and he is the CD. Or you get the career Deputy Commander and he puts a puppet in as Squadron Commander.

Item #7. Now you have to get the GRW for Lt Col? That is a bit much. What I would do is increase the T-I-G. Basically you pushing the possibility of making Lt Col in 10 years to 12 years (not including the special pronotions) I am thinking time in service should be for Lt Col 20 years, Major 15 yrs and Captain 10 years. Of course special skills and Group and Squadron Commanders should be promoted according to their assignments.

[SarDragon]

Item #6. The good old boys will not like term limits. Being in a Wing that has already imposed term limits what happens is you get the classic CAP couple. He has termed out so he puts his wife in as CC and he is the CD. Or you get the career Deputy Commander and he puts a puppet in as Squadron Commander.

Item #7. Now you have to get the GRW for Lt Col? That is a bit much. What I would do is increase the T-I-G. Basically you pushing the possibility of making Lt Col in 10 years to 12 years (not including the special pronotions) I am thinking time in service should be for Lt Col 20 years, Major 15 yrs and Captain 10 years. Of course special skills and Group and Squadron Commanders should be promoted according to their assignments.

That would make the CAP TIG numbers higher than AD AF.

[NIN]

So, wait, 27 months to become a 2nd Lt from walking in off the street.

I'm all for raising the level of training and standards, but that just seems a little ... excessive.

[RiverAux]

The funny thing is that they somehow assume that increasing the time-in-grade for non-prior service members will somehow imbue them with more military knowledge and abilities that they wouldn't get if we put butter bars on them in 6 months. 

I'm just not sure what they see as the problem. 

If the problem is new CAP members not acting military enough due to a lack of knowledge, increase the training requirements so that they have the knowledge they need.

[JeffDG]

The funny thing is that they somehow assume that increasing the time-in-grade for non-prior service members will somehow imbue them with more military knowledge and abilities that they wouldn't get if we put butter bars on them in 6 months. 

I'm just not sure what they see as the problem. 

If the problem is new CAP members not acting military enough due to a lack of knowledge, increase the training requirements so that they have the knowledge they need.

And if the problem is people simply being promoted for showing up, then make maximum grade dependent upon duty assignment.

Region/CC. Region/CV, Wing/CC-Col
Region Sr. Staff (DCS/Director of)/Wing/CV/Wing/CS-Lt. Col
Jr. Region Staff/Sr. Wing Staff (Director of), Group/CC - Major
Jr. Wing Staff/Sr. Group Staff/Group/CD/Squadron/CC - Capt
Jr. Group Staff/Sr. Squadron Staff - 1st Lt
Jr. Squadron Staff - 2nd Lt.

Grade is temporary for x amount of time, then can be made permanent. 

Grade would then denote level of responsibility within the organization.  Want to be the Asst. Squadron Admin Officer and Chief Donut Purchaser, that's fantastic.  But the Squadron DCC is going to outrank you!

[jimmydeanno]

I have issues with our rank/grade structure but I can't articulate it well enough to make a cogent argument. It mainly has to do with age and professional/life experience.

If that's all there is, then there really isn't an issue on the age portion.  The average age of our SMs is well over 50.  Most active duty folks hit Lt Col well before that point.  If you are arguing against the 29 year old Lt Col, I can't say that I've ever met any that I'm disappointed in.  If it's the 25 year old Captains, then we are on par with AD folks again.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I thought there were already limits on squadron CC's term of service.  Maybe it's a Wing thing?

I wouldn't be against the Flight Officer grades for new NPS members, but rename them Warrant Officers and give them the choice to progress in a speciality track from W1 to CWO5 if they don't want to be in a command position.  Yes, yes, I know the AF doesn't have WO's, but they don't have FO's either!  Also, it would have to be determined just how much service is "prior service."  Would it mean a full term of enlistment?  What about a member who has been given a medical discharge through no fault of their own?  Or someone who didn't make it through basic and got an ELS for failure to adapt?

27 months to 2nd Lt is a bit excessive.  I think the NSCC has a good idea as to how they do theirs, which we could use as a model:

http://resources.seacadets.org/nscc_regulations/nsccregs7.html

Letter of justification?  I already had to provide one of those.

The "non-renewal" bit could really be open to abuse.  Commander doesn't like you, s/he non-renews you for "failure to meet core values."

I'm one of the few who doesn't see anything wrong with an NCO corps.  We used to have them, but it's silly to start considering them "NCO's" at E-4, given that the AF is the only service that doesn't consider an E-4 (SrA) an NCO, except for the Army Specialist, which is a misnomer anyway.  If the USAF still had buck sergeants that would be another issue.  Perhaps a way to serve for those who, for whatever reason, haven't got a high school diploma?  Start them at E-1 and let them progress from there.

But please, and I know I'm in the vast minority here, get rid of the "Senior Member" and "Senior Member Without Grade" designations.  There are several things they can be replaced with ("Airman" in the enlisted side if that is adopted, and "Officer Cadet" on the officer side).

[NIN]

Call 'em "officer candidates" and give them a year. A "Level 1"-like training at the outset, some lessons in the middle, and an SLS type weekend at the end prior to 2Lt.

I swear, I got RSC as a Major and there was stuff in that course that I could have well used before I was a Captain.

[Garibaldi]

I have issues with our rank/grade structure but I can't articulate it well enough to make a cogent argument. It mainly has to do with age and professional/life experience.

If that's all there is, then there really isn't an issue on the age portion.  The average age of our SMs is well over 50.  Most active duty folks hit Lt Col well before that point.  If you are arguing against the 29 year old Lt Col, I can't say that I've ever met any that I'm disappointed in.  If it's the 25 year old Captains, then we are on par with AD folks again.

No, mainly it's something personal I guess. Although I've never served in the military, I guess I've always been rankled by 21 year old captains "in charge" of 50 year old 2nd Lts. I understand that we're a volunteer organization, and we come from all ages and all walks of life, but I guess it's just that I've been accustomed to seeing an age progression with grade. I don't know if that makes sense. I've never really met a CAP officer who can't back up his grade with experience, either in CAP or military life or personal experience.

We had a new senior member about 10 years ago who came to us as a former Navy commander, airline pilot for a Saudi prince, and umpteen thousands of hours of PIC time. He insisted on starting at 2LT instead of being jumped to the CAP equivalent. That changed, against his will, when he became squadron commander. We still call him Commander. Never met a more humble man in my life.

I guess when I look at it, the grade really doesn't mean much, it's just a progression scale. I've known people who clamor for their next promotion as soon as they are able, without really doing much more than they absolutely have to, and others who just don't give a hoot if they stay at 2LT for the rest of their career, but choose to do every thing they can to help the program along.

[NIN]

Well, rank among senior members is like... well, I got my butt in a crack last time I said that.

[RiverAux]

In regards to senior member promotions, I do like having the Officer Basic Course be the pre-requisite to becoming a 2nd Lt. and having later promotions match levels 2-5.  However, that could be done without coming up with an entire flight officer course.  Just keep them as senior members until they finish level 1 and OBC with maybe a minimum of a year TIG as a SMWOG. 

As we've talked about many times there is no incentive for seniors to complete level 5 now.  Would many do level 5 just to become a lt col?  Probably not a lot, but probably a lot more than finish level 5 now. 

One odd thing -- they're proposing requiring a letter of justification for field grade promotions --- but have Captain listed as a field grade.  I've always heard that it is Majors and above that are considered "field" grade. 

[jimmydeanno]

In regards to senior member promotions, I do like having the Officer Basic Course be the pre-requisite to becoming a 2nd Lt. and having later promotions match levels 2-5.  However, that could be done without coming up with an entire flight officer course.  Just keep them as senior members until they finish level 1 and OBC with maybe a minimum of a year TIG as a SMWOG. 

As we've talked about many times there is no incentive for seniors to complete level 5 now.  Would many do level 5 just to become a lt col?  Probably not a lot, but probably a lot more than finish level 5 now. 

One odd thing -- they're proposing requiring a letter of justification for field grade promotions --- but have Captain listed as a field grade.  I've always heard that it is Majors and above that are considered "field" grade.

Captains are Company Grade Officers (2d Lt, 1st Lt, Capt).  The Field Grade Officers are the ones that get the nifty little stripe at the end of their epaulet sleeve (Maj, Lt Col, Col).  General Officers are the ones that have a nifty stripe at each end of their epaulet sleeve (Brig Gen, Maj Gen, Lt Gen, Gen).

[coudano]

There are a lot of units where the same guy commands for 10+ years because there is nobody else around willing to take the job.

What are you going to do to those units, when you throw out the one guy willing to do the job at the end of 4 years?

[jimmydeanno]

I can understand the sentiment behind the "what if nobody else will do it" scenario, but I think that signifies larger issues than people not taking command.  If a unit gets to that point, where there is nobody to fill the commander's spot, then the current commander has not effectively run the unit.  Sure, they can squadron of merit and wing cadet competitions, etc. but all that is created is an organization that is dependent on a single person to succeed.  To me, that is a failure of command.

A commander needs to be concerned with continuity and progress.  Progress is not having the same commander for 10 years.  A unit should be active in recruiting, the commander needs to be active in building their seniors, creating a network of people who can not only assist the unit in reaching its goals, but also joining the organization.  It really is something that needs to be on their mind from day 1.

Honestly, all the units that I've been a member of that had commanders that had been such for more than 3 years were stagnant and on the brink of closure anyway.

[coudano]

I can understand the sentiment behind the "what if nobody else will do it" scenario, but I think that signifies larger issues than people not taking command.  If a unit gets to that point, where there is nobody to fill the commander's spot, then the current commander has not effectively run the unit.  Sure, they can squadron of merit and wing cadet competitions, etc. but all that is created is an organization that is dependent on a single person to succeed.  To me, that is a failure of command.

A commander needs to be concerned with continuity and progress.  Progress is not having the same commander for 10 years.  A unit should be active in recruiting, the commander needs to be active in building their seniors, creating a network of people who can not only assist the unit in reaching its goals, but also joining the organization.  It really is something that needs to be on their mind from day 1.

I agree with you, however having nobody in the commander's chair,
or someone who is wholly unqualified and uninterested in doing the job is also going to lead to a failure of command.

[Майор Хаткевич]

That's the commander's failure for not training his replacement...