November 2012 CSAG Meeting Draft Agenda

[SamFranklin]

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.

There's truth in what you're saying, but I think you're taking too firm a stand here and not recognizing the human side of the leadership equation.

Sometimes you identify and begin mentoring your successor, only to have "life" get in the way of that successor's plans. That new guy has to leave and so the existing CC can't step aside. (Cf: "It's a Wonderful Life" when George Bailey can't go to college because his brother-successor is at war.)

When people are paid salaries (for-profit, government, non-profit, whatever), the problem of recruiting a replacement is reasonably easy to solve in a liquid labor market. Just put an ad in the paper and "buy" your solution. In volunteer settings like ours, that's not the case. Leadership is much, much harder in our setting. We don't give ourselves enough credit for that, but that's another story.

In recognition of these dynamics, I would not choose to point my finger at any commander for his not finding a successor.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

The Field Grade Officers are the ones that get the nifty little stripe at the end of their epaulet sleeve (Maj, Lt Col, Col).

Which has sometimes caused some headscratching on my part about how the Army does it...all commissioned and warrant officers have that nifty little stripe.





Note also that the Army Lt. Gen. doesn't get a second nifty little stripe.

Also, once you cross that field grade threshold, you get scrambled eggs/farts and darts...except in the Navy/CG, which make you wait until O-5.

[jimmydeanno]

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.

From the opposite side of that, it drives me crazy when people assume that they should be in a position over somebody else simply because of their age or their perceived life experience.  In the military, you won't find a 50 year old 2d Lt.  The promotion structure, TIG requirements, etc., will dictate that people of the same grade will be generally the same age, and have roughly the same experiences. 

I've seen the 22 year old Captain run circles around the 60 year old Lt Col in terms of unit success.  I've also seen a few younger guys fail to make the transition from being a cadet.  I think that in the last few years, at least in the circles that I've been in, I've seen a slight shift in the idea of what the grade actually means.  Instead of people just promoting and staying put, they've actively tried to move up, etc. 

All I know is that despite what our grade structure is, the majority of our members are hard working individuals who want to see our program succeed. 

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

^^Following JimmyDeanno's note about age/life experience...

I had a supervisor who was a "mustang" with Vietnam combat service.

He went as far as MSgt, got a commission and retired as a Captain.

I don't know how old he was when he got his commission, but he was probably 15 years older minimum than other 2nd Lts out of OTS.  He told me he got some weird looks being a 2nd Lt with greying hair and a massive ribbon rack.

[Майор Хаткевич]

^ +1.

I have my lvl2 complete, and have about 1 1/2 months to go in TIG for minimum time to Captain, but it's really not a big deal. I want to knock out the requirements because things like SLS, CLC, TLC, etc are beneficial to my CAP education. Nothing is cooler than the LtCol who was in my SLS class (military equivalent grade appointment) because he wants to learn the CAP program and not just rock around as a LtCol from day one and forever.

On the other hand, outside of the special appointments, the grade should also reflect the fact that I HAVE done the things that are needed, and in theory, would have more CAP knowledge than a new member (Not that a SMWOG can't get all those things done before any grade appointments).

Grade is nice and all, but lets face it, if I get my Captain bars, that just makes me one of the dozen or so plus in my unit. Same thing with being a Lt or a Major.

Right now what the grade in CAP on the SM tells me is that someone has been in the program for atleast X years based on grade Y. Nothing beyond that.

[Eclipse]

AGENDA ITEM – 3 LG Action SUBJECT:  First Aid Kits – Change from required to optional.

AGENDA ITEM – 4 LG Action SUBJECT:  Removal of Fire Extinguishers from Ground Vehicles.

AGENDA ITEM – 5 SE Action SUBJECT:  Cadets Seeking Orientation Flights Requirement to take Aircraft Ground Handling Course

AGENDA ITEM – 6 DP Action SUBJECT:  Unit Commander Term Limits

AGENDA ITEM – 7 DP Action SUBJECT:  Revision of Promotion Requirements

AGENDA ITEM – 8 DP Action SUBJECT:  Award Consolidation

AGENDA ITEM – 9 DP Action SUBJECT:  Cadet Safety Officer of the Year

AGENDA ITEM – 10 COO Action SUBJECT:  BoG Member-At-Large Selection

AGENDA ITEM – 11 HC Action SUBJECT:  Revision of CAPR 265-1 (Inactive Chaplains)

B.  August 2012 National Board Agenda Item 12 Booster Clubs

C.  August 2012 National Board Agenda Item 14 Flight of Non-Member Spouses in Corporate Aircraft

D.  August 2012 National Board Agenda Item 15 Information Technology (IT) Mission Qualification

E.  August 2012 National Board Agenda Item 19 Non-Renewal of CAP Members

[Eclipse]

AGENDA ITEM – 3 LG Action SUBJECT:  First Aid Kits – Change from required to optional.

AGENDA ITEM – 4 LG Action SUBJECT:  Removal of Fire Extinguishers from Ground Vehicles.

No opinion.

AGENDA ITEM – 5 SE Action SUBJECT:  Cadets Seeking Orientation Flights Requirement to take Aircraft Ground Handling Course

Non-concur.  This will become another gateway that blocks cadets from flying O-rides.   

AGENDA ITEM – 6 DP Action SUBJECT:  Unit Commander Term Limits

STRONGLY CONCUR. My wing has enforced this for nearly ten years, yet the sky has not fallen.  3 years no more than 4, I would add a minimum
1-calendar year before being allowed to come back as a commander at the same unit, and perhaps language to negate the family-based trading.

AGENDA ITEM – 7 DP Action SUBJECT:  Revision of Promotion Requirements

STRONGLY CONCUR.  I would further add that all existing Lt Cols be required to "level-up" within say, 3-5 years or be demoted to Major.
The caveat being that NSC could not handle the volume, so that class would have to be increased. 

Lt Cols are supposed to be prepared and able to serve as staff and command at the Wing or higher.  There is no shame in not being interested in doing that, but there should be recognition for those who go the extra mile in both training and effort.

AGENDA ITEM – 8 DP Action SUBJECT:  Award Consolidation

Concur.

AGENDA ITEM – 9 DP Action SUBJECT:  Cadet Safety Officer of the Year

Non-concur.  We should be eliminating the "OTYs" not adding to them.

AGENDA ITEM – 10 COO Action SUBJECT:  BoG Member-At-Large Selection

No opinion

AGENDA ITEM – 11 HC Action SUBJECT:  Revision of CAPR 265-1 (Inactive Chaplains)

Inactive chaplains should be dropped from the roles.  There is no value whatsoever to CAP
in maintaining members as chaplains who are not serving CAP in that role.

B.  August 2012 National Board Agenda Item 12 Booster Clubs

Concur, though I would just as soon simply eliminate them.

C.  August 2012 National Board Agenda Item 14 Flight of Non-Member Spouses in Corporate Aircraft

Non-Concur.  If you want to fly, join.  Further, CAP conferences (etc) are no vacation time, so
why are people dragging their spouses along, anyway?

D.  August 2012 National Board Agenda Item 15 Information Technology (IT) Mission Qualification

Concur / non-concur.  The need is there, but this is not likely to change who is actually turning the IT wrenchs
during a mission, rating or not.

E.  August 2012 National Board Agenda Item 19 Non-Renewal of CAP Members

Non-Concur.  The regs already allow for actions which will terminate members.  If someone is enough of a problem to
"non-renew", the CC should step up and terminate them formally.

[wuzafuzz]

During my initial CAP years I pursued various grades because I felt it gave me a little street cred within CAP.  Call it the "been there done that" factor.  Over time I realized even that isn't a reliable indicator of worth, whether the grade is CAP-grown or obtained in military service. 

Now I find the constant obsessing about grade and what other people think of it to be amusing.  An NCO corps will confuse matters even more.  There's nothing wrong with making CAP grade reasonably meaningful, but we don't need to go crazy with it.  CAP grade is never going to be the equivalent of military grade, we need to get over it. 

I wear a polo shirt most of the time; my oak leaves spend a lot of time impressing the other clothes in my closet.

[Eclipse]

During my initial CAP years I pursued various grades because I felt it gave me a little street cred within CAP.  Call it the "been there done that" factor.  Over time I realized even that isn't a reliable indicator of worth, whether the grade is CAP-grown or obtained in military service. 

Now I find the constant obsessing about grade and what other people think of it to be amusing.  An NCO corps will confuse matters even more.  There's nothing wrong with making CAP grade reasonably meaningful, but we don't need to go crazy with it.  CAP grade is never going to be the equivalent of military grade, we need to get over it. 

I wear a polo shirt most of the time; my oak leaves spend a lot of time impressing the other clothes in my closet.

+1, especially the bold.

[Private Investigator]

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?

How about the guy who gets in and then does not want to step down?

Would you be on my Staff or be my Deputy Commander if I was the Commander since 1981 and told you up front, "I am not stepping down, EVER." What would you do? Suck it up and be a good volunteer? Not judging, just asking ...

[Private Investigator]

I've seen the 22 year old Captain run circles around the 60 year old Lt Col in terms of unit success.  I've also seen a few younger guys fail to make the transition from being a cadet.  I think that in the last few years, at least in the circles that I've been in, I've seen a slight shift in the idea of what the grade actually means.  Instead of people just promoting and staying put, they've actively tried to move up, etc. 

All I know is that despite what our grade structure is, the majority of our members are hard working individuals who want to see our program succeed.

I look at people like the ocean, sometimes its up and sometimes down. Others run on auto-pilot. 1st meeting of month, get safety and AE done, 2nd meeting, OPS, etc, etc. They just come in do 1 1/2 hours and go home. Every now and then do a membership application for a new member. A procedure changes and eventually they ask when did that happen? I answer, "THREE YEARS AGO."

But I have seen 60 year old Lt Col just as sharp as a Cadet and 22 year old Captains who think they are high speed low drag because now that they been a Squadron Commander for three months and they changed from brown t-shirts and BDU caps to black t-shirts and black ball caps. "ooh, we accented in black, we are so bad ass like a PJ!" They think making changes puts them on the cutting edge, but I remember when they were a silly Cadet and now they are a silly Senior Member, IMHO.

98% of the people mean well but that 2% have their own agenda, i.e. Tony somebody, but you know who I mean.   

[JeffDG]

AGENDA ITEM – 3 LG Action SUBJECT:  First Aid Kits – Change from required to optional.

AGENDA ITEM – 4 LG Action SUBJECT:  Removal of Fire Extinguishers from Ground Vehicles.

Non-concur.  I don't see what problem they're trying to solve.  Both items are cheap insurance for almost no cost

AGENDA ITEM – 5 SE Action SUBJECT:  Cadets Seeking Orientation Flights Requirement to take Aircraft Ground Handling Course

No opinion

AGENDA ITEM – 6 DP Action SUBJECT:  Unit Commander Term Limits

Strongly non-concur.  Solution in desperate search of a problem.  Wing and Region commanders can implement this if they see a need in their AOR, see no reason to force it on areas where there is no identified need.

AGENDA ITEM – 7 DP Action SUBJECT:  Revision of Promotion Requirements

See prior comments on tying maximum grade to duty positions.

[RiverAux]

AGENDA ITEM – 6 DP Action SUBJECT:  Unit Commander Term Limits

Strongly non-concur.  Solution in desperate search of a problem.  Wing and Region commanders can implement this if they see a need in their AOR, see no reason to force it on areas where there is no identified need.

So, you're ok with Wing or Region Commanders implementing the same policy but not if its done at the national level?  Are you saying that there are wings or regions out there chock full of 15-year termed squadron commanders and other wings and regions that magically have regular command changeovers that happen naturally? 

Not sure how that makes sense.  If it makes sense for one wing or region it makes just as much sense nationally. 

[JeffDG]

AGENDA ITEM – 6 DP Action SUBJECT:  Unit Commander Term Limits

Strongly non-concur.  Solution in desperate search of a problem.  Wing and Region commanders can implement this if they see a need in their AOR, see no reason to force it on areas where there is no identified need.

So, you're ok with Wing or Region Commanders implementing the same policy but not if its done at the national level?  Are you saying that there are wings or regions out there chock full of 15-year termed squadron commanders and other wings and regions that magically have regular command changeovers that happen naturally? 

Not sure how that makes sense.  If it makes sense for one wing or region it makes just as much sense nationally.

Why do we have Region and Wing Commanders if you're going to mandate every single thing nationally?

Why not let them run their regions/wings as they deem appropriate, and let them choose the commanders they want to have.

[Cool Mace]

AGENDA ITEM – 6 DP Action SUBJECT:  Unit Commander Term Limits

Strongly non-concur.  Solution in desperate search of a problem.  Wing and Region commanders can implement this if they see a need in their AOR, see no reason to force it on areas where there is no identified need.

So, you're ok with Wing or Region Commanders implementing the same policy but not if its done at the national level?  Are you saying that there are wings or regions out there chock full of 15-year termed squadron commanders and other wings and regions that magically have regular command changeovers that happen naturally? 

Not sure how that makes sense.  If it makes sense for one wing or region it makes just as much sense nationally.

I see the point you're trying to make here. But you also have to look at some of the smaller wings, and smaller squadrons. Some just don't have the man power to do that. No matter how bad squadrons would love to have enough people for this to not be a problem, it is.

[JeffDG]

The idea of "it's good for one Wing, it should be good nationally" is a myth.

Why must people squash all originality and individual thinking and impose national solutions.

As an example:  Having mountain flying courses is an excellent idea in COWG, not so much in FLWG.  Similarly, if FLWG were to mandate Water Survival training because they have such a long coastline, should we mandate the same for AZWG?

Wing Commanders know, or by God should know, the circumstances within their commands, and they have the right today to relieve commanders who are not performing well.  Why do we need to tie their hands and say "Hey, this guy who's doing a helluva job, you have to replace him because he's been doing it for too long.  No matter that he has a great staff and has new ideas constantly being generated, get rid of him, it works in another wing, so you shall do it!"

[RogueLeader]

Not sure how that makes sense.  If it makes sense for one wing or region it makes just as much sense nationally.

It makes the same sense as only allowing the exact same uniforms nationally.  It doesn't.  Climates are different, so you need to allow for that and let the Commanders do their jobs.

You don't need heavy duty cold weather gear in FL or PR, but you do in the northern tier of the US.  Same for Unit Commanders, some places you can have term limits, other places squadrons WILL fold. 
I definitely see where there are problems, but let the Commanders do their job.

[Eclipse]

Some just don't have the man power to do that. No matter how bad squadrons would love to have enough people for this to not be a problem, it is.

Then its time to mandate growth - hammer real recruiting efforts until the "we don't have enough people" argument is no longer a factor.
In my time in CAP there's never been anything close to a legitimate national recruiting campaign, and most wings do literally nothing, ever.
The vast majority of recruiting is random coincidence coupled with the occasional 1/2-hearted table at an airshow, maybe once a year
for 30-40% of the units.

The rest just hope for new people and complain they can't get anything done because they are so short staffed.

A significant number of CAP's baseline issues, including those around legitimacy as an organization and response capabilities will never be solved until
we pay attention to recruiting at the same level that we do everything else, and that includes having coherent programs ready for the FNGs when they show up to the first meeting.

[JeffDG]

Then its time to mandate growth - hammer real recruiting efforts until the "we don't have enough people" argument is no longer a factor.

So, then in the spirit of One-Size-Fits-All, all squadrons should be required to grow by 50% next year.  Doesn't matter if they have a healthy number of members right now or not, a Mandate It Shall Be.

[Eclipse]

Why must people squash all originality and individual thinking and impose national solutions.

CC term limits are not the same as whether or not one wing needs mountain flying or winter coats.  And on the majority, there's a lot of stagnation
out there that has outlived multiple Wing CC's.

Some things simply need a reg to implement.  Do you think anyone would involve themselves in the root-canal of an SUI or CI if it wasn't required?
Etc., etc.

Anyone in a CAP volunteer job for 5+ years N-E-1 is stagnating, and stifling the progression of others as well.