AF View Of CAP Senior Members

[lordmonar]

BTW I have absolutely NO issue with physically challenged personnel joining Civil Air Patrol as senior members.  There are many people I know that have challenges and in the right position in CAP emergency services can perform outstandingly.    HOWEVER, I'm still of the opinion that on the aptitude/skills/memory, and stability side, there can be some significant challenges with the effective utilization (especially in emergency services) adult members.   I personally would like to see job descriptions for both regular & ES positions that outline both physical & mental requirements.
RM         

And you're looking at CAP facing lawsuits out the wazoo should something like that ever be implemented.

Who would make those evaluations?  Who would write those "job descriptions?"

Also, again, your focus is just ES, ES, ES.

Well let me correct that I mean ANY senior member position in Civil Air Patrol should have a description that addresses physical & mental requirements.   As far as who writes these job descriptions, likely there's professional human resources personnel who are volunteers in CAP and are well schooled on meeting ADA requirements.   BTW, I do believe that we need to be all inclusive as much as we can, but also as an organization have a consistent approach.   As you said about lawsuits, those happen when you don't have a consistent policy, and not having good volunteer job descriptions covering physical/mental requirements, actually puts the organization (as well as the individual saying "no") more at risk in my opinion.
RM   

So basically you have a sort of a solution.....looking for a problem. 

"We should have physical and mental standards.  I don't know what they should be....but someone out there in CAP land is proabably a HR professional and they could do it for me for free!"

Dude.......Let me tell you as someone who hired and fired people as part of my job.   No HR type would touch this job with a 10 foot pole!
If you can think of a job in CAP that needs physical or mental standards....by all means  trot it out.

We alread have some out there.....but I don't think you are really thinking this thing through.....so I'll help you out.

MPs and TPs both have a physical requirement.
All CAP officers have an educational requirment....which I think passes for your mental requirment.

[abdsp51]

And the USAF uses PULHESS not MPPSS.  There are standards in place for a lot of this, lets not reinvent the wheel.  And you talking about having members certified for all this and expect them to foot the bill?  Outside of those requiring something outside of the organization (IE pilots, etc.)  I don't see members wanting to foot the bill for it.  If the organization were to set such a thing then they can foot the bill for an experienced, and licensed experts to certify the individual and guess what that is not cheap.  This would be a surefire way to alienate people. 

[flyboy53]

This whole conversation is one big red flag.

Lets all not forget that the intent of this organization, from the beginning, was to be an outlet for those individuals to serve their country who otherwise were not qualified for military service. I have known several individuals who fall into these categories over the years, including a cadet who was blind, and they frankly amazed me with their determination.

Never forget that physical and mental standards apply to the military side of the Air Force due to the missions they perform. It has no bearing on the civil service or DAFC side of the service, other than job classification, and, frankly, I don't see the Air Force EVER coming back on the CAP and saying anything that would hint at discrimination.

I welcome disabled individuals who want to serve their country in our uniform. They, themselves, understand the limitations of their disabilities and usually serve in an appropriate capacity. At the same time, if someone wants to be challenged and enter into those areas requiring higher physical standards, then so be it as long as he or she isn't a safety hazard to the rest of their team.

If someone doesn't cut it academically, most of them never get beyond second or first lieutenant. BUT, I've also seen those individuals who met the challenge.

I welcome them either way.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Nicely said.

Again, I think RM has a view coloured so much by ES that he doesn't see much besides that in CAP; if someone isn't "fit" to do ES (in his opinion), there needs to be a screening process to keep them out of ES.

I think most CAP members have a self-screening process (consciously or unconsciously) that they know their limitations and aren't going to push the envelope.

There are things in CAP that I don't think are suited to me, or me to them.  I am profoundly introverted.  That would make it a very bad idea for me and CAP for me to be in a Public Affairs position.

I knew a CAP colleague who was nearly blind.  He wouldn't have been good for a Scanner or Observer position and he knew it...but he did well otherwise.

[abdsp51]

I am an equal opportunist.  I believe that everyone and anyone should have the opportunity to do what they want to do.  If they succeed let them continue if they fail then the attempt was made.  Now all of this is within the scope of the regulations, laws etc.   I do not think that we need additional guidelines especially ones that can have a increased fiscal impact on membership.