Tips for a large transfer

[tn485]

Please forgive me if this is in the wrong section, I thought this was the best fit.

First I'll give a little background:

I joined CAP as a cadet two years ago as a member of a large cadet squadron in Tennessee. There were roughly 7 active senior members, and about 30 active cadets.  There were about 40-45 people on the roster. Now fast forward to January 2013.  Our squadron is notified of a new rule requiring squadron commanders to step down after 4 years of service, effective immediately.  We were given until 1 March to be in compliance.  As luck would have it, our commander had just reached four years in mid January, which meant he would have to be replaced.  There were about six active senior members in addition to the commander, and two of them were willing to step up and fill the position.  Unfortunately, one was a chaplain and therefore not allowed to be commander, and the other was denied the position for various unknown reasons.  Back to the drawing board. 

Since it was obvious that no one from the squadron could become unit commander, our former commander, whom we all would have liked to keep, applied for command of another area squadron that had the position open.  Within a month he had been assigned as commander at the other squadron, which left the rest of us in an unusual situation.  What many cadets did not know, was that our meeting place was contingent upon the commander.  When the commander moves on, we have to find a new meeting place.  Great.  Now we have no commander and no meeting place, and we were already meeting in the middle of nowhere which left zero nearby alternatives.  After a couple weeks, TNWG did bring in a commander for our squadron, who located a meeting place for us in a large church about 15 miles away from the current meeting location.  What we find out now, is that most of the members were driving from the opposite direction (myself included) and simply refused to drive any farther. 

That left the majority of us with three options:
1) Quit CAP altogether
2) Drive father to be under a commander that we barely knew
3) Transfer to a closer squadron, which our former commander was in charge of

About 75% of the cadets chose option 3.

So, now we find out that the squadron we chose to transfer to had only 19 members on the roster (about half were cadets) and average attendance was only about 6 people (cadets and senior members).  Imagine their surprise when 28 extra cadets showed up to this week's meeting! 

Now, where we are, is that when so many cadets and seniors transferred at once, their squadron grew by about six times immediately.  That's no big deal, they seemed happy to have us there, even though the meeting space is tight.  The ones of us that have just joined, however, find ourselves in a sort of awkward position.  We are afraid that it looks like we came in to take over, which is not at all what we want to do.  We want to join the squadron that was already established.  At our first meeting together, it was determined that the current staff (both cadet and senior) would remain in their current positions until they voluntarily stepped down.  We made it clear that we are all going to follow their rules, keep their traditions, and do as the staff wishes. 

Our question to you:

What can we do to make this big change as seamless as possible?  What should we be doing so that it doesn't look like we came in to take over, but rather to be a part of their existing squadron?  The last thing we want to do is run people off.

Thanks in advance for any advice you can give us!

[RogueLeader]

First, thank you for asking for help.

Second, you need to be in contact with your chain of command , and let your current squadron commander know that you are unhappy with the current situation, and that you are looking to transfer.

Third, let the gaining unit decide how they want to process any transfers- there are two options, one in E-Services, and two is filling out many CAPF2's.  (I recommend the first option.)

Fourth, realize that you could be killing off a unit by everybody leaving.

Fifth,  I STRONGLY suggest you give your new commander some time.  He might be better than the squadron commander you know.  You won't find out if you don't try.

[Eclipse]

I'd ask why the commander who clearly failed at the first squadron was allowed to assume command of another squadron. "Luck" had nothing to do with this.  The former Commander's
lack of the ability to read a calendar and do the requisite transition and contingency planning is the issue.  Further the term limits are not intended to be "Musical Commander Chairs".

The Chaplain could certainly step down as that role and assume command, happens all the time.  That was just a handy excuse to not do it.

And as to those who "voted with their feet" - the bell is tolling for all of them.

[tn485]

I appreciate your prompt response. 

I apologize, I should have been more clear as to where I am personally.

Second and Third are already done.  My transfer in eServices just went through this week.

Forth - I transferred out for two reasons.  The main reason and deciding factor was that I was already driving almost an hour each way to the meetings and am simply not willing to drive the extra distance.  I realize completely what could happen, but it's just not possible for many of us to remain members there. 

It was discussed between myself and several close friends (also cadets) at great lengths the consequences of us transferring out.  However, we eventually came to the conclusion that because of drive time and distance, we were left with the options of quit or transfer.  Staying with the current squadron was just not possible.

[tn485]

I'd ask why the commander who clearly failed at the first squadron was allowed to assume command of another squadron. "Luck" had nothing to do with this.  The former Commander's
lack of the ability to read a calendar and do the requisite transition and contingency planning is the issue.  Further the term limits are not intended to be "Musical Commander Chairs".

He did not "Clearly Fail".  Read my original post.

The squadron commander chartered that squadron four years ago.  It was the second largest cadet unit in the wing, and received the Quality Cadet Unit Award three years in a row.  The squadron kept growing, and member retention was excellent.  Does that sound like a failure to you?

[Luis R. Ramos]

Eclipse-

There appears to be a mandate that no squadron commander can stay more than 3 years as a commander.

The squadron in question had a commander that was in that position for 4 years. Whether he was successful or not was not relevant. He had to go. That is how he left one for the other...

Flyer

[Eclipse]

I'd ask why the commander who clearly failed at the first squadron was allowed to assume command of another squadron. "Luck" had nothing to do with this.  The former Commander's
lack of the ability to read a calendar and do the requisite transition and contingency planning is the issue.  Further the term limits are not intended to be "Musical Commander Chairs".

He did not "Clearly Fail".  Read my original post.

The squadron commander chartered that squadron four years ago.  It was the second largest cadet unit in the wing, and received the Quality Cadet Unit Award three years in a row.  The squadron kept growing, and member retention was excellent.  Does that sound like a failure to you?

Yes, he clearly did, as did higher headquarters.  He was clearly running it as a "one man show", and is now a textbook example of why
this is a bad idea.  Term limits or no, a priority for a commander should be continuity and contingency in the even he can no longer serve in that
role.  After 4 years he still had zero plan in the event he became ill, left CAP, got a new job (internally or externally), etc., etc.

And your Group and Wing should have been more aware of the significant risk of having the "largest cadet squadron" being one person away from closing.
Worse still is that the very meeting place of the unit was dependent on the benevolence of a single member. 

Because of these failures, there are now two units in turmoil, when the transition should have been a relatively simple matter.

Examples like these are the specific reason why term limits have been needed for a long time.

[arajca]

I presume you had a sit down with the new unit to explain the circumstances and what you are and are not planning to do.

Other than that, it appears you've done what you can until your actions demonstrate what you've said.

[Eclipse]

There appears to be a mandate that no squadron commander can stay more than 3 years as a commander.

It is national policy.

[tn485]

I'd ask why the commander who clearly failed at the first squadron was allowed to assume command of another squadron. "Luck" had nothing to do with this.  The former Commander's
lack of the ability to read a calendar and do the requisite transition and contingency planning is the issue.  Further the term limits are not intended to be "Musical Commander Chairs".

He did not "Clearly Fail".  Read my original post.

The squadron commander chartered that squadron four years ago.  It was the second largest cadet unit in the wing, and received the Quality Cadet Unit Award three years in a row.  The squadron kept growing, and member retention was excellent.  Does that sound like a failure to you?

Yes, he clearly did, as did higher headquarters.  He was clearly running it as a "one man show", and is now a textbook example of why
this is a bad idea.  Term limits or no, a priority for a commander should be continuity and contingency in the even he can no longer serve in that
role.  After 4 years he still had zero plan in the event he became ill, left CAP, got a new job (internally or externally), etc., etc.

And your Group and Wing should have been more aware of the significant risk of having the "largest cadet squadron" being one person away from closing.

Because of these failures, there are now two units in turmoil, when the transition should have been a relatively simple matter.

Examples like these are the specific reason why term limits have been needed for a long time.

You don't get it.  He had a huge amount of support from senior members, cadets, and cadet's parents.  The people that were willing to step up and fill the position were denied.  If you know everything (without having been here to see what our situation is like), maybe you should just come on out here and fix it yourself?

[Eclipse]

You don't get it.  He had a huge amount of support from senior members, cadets, and cadet's parents.  The people that were willing to step up and fill the position were denied.  If you know everything (without having been here to see what our situation is like), maybe you should just come on out here and fix it yourself?

Huge?

Two people, one of whom isn't technically able to take the job?  That's "huge"?   Where are the 30-60 parents whose cadets are benefiting from this program to
step up and support the unit when he left?

A better legacy of his support would have been that the unit continued to exist without him.  CAP is not supposed to be a cult of personality.

As to "fixing this", had I been in a position of influence or authority in the matter, it wouldn't have happened in the first place.

[tn485]

You don't get it.  He had a huge amount of support from senior members, cadets, and cadet's parents.  The people that were willing to step up and fill the position were denied.  If you know everything (without having been here to see what our situation is like), maybe you should just come on out here and fix it yourself?

As to "fixing this", had I been in a position of influence or authority in the matter, it wouldn't have happened in the first place.

I have no reason to believe that what you say is true, unless you care to come over here and prove that you could do a better job.  You've already lost credibility with me. You weren't here, you don't know everything that went on behind the scenes, and quite frankly it's none of your business.  Not to mention that you never answered my original question, but instead turned this into another "bash the commander" session.

[tn485]

You don't get it.  He had a huge amount of support from senior members, cadets, and cadet's parents.  The people that were willing to step up and fill the position were denied.  If you know everything (without having been here to see what our situation is like), maybe you should just come on out here and fix it yourself?

Huge?

Two people, one of whom isn't technically able to take the job?  That's "huge"?   Where are the 30-60 parents whose cadets are benefiting from this program to
step up and support the unit when he left?

A better legacy of his support would have been that the unit continued to exist without him.  CAP is not supposed to be a cult of personality.

As to "fixing this", had I been in a position of influence or authority in the matter, it wouldn't have happened in the first place.

Just because they aren't all members, doesn't mean that he's not supported. 

[Eclipse]

I have no reason to believe that what you say is true, unless you care to come over here and prove that you could do a better job.  You've already lost credibility with me. You weren't here, you don't know everything that went on behind the scenes, and quite frankly it's none of your business.

When you have a minute, look up "straw man argument".  As to it being "my business", you brought this here, and "behind the scenes" CAP politics are also basically irrelevant, because
this is a completely objective situation.  The Commander leaves, for whatever reason, and the unit either thrives or it doesn't.  What happened here?  How people "feel" about it won't make
any difference if there's no unit.

Just because they aren't all members, doesn't mean that he's not supported.

If they aren't members, their support is somewhat irrelevant, as you've clearly indicated, since the unit essentially collapsed thanks to the exodus of all those who "supported" him.

CAP is about more then one unit or the personal experience of individual members, and when people fail to see that, the entire organisation, especially at a given wing level,
is negatively impacted.  One of the reasons we have higher HQ's is that they are supposed to be "managing" these situations, not just reacting when they happen.

[tn485]

One of the reasons we have higher HQ's is that they are supposed to be "managing" these situations, not just reacting when they happen.

Higher HQs CAUSED this situation.  We'd still be growing our squadron if it weren't for MGen Carr.

[Eclipse]

One of the reasons we have higher HQ's is that they are supposed to be "managing" these situations, not just reacting when they happen.

Higher HQs CAUSED this situation.  We'd still be growing our squadron if it weren't for MGen Carr.

I agree, in that they ignored all the risk factors and allowed the situation to exist.  No unit, especially the "largest cadet unit in the wing" should be at
risk for closure because one person leaves. 

You will not likely accept this until you have the chance to be in a position of management or command yourself.

[Duke Dillio]

Cadet, you need to stand down your tone.  You have absolutely no idea where Eclipse is going not to mention the fact that you are directly disrespecting a senior CAP officer. 

The fact of the matter is that Eclipse and I and any number of given members on this board have seen this situation play out time and time again.  This change did not come from MGen Carr but in fact started as a movement within the ranks some 10 years ago.  There were too many squadron commanders who, as good or bad as they might have been, did not allow their members to advance.  They built a good ole boy network and so if you weren't in their inner circle, you had a hard time doing anything in CAP.  You need to realize that being a squadron commander is THE most important role anywhere in CAP.  What you do or fail to do has immediate consequences to the CAP in your area and to the program as a whole.

A good squadron commander is always grooming his replacement.  It isn't about people volunteering to take the job when he/she is gone.  It's about training your possible replacement(s) from the day they join or from the day that you take command.  Having only two options in this case was clearly a "Fail" as every member of that squadron should have been ready to assume command.  Granted, there are some people that you would not desire to be in that position but it doesn't mean that they shouldn't be trained to do so if necessary.

Try taking a moment to absorb the information that is being presented versus acting or speaking out of emotion.

[Pylon]

Higher HQs CAUSED this situation.  We'd still be growing our squadron if it weren't for MGen Carr.

You've missed Eclipse's well-formed point.   Maj Gen Carr did not "cause this situation." One main responsibility of a commander is to identify and cultivate his or her replacement, from day one of command.  A unit must be able to survive one or two people leaving, because people will leave.  What if, God forbid, this individual had been hit by the proverbial bus or moved out of state?   You'd be in the same situation (a situation which was clearly not planned for; a major command error).

A well run squadron is never a one-man show.  Any squadron which thrives, but only does so because of one or two individuals, is not stable or sustainable.  It's the very nature of humanity; people will eventually move on for one reason or another.   If a unit does not plan for that eventuality from day 1, then it is not a sustainable and stable unit.  The reason why he left is completely irrelevant.

[FlyTiger77]

Well, this is certainly interesting reading.

[Duke Dillio]

You know it's a bad day when your group commander, or one from the same wing at least, decides to show up in the process of you bashing unit commanders or national HQ.  Certainly it will not look good to be disrespecting senior CAP officers... I think your best bet at this point is to apologize for your attitude, adjust it as required, lick your wounds and move on to bigger and better things...

[a2capt]

Since it was obvious that no one from the squadron could become unit commander, our former commander, whom we all would have liked to keep, applied for command of another area squadron that had the position open.

As a side note, that's probably not the intention of the new directive (to you, all I've ever known are 3/4 year term limits), but I'm sure flop/flopping commanders is a stretch.

What many cadets did not know, was that our meeting place was contingent upon the commander.  When the commander moves on, we have to find a new meeting place.

Well, you know this now. Don't get suckered into following him to a new meeting location. As for the greater intent, that really shouldn't have been "allowed" in the first place, be it as it may, that was a ticking timebomb that no one, not even the commander knew when it might precisely go off. His job could have changed, a health issue taken him out, all kinds of things. The lease on the meeting space should have never been approved by Wing.

Now we have no commander and no meeting place, and we were already meeting in the middle of nowhere which left zero nearby alternatives.

For EXACTLY THIS SCENARIO.

After a couple weeks, TNWG did bring in a commander for our squadron, who located a meeting place for us in a large church about 15 miles away from the current meeting location.  What we find out now, is that most of the members were driving from the opposite direction (myself included) and simply refused to drive any farther.

Again, this is a life lesson. A CAP unit is an investment from all angles. The Wing, NHQ, the local members that run it. A bit later in the thread you say that this unit got Quality Cadet Program for the three years. That's a sign of a well functioning unit. But obviously it wasn't good enough, with the meeting location tied to the commander, look at the mess that caused.

We are afraid that it looks like we came in to take over, which is not at all what we want to do.

..and that is almost what you have done. Through no actual intention other than growing the unit, your group will influence this unit. The unit certainly will need more staff, possibly even three flights of cadets from all that, at least two. Where are these cadet staff people going to come from? The six that were there, already doing what they needed?

We want to join the squadron that was already established.

As I eluded to, it is no longer the same, and a new/same commander to some of you? From 6 to 40?

At our first meeting together, it was determined that the current staff (both cadet and senior) would remain in their current positions until they voluntarily stepped down.  We made it clear that we are all going to follow their rules, keep their traditions, and do as the staff wishes.

..and their rules, traditions, procedures, while I would hope were made to be flexible as the unit grew, will undoubtedly not always work with this kind of growth spurt. I say it again, like it or not, you all are involved. It is now all of you that are responsible for the continued growth of that unit.

If anything, the very first "battle" you may have is proving that the collective bunch of you won't just blow the coop if some other "favorable" change comes along. After all, there's a track record already established.

What can we do to make this big change as seamless as possible?  What should we be doing so that it doesn't look like we came in to take over, but rather to be a part of their existing squadron?  The last thing we want to do is run people off.

Seamless? If it's seamless, it's setup to fail. The very structure of that unit has changed significantly in a very short period of time. It sounds like you've already had a bit of a planning meeting, but like it or not, as I said previously, you all don't want to "intrude", but you must. You don't want to take over, but you need to form a stronger foundation for those leaders and staffers that are there now.

If there is anyone there that has held a particular job for a while and wants to change, give them first shot at something new, like if you're going to add a Cadet PAO, or CAC representative, now that there are many more to choose from, let them explore new options, and the newcomers fill in the ranks or expand into other areas that were not needed before, but surely are now.

This is how you won't run people off. By allowing them to take advantage of the "change" before anyone else does.

The first thing a Commander should do is realize they will need to be replaced someday. Keep an eye on for a replacement, and any "ties" should be exposed up front, always.

[RiverAux]

1st unit = 30 cadets, 7 seniors active
2nd unit = 6 active members
Both units close enough that members could fairly easily participate in either of them.

Seems like this situation was ripe for folding up one squadron into another no matter what was going on with the squadron commander. 

[tn485]

Thank you to a2capt for addressing every point I made in such a way that I can read and understand the whole picture.  And for answering my original question.

You know it's a bad day when your group commander, or one from the same wing at least, decides to show up in the process of you bashing unit commanders or national HQ. 

Not bashing unit, group, wing, or region commanders, and I haven't said anything here that I wouldn't like to discuss with Gen. Carr, should I ever have the chance to do so in the proper manner.

Thank you to the rest of you for all the input I have received.  I apologize to all of you (Eclipse in particular) for the tone that was taken earlier.

Lastly, I will add, I never asked for opinions on what the commander should have done, I am asking what should I do now.  Attending the old unit is no longer an option, because I flat out refuse to drive over an hour each way.

[Eclipse]

I apologize to all of you (Eclipse in particular) for the tone that was taken earlier.

Accepted but not necessary.

Lastly, I will add, I never asked for opinions on what the commander should have done, I am asking what should I do now.  Attending the old unit is no longer an option, because I flat out refuse to drive over an hour each way.

You did it happily for two years, but now "refuse"?

[tn485]

Lastly, I will add, I never asked for opinions on what the commander should have done, I am asking what should I do now.  Attending the old unit is no longer an option, because I flat out refuse to drive over an hour each way.

You did it happily for two years, but now "refuse"?

Sorry, I must have missed something.  I did it happily for two years, it was about a 50 minute drive.  When all this happened, the squadron meeting location was moved another 15 miles farther away.  It would take significantly longer to get there.

[Eclipse]

Well if the new unit is closer, then especially as a cadet, you should participate where best you can.

Just see this situation as it really is, with no filter, and be prepared if people at the former squadron get their noses out of joint.

As River said, it sounds like this is a situation where two units should have been combined a long time ago.  With that said,
anyone looking in from the outside would probably agree that instead of forcing new blood into the system, the term limits
were effectively circumvented by simply changing the charter number of the members and having them meet elsewhere.

[a2capt]

In Southern California, another 15 miles on the freeway can be a blip or death, depending on the time of day, and commuting trends. We actually get quite a bit of members from far away, that live closer to other units, at ours, partially because of our program, but also because we are "reverse" of the commute and it's easier to get to us in the evening hours.

OTOH, a rural located unit, or one that you must use surface streets to get to, can be a chore. When I visit Kansas City in the Summer, and I pick a unit to go to, I've driven longer because of the freeway, but it's quicker than the KC Metro area's massive wad of 35 MPH grid streets. Something I'm not used to, because quite the majority of even semi-major roads in the Southern California area are posted 45 to 55MPH. It's not hard to get around here, and it's not the typical grid due to terrain, so a lot of traffic is funneled onto less roads. Perhaps .. that's why.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Another 15 minutes? Why does this commander have a need for command? He could have stayed at the unit, mentored the new commander, kept the meeting place, and kept the biggest unit in the wing intact. Sounds quote selfish to me.

[tn485]

Well if the new unit is closer, then especially as a cadet, you should participate where best you can.

Just see this situation as it really is, with no filter, and be prepared if people at the former squadron get their noses out of joint.

Yes Sir!

Another 15 minutes? Why does this commander have a need for command? He could have stayed at the unit, mentored the new commander, kept the meeting place, and kept the biggest unit in the wing intact. Sounds quote selfish to me.

Not 15 Minutes, 15 Miles.

[a2capt]

Another 15 minutes? Why does this commander have a need for command? He could have stayed at the unit, mentored the new commander, kept the meeting place, and kept the biggest unit in the wing intact. Sounds quoite selfish to me.

Does the new language say "no moving to deputy" for a previous CC?

15 Miles can equate to 15 minutes if it's unobstructed freeway miles, and in some vehicles, another $4 each way in costs, as some eat that much more gas, etc. It adds up. Everything factors in.

[Eclipse]

Another 15 minutes? Why does this commander have a need for command? He could have stayed at the unit, mentored the new commander, kept the meeting place, and kept the biggest unit in the wing intact. Sounds quote selfish to me.

+1

[Eclipse]

Another 15 minutes? Why does this commander have a need for command? He could have stayed at the unit, mentored the new commander, kept the meeting place, and kept the biggest unit in the wing intact. Sounds quoite selfish to me.

Does the new language say "no moving to deputy" for a previous CC?

No, nor does it preclude someone from being a commander at that unit again, they simply cannot succeed themselves.

[Private Investigator]

You don't get it.  He had a huge amount of support from senior members, cadets, and cadet's parents.  The people that were willing to step up and fill the position were denied.  If you know everything (without having been here to see what our situation is like), maybe you should just come on out here and fix it yourself?

You don't get it. Do you know what happen at the New Orleans Squadron in 1955? Pear Falls Cadet Squadron in 1972? Mansfield (TX) Squadron in 1995? Petticoat Junction Composite SQ in 2001?

You want to reinvent the wheel? You think you are the only one in the country? Join the boy scouts or stick with little league because you are 98.44% wrong and if you pay attention in college one day you will know what being 98.44% wrong is   

[tn485]

You don't get it.  He had a huge amount of support from senior members, cadets, and cadet's parents.  The people that were willing to step up and fill the position were denied.  If you know everything (without having been here to see what our situation is like), maybe you should just come on out here and fix it yourself?

You don't get it. Do you know what happen at the New Orleans Squadron in 1955? Pear Falls Cadet Squadron in 1972? Mansfield (TX) Squadron in 1995? Petticoat Junction Composite SQ in 2001?

You want to reinvent the wheel? You think you are the only one in the country? Join the boy scouts or stick with little league because you are 98.44% wrong and if you pay attention in college one day you will know what being 98.44% wrong is   

Nope, I don't.  But I do know that 94.43% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

[lordmonar]

I'd ask why the commander who clearly failed at the first squadron was allowed to assume command of another squadron. "Luck" had nothing to do with this.  The former Commander's
lack of the ability to read a calendar and do the requisite transition and contingency planning is the issue.  Further the term limits are not intended to be "Musical Commander Chairs".

The Chaplain could certainly step down as that role and assume command, happens all the time.  That was just a handy excuse to not do it.

And as to those who "voted with their feet" - the bell is tolling for all of them.

This is why I was against term limits.   Squadron A is doing fine, Wing Commander has no problem with the commander......but the "reg says" you must step down after 4 years....now Squadron A falls apart.

As for the "term limits were not for musical commanders".......again......now we are following the letter of the reg  Squadorn A has a new commander and Squadron B has a new commander.  The Wing/Group commanders are putting round pegs into round holes......but you are saying that is not what is intened......what exactly was intended by the terms limits?

Sqauadron A and B both get experinced leaders with freash idead (at least from their point of view).
Those ready and willing to step up and take command were given the opportunity to do so.
But because we arbitratily decided that this was a good idea we now have a squadron failing and some members simply decideing to quit.

I also question you assessment of performance of the commander as a "fail".    By what objective criteria do you say he failed? 

[Eclipse]

Squadron A was clearly not "doing well" since they were one person away from folding.

[Майор Хаткевич]

We had our unit commander move up to group before his term was over. We didn't have any issues with the transition. We had a plan in place.

[tn485]

I'd ask why the commander who clearly failed at the first squadron was allowed to assume command of another squadron. "Luck" had nothing to do with this.  The former Commander's
lack of the ability to read a calendar and do the requisite transition and contingency planning is the issue.  Further the term limits are not intended to be "Musical Commander Chairs".

The Chaplain could certainly step down as that role and assume command, happens all the time.  That was just a handy excuse to not do it.

And as to those who "voted with their feet" - the bell is tolling for all of them.

This is why I was against term limits.   Squadron A is doing fine, Wing Commander has no problem with the commander......but the "reg says" you must step down after 4 years....now Squadron A falls apart.

As for the "term limits were not for musical commanders".......again......now we are following the letter of the reg  Squadron A has a new commander and Squadron B has a new commander.  The Wing/Group commanders are putting round pegs into round holes......but you are saying that is not what is intended......what exactly was intended by the terms limits?

Squadron A and B both get experienced leaders with fresh ideas (at least from their point of view).
Those ready and willing to step up and take command were given the opportunity to do so.
But because we arbitrarily decided that this was a good idea we now have a squadron failing and some members simply deciding to quit.

+1

Thank you.  I'm glad somebody agrees with me.

[Майор Хаткевич]

The issue isn't the regulations. The issue is a commander more interested in the title than the people.

[abdsp51]

Term limits if used properly can be a good thing.  This is why Commanders need to start training and grooming their replacements when they take office.  Good commanders are hard to come by in any organization especially this one.  However he failed in having the meeting place tied to him and there was no plan in place for when he left. 

Loyalty serves it's purpose but make sure that you are not blindly loyal. 

What I see here is people not wanting to adapt to the change or figure out a solution and gave up. 

[a2capt]

Goes back to this very scenario as I painted it. The unit was obviously dependent on some way, on that one individual. Whatever that dependency was, employer, CC's garage, etc. could have changed for ANY reason. Also like was mentioned, not being CC anymore doesn't mean "You need to leave now".

If this meeting location is supplied solely on the basis that Individual X is CC, then that's totally flawed right there. If this meeting location is supplied solely because Individual X is a CAP member of that unit, that's only slightly less flawed. Things can change fast. People get sick, pissed, fired, burned out, lose interest, etc. 

To be honest, that does not sound like a functioning unit to me. That sounds like hanging by a thread. That doesn't mean they're not accomplishing stuff while hanging on that thread though, as evidenced by the recognition for meeting the statistics of a productive, developing unit. But living in the shadows of eviction isn't good either.

[MSG Mac]

The Term limits are not something new, it's been around for several years, so your  nether your Commander
Nor the unit at large should not be complaining about being replaced. As noted in a previous post why didn't he stay around to assist the new commander or at least work with the landlord to keep the squadron at the location?

[a2capt]

Term limits have been in existence in some regions/wings for a while. Not everywhere, it appears now that it is nationally mandated by regulation.  I originally got the impression that it was a national thing all along, only having myself ever been in one Wing/unit during my 12 years so far. But in the unit's I've visited, I've found this to be the case, in other wings.  Perhaps it's only new to the south/southeast?

[Private Investigator]

You don't get it.  He had a huge amount of support from senior members, cadets, and cadet's parents.  The people that were willing to step up and fill the position were denied.  If you know everything (without having been here to see what our situation is like), maybe you should just come on out here and fix it yourself?

You don't get it. Do you know what happen at the New Orleans Squadron in 1955? Pear Falls Cadet Squadron in 1972? Mansfield (TX) Squadron in 1995? Petticoat Junction Composite SQ in 2001?

You want to reinvent the wheel? You think you are the only one in the country? Join the boy scouts or stick with little league because you are 98.44% wrong and if you pay attention in college one day you will know what being 98.44% wrong is   

Nope, I don't.  But I do know that 94.43% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

Source?   

[Private Investigator]

Goes back to this very scenario as I painted it. The unit was obviously dependent on some way, on that one individual. Whatever that dependency was, employer, CC's garage, etc. could have changed for ANY reason. Also like was mentioned, not being CC anymore doesn't mean "You need to leave now".

If this meeting location is supplied solely on the basis that Individual X is CC, then that's totally flawed right there. If this meeting location is supplied solely because Individual X is a CAP member of that unit, that's only slightly less flawed. Things can change fast. People get sick, pissed, fired, burned out, lose interest, etc. 

To be honest, that does not sound like a functioning unit to me. That sounds like hanging by a thread. That doesn't mean they're not accomplishing stuff while hanging on that thread though, as evidenced by the recognition for meeting the statistics of a productive, developing unit. But living in the shadows of eviction isn't good either.

A good example is Squadron of the Year. That does not mean you are the greatest Squadron ever, it just means you are better than others and the others may not have put in for it or have other issues.

The other factor we got is the good ole boy network. And the GOBN is all about favoritism. It is great when you are a favorite, not so much when you are not. In Little League, even if your father is the manager, if you can not pitch you can not be the pitcher.   

[blinky]

TN485 - you are doing the right thing kid.  But you probably didn't come to the right place for gentle advice.  Just ignore the harshness and try to filter out the garbage - and best advice to the harsh posts - ignore them - do not respond.  In terms of helping the new squadron not feel overwhelmed or overrun - just do your best to make friends with them.  A friendly attitude will get you a long way.

Good luck with your new digs.