The CAP NCO Program - your experience?

[JohhnyD]

I am curious.   

[kcebnaes]

What about the option: "Would be a great program, but to be effective as an NCO Corps, we would need an entire overhaul of the Senior Member program."

[JohhnyD]

What about the option: "Would be a great program, but to be effective as an NCO Corps, we would need an entire overhaul of the Senior Member program."

I agree with the sentiment, but I am looking for opinions as the program stands. I am seeing a "push" in our Region for more NCOs so I am curious.

[JohhnyD]

I did add my response as an option, "I have no idea!"

[TheSkyHornet]

I've already talked about the training matters regarding the NCO Corps in the other thread, so I'll just touch on my take on NCO responsibilities.

In a practical sense, if you're an NCO (wearing stripes), I have a natural inclination to treat you as an NCO as far as duty, responsibilities, and performance. My expectation is that you serve as a tactical manager and trainer, and that you are the frontline supervisor of the enlisted body (i.e., really only applicable to cadets in that regard). You receive orders on the execution of an assignment, and you take those orders and ensure the delegation of supporting tasks are carried out by the lower echelon/team.

If you're an officer, I expect that you act as a mid-level manager at the junior level. You need to be reviewing the performance of the operation and looking at moderate-to-long term plans for improving the conduct of the operation toward the greater strategic objectives as set by higher grade officers. You should be able to progress into being a project manager and be able to develop methods for accomplishing essential tasks through an assessment of risks, constraints, and needs to succeed in achieving your end state goal.

Where I start to see that breakdown is when I have a Captain who takes on the challenge of planning a weekend training camp, and they build a staff team to help provide instruction and manage the administrative and logistical needs of that training camp. Then, I have a Master Sergeant who takes on the challenge of planning a nearly identical training camp, serving as the project director. There is virtually no difference in what these two individuals are expected to do, yet have different grades and titles.

Why is it a thing, if that's going to be the case?

If an NCO can be the lead project director, building the training plan, procuring the logistical necessities, and ensuring the appropriate execution of all administrative tasks, why do we even make the distinction of an NCO versus an officer?

All of that said, we tend to do the same thing within the officer grades, where that same project director of that same activity can be a Major, a Captain, or a Second Lieutenant...and it often depends on whose hand was raised and to which shoulder the sword tapped in the process of bestowing knighthood.

[etodd]

Where I start to see that breakdown is when I have a Captain who takes on the challenge of planning a weekend training camp, and they build a staff team to help provide instruction and manage the administrative and logistical needs of that training camp. Then, I have a Master Sergeant who takes on the challenge of planning a nearly identical training camp, serving as the project director. There is virtually no difference in what these two individuals are expected to do, yet have different grades and titles.

So knowledge, abilities, and willingness to do the job of Camp Director should be priority. Not one's rank or title.

In ES, at a SAREX or actual mission, its all about filling jobs with qualified individuals. Rank often goes out the window, as you have "all hands on deck", and who can fill this slot?  Lt. Col. might be making the pizza run.

Civilian volunteers working together to get a job done. Raise your hand. LOL

[jeders]

What about the option: "Would be a great program, but to be effective as an NCO Corps, we would need an entire overhaul of the Senior Member program."

That would be, IMHO, the definition of a solution in search of a problem, which is already an option.

[baronet68]

I am curious.   

Why did you feel the need to add the adjectives meaningless and useless to the poll options?  Which Civil Air Patrol Core Value is being demonstrated by their inclusion?

The value of any information gained by your poll is negated by the use of inflammatory rhetoric.

[JohhnyD]

I am curious.   

Why did you feel the need to add the adjectives meaningless and useless to the poll options?  Which Civil Air Patrol Core Value is being demonstrated by their inclusion?

The value of any information gained by your poll is negated by the use of inflammatory rhetoric.

Those are direct quotes from prior Captalk members on this subject. Q.E.D.

(And the value of the poll is in the eye of the beholder. In my opinion, it is valuable data.)

[Jester]

I've already talked about the training matters regarding the NCO Corps in the other thread, so I'll just touch on my take on NCO responsibilities.

In a practical sense, if you're an NCO (wearing stripes), I have a natural inclination to treat you as an NCO as far as duty, responsibilities, and performance. My expectation is that you serve as a tactical manager and trainer, and that you are the frontline supervisor of the enlisted body (i.e., really only applicable to cadets in that regard). You receive orders on the execution of an assignment, and you take those orders and ensure the delegation of supporting tasks are carried out by the lower echelon/team.

If you're an officer, I expect that you act as a mid-level manager at the junior level. You need to be reviewing the performance of the operation and looking at moderate-to-long term plans for improving the conduct of the operation toward the greater strategic objectives as set by higher grade officers. You should be able to progress into being a project manager and be able to develop methods for accomplishing essential tasks through an assessment of risks, constraints, and needs to succeed in achieving your end state goal.

Where I start to see that breakdown is when I have a Captain who takes on the challenge of planning a weekend training camp, and they build a staff team to help provide instruction and manage the administrative and logistical needs of that training camp. Then, I have a Master Sergeant who takes on the challenge of planning a nearly identical training camp, serving as the project director. There is virtually no difference in what these two individuals are expected to do, yet have different grades and titles.

Why is it a thing, if that's going to be the case?

If an NCO can be the lead project director, building the training plan, procuring the logistical necessities, and ensuring the appropriate execution of all administrative tasks, why do we even make the distinction of an NCO versus an officer?

All of that said, we tend to do the same thing within the officer grades, where that same project director of that same activity can be a Major, a Captain, or a Second Lieutenant...and it often depends on whose hand was raised and to which shoulder the sword tapped in the process of bestowing knighthood.

As the only actual CAP NCO in this thread (at least the only one who voted as such) I would LOVE it if I could just handle NCO business 100% of the time.  Most of the time, there's no officer capable or willing to do those higher-level tasks, so I end up doing both.  I would be perfectly content to focus on tactical/operational level leadership, ops, training/program management, and communications.  The officer level of competency just isn't where it needs to be most of the time.  I try to bring in an officer and work in a supporting role, but again, not always available.

There does need to be a distinction, and the enlisted corps needs to be expanded while the officer corps needs to be restricted.  I'm super sick of officers who are doing Airmen-level work (and I'm being generous) completely throwing everything out of whack.  I can't think of any other paramilitary or military organization where everyone is an officer.  It makes zero sense.

I don't understand why we have ad nauseum repeats of this same debate, but I never see actual chaplains in the wild, think they're a solution in search of a problem, and 100% of their actual tasks can be handled by other specialty areas (character development needs to be completely owned by CP and the insinuation that the quasi-religious arm of CAP is the only credible source of character is obnoxious in my opinion.  I said what I said).  But I'll see you guys here in 3-6 months for the the semi-annual rehash of NCO-bashing.

[JohhnyD]

As the only actual CAP NCO in this thread (at least the only one who voted as such) I would LOVE it if I could just handle NCO business 100% of the time.  Most of the time, there's no officer capable or willing to do those higher-level tasks, so I end up doing both.  I would be perfectly content to focus on tactical/operational level leadership, ops, training/program management, and communications.  The officer level of competency just isn't where it needs to be most of the time.  I try to bring in an officer and work in a supporting role, but again, not always available.

1 - Thank you for your service!
2 - Your comments indicate that, for me, the local push for an NCO corps makes a lot of sense.
3 - I will report back in six months about the success (or not) of our local program.
4 - The naysayers we will alway have.

[Mitchell 1969]

I've already talked about the training matters regarding the NCO Corps in the other thread, so I'll just touch on my take on NCO responsibilities.

In a practical sense, if you're an NCO (wearing stripes), I have a natural inclination to treat you as an NCO as far as duty, responsibilities, and performance. My expectation is that you serve as a tactical manager and trainer, and that you are the frontline supervisor of the enlisted body (i.e., really only applicable to cadets in that regard). You receive orders on the execution of an assignment, and you take those orders and ensure the delegation of supporting tasks are carried out by the lower echelon/team.

If you're an officer, I expect that you act as a mid-level manager at the junior level. You need to be reviewing the performance of the operation and looking at moderate-to-long term plans for improving the conduct of the operation toward the greater strategic objectives as set by higher grade officers. You should be able to progress into being a project manager and be able to develop methods for accomplishing essential tasks through an assessment of risks, constraints, and needs to succeed in achieving your end state goal.

Where I start to see that breakdown is when I have a Captain who takes on the challenge of planning a weekend training camp, and they build a staff team to help provide instruction and manage the administrative and logistical needs of that training camp. Then, I have a Master Sergeant who takes on the challenge of planning a nearly identical training camp, serving as the project director. There is virtually no difference in what these two individuals are expected to do, yet have different grades and titles.

Why is it a thing, if that's going to be the case?

If an NCO can be the lead project director, building the training plan, procuring the logistical necessities, and ensuring the appropriate execution of all administrative tasks, why do we even make the distinction of an NCO versus an officer?

All of that said, we tend to do the same thing within the officer grades, where that same project director of that same activity can be a Major, a Captain, or a Second Lieutenant...and it often depends on whose hand was raised and to which shoulder the sword tapped in the process of bestowing knighthood.

As the only actual CAP NCO in this thread (at least the only one who voted as such) I would LOVE it if I could just handle NCO business 100% of the time.  Most of the time, there's no officer capable or willing to do those higher-level tasks, so I end up doing both.  I would be perfectly content to focus on tactical/operational level leadership, ops, training/program management, and communications.  The officer level of competency just isn't where it needs to be most of the time.  I try to bring in an officer and work in a supporting role, but again, not always available.

There does need to be a distinction, and the enlisted corps needs to be expanded while the officer corps needs to be restricted.  I'm super sick of officers who are doing Airmen-level work (and I'm being generous) completely throwing everything out of whack.  I can't think of any other paramilitary or military organization where everyone is an officer.  It makes zero sense.

I don't understand why we have ad nauseum repeats of this same debate, but I never see actual chaplains in the wild, think they're a solution in search of a problem, and 100% of their actual tasks can be handled by other specialty areas (character development needs to be completely owned by CP and the insinuation that the quasi-religious arm of CAP is the only credible source of character is obnoxious in my opinion.  I said what I said).  But I'll see you guys here in 3-6 months for the the semi-annual rehash of NCO-bashing.

I think you've actually proven the point of those who question the need for NCOs in CAP.

The dynamics you describe regarding the CAP officers you've encountered are actually fairly common in volunteer organizations. CAP is one of many organizations where the ultimate focus is on pitching in - many hands making light work. Meanwhile, you are disappointed that people don't respond the way your niche NCO status would demand that they do.

I don't think anybody is engaged in NCO bashing. It seems to be more along the lines of questioning the need for a special category of people who believe they "need" to do something different than what others do, with those others not seeing the "different."

If CAP did. away with rank tomorrow, how would your job differ next week? How would the officers jobs differ? If there isn't any obvious difference, then let's get real and admit what the NCO "program" really is - a formalized way to recognize past accomplishments.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mitchell 1969]

(Text deleted due to duplicate post - thanks, Tapatalk)!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[exarmyguard]

Just my opinion. I'm prior enlisted army. I looked at the NCO program and decided against it because I felt it would confuse people at my squadron. They can wrap their head around how the officer ranks work, so why should I complicate things. There are very few prior service where I'm at, so I felt it best to keep things simple.

[etodd]

All sounds great in an ideal world. In the military you have the folks "there". Each with their levels, ranks, jobs, etc. and ready to perform. So having all the structure mentioned above is fantastic.

When a real world mission happens in CAP.  The calls go out. And whoever can get away from work/family/etc. shows up. It can be a sparse crew. And at that point its a matter of filling job slots to get the mission done. Rank goes out the window. Its all about ES Quals.

A bunch of volunteers. All with the desire to serve. But for most its secondary to work/family/etc.

[JohhnyD]

All sounds great in an ideal world. In the military you have the folks "there". Each with their levels, ranks, jobs, etc. and ready to perform. So having all the structure mentioned above is fantastic.

When a real world mission happens in CAP.  The calls go out. And whoever can get away from work/family/etc. shows up. It can be a sparse crew. And at that point its a matter of filling job slots to get the mission done. Rank goes out the window. Its all about ES Quals.

A bunch of volunteers. All with the desire to serve. But for most its secondary to work/family/etc.

And in that "real world", it sounds like prior service NCOs can play a very real part. I am looking forward to this grand experiment on the part of local leadership.

[arajca]

Yes. They

All sounds great in an ideal world. In the military you have the folks "there". Each with their levels, ranks, jobs, etc. and ready to perform. So having all the structure mentioned above is fantastic.

When a real world mission happens in CAP.  The calls go out. And whoever can get away from work/family/etc. shows up. It can be a sparse crew. And at that point its a matter of filling job slots to get the mission done. Rank goes out the window. Its all about ES Quals.

A bunch of volunteers. All with the desire to serve. But for most its secondary to work/family/etc.

And in that "real world", it sounds like prior service NCOs can play a very real part. I am looking forward to this grand experiment on the part of local leadership.

Yes, they can play the same very real part as EVERY OTHER MEMBER who responds plays. There no special NCO part for them to play.

[JohhnyD]

Yes, they can play the same very real part as EVERY OTHER MEMBER who responds plays. There no special NCO part for them to play.

Well, except it appears that there is. And you appear to not like it. Odd.

[Eclipse]

What, exactly, is your deal?

[arajca]

Yes, they can play the same very real part as EVERY OTHER MEMBER who responds plays. There no special NCO part for them to play.

Well, except it appears that there is. And you appear to not like it. Odd.

What, exactly, is the 'special' part only NCOs wearing NCO stripes can play? That is the overriding question that has NEVER been answered.