I just withdrew from Encampment.

[jimmydeanno]

The problem seems to be a lack of communication, in not informing the Cadet Lieutenant that his position was changed in time for him to make an informed decision about accepting the AV position (What does an AV Medical Officer do anyways). I hope you communicated with the DCP of the applicable Wing your concerns about the lack of communications and the assignment of someone to your presumed position who hadn't even applied for a staff position, prior to day 1.

AV = Make sure the projectors and such are setup and running for presentations.

Medical = Distribute bandaids and put moleskin on blisters.

[ZigZag911]

I think some of you folks are being very unfair to this cadet...it would be one thing if he were asked to accept a lesser position that actually needed to be done, but something that certainly sounds, as one poster characterized it, as if it were invented on the spur of the moment?  That's ridiculous!

Put yourselves in his position, as CAP members...not retired USAF, or in your civilian careers, but as CAP seniors...you give up vacation time to assist in the CAP encampment, plan and work for months to prepare...then get 'ranked' out of your post, and are offered a 'consolation prize' of some busywork, button sorting, mess kit counting silliness???

This isn't a question of supporting the mission, it's a question of parochialism ("after all, he's not from OUR wing!") and cronyism.

Somebody on that wing or encampment staff ought to get reprimanded, at the very least, about this.

[lordmonar]

I don't think anyone is saying he did not get a raw deal.

It sucks....getting sent to the basement because a freind of someone gets the good job.

But that is in fact life.

If we take out the "he was her friend" factor......there is still an argument that the C/maj was better fit for the XO position.

He is known by the wing.
They wanted him for the CC position but he declined.
The situation changed and he became available.

Who would not want their "A" team in the top positions?

Was it unfair?  Yep.  Did they do him wrong?  Yep.  Are the AV and Medical "non-critical" jobs?  Sure.....but they are jobs.  Staff work is the bread and butter of any organisation.  Doing time there would still have been a valuable learning experince for the cadet. 

But the cadet did not see it that way.  He got advice from his leadership and decided to quit.

Bad situation, bad advice, bad decision?  Who knows.

Bottom line.....the AV/Medical jobs had to be done by someone else and the cadet lost out on a leadership experince.

[Eclipse]

If we take out the "he was her friend" factor......there is still an argument that the C/maj was better fit for the XO position.

He is known by the wing.
They wanted him for the CC position but he declined.
The situation changed and he became available.

Who would not want their "A" team in the top positions?

Yes.  However when the "A" team decides to do "other", you pick form the pool who applied properly and saw the encampment
as their priority.

This is teaching all the wrong lessons.

This taught all involved that "who you know" is the way to get things done, regardless of process or procedure.

[davidsinn]

If we take out the "he was her friend" factor......there is still an argument that the C/maj was better fit for the XO position.

I disagree there. The C/Maj couldn't be bothered to follow the proper process and only got in because the rules were changed for him. He was not the proper one for the job.

[phoenix212]

You were likely an untested out of state C/Lt and got the short stick.

Thats an unfair assessment. I have 2 encampments under my belt and single-handedly planned unit involvement with a local airshow which was like a 3 day long event. I think I was tested.

True, though there is a lot that can be said for knowing someones capabilities. It should not have been on as short a notice as it was though. I have had to make day of adjustments before, but I try and talk to the cadet about it first, and usually it is a higher position then they had been holding.

Honestly, I am just trying to point out possible reasoning by the CC, either way they should have done a more thorough job getting their ducks in a row before making any staff changes. You got shafted yes, but in the end it is only a week, and it is a good test of leadership when you do a job that you don't want to do, to the best of you ability.

[Eclipse]

Another question I have is who made these changes?

The senior staff or cadet staff?  This is not an authority I granted to my cadets for this exact reason.

[cap235629]

How many seniors would stick around for SAREx if they left the house expecting to be the GBD, OSC, or even mission pilot, having participated in planning sessions and other prep work, only to be told to sit in the general assignment pool because "a Major we know better decided to show up at the last minute".

Happens all the time.  If you travel 2 hours to get to mission base it is kind of hard to just turn around and go home.

[lordmonar]

If we take out the "he was her friend" factor......there is still an argument that the C/maj was better fit for the XO position.

He is known by the wing.
They wanted him for the CC position but he declined.
The situation changed and he became available.

Who would not want their "A" team in the top positions?

Yes.  However when the "A" team decides to do "other", you pick form the pool who applied properly and saw the encampment
as their priority.

This is teaching all the wrong lessons.

This taught all involved that "who you know" is the way to get things done, regardless of process or procedure.

Maybe.....or it is picking your strongest team.

How many times have you lamented that we have poor leadership becuase only the ones who volunteer are picked.  Now you say that the we have to ignore the round peg for the round whole because of the application process?

That doesn't sound right.

Again....yes it is a raw deal....yes it was "unfair".....but let's give them the benifit of the doubt that it was not just simple nepostims but an unusual situation that changed at the last minute.

No one gets to "buy" leadership positions.  How would you like it if your adminstation officer got bent out of shape because you brought in a new better qualified adminstrator because he was there first and the new guy did not do the "proper application process".

No...don't buy it...won't buy it.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Another question I have is who made these changes?

The senior staff or cadet staff?  This is not an authority I granted to my cadets for this exact reason.

But sir, cadets can pick the best allstar team evah!

[Eclipse]

How many seniors would stick around for SAREx if they left the house expecting to be the GBD, OSC, or even mission pilot, having participated in planning sessions and other prep work, only to be told to sit in the general assignment pool because "a Major we know better decided to show up at the last minute".

Happens all the time.  If you travel 2 hours to get to mission base it is kind of hard to just turn around and go home.

It shouldn't, especially if you are traveling that far.  Call, text, or email "we don't need you".  Better to turn around mid-trip than waste your whole
day.

I'm a team player, but there's also an issue of respect here, for people and their time.

[lordmonar]

How many seniors would stick around for SAREx if they left the house expecting to be the GBD, OSC, or even mission pilot, having participated in planning sessions and other prep work, only to be told to sit in the general assignment pool because "a Major we know better decided to show up at the last minute".

The good ones (which is my point) would see that mission is more imporatant than their personal desires.

A good leader (the IC) would do his best to hold down that sort of BS.....because keeping your people happy is part of good leadership....but the mission comes first...and if the "Major we know better" is better from the mission....then so be it.

[Майор Хаткевич]

How many seniors would stick around for SAREx if they left the house expecting to be the GBD, OSC, or even mission pilot, having participated in planning sessions and other prep work, only to be told to sit in the general assignment pool because "a Major we know better decided to show up at the last minute".

The good ones (which is my point) would see that mission is more imporatant than their personal desires.

A good leader (the IC) would do his best to hold down that sort of BS.....because keeping your people happy is part of good leadership....but the mission comes first...and if the "Major we know better" is better from the mission....then so be it.

That may be more applicable to SMs, but cadets are teenagers (for the most part). They are really just developing their ego, their sense of self, etc. I'll tell you what happens in most cases like this. The cadet decides X wing is dead to them. Cadet guides other cadets towards other encampments if they can help it. Cadets spread the word about it further out. And so on and so on.

If someone put in time to prepare for an event/help plan the event, they should be there to execute it. Otherwise, if there is an issue with their performance, they should have been removed in the planning stage, not the day of.

ESPECIALLY, when this replacement is a cadet that turned down the C/CC job to go to COS. (But was still able to attend both anyway?). Quite telling about their attitude.

[DakRadz]

ESPECIALLY, when this is a cadet that turned down the C/CC job to go to COS. (But was still able to attend both anyway?). Quite telling about their attitude.

When I see this particular part (it was actually Cadet Deputy Commander), the first thought I have is that the C/Maj who turned the job down thought they'd be too exhausted/tired/wouldn't feel like doing encampment after COS. Then decided he was up for it, so let's go, I still get a good position, right?!
YMMV

[N Harmon]

How many seniors would stick around for SAREx if they left the house expecting to be the GBD, OSC, or even mission pilot, having participated in planning sessions and other prep work, only to be told to sit in the general assignment pool because "a Major we know better decided to show up at the last minute".

The good ones (which is my point) would see that mission is more imporatant than their personal desires.

But even the good ones would go home after spending the whole first day of a SAREX doing nothing.

[Eclipse]

How many seniors would stick around for SAREx if they left the house expecting to be the GBD, OSC, or even mission pilot, having participated in planning sessions and other prep work, only to be told to sit in the general assignment pool because "a Major we know better decided to show up at the last minute".

The good ones (which is my point) would see that mission is more imporatant than their personal desires.

A good leader (the IC) would do his best to hold down that sort of BS.....because keeping your people happy is part of good leadership....but the mission comes first...and if the "Major we know better" is better from the mission....then so be it.

You can't go to "mission first" here unless you assume and assert that a C/Maj with poor planning skills, the inability to make a decision, and an overly involved mom is a better choice than a C/1st Lt. who followed the directions and was involved in planning the activity.  As presented this was a situation of nepotism and not making the C/Maj feel bad.  How is that "mission first"?

You can't go there on the senior side, either, because again, the scenario is nepotism, not skill set.  If we're talking about a 1-year senior who leveraged NESA and circumstance to get to GBD fast but has never been to a major exercise vs. a 5-year member with real-world mission experience who
has a work trip cancelled and can participate, that is a mission first scenario.

But that still leaves the common respect of calling someone from out of state and giving them the option of disengaging before they get there.  we're also not talking about Support flight or an alternate flt sgt here, we're talking big-4 cadet staff.  I know at my encampment that would have been a decision not made lightly, and replacing them would be even more of a weighty decision.

The issues of ego and standing that USAFAUX2004 makes are salient as well.  We may not care how an adult reacts, but we sure should be sensitive to
the potential ramifications this would have on a young person - someone who likely put a fair amount of effort and excited expectation into this activity and their role.

This is how we lose members, because we make and allow poor decisions which ultimately send the wrong message.  The proper response to the C/Maj (and his mom) was "You made your choice, but if you still want to come, we have support roles for you."  The precedent set will haunt them for years to come because it will get around that cadets don't need to make choices or follow process, they can just roll-in day-of and take over.

But even the good ones would go home after spending the whole first day of a SAREX doing nothing.

Yep, and as well they should.  It's one thing for a professional to be called up and sidelined, that's called "gravy" and is generally reflected somehow in their pay envelope at the end of the month.

The "pay" for volunteers is good work that respects their time and ability, meets their expectations, and is occasionally even fun.  Frankly I don't want people around who have so little to do that driving several hours to a mission base and watching paint dry seems like a good use of their time.

[lordmonar]

Ah.....but now you are assuming that Cadet Dan L's story is the only side of it.

I don't know any of these cadets from Adam....don't know the encampment either....neither do you.

So we speculate.

You say there is no scenario where the C/Maj is the right choice and I say there is.

Ergo the impass.

Either way this was a life experience that all adults face at one point or another.....and IMHO the cadet chose poorly.  I may be wrong....I have been before.....but there you go.

If a SM at a project I was running got upset about getting bumped, based on my assessment of what was best for the mission.....then that SM would not ever get picked up again.

The real military is the same way.  You quit an assignment/command/staff job.....and you will most likely never ever get offered one again.   So what lesson are we teaching?  Perseverance it face a adversity.  Sticking it out.  Taking your lumps and getting on with the mission.

Yes it sucks......I know it sucks....I know it is hard for young people to deal with the suck factor.   But by allowing the cadet to quit.....we teach him to take the easy way out. 

YMMV.

[DakRadz]

There is a fine line between "the easy way out" and "standing up for yourself and your worth"

The only person who truly knows which occurred is Lt Lunsford.

[Eclipse]

I agree it is speculation, and we don't know all sides, but I don't think you can compare this to a professional situation in which people are paid
to suck it up.

We all need to take one for the team, occasionally, but just as you may not call someone again who disagrees with being moved around, you may not have the option as they may find a better way to spend their time. 

[lordmonar]

I disagree.

Professionalism is professionalism whether you get paid or not.

Managing volunteers is an add challenge to CAP leaders (and I agree with you, screw over a volunteer too much and he walks).....but MISSION COMES FIRST that is what marks a professional vs a wannabe or fair weather member.