Increased Safety Requirements For Cadet Activities

[captrncap]

With such short notice (in some cases a few days), how are activities handling these new requirements?

[Eclipse]

I just saw that last night and I have to say I'm glad my activity is done for the year.  By next year much of the last-minute pain should be worked out.

Its one thing to require additional training that is manageable by the commanders on a presentation basis, but to expect everyone to get this done in advance of activities in the channel this year is going to be a challenge. 

In my state the traditional definition of those requiring RST training has been "All seniors and any cadet in a position of authority over other cadets" (i.e. all staff down to Flt Sgt).  Commanders can attest to any training they provide, but what about training who's only substantiation is online and the member is from another state?

Now participants have to include the certificates with their 31's?

Is this only for activities which required RST to start with (i.e. 4+ days overnight).

If you missed it, the second paragraph indicates that all participants (i.e. students) need to complete the basic ORM course.  Considering how hard it is to get cadets to do online classes for ES, I know that a lot of Commanders have sat back thinking "not my problem", well, welcome to our world.

I think NHQ needs to take a hard/fast look at the requirements they are pushing down to members for basic participation and consider rolling all this up to Level 1 / Curry so that the issues are ironed out well in advance of these activities. 

ORM is important as a mindset and process, but how much is the average slick-sleeve cadet going to grasp?

It should be further noted that this memo also adds or reinforces the below:

For any cadet activity involving flying:
Ground Handling Video
AOPA Aerodynamic essentials

Wing Runner (Glider activities)

I am requesting clarification from my Wing on this.

[jimmydeanno]

I was told that the letter states that the cadets must complete this before attending the activities, but is actually an activity requirement (meaning that the cadets show up to encampment and before they do anything they do the basic ORM course).

I think the short notice is absurd, the requirement is unreasonable and unnecessary and puts undue administrative burden on local leaders - again.

There are now more courses and bureaucratic requirements for cadets to complete to be able to participate in the cadet program than there are for them to promote.  It's driving me nuts...

[heliodoc]

Yes Sir

CAP, like aircraft manufacturers, NEED more lawyers in their midst....

Do Not try pinning ALLL that safety stuff on 1AF or try to copy a AF safety culture

This is getting pretty crazy.......

CAP's overzealousness to emulate a "safety culture" should have originated in 1946 when it was incepted....trying to catch up or "ketchup" now is as messed up as a soup sandwich

Thanks, CAP, BUT I am ahead of you in the line squadron arena..... I already took your ORM online stuff......... NICE ....REAL NICE

[Eclipse]

I was told that the letter states that the cadets must complete this before attending the activities, but is actually an activity requirement (meaning that the cadets show up to encampment and before they do anything they do the basic ORM course).

I don't see how this can be considered an "activity requirement" unless they are also going to allow the time spent to count towards required curriculum hours, which for many activities would be a practical impossibility.

I read this as they need to show up with this completed.  If a respective activity has a day to kill doing pre-requisite training, so be it, but many do not. 

Take a weekend flight bivouac, for example, or for that matter, even a glider day.

Its needs to be noted that there is nothing, specifically, in this letter that says these training requirements are only mandated for RST-level activities.

[notaNCO forever]

It has been a real pain. If they want to do something like this national should decide in the fall and winter months when their is less activities.

[Al Sayre]

The way I read it, it applies to any cadet flight activities, this would seem to include local O'Flights.  So do the staff have to complete the material before each activity or is once enough?  If before each "activity" is the case, I can see a serious reduction in the number of O'flights coming...

[jimmydeanno]

They need to complete it once.  Not once per flight.

However, the initial hurdle isn't that difficult - sit them all in a mass, go through the course  in one group.

However, where it becomes more difficult is keeping up with them.  A new cadet joins, you sign them up for an o-flight - now he needs to be instructed/take the course.  The next cadet joins, and on and on.

Local leaders will have to check to ensure that the courses are completed prior to sending off encampment applications, etc.

I will almost guarantee that taking this course will do absolutely nothing to reduce the number of incidents we have. 

Stopping a cadet from going to encampment because they didn't learn how to fill out an ORM worksheet is ridiculous.

[RiverAux]

They need to put the infrastructure in place to track these requirements before they make them a requirement.  Meaning it needs to be put in e-services and reports should be designed for use at all levels to track this stuff.  Its getting nuts. 

[notaNCO forever]

I just finished both the test and I seriously doubt taking those tests will change anyones decision making process. 

[sparks]

Two words followed by two more,

Knee Jerk and B*** S***

[Spike]

I just finished both the test and I seriously doubt taking those tests will change anyones decision making process.

+1

My response......well the Cadets are off to Encampment before the next SQD meeting rolls around.  Maybe next year 

[Ned]

I'm certainly agree that it would have been easier on activity staffers if the requirement had been published earlier in the training cycle.

But once the leadership has concluded that we could do a better job of ensuring cadets' safety at encampments and NCSAs, we need to move aggresively forward, not simply put it off until next summer.

And in the meantime do everything we can to ease the administrative burdens.  Which is one of the reasons that existing courses were identified - to avoid having encampment commanders re-invent wheels designing safety training for the troops.  NHQ is working the administrative issues concerning eServices.

Bottom line - this is a series of requirements put together specifically to enhance safety at cadet summer activities - an area where we can clearly improve.  There were a number of avoidable injuries last summer, and we can do better.

Ned Lee
National Cadet Advisor

[RiverAux]

I respect what you're saying Ned, but the bottom line is that these steps have little chance of making any significant impact on encampment safety.  Its clear from a recent addition I've made to this thread http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=7909.new#new that CAP could cut down on its summer bodily injury accidents by about a third by stopping all encampment-related sports and PT activities and by making the cadets sleep in sleeping bags rather than bunks.  Education won't impact those or most of the other encampment-related injuries. 

Now, those are clearly absurd suggestions, but so is the idea that we're going to prevent the sort of bodily injury accidents seen in CAP through this sort of mandatory safety education.  I'm all for meaningful training that addresses a specific problem.  The ground handling video, for example, targets a specific problem in a basically effective way. 
How about some sports/PT related safety training? 

Solve the actual problem.  This new mandate just won't do it. 

[jimmydeanno]

I hate to speculate, but I assume that the National CC is under some pressure from the NB to address our "safety issue."  This is probably the result, and to me, an unfortunate one.

My first reply was off the cuff, initial reaction.  However, my sentiments towards these new requirements are only compiled with the increase of requirements for new members and existing members to do when they join CAP, especially cadets.

Our cadets now have more bureaucratic compliance requirements to meet to participate in CAP then they do to get promoted (ie: complete the stated objectives of the CP).  To be able to participate in the O'Flight program, they must complete the ground handling video and wing runner's courses.  To go to encampment ( a promotion requirement) they must now complete the ORM basic course.

I remember going to summer camp when I was little.  Not once did we have to complete a course or get formal instruction on how not to drown during swim lessons.  Instead, those in charge (read senior members or staff) had an RST style training.  The attendees just showed up and enjoyed the event.  If something was particularly risky, there were ground rules set out, by the staff before hand and they watched to make sure nobody was doing it.

I went to camp for 4 years.  There wasn't a single injury amongst the campers.

I take this same approach with safety now.  For example, when I take my cadets hiking, I (as the leader) do the ORM stuff beforehand - checking weather, trail conditions, etc.  Then when the cadets get to the event I go over the stuff I previously checked into with them to prep them.  Guess what.  Not a single mishap reported in any of my units in the last 12 years.

So perhaps we should stop looking at making our customers (cadets) participate in our bureaucratic processes and compliance checkboxes and take a look at the management and where their failures are.  To me, it is quite obvious that the failure is with those in charge and their (our) failure to use a common sense approach to safety.

The other thing is that not all incidents are avoidable, but the purpose of ORM isn't to eliminate risk or injury, but to evaluate whether the risk is able to be mitigated and whether the juice is worth the squeeze.

I'm all for senior members needing to complete courses, etc because we are the leaders.  I'm all for RST style training before a large activity - but for cripes sakes stop passing off our failure onto our customers and stop adding bureacratic checkboxes and reports which we all know will make absolutely no difference in mitigating the number of incidents we do have.

So when we chalk this up we have the following safety "requirements" for our members: ORM basic course, safety briefs, required safety down days, safety checklists, safety reports (national, region, wing), ground handling video, wing runners, vehicle safety check-off, flight related sign-offs, etc.  After all that, the number of incidents still has yet to decrease, our solution?  Add more requirements.

There is no reason for the average cadet to need to have to do any of these courses and doing so only reduces the amount of time or opportunities they have to actually participate in our program.

[BillB]

Florida's Encampment starts in 12 days. This means the majority of Squadrons in Florida have only once meeting night to run the run the ORM course since many cadets don't have internet access. The way the letter is writrten "flying activities" also includes O-rides. Why require the cadet to take the ground handeling if the FBO is providing this service, or there is no need for the cadet to do FLM.
RST training required for doolies to attend an encampment? One question, WHY? If the senior staff and cadet staff don't have control of the doolies, they should not be on staff. Doolies do what they are told, and there is no need for the RST training for doolies.
It appears Gen Courter's National Staff needs to learn about the cadet program before coming up with unworkable ideas that negatively affects the cadet and cadet program.
Of the six Wing encampments I commanded and one Region encampment, the only injuries were during PT, and cadet tripping over their own feet in drill. And in those 13 weeks of encampments, I could probably count injuries on one hand.

[RedFox24]

This is a Forrest Gump directive:  Stupid is as stupid does.  

If safety is the real issue, then lets cancel all summer activities so that no one gets hurt.  Really to pop this out days or weeks before the majority of the special activities and encampments start is just stupid.  If this was a real issue then why not have done something about it months ago? 

More insane, Barbra Streisand, out of touch, feel good nonsense from a leadership that is out of touch with the field and reality.

And that's all I got to say about that!

[cap235629]

This new requirement came out on day 3 of the Arkansas Wing encampment.  I wonder if everything came to a screeching halt??

[NCRblues]

HAHA! Flight HALT! Ok no one move at all, you dont understand risk!!!!

[notaNCO forever]

HAHA! Flight HALT! Ok no one move at all, you dont understand risk!!!!

Standing is a risk they better sit down. If only the person in command took the course he  would know that.