Updated ABU Wear Instructions

[foo]

How do you police individuals who believe this organization is nothing more than a voluntary chaperone gig? I was told that the CAPR 39-1 is more of a guideline and suggestion, than it is a regulation.

The "R" in CAPR 39-1 stands for Regulation. Commanders need to do their jobs -- educate and enforce.

Senior members who join just to be a chaperone (and we do need them) should be in the Cadet Sponsor membership category, where the only uniform they need be concerned with is the polo shirt.

Well, to be fair, 39-1 is not regulation.  It is a manual, thus CAPM 39-1.  That being said, right at the beginning, it says Compliance with this publication is mandatory.

Oops. Good catch, and thanks for the correction.

It happens.  I hope that others would correct me when I'm wrong to.

I appreciate it. At least the main point stands that it's not an optional "guideline." Unit commanders must know this and should be enforcing proper uniform wear.

[Sketch]

No worries, at least I got the 39-1 part correct, and knew it dealt with wear and appearance of the CAP uniform

I wouldn't take this subject too seriously. The person wearing the uniform and what they bring to the program are more important.

[SarDragon]

How do you police individuals who believe this organization is nothing more than a voluntary chaperone gig? I was told that the CAPR 39-1 is more of a guideline and suggestion, than it is a regulation.

The "R" in CAPR 39-1 stands for Regulation. Commanders need to do their jobs -- educate and enforce.

Senior members who join just to be a chaperone (and we do need them) should be in the Cadet Sponsor membership category, where the only uniform they need be concerned with is the polo shirt.

Except that CAPR 39-1 has not existed for many years. The regulatory publication for uniforms is, and has been for over 50 years, CAPM 39-1.

[Eclipse]

No worries, at least I got the 39-1 part correct, and knew it dealt with wear and appearance of the CAP uniform

I wouldn't take this subject too seriously. The person wearing the uniform and what they bring to the program are more important.

This attitude is why CAP is where it is, and has been for a decade+ of non-progress in this area.  Proper uniform wear is a baseline expectation of membership,
and a core component of the cadet program.  Everyone makes mistakes, mis-measures, or occasionally mis-interprets, but when units or whole wings
ignore simple rules, it points to larger issues with their level of adherence and execution.

It is not mutually exclusive, nor negated by "what you bring to the program".

Another opportunity to fix things most organizations settle before their charter is dry - "What members wear and how they wear it."
The new 39-1 is a mess and more confusing then the previous version, was broken upon publication despite errors and omissions that
were submitted and ignored on the OPRs desk for about 6 months, has remained broken for a year while other "emergency" directives
like emails signatures and historical wings are published, and now there's two rushed ICLs making it worse.

At a minimum the "manual" should have been redesignated a "regulation" to take the "guidance" nonsense off the table.

[grunt82abn]

No worries, at least I got the 39-1 part correct, and knew it dealt with wear and appearance of the CAP uniform

I wouldn't take this subject too seriously. The person wearing the uniform and what they bring to the program are more important.

To clarify your point, as long as a person can bring something beneficial to the program, Board Shorts, inappropriate tank tops, and crocks are allowable, and/or a member wearing a trashed CAP polo and jeans is also acceptable?

[Майор Хаткевич]

No worries, at least I got the 39-1 part correct, and knew it dealt with wear and appearance of the CAP uniform

I wouldn't take this subject too seriously. The person wearing the uniform and what they bring to the program are more important.

To clarify your point, as long as a person can bring something beneficial to the program, Board Shorts, inappropriate tank tops, and crocks are allowable, and/or a member wearing a trashed CAP polo and jeans is also acceptable?

Pretty much. Git Er Don', or Go Home!

[Sketch]

No worries, at least I got the 39-1 part correct, and knew it dealt with wear and appearance of the CAP uniform

I wouldn't take this subject too seriously. The person wearing the uniform and what they bring to the program are more important.

To clarify your point, as long as a person can bring something beneficial to the program, Board Shorts, inappropriate tank tops, and crocks are allowable, and/or a member wearing a trashed CAP polo and jeans is also acceptable?

Bingo. In fact, I'd send them home if they even thought about wearing their uniform properly.

[grunt82abn]

Glad we aren't in the same squadron, I would be sent home every meeting!!! :clap:

[SMWOG]

Pretty simple folks; 39-1 says wear it this way. Not sure about specific wear instruction, send it up the chain for clarification. 

[SarDragon]

Regarding regs and manuals, from CAPR 5-4:

1.f. "Manuals" announce procedures and guidance for performing standard tasks and usually contain examples.

1. j. "Publication" means regulations, manuals, pamphlets, operating instructions, any other documented guidance and supplements thereto. A "directive publication" is a regulation or manual that establishes compliance standards.

1. l. "Regulations" announce policies, direct actions and prescribe standards.

And from CAPM 39-1:

1.1.2.1. COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY. This publication is the sole source for wear instructions and authorized items for various uniform combinations as prescribed within. Variation from this publication is not authorized. Items not listed in this publication are not authorized for wear with uniforms. Local commanders do not have the authority to waive grooming and appearance standards.

Seems pretty clear to me.

[foo]

How do you police individuals who believe this organization is nothing more than a voluntary chaperone gig? I was told that the CAPR 39-1 is more of a guideline and suggestion, than it is a regulation.

The "R" in CAPR 39-1 stands for Regulation. Commanders need to do their jobs -- educate and enforce.

Senior members who join just to be a chaperone (and we do need them) should be in the Cadet Sponsor membership category, where the only uniform they need be concerned with is the polo shirt.

Except that CAPR 39-1 has not existed for many years. The regulatory publication for uniforms is, and has been for over 50 years, CAPM 39-1.

Thank you. Of course, while an embarrassing oversight on my part, this doesn't in even in the minutest way negate the point being made. The more times I'm corrected on this the better, though (see above).

[foo]

And from CAPM 39-1:

1.1.2.1. COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY. This publication is the sole source for wear instructions and authorized items for various uniform combinations as prescribed within. Variation from this publication is not authorized. Items not listed in this publication are not authorized for wear with uniforms. Local commanders do not have the authority to waive grooming and appearance standards.

Seems pretty clear to me.

As was earlier clarified.

[Fubar]

The cadet was likely told to set up the ABU same as the BDU.

There was quite the flamewar on Facebook when a couple of seniors popped up wearing the ES patch a few days after ABUs went live. Their argument was the wear instructions didn't mention the patch, so they assumed it would be like the BDU. It didn't occur to them that if it's not mentioned, it's not allowed. It was also interesting to see how brave some cadets are when addressing adults over the internet.

I suppose removing and moving things are the cost of doing business when you're rushing to be among the first in the new getup.

[NIN]

The cadet was likely told to set up the ABU same as the BDU.

There was quite the flamewar on Facebook when a couple of seniors popped up wearing the ES patch a few days after ABUs went live. Their argument was the wear instructions didn't mention the patch, so they assumed it would be like the BDU. It didn't occur to them that if it's not mentioned, it's not allowed. It was also interesting to see how brave some cadets are when addressing adults over the internet.

I suppose removing and moving things are the cost of doing business when you're rushing to be among the first in the new getup.

I dunno. I didn't see a lot of "bravery" in the comments...  I'd say "bold."

[winterg]

[Pace]

The cadet was likely told to set up the ABU same as the BDU.

There was quite the flamewar on Facebook when a couple of seniors popped up wearing the ES patch a few days after ABUs went live. Their argument was the wear instructions didn't mention the patch, so they assumed it would be like the BDU. It didn't occur to them that if it's not mentioned, it's not allowed. It was also interesting to see how brave some cadets are when addressing adults over the internet.

I suppose removing and moving things are the cost of doing business when you're rushing to be among the first in the new getup.

I dunno. I didn't see a lot of "bravery" in the comments...  I'd say "bold."

You should read the email I got from the last 12 year old right before I banned him. All I asked that he not curse on the board.

[stillamarine]

The cadet was likely told to set up the ABU same as the BDU.

There was quite the flamewar on Facebook when a couple of seniors popped up wearing the ES patch a few days after ABUs went live. Their argument was the wear instructions didn't mention the patch, so they assumed it would be like the BDU. It didn't occur to them that if it's not mentioned, it's not allowed. It was also interesting to see how brave some cadets are when addressing adults over the internet.

I suppose removing and moving things are the cost of doing business when you're rushing to be among the first in the new getup.

I dunno. I didn't see a lot of "bravery" in the comments...  I'd say "bold."

It is always interesting to me how cadets act in those facebook groups. Including the one that went into eServices specifically to pull my information and put it on facebook. I was not amused.

[Spam]

Actually, I don't find that so amusing, sir!

Has that cadet been separated from CAP?

V/R
Spam

[NIN]

It is always interesting to me how cadets act in those facebook groups. Including the one that went into eServices specifically to pull my information and put it on facebook. I was not amused.

Really?  Never mind things like OPSEC, Non-disclosure, etc...

People can't be bothered to read those bold warnings about what you're supposed to be using eServices for....

[LSThiker]

The cadet was likely told to set up the ABU same as the BDU.

There was quite the flamewar on Facebook when a couple of seniors popped up wearing the ES patch a few days after ABUs went live. Their argument was the wear instructions didn't mention the patch, so they assumed it would be like the BDU. It didn't occur to them that if it's not mentioned, it's not allowed. It was also interesting to see how brave some cadets are when addressing adults over the internet.

I suppose removing and moving things are the cost of doing business when you're rushing to be among the first in the new getup.

I dunno. I didn't see a lot of "bravery" in the comments...  I'd say "bold."

Which Facebook Group was this one?

PM if you do not prefer to post publicly.