Boonies anyone?

[SARMedTech]

Is there a hard and fast rule against the wearing of boonie caps with either the BDUs or the BBDUs. I ask because I thought that there was, that is that they are not regulation wear, but I have seen several members so far wearing both camo and blue boonie caps, even with cloth grade insignia sewn on. If there is a rule against them, whats the reasoning? Not that reasoning necessarily applies to any issue regarding uniform wear. Also does CAP really want me wearing a ballcap if I am in CAP distinctive service uniform? Why is the flight cap not allowed?

[lordmonar]

There is a rule against them......but is it hard and fast?

39-1 dectates what you can and can't wear.  Boonie Hats are not in there so you can't wear them.

But....having said that....there are a lot of things not in 39-1 that commanders at various levels have authorise their people to wear.  So....the answer to your question is "Maybe". 

[Chris Jacobs]

I was pretty certain we pounded this one to death, then made sure it was dead, then brought it back to life, killed it two more times and then did some more to it.

And taking a quick look back the topic went way off topic and then was locked.

[DeputyDog]

Also does CAP really want me wearing a ballcap if I am in CAP distinctive service uniform? Why is the flight cap not allowed?

Which uniform are you talking about? There are several variations of "distinctive" uniforms for CAP. The corporate service dress (TPU) does utilize the flight cap.

[SARMedTech]

I was talking about the white aviator shirt uniform. The regs say that no cover is mandated but if one is to be worn, its to be the baseball cap.

[DeputyDog]

Is there a hard and fast rule against the wearing of boonie caps with either the BDUs or the BBDUs.

Yes. CAPM 39-1 states which headgear is authorized. As LordMonar pointed out...the boonie cap is not listed.

I ask because I thought that there was, that is that they are not regulation wear, but I have seen several members so far wearing both camo and blue boonie caps, even with cloth grade insignia sewn on.

Unfortunately you will find stuff like that all over CAP. The regulations say to do it this way, but people will skew or just ignore the regulations to do what they want.

Boonie hats are not worn in my group.

If there is a rule against them, whats the reasoning?

What I have heard is that the Air Force said, "No way!" I can't remember where I read about that though. I don't remember a reasoning given.

I do seem to remember the Chief of the CAP Health Service trying to push through authorization for wear of the boonie hat for sun protection. It didn't get very far. Someone on here (or on the Portal) countered that the regular BDU cap with liberal use of sunblock provides more protection than a boonie hat.

[DeputyDog]

I was talking about the white aviator shirt uniform. The regs say that no cover is mandated but if one is to be worn, its to be the baseball cap.

Most members don't wear any headgear with that uniform. I did have a member that wore the flight cap with it once (he was new). It looked rather tacky (read: stupid). He thought it looked tacky as well, but only wore it because he thought he was supposed to.

Granted, the CAP baseball cap doesn't look much better. Hence the reason that most members just wear no headgear with it.

[davedove]

I was talking about the white aviator shirt uniform. The regs say that no cover is mandated but if one is to be worn, its to be the baseball cap.

I usually don't wear any headgear with that uniform, unless I'm going to be out in the sun for a while, or I wear a jacket/coat over it.  In that case I wear the ball cap.  From what I read, the CAP baseball cap is the only authorized headgear for that uniform.

[BillB]

Deputy Dog.  You are correct, National requested the boonie cap be authorized, and the Air Force did not approve the request.

[JohnKachenmeister]

39-1 forbids the boonie cap, but 60-1 requires one in the survival kit.

CAP get caught with contradictory regulations?  Nevah happen, G.I.!

But... just because 60-1 requires that the boonie hat be carried in survival gear does not mean it can be worn with any CAP uniform.  If you crash, and need it, you can:

1.  Use the boonie hat as a small fish net, or...

2.  Remove your uniform before putting it on.  There is no CAP regulation specifying headgear to be worn when underwear is worn as an outer garment.

[Chaplaindon]

But... just because 60-1 requires that the boonie hat be carried in survival gear does not mean it can be worn with any CAP uniform.  If you crash, and need it, you can:

1.  Use the boonie hat as a small fish net, or...

2.  Remove your uniform before putting it on.  There is no CAP regulation specifying headgear to be worn when underwear is worn as an outer garment.

Placing tongue firmly in cheek ...

Katch, your scenario #2 depends entirely upon whether the unfortunate crash survivor happens to be wearing USAF/CAP undies or the corporate service ones ... and to that end, are Underoos (tm) approved (I especially like the Superman ones myself)?

Regardless, can you imagine the horror of surviving a crash in a CAP corporate a/c only to be 2b'd subsequent to your rescue for failing to your wear survival equipment IAW CAPM 39-1? The shame of it ... !!!

To prevent such predicaments henceforth, I suggest a new "CAP Survival Uniform" (CSU) ... maybe with regional variations (e.g. for climate, etc.), such as a "CSU-New York" (for the north) & "CSU-Miami" for the tropical south, etc.

[davedove]

Deputy Dog.  You are correct, National requested the boonie cap be authorized, and the Air Force did not approve the request.

You know, if National really wanted a boonie hat authorized, they could just authorize it for the blue field uniform.  Air Force wouldn't care then.

[Eclipse]

39-1 forbids the boonie cap, but 60-1 requires one in the survival kit.

Cite, please...

A quick search does not find the word "survival" or "boonie" anywhere in 60-1

[SARMedTech]

Deputy Dog.  You are correct, National requested the boonie cap be authorized, and the Air Force did not approve the request.

You know, if National really wanted a boonie hat authorized, they could just authorize it for the blue field uniform.  Air Force wouldn't care then.

By that rational, couldnt the boonie also be worn with the blue BDU's...this is where I have seen a couple of pictures or it being worn. Could it not also be worn when we are "AUX OFF?" and if not, to what extent to USAF regs cover us when we are working DR for say...the Red Cross or some other non-AF agency? And I have talked to a dermatologist friend of mine (which inspired the post) and he states that the consensus is that high SPF sunscreen AND wide brimmed sun or boonie hats increase the protection against sun damage. Since every member of my family has had or currently has skin cancer (save for me, knock on wood) I would like to have to option of wearing the boonie...I know I know...go up the chain.

[DeputyDog]

By that rational, couldnt the boonie also be worn with the blue BDU's...this is where I have seen a couple of pictures or it being worn.

National can authorize it for wear with the blue BDUs, but they just haven't done it.

Could it not also be worn when we are "AUX OFF?" and if not, to what extent to USAF regs cover us when we are working DR for say...the Red Cross or some other non-AF agency?

"AUX ON/AUX OFF" status does not affect uniform wear. We abide by the uniform regulations the same whether we are "AUX ON" or "AUX OFF".

[JohnKachenmeister]

But... just because 60-1 requires that the boonie hat be carried in survival gear does not mean it can be worn with any CAP uniform.  If you crash, and need it, you can:

1.  Use the boonie hat as a small fish net, or...

2.  Remove your uniform before putting it on.  There is no CAP regulation specifying headgear to be worn when underwear is worn as an outer garment.

Placing tongue firmly in cheek ...

Katch, your scenario #2 depends entirely upon whether the unfortunate crash survivor happens to be wearing USAF/CAP undies or the corporate service ones ... and to that end, are Underoos (tm) approved (I especially like the Superman ones myself)?

Regardless, can you imagine the horror of surviving a crash in a CAP corporate a/c only to be 2b'd subsequent to your rescue for failing to your wear survival equipment IAW CAPM 39-1? The shame of it ... !!!

To prevent such predicaments henceforth, I suggest a new "CAP Survival Uniform" (CSU) ... maybe with regional variations (e.g. for climate, etc.), such as a "CSU-New York" (for the north) & "CSU-Miami" for the tropical south, etc.

NO!  NO!  NO!

I can see it now...

"CSU Miami... Return of the Guyaberra Shirt!"

[JohnKachenmeister]

39-1 forbids the boonie cap, but 60-1 requires one in the survival kit.

Cite, please...

A quick search does not find the word "survival" or "boonie" anywhere in 60-1

Ooops... my mistake.

I looked it up and the contents of the survival kit are in the Florida Supplement to 60-1, not in the basic regulation. 

I keep the basic reg and the supplements together in my "CAP Flying Stuff" book, and they all tend to mush together.

[Chaplaindon]

Maybe then a "Panama Jack" straw "cover" would be more appropo ...

[JohnKachenmeister]

Maybe then a "Panama Jack" straw "cover" would be more appropo ...

No, because then each wing would want to have a different color hatband.  California and Massachusetts would end up fighting over "Hot pink."

[Al Sayre]

Kack,
You now owe me a new keyboard. 

[BillB]

I think Kach should be barred from posting. Do you realize the expense he has caused members of CAP Talk for new keyboards, plus Windex for the monitor screens. Members have to change keyboards almost as fast as National changes uniform regulations.

[Al Sayre]

He is a definite danger to our electronic equipment...

[RogueLeader]

^^^ The same to you two too. :angel:^^^^

[SARMedTech]

39-1 forbids the boonie cap, but 60-1 requires one in the survival kit.

Cite, please...

A quick search does not find the word "survival" or "boonie" anywhere in 60-1

I couldnt find it there either.

[SARMedTech]

I do seem to remember the Chief of the CAP Health Service trying to push through authorization for wear of the boonie hat for sun protection. It didn't get very far. Someone on here (or on the Portal) countered that the regular BDU cap with liberal use of sunblock provides more protection than a boonie hat.

Absolute bull cookies. The accepted medical findings for about 25 years now have been that sun screen and a hat that throws shade over the whole neck and face is your best option. The ball cap does nothing for the back or sides of your neck. Give me a few months...  by God, I WILL get my boonie authorized.

[PHall]

Give me a few months...I will get my boonie authorized.

Good luck on that. You're only the latest of a long line of folks that have tried, in vain, to get the Boonie authorized.
But hey, more power to ya. You'll need it.

You'll excuse me if I don't hold my breath waiting for that approval.

[DeputyDog]

I do seem to remember the Chief of the CAP Health Service trying to push through authorization for wear of the boonie hat for sun protection. It didn't get very far. Someone on here (or on the Portal) countered that the regular BDU cap with liberal use of sunblock provides more protection than a boonie hat.

Absolute bull cookies. The accepted medical findings for about 25 years now have been that sun screen and a hat that throws shade over the whole neck and face is your best option. The ball cap does nothing for the back or sides of your neck. Give me a few months...  by God, I WILL get my boonie authorized.

Okay.....so if the Chief of the CAP Health Service couldn't get the authorization past the Air Force with that reasoning, you can get it done?

Good luck.

[SARMedTech]

I do seem to remember the Chief of the CAP Health Service trying to push through authorization for wear of the boonie hat for sun protection. It didn't get very far. Someone on here (or on the Portal) countered that the regular BDU cap with liberal use of sunblock provides more protection than a boonie hat.

Absolute bull cookies. The accepted medical findings for about 25 years now have been that sun screen and a hat that throws shade over the whole neck and face is your best option. The ball cap does nothing for the back or sides of your neck. Give me a few months...  by God, I WILL get my boonie authorized.

Okay.....so if the Chief of the CAP Health Service couldn't get the authorization past the Air Force with that reasoning, you can get it done?

Good luck.

Do you go to parks and stick pins in childrens balloons and steal their lollipops?  I guess you couldnt see my tongue in my cheek in my posting.

[DeputyDog]

Do you go to parks and stick pins in childrens balloons and steal their lollipops?

Yes I do. That is why I am no longer a cadet programs officer.

I guess you couldnt see my tongue in my cheek in my posting.

I guess I couldn't either. "Tongue in Cheek" posting is better shown by using:      or  . Not: 

[SARMedTech]

Do you go to parks and stick pins in childrens balloons and steal their lollipops?

Yes I do. That is why I am no longer a cadet programs officer.

I guess you couldnt see my tongue in my cheek in my posting.

I guess I couldn't either. "Tongue in Cheek" posting is better shown by using:      or  . Not: 

Thank you for the advice. I meant no offense to you.

[Stonewall]

I held off and just read the Boonie thread, but I thought I'd throw my own $.02 in, you know, for what it's worth.  Which is actually less than $.02.

I'll start by saying I've owned at least one boonie since I popped out of my mom with my first pair of jungle boots.  I still have at least 6 or 7 stashed somewhere in the house along with one hanging in my locker at my ANG unit and one in my E&E kit in my POV.  I believe boonies are useful and effective means of camouflage.  They break up the outline much better than a standard issue patrool cap.

Contrary to popular belief, I am not totally against people wearing boonies in the field.  But only in the field.  I am a stickler for uniform regulations, even though I don't always agree with them.  I think that's part of being a good leader; you don't always have to agree with the orders you are given or the regs that guide you, but you follow them and set a good example.

The problem is most CAPers I run into, are using "the field" as an excuse to look high speed.  You know, sporting the Gunny Highway or Hooah SEAL look.  They'll argue it to the death, but it's kind of like berets for a lot of people, THEY NEED THEM and will never give in to admiting that they really are a useless piece of headgear.  The difference is, boonies are not useless.  They do block the sun from hitting your ears, but I'd also argue that it doesn't block too much of your neck unless you're a "no-neck".  My personal preference (and this is personal, so don't take offense), is NOT wearing any headgear in the field while on a search.  First, I hate wearing hats.  Second, I can see and hear more.  A regular hat partially blocks the view of what's above you.  A boonie partially blocks that as well as being close to your ears so that everything that scrapes along your hat makes a noise close to your ear thus distracting you from hearing what may be a clue.  Argue it if you want, I won't argue back.  This is based on my experience and my ultra sensitive ears.

Folks in CAP often can't define right from wrong.  Not in the legal/illegal sense, but with the small stuff like taking off a boonie hat when returing from the field or mission base.  You don't wear a boonie into the store, McDonalds or the squadron meeting just because it's "ES training night" in the classroom.  On numerous occasions, in my 20 years of service, I've seen folks show up to missions with boonies and that's the only hat they bring.  Their excuse:  "It's my field hat".  Great, but Micky Dee's is not in the field and we happen to be at the Micky Dee's two feet from the main gate of Andrews AFB.  Or we're training at Quantico MCB and dude decides he wants to get his haircut so he sports his boonie at the MCX.  Yes, that happened.  So my solution to prevent these things from happening, is to not give anyone the option of wearing the boonie.  Call me a hard a** or uniform nazi, but hey, that's just how I roll. 

We can argue that we're not in the "real military" all day.  But in the "real military", you'd be hard pressed to find a Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine that would grab their boonie and wear it anywhere but in the field. 

Here is a picture of some members from another wing who were invited to my squadron's FTX in November.  Notice one is wearing a watch cap and another a boonie.  Boonie caps are considered a hot weather hat.  Being in a densely wooded area in winter, I think there was little use for the boonie.  But again, he HAD_TO_HAVE_HIS_BOONIE cuz he was in the field and that's his field hat.  Yes, this was at Prince William Park, right outside the gate of Quantico MCB.

[floridacyclist]

For that matter, is that watch cap even authorized? Or those gaiters? How about a pair of mukluks? Should we pull 341s on someone for wearing extreme cold-wether gear that's not listed in 39-1 if it really is extreme cold weather? Lots of uniform items get worn and nobody seems to care as long as it's useful.

PS Maybe a blaze orange boonie isn't such a bad idea...it would be very useful in the field not just for shade, but visibility as well and would look stupid enough that folks would never wear them unless there was a real need to.

[Stonewall]

I absolutely agree with you.  I found the things those guys are wearing to be a little extreme and for the most part, unnecessary.  I used this picture in a uniform class as an example of "what not to wear".

Here goes my opinion again, but with the watch cap and gore-tex, before they were officially authorized, I'd call you a fool for not having one when the conditions called for it.  But like the boonie, I better not catch you wearing a watch cap outside of the FOB or the field (aka in the public's eye).

[c172drv]

I have to agree with Kirt.  He and I both ran large ground teams up in Northern VA although in different wings.  The proper use of a boonie hat is in the field only.  I've kept on in my gear for a long time.  I'd break it out in the field and only a few times on an airport when doing flight line duty.  I've always enforced wearing the proper gear for the conditions.  That would include the Gortex way before it was officially authorized or civilian gear as needed to stay warm or dry.  I knew many of us did and we made adjustments to make sure actual military components know we were CAP and not regular military while wearing the gortex.  Kirt's old squadron was and probably still is very tight.  It helped that they met on base too.  We always have to be cognizant of what is appropriate. 

     Uniforms are one of those touch things in this organization.  I think that, as seniors officers, we have to set an example.  Unfortunately we let everyone down too often.  I know there are a few changes to uniforms that I'd like.  Some are practical and some are purely aesthetic.  One of these changes would be to authorize the wear of the boonie officially for field use only.  It certainly isn't the only answer to proper field wear to protect from the sun but it can be an intregal component of a system.  We ofter worry more about image than function.  I know I'm prone to ironing all life out of my uniforms and ensuring the proper crease is there but in the field, I tuck the pants into the boots to help keep the critters out, I pull down the sleeves and I'll even flip up the collar on the shirt to keep my neck from becoming as red and looking like I've been to the NASCAR race that I really can't afford to go to.  But, back at base, I roll up the sleeves, flip the collar down, blouse up the pants again ( or at least hide that they are tucked in) and hide the boonie back it the my pack.

     Part of professionalism is the image.  As an airline pilot I always try to have my stuff and my uniform in shape.  Nothing makes people wonder more about things than seeing an unkempt FO or Captain stroll up with stuff hanging out of their bags and the hat dangling from the side of their head with a 5 o'clock shadow at 9am.  Same goes for the image we project as being professionals when we show up to do a job, wether it be an airshow, teach a class or trying to find some 2 year old who wandered off into the woods behind the house.  If you look the part you usually act the part and people will believe in you until you show them otherwise.

OK, thought this would be a short soap box speech but it wasn't.  Stepping down now.

John Jester


BTW  Hey Kirt, how's it going down in the sunshine state?

[SARMedTech]

You know, I believe that is the most rational discussion of the wear of gear I have heard. I mean in general its like EMS. Sometimes we get a REALLY messy call. I mean one that tears you up appearance wise. But before we run another call, we clean up, change uniforms if necessary, wipe the inside of the rig down with bleach, make up the cot with clean sheets, pillow cases and blankets, empty the trash and if necessary wash the rig. Theres no way around it: on some calls you are just gonna get "ate up." But the next person that is looking to you to help them in an emergency wants to see a pressed shirt and trousers, clean boots and a clean EMT. And theres also stuff that we use and do outside of the view of the public because they just dont need (or in some cases want) to see it (even though they are rubber necking because they think they want to see it). Someone ejected from a car comes to mind. If you dont have to look at that scene and get hip deep in it, you do not want to. Also, for our victim, whether they have survived or not, we do our utmost to protect their dignity as a human being, so we will grab every sheet off the truck if necessary and get a bunch of fire fighters and LEOs out there to make a human curtain around our patient/victim. Im a hard nose when it comes to my patients, especially in motor vehicle accidents that are extremely bad. If the media shows up, and wants to take shots of the wrecked cars, etc...fine. But I NEVER allow them pull the famous trick of filming the pool of blood. Its not dignified, theres no need for it and if the family of that person sees that it could be very traumatic for them. Doesnt happen on my crew.

So it is with the boonie. I think its a valuable and necessary part of the job. Its a hot weather cover/possibly rain cover but I totally agree that it (or any other cover) has no business indoors or in sight of the public. I also agree with those that have said that some CAPers wants to wear it to look high speed. Tough I guess. I would just like to see it authorized as necessary, the CO or GTL or whoever can order it as UOD wear as they see fit, but other wise it stays folded in your pack or your pocket. Theres a reason why they are meant to be crushed up. Its so you can stuff them away when they arent mean to be used. I think there are those among us who may have seen the Navy Seal Team documentaries one too many times...perhaps the team pictured in that photo. Thanks for the input guys. I joke about the boonie all the time but I really agree exactly with what you are saying.

[Stonewall]

or trying to find some 2 year old who wandered off into the woods behind the house. 

You talking about the Karynne Sheldon, the one in PWFP area?  I remember that one well.  Got the page in History class in college and walked right out of class and didn't come back for a few days.

BTW  Hey Kirt, how's it going down in the sunshine state?

I'm smoked, spent Sat, Sun and Tue surfing.  I love my 5 on 4 off schedule and having part of my patrol area on 2 miles of beach front.  All doing very well but I just couldn't pull myself to get back involved with CAP.  I've tried twice but keep getting disappointed, mostly due to cadets of today.

Thanks for the input on the boonies.  I'm not the best one to explain even my own opinion. 

[arajca]

The only problem with "For Field Use Only" uniform items is too many CAP members don't comprehend what that means. This applies to seniors and cadets.

While this is most likely a training and supervision issue, most commanders either don't comprehend "For Field Use Only" or don't have the time to babysit all their members.

Aside from that, Big Blue came down hard on CAP using boonies. So, for the present and near future, boonies are verbotten.

[SARMedTech]

So I understand Mama Blue not wanting to see us in boonies. I read that 5x5. But isnt it possible to say to cadets and officers "Boonies are a field cover ONLY. You may wear them for SARs and SARexs  in non-urban settings only. You will not wear that cover in sight of the public, under any circumstances at any time. Does everyone comprehend that?"  I mean I understand that the covers are forbidden to us, but are there cadets and officers that are so thick that they cannot comprehend and comply with a direct order?

[SarDragon]

I mean I understand that the covers are forbidden to us, but are there cadets and officers that are so thick that they cannot comprehend and comply with a direct order?

Yes.

[arajca]

How many times have we seen uniforms worn incorrectly?

Hint: I quit counting.

[Stonewall]

I mean I understand that the covers are forbidden to us, but are there cadets and officers that are so thick that they cannot comprehend and comply with a direct order?

Hahahaha..    

[DeputyDog]

So I understand Mama Blue not wanting to see us in boonies. I read that 5x5. But isnt it possible to say to cadets and officers "Boonies are a field cover ONLY. You may wear them for SARs and SARexs  in non-urban settings only. You will not wear that cover in sight of the public, under any circumstances at any time. Does everyone comprehend that?"  I mean I understand that the covers are forbidden to us, but are there cadets and officers that are so thick that they cannot comprehend and comply with a direct order?

As you may have ascertained from the other members who replied, CAP has a problem with policing its own uniform wear. As of right now the boonie hats are not authorized, but they are still worn (against regulations).

So would they comply with a direct order on that? No. From my own observation, CAP does not have a culture in which it is encouraged to correct others on uniform wear. RiverAux related a story once in which a senior member was 2b'd for attempting to correct a senior member from another unit on uniform wear.

Every SLS I teach at there is at least one person in a flightsuit (status, baby), or someone wearing the uniform grossly (double meaning) out of regulation. Do I try to correct them? Yes. Are they hostile to me for the rest of the course? Oh yes. Do they change? No. And yes, I am very nice about it and I do it in private.

It's not that they are too thick to comprehend a direct order about the wear of the boonie hat. It's that some members do not care what the regulations say. The attitude is that they are volunteers, and the Uniform Nazis (like me) need to lighten up.

The problem is that I don't see them as volunteers. I see them as unpaid professionals. Wearing the uniform correctly is an outward appearance of an individual's and a unit's professionalism.

[SARMedTech]

Here's my thing and it may get me flamed but last time I checked the first amendment was still in force:

CAP is a para-military organization. As such, it has a rank (grade) and command structure. Why is it not as simple as giving an order to remove the improper cover or correct the aforementioned uniform violations or face a formal "education" about both the structure of command and uniform regulations.

Now, as a newbie, I dont know everything. But my suspicion is that if someone is about to do something or experience something that is going to cause themselves or others to be harmed or die, one "urges" them to immediately stand down from said behavior, regardless of the "equal or high" rank concept. However, if an officer with a grade higher than my own and more seniority comes over and tells me privately and in a dignified manner that I am wearing the uniform of the Civil Air Patrol incorrectly, my only reaction would be to thank that officer for spotting and correcting my error, counseling me on the appropriate correction and moving on. Maybe Im old fashioned but I still think that as "unpaid professionals" in our orgranization a silver oak-leaf trumps railroad tracks and one does what an ranking officer says. Am I really the only one that feels this way? Theres a reason for this structure, I believe that rank matters, especially when the person who holds that rank has the experience and seniority to back it up. I dont quake in my boots at the sign of a ranking officer, but I do stand when one enters and departs a room, I never forget to address him/her as sir/ma'am and I may be a dweeb for doing so, but I salute CAP officers senior to me. Its a little think called respect. Most of the people that trump me have been around long enough to either have earned that respect or be given the benefit of assuming they have. And even if that officer gained his rank by dubious means (none of my business in the situations I am describing), by arm still goes parallel to the deck and my elbow is still at a forty five degree angle until my gesture of respect is returned or that officer leaves my sight. Is this just my newbie's enthusiasm or is it how it should be done?

[RogueLeader]

Absolutely right.  Same for me, even if i don't like the officer, doesn't matter.  Do it or leave.  It's called common courtesy.

[Eclipse]

Here's my thing and it may get me flamed but last time I checked the first amendment was still in force:

CAP is a para-military organization. As such, it has a rank (grade) and command structure. Why is it not as simple as giving an order to remove the improper cover or correct the aforementioned uniform violations or face a formal "education" about both the structure of command and uniform regulations.

It is that simple.

What's not so simple is the follow-up conversation(s) when the member says "no".  Way too many commanders are not willing to risk "upsetting people".

Which, in many cases, is why CAP is in the straits its in today.

[pixelwonk]

Absolutely right.  Same for me, even if i don't like the officer, doesn't matter.  Do it or leave.  It's called common courtesy.

Actually, it's an uncommon courtesy which much of CAP just doesn't get the hang of.
It's a failure of CAP to not instill followership principles organization-wide like it does for cadets just entering the program.

[Dragoon]

Here's my thing and it may get me flamed but last time I checked the first amendment was still in force:

CAP is a para-military organization. As such, it has a rank (grade) and command structure. Why is it not as simple as giving an order to remove the improper cover or correct the aforementioned uniform violations or face a formal "education" about both the structure of command and uniform regulations.

Now, as a newbie, I dont know everything. But my suspicion is that if someone is about to do something or experience something that is going to cause themselves or others to be harmed or die, one "urges" them to immediately stand down from said behavior, regardless of the "equal or high" rank concept. However, if an officer with a grade higher than my own and more seniority comes over and tells me privately and in a dignified manner that I am wearing the uniform of the Civil Air Patrol incorrectly, my only reaction would be to thank that officer for spotting and correcting my error, counseling me on the appropriate correction and moving on. Maybe Im old fashioned but I still think that as "unpaid professionals" in our orgranization a silver oak-leaf trumps railroad tracks and one does what an ranking officer says. Am I really the only one that feels this way? Theres a reason for this structure, I believe that rank matters, especially when the person who holds that rank has the experience and seniority to back it up. I dont quake in my boots at the sign of a ranking officer, but I do stand when one enters and departs a room, I never forget to address him/her as sir/ma'am and I may be a dweeb for doing so, but I salute CAP officers senior to me. Its a little think called respect. Most of the people that trump me have been around long enough to either have earned that respect or be given the benefit of assuming they have. And even if that officer gained his rank by dubious means (none of my business in the situations I am describing), by arm still goes parallel to the deck and my elbow is still at a forty five degree angle until my gesture of respect is returned or that officer leaves my sight. Is this just my newbie's enthusiasm or is it how it should be done?

You are under the assumption that grade in CAP designates authority.  It doesn't.

The regs only require members to obey their chain of command.  By regs, you cannot be disciplined for ignoring the orders of a senior officer who isn't your commander (as long as you are polite).

It's good that you personally hold yourself to a higher, more military standard.  But the prevailing  culture of CAP flows from the regs.  And the regs make it clear that grade doesn't matter - you can ignore it.

One advantage the real military has over us is that every officer has the authority to correct problems, and the responsiblity to do so.  So there are more "eyes' scrutinized every action, and finding/correcting any issues.  The most obvious area for this is uniforms, but it applies to everything including safety, property accountability, maintenance, caring for troops, etc.  More folks keeping an eye on things can make a organization better.

We could run a CAP that way, but it would require a major change in the regs.  We'd need to limit grade to those who could handle it, give them the authority to correct problems and then hold them accountable for doing so.

No small job.

[LtCol White]

Here's my thing and it may get me flamed but last time I checked the first amendment was still in force:

CAP is a para-military organization. As such, it has a rank (grade) and command structure. Why is it not as simple as giving an order to remove the improper cover or correct the aforementioned uniform violations or face a formal "education" about both the structure of command and uniform regulations.

Now, as a newbie, I dont know everything. But my suspicion is that if someone is about to do something or experience something that is going to cause themselves or others to be harmed or die, one "urges" them to immediately stand down from said behavior, regardless of the "equal or high" rank concept. However, if an officer with a grade higher than my own and more seniority comes over and tells me privately and in a dignified manner that I am wearing the uniform of the Civil Air Patrol incorrectly, my only reaction would be to thank that officer for spotting and correcting my error, counseling me on the appropriate correction and moving on. Maybe Im old fashioned but I still think that as "unpaid professionals" in our orgranization a silver oak-leaf trumps railroad tracks and one does what an ranking officer says. Am I really the only one that feels this way? Theres a reason for this structure, I believe that rank matters, especially when the person who holds that rank has the experience and seniority to back it up. I dont quake in my boots at the sign of a ranking officer, but I do stand when one enters and departs a room, I never forget to address him/her as sir/ma'am and I may be a dweeb for doing so, but I salute CAP officers senior to me. Its a little think called respect. Most of the people that trump me have been around long enough to either have earned that respect or be given the benefit of assuming they have. And even if that officer gained his rank by dubious means (none of my business in the situations I am describing), by arm still goes parallel to the deck and my elbow is still at a forty five degree angle until my gesture of respect is returned or that officer leaves my sight. Is this just my newbie's enthusiasm or is it how it should be done?

You are under the assumption that grade in CAP designates authority.  It doesn't.

The regs only require members to obey their chain of command.  By regs, you cannot be disciplined for ignoring the orders of a senior officer who isn't your commander (as long as you are polite).

It's good that you personally hold yourself to a higher, more military standard.  But the prevailing  culture of CAP flows from the regs.  And the regs make it clear that grade doesn't matter - you can ignore it.

One advantage the real military has over us is that every officer has the authority to correct problems, and the responsiblity to do so.  So there are more "eyes' scrutinized every action, and finding/correcting any issues.  The most obvious area for this is uniforms, but it applies to everything including safety, property accountability, maintenance, caring for troops, etc.  More folks keeping an eye on things can make a organization better.

We could run a CAP that way, but it would require a major change in the regs.  We'd need to limit grade to those who could handle it, give them the authority to correct problems and then hold them accountable for doing so.

No small job.

Regardless of rank, EVERY CAP member has the authority and responsibility to point out (correctly and politely) problems with uniform wear and appearnce and address them. This is exactly what USAF wants to see....US policing our own people on uniform wear and enforcing our own regulations.

[Pylon]

Quick example:

If you worked in the MX shop at your local ANG unit and showed up to work sporting a boonie cap (while the rest of your colleagues were wearing their wing baseball cap), they'd laugh at you.  Bare minimum, you'd feel like a tool.  Multiple people would say something.  The boonie cap would come off, despite any jusitifcation attempts by the PX ranger.  It'd be an embarassing experience.

The question is - why doesn't that happen in CAP?  The above situation involved no commander correcting or reprimanding this troop, nobody needed to probably even point out quotations from 36-2903.  A simple "Dude, what are you wearing?  Where's your regular cap?" would have probably been the comment of the day.  And it would have worked to solve the issue.

[LtCol White]

Quick example:

If you worked in the MX shop at your local ANG unit and showed up to work sporting a boonie cap (while the rest of your colleagues were wearing their wing baseball cap), they'd laugh at you.  Bare minimum, you'd feel like a tool.  Multiple people would say something.  The boonie cap would come off, despite any jusitifcation attempts by the PX ranger.  It'd be an embarassing experience.

The question is - why doesn't that happen in CAP?  The above situation involved no commander correcting or reprimanding this troop, nobody needed to probably even point out quotations from 36-2903.  A simple "Dude, what are you wearing?  Where's your regular cap?" would have probably been the comment of the day.  And it would have worked to solve the issue.

Should be a no-brainer

[Dragoon]

Regardless of rank, EVERY CAP member has the authority and responsibility to point out (correctly and politely) problems with uniform wear and appearnce and address them. This is exactly what USAF wants to see....US policing our own people on uniform wear and enforcing our own regulations.

Sadly, not true.

If it was our responsiblity to make corrections, somewhere in a reg we'd be told to do this.  We're not.

If it we had the authority to make corrections, the regs would punish those who ignored us.  They don't.

And that's my point - it's nice if we go the extra mile to make things right, but it's not required, which is too bad.  Relying on folks to do more than what is required is a recipe for disappointment.  We can get better, but it will require changes in the underlying structure of CAP - changes that make it easier to police our members.

Tags - MIKE

[Hawk200]

If it was our responsiblity to make corrections, somewhere in a reg we'd be told to do this.  We're not.

It may not say in the regs that we should maintain standards, but I don't know anyone that should let something go for the reason that "the regs don't say we should correct them." What's the point of a regulation if it's not enforced?

[ddelaney103]

If it was our responsiblity to make corrections, somewhere in a reg we'd be told to do this.  We're not.

It may not say in the regs that we should maintain standards, but I don't know anyone that should let something go for the reason that "the regs don't say we should correct them." What's the point of a regulation if it's not enforced?

What, indeed?

I worked the Fort McHenry Flag Day event and saw a SMWOG wearing white and grays and a AF GO-style flight cap.  I told him that 1) you don't wear a flight cap with the W&G's and 2) you never wear that sort of flight cap.  He told me he thought it looked better and walked away.

I could have tried to find his sqdn/gp/wing/region CC and reported him - maybe he would do something, maybe not.  I could have told the Project Officer - maybe he would have taken him off the project, but he couldn't stop him from wearing it as an audience member.  I went back to work, chalking it up as another classic "CAP moment."

I've said it before and I'll say it again: authority in CAP is based on position, not grade.  Even TP himself will have no power with those stars he wears once he steps down as CAP/CC.

Maybe we should change the song from "The C. A. P. is on the Go!" to "(You're Not the) Boss of Me!"

[Hawk200]

Maybe we should change the song from "The C. A. P. is on the Go!" to "(You're Not the) Boss of Me!"

OK, up to now, I've never been in the position of having to say it, you just ruined my record. You owe me a keyboard! 

And maybe some Windex for the monitor...

[SARMedTech]

Just out of curiosity, how does the apply to Cadets and Officers. Not only with things that are just non-regulation or contradict regulation, but also things that are unsafe. If I see someone doing something stupidly unsafe (as opposed to just stupid and notice I didnt say a Cadet doing something stupid because I have quickly learned they arent the only ones) if I am not the safety officer, is it basically just I can say something to them but if my position doesnt put be in a place to take corrective action, then weather I am a higher ranking officer or an officer talking to a cadet, it really doesnt matter? Which begs the question I and others have asked before, why not abolish grade altogether. We could just go to the Cadet system of pips and if you have more pips than I do (Im picturing a flight cap with about 16 pips on it) you can tell me to stand down from something I am doing. Ahhhh...here i go spitting in the wind again...

[Dragoon]

Maybe we should change the song from "The C. A. P. is on the Go!" to "(You're Not the) Boss of Me!"

OK, up to now, I've never been in the position of having to say it, you just ruined my record. You owe me a keyboard! 

And maybe some Windex for the monitor...

That's funny, but also kind of true.

Right now, the only guys in CAP who legally can enforce the regs are unit commanders.  And in CAP, often we operate apart from our unit commanders, so they aren't around to do much of anything.

IF we want more enforcement from our officers, we need clear guidance on who can tell who to do what.  And what happens if they are ignored.

The military got to its mindset of "officer has the job to correct errors" out of the fact that the Uniform Code of Military Justice empowers officers to do this - it's illegal to disobey an officer.  You can go to jail.

CAP doesn't have anything close.  The only guy a SM has to listen to is his commander. And if the commander isn't around.....

[Dragoon]

Just out of curiosity, how does the apply to Cadets and Officers. Not only with things that are just non-regulation or contradict regulation, but also things that are unsafe. If I see someone doing something stupidly unsafe (as opposed to just stupid and notice I didnt say a Cadet doing something stupid because I have quickly learned they arent the only ones) if I am not the safety officer, is it basically just I can say something to them but if my position doesnt put be in a place to take corrective action, then weather I am a higher ranking officer or an officer talking to a cadet, it really doesnt matter? Which begs the question I and others have asked before, why not abolish grade altogether. We could just go to the Cadet system of pips and if you have more pips than I do (Im picturing a flight cap with about 16 pips on it) you can tell me to stand down from something I am doing. Ahhhh...here i go spitting in the wind again...

Here's the skinny.  In CAP, we have two kinds of real punishments - dismissal and demotion.  (There are a few others, like grounding, but for this discussion we'll stick with the big two).

For seniors, you can be demoted or dismissed for "conduct unbecoming" your grade (whatever that means).  You can also be dismissed for "Failure to obey rules, regulations, and orders of higher authority."  That would mean your commander, or his commander, since rank in CAP does not denote authority.  You can also be dismissed for "Serious or willful violations of CAP regulations or directives."  Wearing a wrong hat probably doesn't meet the standard.

Remember, for both these actions there will be an appeal process, and often credible threats of a lawsuit.  Meaning unless you have a really well documented case against someone, you may not win the appeal.

Cadets are a bit simpler.  First, they can be kicked out simply for "misconduct."  Nice and vague, and pretty easy to prove.  Also, they can be demoted by the squadron commander up to three grades for basically anything (52-16 is nice an open on this one).  There is an appeal process to group, but since the criteria are so vague, it's more likely to fly.

But in all cases, it's a commander's action.

So, if you tell someone to do something, and they don't do it, you have to talk to their commander.  If he agrees that they should have done it, he can take action.  And it's easier to take action with a cadet.

But if the commander doesn't agree with you, you're pretty much S.O.L.

[SARMedTech]

Well, as someone as new as I am to CAP, Im not likely to go around barking orders or correcting anyone on anything. But again, I fail to see how demotion means anything if its position that means something and not grade. Why dont we just do away with grade and have a Commander and then everyone else. I mean thats basically where we are now anyway it would seem. Its sort of like the local fire volunteer fire departments where everyone is a Lieutenant and wears bars on his uniform. Its really meaningless, but there you have it. Im not trying to argue this one, Im just trying to get a hold on why we have rank if it means nothing except that I have suspicion that others have been right when they have said that if we did away all of the sudden with all of the grades and ribbons and clasps and citations and promotions, people would just stop showing up, because for whatever reason, alot of people are not willing to volunteer unless there is something in it for them, even if that something is, after all, a largely if not entirely meaningless "rank/grade/star/  bars/oak leaf." Personally, Im just happy to be able to have an organization like CAP that does what it does for communities, young people and the country. Maybe Ill be a Lt. for life, and thats pretty much ok with me. I guess when I asked how it applies to cadets and officers, i was thinking of a cadet doing something dumb that might involve some risk of danger or injury and whether an officer saying "stop that" carries any weight because they are an officer or only because they are twice (or more) the cadets age.

[ColonelJack]

Im not trying to argue this one, Im just trying to get a hold on why we have rank if it means nothing except that I have suspicion that others have been right when they have said that if we did away all of the sudden with all of the grades and ribbons and clasps and citations and promotions, people would just stop showing up, because for whatever reason, alot of people are not willing to volunteer unless there is something in it for them, even if that something is, after all, a largely if not entirely meaningless "rank/grade/star/  bars/oak leaf."

Bingo -- you've hit the nail on the head.  "Altruism" is something that really is defined on a personal, individual basis.  For many people (I won't say most, though I feel it's true), the military-like aspect of CAP is a major factor in their joining and remaining.  The military aspect centers around the uniforms, the formations, the bling, and the rank.

The rank is not necessarily meaningless, by the way.  Tell Generals Pineda or Courter that their rank means nothing.  Or any Region or Wing CC who's wearing eagles.  They will give you something of an earful, because their rank is indicative of their position in the organization.  Below them, yes ... rank holds little meaning, with one major exception:  It shows how far you as an individual have progressed in the training provided by the organization. 

Are there other ways this can be shown?  Of course.  But the military rank structure is there, so we use it.  Are there people who don't give a flying flip whether anyone else knows what they've accomplished?  Of course.  But they are not the majority.

Personally, Im just happy to be able to have an organization like CAP that does what it does for communities, young people and the country. Maybe Ill be a Lt. for life, and thats pretty much ok with me.

Now you're talking!     That's your reason for being here and that is just right.  For you.  But when people start saying "we should do away with rank," etc., they're heading toward the slippery slope of trying to make the entire organization fit their perspective instead of allowing all who serve with CAP to do so for their own reasons.

I guess when I asked how it applies to cadets and officers, i was thinking of a cadet doing something dumb that might involve some risk of danger or injury and whether an officer saying "stop that" carries any weight because they are an officer or only because they are twice (or more) the cadets age.

These days, my friend, most kids don't bother listening to anyone in positions of authority when they reach the age of CAP cadets.  (I'm a 7th grade history teacher.  I know this first-hand.)

Many moons ago, I was on a mission with cadets and officers from other units -- and my squadron commander.  A cadet from another unit was doing something he shouldn't have been, and my unit CC advised him to stop.  The kid pretty much ignored my boss until the CC said, "Son, can you read?"

The kid said, "Yes."

And my unit CC grabbed the right collar of his fatigues (that's how long ago this was!) and pointed to his captain's bars.  "Read these, then."

The kid looked, and realized my CC meant business.  He stopped his foolishness.

Hey, it worked for him.

Jack

[SARMedTech]

Colonel-

I agree with EVERYTHING you said in your reply to my post and do agree that there would be those at Wing level would give me an earful if I said their "birds" didnt mean anything and also that rank can be useful as a symbol of how much work an individual has put into their professional development. Certainly, I have respect for your grade and the experience of all kinds that has gone into you getting it. Thank you for your response and for being so clear and concise. If I manage to get above Lt grade, can I use the "read these" on a misbehaving cadet? 

[ColonelJack]

If I manage to get above Lt grade, can I use the "read these" on a misbehaving cadet? 

You can use the ones you've got ... if the cadet was properly trained to recognize and respect grade.

I'd do it, anyway!

Jack

[MIKE]

Kooler... Twenty days - Obst. Von Luger