Utility Uniform Oddity

[MIKE]

Noted this while composing my Mandatory Wear Dates sticky.  The 15 Mar 06 CAP/CC Letter includes the Utility Uniform as one of the uniforms that must comply with the mandatory wear date for the reversed American flag patch.  Further, patches previously worn in this location are to be moved to the left pocket.

This is odd because a non-reversed flag patch is already worn on the left shoulder of the Utility Uniform.  So, you have to wear a flag on each shoulder now?  Also note that the 5 Dec 05 CAP/CC Letter which announced the change originally, does not include the Utility Uniform... It only mentions the BDU and the Field Uniform.

[DNall]

I think that's a mistake & they were attempting to refer to the BBDU. Just guessing.

[MIKE]

g. Optional patches previously worn on the right shoulder of the BDUs, field
and utility uniforms. Those patches that were removed to allow wear of the reverse
American flag on the right shoulder are now authorized to be worn centered on the lower
portion of the left pocket or corresponding position on the utility uniform. The mandatory
wear date of the reverse American flag was extended to 1 April 2007.

[shorning]

g. Optional patches previously worn on the right shoulder of the BDUs, field
and utility uniforms. Those patches that were removed to allow wear of the reverse
American flag on the right shoulder are now authorized to be worn centered on the lower
portion of the left pocket or corresponding position on the utility uniform. The mandatory
wear date of the reverse American flag was extended to 1 April 2007.

Mike, that paragraph is telling you what to do with the patches, not the flag.  It's true that "those patches that were removed to allow wear of the reverse
American flag on the right shoulder", but what isn't written is "on uniforms for which the flag is worn on that shoulder".  No where does that paragraph say to put the "reversed" flag on the right shoulder on the utility uniform.

At least that's how I read it.

[DNall]

Remove "and" & you're talking about BBDU... that's my guess anyway. If they intend that to apply to the blue jumpsuit they need to better spell out the policy. That's one for the knowledge base.

[brasda91]

Noted this while composing my Mandatory Wear Dates sticky.  The 15 Mar 06 CAP/CC Letter includes the Utility Uniform as one of the uniforms that must comply with the mandatory wear date for the reversed American flag patch.  Further, patches previously worn in this location are to be moved to the left pocket.

This is odd because a non-reversed flag patch is already worn on the left shoulder of the Utility Uniform.  So, you have to wear a flag on each shoulder now?  Also note that the 5 Dec 05 CAP/CC Letter which announced the change originally, does not include the Utility Uniform... It only mentions the BDU and the Field Uniform.

Wing/Region/National patches are now optional on BDUs, flight suits, CAP field and utility uniforms.

[MIKE]

Wing/Region/National patches are now optional on BDUs, flight suits, CAP field and utility uniforms.

I know, that's not what I'm asking.

[arajca]

Remove "and" & you're talking about BBDU... that's my guess anyway.

No. The bbdu is officially called the field uniform, not field utility uniform. Most of us use the 'bbdu' abbreviation because it's 1. more discriptive and 2. less rude (wearing the fu  :angel:)

If they intend that to apply to the blue jumpsuit they need to better spell out the policy. That's one for the knowledge base.

I think some decided that the bdu and bbdu were "utility" aka work uniforms and forgot CAP has an uniform called the utility uniform.

[DNall]

right whatever, I think it's just a matter of mixing up terms. Toss it at the knowledge base & I'm sure you'll get a clarification. If I remotely owned either of them or cared I'd do that, but I don't & neither do my people far as I've seen so far.

[SarDragon]

Wing/Region/National patches are now optional on BDUs, flight suits, CAP field and utility uniforms.

Unless your wing has a supplement making them mandatory.   

[CAPOfficer]

Wing/Region/National patches are now optional on BDUs, flight suits, CAP field and utility uniforms.

Unless your wing has a supplement making them mandatory.   

I disagree.  In reviewing the National Commander's letter of 15 Mar 06, which addresses this issue.  I discovered that the memorandum didn't delegate the authority (or decision) to any commander to prescribe its mandatory wearing, but left it up to the individual member.

Nevertheless, if a commander wishes to make an optional item mandatory it can be done; however, the imposing commander is required to purchase or supply the optional item for wear.  Short of this, I don't see how this directive can be enforced throughout a wing.

This is the same policy that is followed in the military (USAF) as well, e.g. wing & unit patches worn on Air Force BDU and DCU uniforms are supplied by the respective unit(s).  Although they are authorized and approved for wear, they are optional and therefore not the responsibility of the individual member to purchase.  Thus the responsibility of the host wing and unit to provide same.  At least, in my twenty plus years in the service, I never was required to purchase an insignia that was optional (but required by my unit(s)).

I explained this to the wing commander in the state in which I reside (in writing); although he acknowledged receipt, he never reply.

[DNall]

You told a WG/CC, in writing, that he doesn't have the power to do something? I'm sure that went over real well.

[CAPOfficer]

You told a WG/CC, in writing, that he doesn't have the power to do something? I'm sure that went over real well.

Yes, very well.  I was both courteous and respectful in my communication, addressing the issue as I understood it and providing my opinion and the reasoning for it.

[DNall]

The thing actually in a military organization is you don't have the right to give your opinion like that. The Wg CC has a staff, and those people are supposed to give opinions only within their position in support of the Wg CC's decisions. If you have some great idea significant enough to exceed your authority proposing, then you have a chain of command to propose it thru. Now I understand CAP is made of civilians that don't understand subserviance to those appointed over you & respect for the system even when you question it. But, when you submit an idea like that, even if it's brilliance, 99.5% of the time it's going to be rejected out of hand cause no one asked you.

[alamrcn]

I disagree.  In reviewing the National Commander's letter of 15 Mar 06, which addresses this issue.  I discovered that the memorandum didn't delegate the authority (or decision) to any commander to prescribe its mandatory wearing, but left it up to the individual member.

Regs don't have to point out that a subordinant authority can or can not supliment (maybe wrong use of word) a rule where there is none. Further narrowing a national level regulation or creating a standard where there is little to none already is certainly within their power.

An incorrect suplimental regulation would be...
National says to wear black or white socks with BDUs, and X-Wing says their members can also wear gray socks.

A correct suplimental regulation would be...
National says to wear black or white socks with BDUs, and X-Wing says their members will wear only white socks.

Think of it at this level...
Your unit commander makes the wear of the unit's pocket patch for all unit members mandatory. Even though 39-1 says that pocket patches are optional, the individual unit member must now comply with the narrowed, suplimental regulation.

This "suplimental ability" could also be abused. Quite awhile back, a member with a grudge tried to create a wing supliment to the national grooming regulations that male cadets could not have "high-and-tight" (typical military style) haircuts. The reason was that this hairstlye was neither "tapered" or "blocked" in appearance, and did not provide sufficiant protection of the scalp from sun and windchill. The real reason was the same as why we have beret regs, in that he felt the haircut was a typical thing amoungst certain types of "high-speed" cadets whom he did not like or get along with. Of course this did not get passed, thank goodness.

Anyway, my wing also passed the mandatory wear of the wing shoulder patch.

- Ace

[DNall]

as did mine. I believe the system now requires wing supplements to be approved by NHQ (which is mainly for deconflicting purposes as I understand it).

[MIKE]

This is off topic but what the hell.

My openion... If a piece of insignia is optional, then it should work like this:  Commanders may require that optional items not be worn for uniformity, but they may not require members to purchase and wear an optional item for the same reason.

IMO, when the shoulder patches came off the service uniforms, they should have come off of ALL uniforms.

[DNall]

I would agree with that.

[Major Lord]

Okay, I guess I have been out of the uniform argument venue for awhile, so you guys will have to update me! 1) Did the Air Force approve (require) the shoulder flag, or is this an informal Pinedism? 2) I heard that Wing Supplements would be limited in time and require National approval and admission to regulations, is this correct? 3) Are you gents inferring that a Wing Commander cannot require us to wear the Wing Patch on the BDU's? 4) My understanding is that CAWG does require the Wing Patch on BDUs. Is this correct and permissable? Lots of questions, sorry please don't kill me!

Capt. Lord

[alamrcn]

My openion... If a piece of insignia is optional, then it should work like this:  Commanders may require that optional items not be worn for uniformity, but they may not require members to purchase and wear an optional item for the same reason.

The Come And Pay discussion about volunteers being required to purchase uniform items has been one of the major arguements against individual Wings (or groups, or squadrons) requiring the wear of a patch. Not like that was something new since the Army Overseas (flag) patch arrived!

The feeling of "if you have to have it, it should be provided" gets old when used in reference to a $2 patch and not a $30 short-sleeve blues shirt like the chits were developed for. Luckily, wing patches are no longer required on the "minimum uniform" combination. Each wing (and even some local units) have a financial assistance program or capability in place for such issues.

...and now, back to your regular discussion!

- Ace