NEC approves GT uniform requirement

[MIKE]

Merged.

[iamchj]

On the copy of the "Notes from the May 1 NEC meeting and other items" from the Pacific Region sent to all Oregon Wing members by the Oregon Wing Commander, the last item within the notes reads, "Safety Apparel: Approved. This will required all GT members to wear safety color uniform. You need to read the requirement. It is very long. It will be posted soon."

Does anyone know where this information will be posted?
Does anyone know what this "safety color uniform" looks like?

The California Wing had a Ground Team uniform approved that includes the wearing of a blaze orange BDU shirt and blue BDU trousers a number of years ago. Does anyone know if the new Region GT "safety color uniform" is the same as the CA Wing Ground Team uniform, or is it different?

[SarDragon]

NOT blaze orange!

CAWG Ground Team Uniform Definition
(1) Description:
(a) Long or short sleeve orange (not fluorescent), two or four pocket shirt without epaulets.

[a2capt]

CalTrans Orange. .... ;-)

You know what really gets me? We, as a county accomplished so much until now, and most of it was not with all this nanny-ism legislative oversight from every direction.

I wonder if we'll ever accomplish the same amount again.

We got to the moon, with a spacecraft we designed. In 10 years. In 10 years, now, we've cancelled several programs, and spent most of that time on one of them, only to have it cancelled, too.

Maybe NASA needs orange hats to encourage safe thinking.

[iamchj]

Thanks, Maj Bowles.

[MIKE]

Merged again.  Please take a minute to look for the active topic on the subject before posting. Duplicate topics may have been merged or deleted.

[JC004]

Did they think Item 11 through?  (ID cards)  Why not allow minor cadets to get photo IDs if they want them?  If they're under (fill in the blank here for your respective state) years old, they may not be able to get a photo ID card issued by the state and if somewhere like an airport security wants it...they're screwed.  We've had to have cadets sit out (that is, sit inside) at the airport and such for not having photo ID. 

[necigrad]

As someone that has spent a lot of time playing in traffic with a police department, I can say with experience that a VEST is a very good idea.  I can also say that anything more is a waste.  My logic for this is vehicle lighting.  I have seen both slightly lit vehicles (4 ways and a 2 strobe light bar) as well as well lit (police (and other) cars with full halogen, strobe, or LED light bars, LED lights to the sides, LEDs or strobes in the rear window, and corner strobes) get hit.  Make yourself visible, and you REDUCE the chance of being hit and increase the chance of being seen.  Anything other then a vest is just "feel good" regulation.  ANSI Class III vest, call it good.  Rules like this "high vis" uniform are reasons why I'd like to see a certain west coast State sink.

Did they think Item 11 through?  (ID cards)  Why not allow minor cadets to get photo IDs if they want them?  If they're under (fill in the blank here for your respective state) years old, they may not be able to get a photo ID card issued by the state and if somewhere like an airport security wants it...they're screwed.  We've had to have cadets sit out (that is, sit inside) at the airport and such for not having photo ID.

You don't actually NEED photo ID, even as an adult, at an airport, just Government ID.  That requirement is only for those under (I think) 18.

[mynetdude]

As someone that has spent a lot of time playing in traffic with a police department, I can say with experience that a VEST is a very good idea.  I can also say that anything more is a waste.  My logic for this is vehicle lighting.  I have seen both slightly lit vehicles (4 ways and a 2 strobe light bar) as well as well lit (police (and other) cars with full halogen, strobe, or LED light bars, LED lights to the sides, LEDs or strobes in the rear window, and corner strobes) get hit.  Make yourself visible, and you REDUCE the chance of being hit and increase the chance of being seen.  Anything other then a vest is just "feel good" regulation.  ANSI Class III vest, call it good.  Rules like this "high vis" uniform are reasons why I'd like to see a certain west coast State sink.

Did they think Item 11 through?  (ID cards)  Why not allow minor cadets to get photo IDs if they want them?  If they're under (fill in the blank here for your respective state) years old, they may not be able to get a photo ID card issued by the state and if somewhere like an airport security wants it...they're screwed.  We've had to have cadets sit out (that is, sit inside) at the airport and such for not having photo ID.

You don't actually NEED photo ID, even as an adult, at an airport, just Government ID.  That requirement is only for those under (I think) 18.

Yes but now they are requiring photo IDs for all SMs so after beginning 2012 it will be mandatory.  I can remember being able to get a government issued photo ID as soon as I was 14 and it only cost $13 from DMV you just had to show proof of who you are and where you live.

back in my teen days the airlines didn't require me to have photo ID heck this was way before 9/11 security didn't even look at photo IDs then you showed your picture from the yearbook (at the time it was an acceptable proof if you didn't have government ID)

Nowadays how are minors supposed to get through security checkpoint without a photo ID? I don't understand why they are prohibiting cadets from being able to get a photo ID is there some kind of threat they perceive?

[jimmydeanno]

Nowadays how are minors supposed to get through security checkpoint without a photo ID?

Passport for those under 16: http://www.travel.state.gov/passport/get/minors/minors_834.html

[cap235629]

a non driver ID here in Arkansas is $5.00

[PHall]

I would agree. If some wings had stuck to their guns, instead of cowing, we wouldn't have outside agencies setting policy for us.

Kinda hard to "stick to your guns" when you're going against an established state law.

[davedove]

I would agree. If some wings had stuck to their guns, instead of cowing, we wouldn't have outside agencies setting policy for us.

Kinda hard to "stick to your guns" when you're going against an established state law.

Not for a federal level agency, which we are (even though some people forget that).  Nobody tells the military, the FBI, or even FEMA what they have to wear.

[Eclipse]

I would agree. If some wings had stuck to their guns, instead of cowing, we wouldn't have outside agencies setting policy for us.

Kinda hard to "stick to your guns" when you're going against an established state law.

Not for a federal level agency, which we are (even though some people forget that).  Nobody tells the military, the FBI, or even FEMA what they have to wear.

I agree with the sentiment, but unfortunately we aren't a federalized agency in this regard.

The majority of our ES response is not via AFAMs, but via corporate agreements (MOU) at the state or lower level, so waving the Fed flag doesn't "fly".

If we only and always responded via FEMA, HLS, or DOD (via AFAM), it would potentially be a different story.

[JC004]

...
You don't actually NEED photo ID, even as an adult, at an airport, just Government ID.  That requirement is only for those under (I think) 18.

Not exactly the argument I want to have with airport security at night at the world's 10th busiest airport.

I wouldn't want to ask the cadets to go through the passport process either. 

I don't see any reason why they shouldn't be able to have a photo ID optionally.

[PHall]

I would agree. If some wings had stuck to their guns, instead of cowing, we wouldn't have outside agencies setting policy for us.

Kinda hard to "stick to your guns" when you're going against an established state law.

Not for a federal level agency, which we are (even though some people forget that).  Nobody tells the military, the FBI, or even FEMA what they have to wear.

In California, the Sheriff of each county is responsible for all Search and Rescue activities in their county, we operate at the pleasure the Sheriff while in their county. CAP has been banned from operating in certain counties in the past and there was nothing the Air Force or AFRCC could do about it. Believe me, all legal avenues were explored.

CalEMA acts as a coordination/standardization agency and while they can not tell the counties what they can do, they can withhold state funding. So they pretty much get their way.

We're just doing what has been suggested that we do, i.e. "shut up and color between the lines".

Now, if you can point out a legal way to get around this requirement, then have at it.

[RiverAux]

The majority of our ES response is not via AFAMs, but via corporate agreements (MOU) at the state or lower level,

Oh, I don't know about that "fact" at all. 

[Eclipse]

The majority of our ES response is not via AFAMs, but via corporate agreements (MOU) at the state or lower level,

Oh, I don't know about that "fact" at all.

Perhaps I should have qualified that but I can certainly speak for my AOR.  This has been a point of contention with me for a long time - that we don't get AFAM's for DR response - everything I've been involved in with the exception of Katrina has been a "C", including at least one that qualified for a DR-V and several that supported 3- and 4- letter agencies.

Every wing is mandated to have an MOU with their state's ES agency (though some states refuse to sign them), and in most states anything short of Armageddon is handled by the state or lower.

[RiverAux]

There may be more small scale disasters done on C-missions but I don't think the total CAP committment (either manpower or flight hours) would actually add up to much when compared to the massive committments for the large scale disasters that end up on AFAMS.  We probably do 3-4 small DR missions on the state dime every year, but they almost never amount to more than a sortie or two each.  But, when a "real" disaster hits, it almost always turns into an AFAM and many, many more CAP resources are devoted to it. 

But, we digress (it would be interesting to see some figures on breakdown of flying hours on corporate vs AFAM es missions). 

[lordmonar]

CalEMA acts as a coordination/standardization agency and while they can not tell the counties what they can do, they can withhold state funding. So they pretty much get their way.

We're just doing what has been suggested that we do, i.e. "shut up and color between the lines".

Now, if you can point out a legal way to get around this requirement, then have at it.

While I agree with you 100% that we need to comply with the regulations and laws of our customer.....

I have to ask.....is this really a legal requirment?

I ask that because a quick google search on Cali SAR agencies I found several that do not wear the orange shirt.

Also how do Federal agencies fit into CALI's suggested SAR clothing?   I was watching the NV Traingle show on the NatGEO chanel an all the National Parks guys were in their own uniforms and not the orange shirts suggested by CALI.

Like I said.....I support that CAP may need to do some (a lot of) fence mending in Cali....and adopting their SAR uniform may help in that.....but I also wonder if this "requirment" is being blown out of porpotion (at least here on CT).

With that said....I still go back to my origninal questions about inter operability.

Do the CAWG guys know that they can't wear their orange shirts over the borders and has anyone considered what requirments may be placed on non-CAWG support if they are ever called apon?