Flight Officer revamp -- what if?

[supertigerCH]

Here's an idea...


Most likely people's opinions about this will vary widely... but what else is new when it comes to uniforms?



What if CAP were to stop the (somewhat silly looking) practice... of "Senior Members Without Grade" wearing epaulets with no rank on them?

What if when a new member joined CAP (and finished the Orientation, Exam, and Cadet Protection, etc.) he/she was given the rank (and epaulets) of Flight Officer?

What if after 6 months, those Flight Officers who wanted to be part of the "Regular" Leadership/Officer track... would then be made 2nd Lieutenants, and move up the ranks from there?

What if the remaining Flight Officers were then to keep the rank of Flight Officer all the time... instead of being referred to as SMWOG?

What if, after 5 total honorable years of service in CAP... Flight Officers became Technical Flight Officers... and after 10 total honorable years of service to CAP... Tech. Flight Officers became Senior Flight Officers?


This seems like it would eliminate the goofy practice of some members walking around in uniforms with epaulets that have no rank on them.  Also, it would allow those who want to be regular officers to move up into officer ranks early on... and (over time) would still recognize the years of service given by those who don't want to be regular officers or NCOs.

After all... even members who are not regular officers or NCOs... still accumulate knowledge & experience after working for & being part of CAP for so many years.


Cadets who turn 18 would still continue the practice of serving more time as a cadet... or becoming a flight officer until age 21.  That part would stay the same as it is now.


Just a random idea...

Thoughts or opinions anyone?

[Luis R. Ramos]

It would be great if people would drop the SMWOG since NHQ never made it a grade. People adopted that on their own after reading too much in the appropriate regulations...

[SarDragon]

Some prior perspective on SMWOG:

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=10904.msg295705#msg295705

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=18401.msg334826#msg334826

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=10177.msg185497#msg185497

That's enough. you'll get the idea.

[supertigerCH]

What are people's thoughts about an actual change... in who CAP would call Flight Officers (like what has been proposed here)?


Making those people who (up until now) have been referred to as "SMWOG" into Flight Officers... therefore giving them some type of rank if they choose to serve CAP in this way.

We all know many members of CAP who are like this... who enjoy doing work, helping and serving in whatever way they can... but they are not really interested in having high rank or leadership positions.  They are very content at just helping and donating their time to do work supportive of CAP.

Such a change would allow these people to keep serving in the way they enjoy best... and would give them an occasional "promotion" (Technical Flight Officer, Senior Flight Officer) that recognized their experience & years in CAP... without adding the leadership pressures of becoming a regular officer.



As was mentioned in the beginning... this would eliminate the phrase "Senior Members Without Grade" ...and would also still provide a "launching point" for all members who wanted to move up into the regular officer leadership track after joining.

[Storm Chaser]

It would be great if people would drop the SMWOG since NHQ never made it a grade. People adopted that on their own after reading too much in the appropriate regulations...

Members using the unofficial SMWOG (Senior Member Without Grade) is no different that members using other unofficial acronyms or terms such as BBDU, G/W, covers (not a CAP or USAF term), blues, etc. What else should we call them? Members who have not been promoted yet?

[supertigerCH]

I guess that's kind of the main idea of this thread.


How about making people Flight Officers when they first enter CAP (when they finish all the joining requirements such as Orientation, Exam, Cadet Protection, etc.)?  That way as soon as the complete the membership requirements for joining... BANG! they are a Flight Officer.

It would be the starting rank for everyone who joined (from the moment their application is approved by National).  There would not then be a "limbo" period anymore... and members without rank would not even exist.

Problem Solved.



(and of course those people who wanted to work on the requirements for promotion to Lieutenant after 6 months could do so.)

[JeffDG]

Yet another solution in desperate search of a problem.

[supertigerCH]

Hi Jeff,


Don't know if this an example of "something that's not a problem".

The reason I started this thread was because so many people (at my squadron and here in CAPTALK)... are always talking about SMWOG... and what they're really supposed to be called, and if it's even a rank or not.  After years in CAP, members still continue to go back and forth about this.


(Also if you take time to look at what I named the thread... you will see that it's not a proposed "solution" to anything.  Rather, as it says, this is a "What if?" ...which means it is just an idea for people to toss back and forth.)


I ask anyone's forgiveness... who was under the impression that I just made myself a CAP General by bringing this topic up.

[Eclipse]

The reason I started this thread was because so many people (both at my squadron and here in CAPTALK) are always talking back and forth about SMWOG... and what they're really supposed to be called, and if it's either a rank or not.  After years in CAP, members still continue to go back and forth about this.

SMWOG is a status, not a grade.  The proper term is "Senior Member", but because that is also the generic for anyone over 21 in the program,
the WOG is added, usually only in text.

In a perfect world, members would join as "nothing", perhaps "airmen", etc.  Complete their Level 1 and whatever basic training
was considered as the minimum, and then perhaps "declare" their intentions to pursue either technical (enlisted) or management
(officer) duties.  No reason there couldn't be mobility within that declaration, but not as much as there is today.

Sadly, we're at least 2/3rds short of the number of members to make that viable.

[Flying Pig]

I think it adds, nor takes away absolutely nothing to the program.  Just like the whole NCO discussions.  No rank in CAP has anything to do with what you can participate in.  I enjoyed CAP as a 10yr 1st LT.  Flew, commanded the cadet program, commanded a squadron...had a good ol' time. 

Edit:  I meant "it neither adds, nor takes away....."

[supertigerCH]

Flying Pig,

You're exactly right.  Rank in CAP does not determine what things you can (and cannot) be involved in.  It's one of the neat things about the more informal side of CAP. 

[Storm Chaser]

One possible alternative to the status quo is using the term "Officer Trainee" for those members pursuing officer grades and "NCO Trainee" for those pursuing NCO grades. That would be compatible with the distinction in uniform made in CAPM 39-1 for these two tracks.

Interesting enough, CAPR 35-5, Para. 1-4 refers to these members as "CAP members without grade". Should we start using the acronym CAPMWOG instead?

[Eclipse]

One possible alternative to the status quo is using the term "Officer Trainee" for those members pursuing officer grades and "NCO Trainee" for those pursuing NCO grades. That would be compatible with the distinction in uniform made in CAPM 39-1 for these two tracks.

That's fine, but I don't think you should declare until you're past Level 1 and have a clue.

Perhaps the membership ribbon requires a member to declare?

[Flying Pig]

One possible alternative to the status quo is using the term "Officer Trainee" for those members pursuing officer grades and "NCO Trainee" for those pursuing NCO grades. That would be compatible with the distinction in uniform made in CAPM 39-1 for these two tracks.

That's fine, but I don't think you should declare until you're past Level 1 and have a clue.

Perhaps the membership ribbon requires a member to declare?

Im really NOT trying to derail this but I have to ask......  Has CAP determined that there will be specific NCO and officer duties? 

[Storm Chaser]

Not yet.

[Flying Pig]

You'd think they would have identified the need before implementing the program 

[Luis R. Ramos]

What should we call them?

How about... senior members!!! No rocket science. What the regulations call them.

What the regulations always called them.

It was not until 2005 that someone ended reading a little too much into regs and decided that all senior members were and should be treated as officers. So, if (s)he is not a lieutenant, (s)he must have the officer grade of Senior Member Without Grade.

We keep reading that "CAP Grade structure parallels the Air Force."

Use your common sense, people!

Since when the US Air Force has the grade of Officer Without Grade?

No Rocket Science!!!

[Storm Chaser]

What should we call them?

How about... senior members!!! No rocket science. What the regulations call them.

What the regulations always called them.

It was not until 2005 that someone ended reading a little too much into regs and decided that all senior members were and should be treated as officers. So, if (s)he is not a lieutenant, (s)he must have the officer grade of Senior Member Without Grade.

We keep reading that "CAP Grade structure parallels the Air Force."

Use your common sense, people!

Since when the US Air Force has the grade of Officer Without Grade?

No Rocket Science!!!

No, they have Officer Trainee for those attending OTS and Cadet for those attending ROTC or the USAFA. Neither of those are pay grades. On the enlisted side, they have Airman Basic, which has a pay grade (E-1).

Since now we have two tracks (those pursuing officer grades and those pursuing NCO grades) as described by CAPM 39-1, Para. 1.4 and CAPR 35-5, Para. 1-2, I recommended the terms "Officer Trainee" and "NCO Trainee", respectively.

That said, Senior Member without Grade (SMWOG) is not necessarily an inappropriate term. While eServices identifies members without grade as SM (Senior Member), technically all active adult members are senior members.

Also, is that really what the regulations call members without grade? Well, let's see.

All members will be enrolled as CAP members without grade...

Adult individuals without grade...

Active Member

According to CAPR 39-2, senior members include active, reserve/patron and retired members.

And while eServices identifies adult members without grade as SM, it also identifies cadets that have not completed Achievement 1 as CADET, even though they do have a grade: Cadet Airman Basic (C/AB).

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I have suggested this before, but I would take the OP suggestion (which I think has merit) but call them "warrant officers," and revamp the insignia accordingly.

Alright, you have to use a bit of imagination here, but picture these embroidered on standard grey CAP shoulder marks:

WO-1 - appointed after completion of Level I, CPPT, and background check.


CWO-2 - appointed after minimum one year service as WO-1, earning Technician rating in speciality track.


CWO-3 - appointed after minimum two years' service as CWO-2, earning Senior rating in speciality track.


CWO-4 - appointed after minimum three years' service as CWO-3, earning Master rating in speciality track.


SLS, CLC, Wing/Region conferences would be optional, as WO's are specialists.

[supertigerCH]

CyBorg,

You make a good point.  I have often wondered why... if CAP has decided to have Flight Officers... why they didn't make their ranks parallel (and look like) Warrant Officers in the military.  The Air Force DID at one time have Warrant Officers (like the other services), but they got rid of them.

I'm assuming this is the historic reason why CAP created the "Flight Officer" ranks.

Your idea CyBorg makes sense... however I'm not sure if the Air Force would ever go that far... to be okay with changing the look of CAP's Flight Officer Ranks.  My original idea from the beginning of this thread... would keep the current FO ranks looking as they are now, and would only change WHO was called a Flight Officer.


However, I think even my more tame idea would have almost no chance of ever happening... even though a lot of these ideas make sense.