Advancded Grade for RM Officers- Split from NCO thread

[MIKE]

Retiring at least.

[mikeylikey]

Maybe, once you hit 70, we need to start demoting.

I can hear it now...."Lt Col Jones happy birthday, here is your gift certificate to McDonalds, oh by the way.....we are demoting you to Major so a more junior officer can be promoted to Lt Col so that it does not look like the Cadet Program is run by all old men"

Then Lt Col (now Major) Jones says "Fine, I quit, and I am taking my typewriter with me".

[SJFedor]

Well, that way, at least when they're REALLY old and senile (no offense to anyone, I'm just being playful) they'll just be SMWOGs, and no one from the outside looking in will expect much, because they're just new SMWOGs, not those experienced Lt Cols over in the corner.

[PaulR]

Why is the ranking such a big deal.  It is not like folks are being paid for their paygrade!   Sounds like a lot of ego hype to me.

The way I see it, everyone (unless they reached certain rankings as a cadet, as already stated) should start off at the bottom.  To bring personnel in at an advanced paygra... uuuhhmm I mean ranking who do not have any CAP experience is a disservice to the CAP.  I dont know about you, but when I see people with advanced rank, I would think that they would have a certain amount of experience within the organization.

Paul

[ZigZag911]

I believe there are federal laws and CAP regulations against discrimination of pretty much any sort that is not directly mission related, i.e., it is not considered discrimination to have physical  capability benchmarks relevant to task -- a pilot needs to have sight, a GTL/GTM needs to be able to move through difficult terrain.

I presume these rules include age discrimination.

[Major Carrales]

OK...not get your philosophical faculties around this next trick...

If...
USAF Major = CAP Major,

then does...

CAP Major = USAF Major?

It has always been my understanding that a prior service rank was extended in CAP to honor that person's service in the Military.  However, some of you seem to take it to the point where I have to bring up the above mathematics.

So, should everyone begin at the bottom?  Should we remove prior service appointments an donly alow pilots credentials?  Should we extend the rank to prior service officers only if they first attend some CAP specific training?

[PaulR]

Outside of sharing a name and general appearance of the ranking insignia, a major in the CAP is not equal to an equivalent rank in the regular military.   


The roles and job descriptions are not equal.  If an active duty officer was to switch branches of service in the military, in most cases he/she would drop a paygrade or two.  That is because the organizations have different ways of "doing business". 

What I mean, is that policies, procedures, reporting, and even forms/paperwork vary from branch to branch.  I feel that bringing personnel at an elevated senior grade without experience into any organization is setting both the member and the organization up for failure.

Just my take.

Paul

[Major Carrales]

Oh, I agree, there is a world or difference between a USAF Major and a CAP Major, I made that above equasion to try to point out the difference.

I have always maintained that a CAP Major should have the skills and training equal to that of a USAF 2d Lt. 

[ZigZag911]

I think very, very few of us would try to claim that a CAP officer was the quivalent of his/her active duty counterpart.

[Hawk200]

...If an active duty officer was to switch branches of service in the military, in most cases he/she would drop a paygrade or two.  That is because the organizations have different ways of "doing business".

I've seen a half dozen officers switch branches. They were either 1LT's or Captains. No reduction was done. The officer was required to attend initial entry training in whatever MOS (or AFSC)was required, but wore their rank through the school. More common were switches from Army to Air Force components, but the grade carried over.

I have always maintained that a CAP Major should have the skills and training equal to that of a USAF 2d Lt. 

I wouldn't say necessarily to 2LT, but I don't think additional training is all that bad an idea. Most states have Guard commisioning programs that are 18 drills (essentially 18 weekends), and two Annual Training periods. At the end you get your bars.

I don't think 12 weekends and a week would be all that difficult. Wouldn't be easy, but it's doable. Be nice if we could work on military installations for it. I'm sure the military wouldn't mind if they knew it was for a more professional officer corps for us. Hopefully they'd be willing to forgo charging us for it.

[Major Carrales]

I wouldn't say necessarily to 2LT, but I don't think additional training is all that bad an idea. Most states have Guard commisioning programs that are 18 drills (essentially 18 weekends), and two Annual Training periods. At the end you get your bars.

I mean this as a "rule of thumb." A standard for professionalism.

[LeoBurke]

Oh, I agree, there is a world or difference between a USAF Major and a CAP Major, I made that above equasion to try to point out the difference.

I have always maintained that a CAP Major should have the skills and training equal to that of a USAF 2d Lt. 

Interesting this fascination we have with equivalences.  (As it relates to Civil Air Patrol, Aviation, Cadet Programs and Leadership - forget about Aero Ed)  I know very few USAF officers, from 2d Lt to Major that could leave there current duty assignment and transfer to Operational role, A leadership position at the squadron or group level.  Bring the new guy over from the Navy or Army and forget about it.

The skills do not track.  From an aviation perspective, I recently spent 45 minutes at an eval watching TWO USAF RAP Officers try to find the tach time on a G1000 C182.  Not your run of the mill guys, both were airline captains (I hope flying steam gauges!)  They just didn't know anything about GA aircraft. 

If you ever have an adult conversation with a more senior military officer (or any NCO) they will tell you that all LTs and most Captains are useless beyond specific technical skills (running a computer, flying an airplane).  I will tell you the exact same thing about most college grads.  There are exceptions, but until they have 5-6 yrs of experience, rank and title mean nothing. 

In CAP, we have a different problem, as mentioned previously.  We use this rank structure as if it had some translation to the RM.  It doesn't.  It is a way for CAP to recognize the progression of our members through our technical/mission skills progressions. 

Everyone knows it the ribbons that really count!  LOL

PS I was a 21 yr old Captain and 28 yr old Lt Col.  I was also a Squadron CC at 21 and one day, and Wing Director of CP, Plans and Programs, a Mission Coordinator, MP, etc, by 28 as well. 

Don't be a hater.  There are some spectacular 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 yr olds in our program.  We also need to acknowledge that we have a spectacular number of fools in the same (and all the other) age groups.

[PaulR]

Don't be a hater.  There are some spectacular 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 yr olds in our program.  We also need to acknowledge that we have a spectacular number of fools in the same (and all the other) age groups.

LOL... I dont think that this is about the member's biological age so much as actual years experience in regard to rank.  I Agree that there can be some personnel with 15 years of experience/service in the CAP by the time they are 28.  I believe that these people should be wearing the senior ranks.

[ZigZag911]

 

If you ever have an adult conversation with a more senior military officer (or any NCO) they will tell you that all LTs and most Captains are useless beyond specific technical skills (running a computer, flying an airplane).  I will tell you the exact same thing about most college grads.  There are exceptions, but until they have 5-6 yrs of experience, rank and title mean nothing. 

PS I was a 21 yr old Captain and 28 yr old Lt Col.  I was also a Squadron CC at 21 and one day, and Wing Director of CP, Plans and Programs, a Mission Coordinator, MP, etc, by 28 as well. 

Don't be a hater.  There are some spectacular 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 yr olds in our program.  We also need to acknowledge that we have a spectacular number of fools in the same (and all the other) age groups.

I think you contradict yourself....you make the point that virtually all LTs lack the experience (and I would add 'maturity') to handle senior leadership roles....then tell is that, of course, CAP's former cadets are the exception to the rule.

I was a cadet officer myself.....I would have made a horrible squadron CC @ 21 y.o.....I was a group staff officer and did a reasonable job, with some guidance.

I recognize that there are varying situations and people; eg, one of my own former cadets took command of her home squadron almost as soon as she turned 21.....a rural area, few seniors, she was truly best qualified -- and has done a fine job under the circumstances....but still wouldn't have been my first choice if their had been some one more mature and as capable....and, as a rule, would rather see new seniors/former cadets work on their PD, SQTR, and technical track training....and just get used to being on 'the dark side'!

It's not a question of 'hating' -- simply my professional judgement that too much rank at too young an age is good neither for CAP nor for the officer.

[Dragoon]

If you ever have an adult conversation with a more senior military officer (or any NCO) they will tell you that all LTs and most Captains are useless beyond specific technical skills (running a computer, flying an airplane).  I will tell you the exact same thing about most college grads.  There are exceptions, but until they have 5-6 yrs of experience, rank and title mean nothing. 

Well, speaking as relatively senior military officer (0-5, Army), I've got a different perspective.

It may well be that USAF Lts and Captains are useless - I wouldn't know.  But I believe that vast majority of junior Army captains and senior 1LTs have organizational and leadership skills a good bit beyond the average CAP major.

Of course, we're in the people business, so it makes some kind of sense that this would be kind of a core competency. 

True, we do have a few  truly "technical" officers (mainly lawyers, doctors, etc), and yeah, they are pretty weak in the leadership arena.  And we all know that 2d Lts are unproven - some good, and some pretty worthless.  They get weeded out rather quickly.

But don't discount the value of a few years of active duty officer leadership experience - I've found it's incredibly valuable to CAP. 

[Hawk200]

But don't discount the value of a few years of active duty officer leadership experience - I've found it's incredibly valuable to CAP. 

I would agree on the leadership, especially since command is a difficult concept when it comes to volunteers. Make your people want to do something, it works a lot better than telling them to.

[Eclipse]

A RealMilitary® Captain is no more equivalent to a CAP Captain than a Police Captain is, in fact probably less so, because CAP does not require or equate grade or rank to positional authority.

The RealMilitary®, and most PD, FD, & similar agencies do.  So what?

We also do not have mandatory retirements, nor minimum / maximum entry ages - thus the 28 yro Lt. Col's., and the 80 yro Lt. Col's.. So what. The minimum requirements for the grades is clearly stated in the curriculum, meet them and advance.  It doesn't matter if you are a GOB or a Spaatz with parents in the program. It doesn't matter if you are a GOB or a Spaatz with parents in the program, the bars, oaks and clusters cost the same and carry the same weight and authority.

They mean more or less to individuals because of what they personally did to achieve them, and to those around that person for the same reason.  People know who does the work, and who gets the benefit of the golden pen, and in the end, its all the same.

Grade has absolutely NOTHING to do with operations, it is a historical representation of your relative training, development, and overall commitment to the program.  Nothing more (or less).

Airplanes fly straight and level because of the pilot's ability, not grade.

A ground team will be successful because of the experience and ability of the members, not their respective grades.

Commanders have their authority because of their corporate appointments, not their grade.

Your grade and ribbons speak volumes about you and are at the same time worthless and useless.  Read this, hang it on your wall, and move on.

Something which is also lost in all this background noise is that while members with experience from the RealMilitary®, whether platoon leaders or regimental commanders, may have a wealth of general knowledge, experience and background in group dynamics and leadership theory, there is a cavernous expanse between motivating people with identical training and compensation, who
are legally bound to follow your directions, from leading volunteers with diverse motivation and experience who always have the option of just going home.

[Eclipse]

Should have been an edit, not a quote...

[ddelaney103]

A RealMilitary® Captain is no more equivalent to a CAP Captain than a Police Captain is, in fact probably less so, because CAP does not require or equate grade or rank to positional authority.

The RealMilitary®, and most PD, FD, & similar agencies do.  So what?

We also do not have mandatory retirements, nor minimum / maximum entry ages - thus the 28 yro Lt. Col's., and the 80 yro Lt. Col's.. So what. The minimum requirements for the grades is clearly stated in the curriculum, meet them and advance.  It doesn't matter if you are a GOB or a Spaatz with parents in the program. It doesn't matter if you are a GOB or a Spaatz with parents in the program, the bars, oaks and clusters cost the same and carry the same weight and authority.

They mean more or less to individuals because of what they personally did to achieve them, and to those around that person for the same reason.  People know who does the work, and who gets the benefit of the golden pen, and in the end, its all the same.

Grade has absolutely NOTHING to do with operations, it is a historical representation of your relative training, development, and overall commitment to the program.  Nothing more (or less).

Airplanes fly straight and level because of the pilot's ability, not grade.

A ground team will be successful because of the experience and ability of the members, not their respective grades.

Commanders have their authority because of their corporate appointments, not their grade.

Your grade and ribbons speak volumes about you and are at the same time worthless and useless.  Read this, hang it on your wall, and move on.

Something which is also lost in all this background noise is that while members with experience from the RealMilitary®, whether platoon leaders or regimental commanders, may have a wealth of general knowledge, experience and background in group dynamics and leadership theory, there is a cavernous expanse between motivating people with identical training and compensation, who are legally bound to follow your directions, from leading volunteers with diverse motivation and experience who always have the option of just going home.

All very true - which begs the question "why do we wear grade?"

All of the services (armed, public service or emergency) wear insignia so a person can immediately determine the senior person there.  That is because the senior person bears the authority and responsibility.

As you say, CAP does not follow this system.  Grade has little to do with your authority or responsibility, so why do we wear it on our uniforms?  The bling factor? Wannabe-ism?

Also, there is a difference between "giving orders" and "leading people."  Getting the most out of people involves leading, even if you pay them or have UCMJ authority over them.

[Dragoon]

All very true - which begs the question "why do we wear grade?"

All of the services (armed, public service or emergency) wear insignia so a person can immediately determine the senior person there.  That is because the senior person bears the authority and responsibility.

As you say, CAP does not follow this system.  Grade has little to do with your authority or responsibility, so why do we wear it on our uniforms?  The bling factor? Wannabe-ism?

Also, there is a difference between "giving orders" and "leading people."  Getting the most out of people involves leading, even if you pay them or have UCMJ authority over them.

So true, so true.

Of course, Police and Fire departments use officer grade as well, in a very different fashion than the military.  But

1.  Unlike CAP, they aren't wearing U.S. military uniforms, so it's pretty durned obvious they aren't part of DoD

2.  Unlike CAP, they do link rank to authority and responsibility.  It's not very often you see a Police Major taking orders from a Police Lieutenant.

3.  Unlike CAP, they don't have anywhere the amount of military customs and courtesies attached to the grade.  When's the last time you saw a bunch of firemen salute when their captain walks by?

Seems to me, we'd be better off either using officer rank to designate current authority, as most folks do, or trading it in for some CAP specific stuff that clearly ISN'T a badge of authority.  It would eliminate the confusion (and half the traffic on this board!)