Post the most ridiculous CPP misinterpretation you have seen

[RTFB]

I'll start:

(Some items are intentionally vague to remain anonymous)

I was driving along a public road between two sites of a weekend CAP activity.  The campsite and the base of operations were separated by about 0.5 mi.  Heading in the opposite direction was another CAP van moving at a crawl.  I slowed down and rolled down the window to ask if something was wrong.  Just then, I noticed a male CAP cadet walking along the side of the road, just behind the other van.  The van driver, a female senior member who has been around long enough to know better, explained that because of the cadet protection policy, she could not drive the van with an opposite-sex cadet in it unless another senior member were also present.  Therefore, she made him walk down the public road, while she loitered in the van alongside "for safety".

Anybody have anything more ridiculous?  Please share.

[lordmonar]

Recently.....our Assistant Deputy Commander for cadets was conducting mock Promotion Review Board interviews with all the cadets.
We had an old Lt Col who had just transferred over to our squadron THAT DAY sitting in and seeing how things were done.

The Lt Col was a long time ES heavy senior squadron and wing/regional level time....who crossed over to the cadet side because of his grand son.

So....our ACDC was yelling "NEXT" from the conference room to get the next cadet to report to the board.

The Lt Col objected to this as "Yelling at the cadets" and was ready to call wing then and there to report that we routinely yell at our cadets and did not know the CPP rules.

Geese!

[NIN]

One of my favorites that I have not been able to beat out of anybody (yet).. (Remember, kids, there is no Senior Protection Policy. "Majors and below, beat your faces!")

National Guard armory meeting location. Large drill hall with rolling door at one end, flanked by double personnel doors.  All doors are wide open.  Unit "office" is the Armory DFAC, accessible via double doors, also open, immediately inside one set of personnel doors.  You can hear the cadets 30 ft away outside, and if you stand in the doorway of the DFAC, you can see them, too.

Cadets walk outside to hold formation & inspection outdoors.

"Wait, you need a senior to supervise."

Can anybody point out where the CPP says "Cadets cannot be out of sight of seniors?"

(The cadets drill outdoors in the summer in the parking lot behind the Armory. The contiguous parking area is probably 150 yards long by about 20 or 30 yards wide.  A little knot of seniors "supervising" can always be found in the middle of this parking area.  Never mind correcting crappy D&C or providing any training value...)

[Flying Pig]

A squadron with no female seniors present that particular night.  During drill time, the male deputy commander for cadets made all the female cadets sit in the classroom while the male cadets drilled.  Reasoning was that it was not appropriate for female cadets to be outside without female adult escort.  Nevermind that there was a total of about 8 female cadets, about 15 male cadets and at least 5 seniors outside.   The couple of mothers there didnt "qualify" because they werent members.

[lordmonar]

A squadron with no female seniors present that particular night.  During drill time, the male deputy commander for cadets made all the female cadets sit in the classroom while the male cadets drilled.  Reasoning was that it was not appropriate for female cadets to be outside without female adult escort.  Nevermind that there was a total of about 8 female cadets, about 15 male cadets and at least 5 seniors outside.   The couple of mothers there didnt "qualify" because they werent members.

So they did a Title IX violation to avoid a CPP violation?   FSM! I love some people's thought processes.

[Flying Pig]

Risk vs Reward . But yeah, punish the girls for their own safety. They couldnt drill in the company of several male seniors and mothers, but they could sit inside with male seniors and non-member mothers. I didnt quite see the logic how it was any different.

Fortunately I was just visiting.  I voiced my opinion and was told I needed to review the policy.  I left about 30min later.  This was 10+yrs ago if not more.


(i hate posting via Iphone!!)

[EMT-83]

I know of a squadron that made a senior and cadet wait outside in the rain for the cadet's ride to show up, because they weren't allowed to be in the building alone.

[a2capt]

In a nutshell:

13 Meetings. Phase III cadet shows up 4 times.

One of which was for the review board.

When the promotion was denied, a hazing claim was leveled.

[Critical AOA]

And all of these instances were decisions made and actions taken by adults put in charge of children?  Amazing!

[Spaceman3750]

My unit is rather fond of requiring 2 seniors to be within sight of the cadets at all times, even in the classroom. It can get really disruptive to the senior staff but I haven't managed to break them of it...

[ol'fido]

Oh lord! Some of these people would have heart attacks and strokes if they saw the way we used to operate WIWAC.

[Garibaldi]

I cannot tell tales of WIWAC...the statute of limitations hasn't expired 

However...

My ES program was run into the ground by our over-zealous DCC who filled every possible weekend and meeting with AE related things. When I asked if I could have a weekend to train the cadets in ES, she (no joke) looked me dead in the eye, and said "Well, we can't risk burning the cadets out. They already have enough to do." I looked at her blankly, and walked off. This is the same woman who burned her 12 year old daughter through the entire cadet program as fast as the regs would allow.

[mwewing]

A squadron with no female seniors present that particular night.  During drill time, the male deputy commander for cadets made all the female cadets sit in the classroom while the male cadets drilled.  Reasoning was that it was not appropriate for female cadets to be outside without female adult escort.  Nevermind that there was a total of about 8 female cadets, about 15 male cadets and at least 5 seniors outside.   The couple of mothers there didnt "qualify" because they werent members.

So they did a Title IX violation to avoid a CPP violation?   FSM! I love some people's thought processes.

I was unaware that we were bound by Title IX. Does our USAF funding place us in the same boat as schools and colleges that get federal financial aid? If we are subject to the provisions of Title IX, how do we escape the obligation to have a Title IX coordinator, or am I just not aware that we have one? Also, what procedures do we have for the investigation of a Title IX complaint? I doubt many of our IGs are trained Title IX investigators.

I deal with Title IX compliance at work, and it is quite a bear. This is the first I have heard of it in a CAP context, and if we have the same obligations, it may impact the way we must deal with certain complaints.

[a2capt]

On the opening paragraph, it would appear the scenario fits right in:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance...

We are an education activity that receives federal assistance  If you can trace every dollar of CP money to something else, then you're free of this. But I suspect that's not easy. However I will defer to someone who is better qualified to make that connection. Section 1687 is probably where the determination would be.

[Luis R. Ramos]

A2, you stopped short, in reading your html, it reads just after the section you quoted:

(1) Classes of educational institutions subject to prohibition

in regard to admissions to educational institutions, this section shall apply only to institutions of vocational education, professional education, and graduate higher education, and to public institutions of undergraduate higher education;

And farther down it reads:

(c) Educational institution defined.

For the purposes of this chapter an educational institution means any public or private preschool, elementary, or secondary school, or any institution of vocational, professional, or higher education, except that in the case of an educational institution composed of more than one school, college, or department which are administratively separate units, such term means each such school, college or department.

I agree that CAP is an educational institution but section c above states we are not covered by Title IX...

Flyer

[lordmonar]

A squadron with no female seniors present that particular night.  During drill time, the male deputy commander for cadets made all the female cadets sit in the classroom while the male cadets drilled.  Reasoning was that it was not appropriate for female cadets to be outside without female adult escort.  Nevermind that there was a total of about 8 female cadets, about 15 male cadets and at least 5 seniors outside.   The couple of mothers there didnt "qualify" because they werent members.

So they did a Title IX violation to avoid a CPP violation?   FSM! I love some people's thought processes.

I was unaware that we were bound by Title IX. Does our USAF funding place us in the same boat as schools and colleges that get federal financial aid? If we are subject to the provisions of Title IX, how do we escape the obligation to have a Title IX coordinator, or am I just not aware that we have one? Also, what procedures do we have for the investigation of a Title IX complaint? I doubt many of our IGs are trained Title IX investigators.

I deal with Title IX compliance at work, and it is quite a bear. This is the first I have heard of it in a CAP context, and if we have the same obligations, it may impact the way we must deal with certain complaints.

Not necessary "bound" by title IX....but we do have a not discriminatory policy and we have to follow certain rules from the DoD because we get funding from them.

EXCLUDING GIRLS from and activity is sexual discrimination......If you can't include the girls.....YOU CAN'T DO IT at all or we set ourselves up for a lawsuit and/or grief from the USAF and other potential donors.

[Critical AOA]

So if you are planning an overnight outing and you have 10 male cadets signed up, only 1 female cadet signed up and 2 or 3 male senior members ,what do you do? 
Do you take the 1 girl along and assume any potential risks and possibly a CPP infraction? 
Do you exclude her citing CPP but hold the event for the boys? 
Or do you cancel the entire event because you decide that per CPP, you cannot take the girl and you believe the following?

EXCLUDING GIRLS from and activity is sexual discrimination......If you can't include the girls.....YOU CAN'T DO IT at all or we set ourselves up for a lawsuit and/or grief from the USAF and other potential donors.

[Eclipse]

EXCLUDING GIRLS from and activity is sexual discrimination......If you can't include the girls.....YOU CAN'T DO IT at all or we set ourselves up for a lawsuit and/or grief from the USAF and other potential donors.

Untrue, beyond the fact that respiration and gravitational attraction are potential ground for a suit these days if someone doesn't like your proportional use of same.

[Ned]

So if you are planning an overnight outing and you have 10 male cadets signed up, only 1 female cadet signed up and 2 or 3 male senior members ,what do you do? 
Do you take the 1 girl along and assume any potential risks and possibly a CPP infraction? 
Do you exclude her citing CPP but hold the event for the boys? 
Or do you cancel the entire event because you decide that per CPP, you cannot take the girl and you believe the following?

You are over thinking this.  Just follow the regulation, which talks about having two seniors on an overnight activity.  It does not require that the necessary seniors be any particular assortment of genders. 

For your particular hypo, I'd recommend that you speak to the female cadet and her parents and let them know about the gender ratios.  Ultimately it is their decision whether to participate, not yours.

But deliberately excluding a gender from an activity is almost always going to be the wrong answer.  There are descriptive names provided by society for those who discriminate against one gender or another.  Try not to be one of those.

Thank you for your service with our cadets.  You are making a difference.

Ned Lee

[NIN]

So if you are planning an overnight outing and you have 10 male cadets signed up, only 1 female cadet signed up and 2 or 3 male senior members ,what do you do? 
Do you take the 1 girl along and assume any potential risks and possibly a CPP infraction? 
Do you exclude her citing CPP but hold the event for the boys? 
Or do you cancel the entire event because you decide that per CPP, you cannot take the girl and you believe the following?

Thats a no-brainer.

Whats the CPP say?

I'll even be a nice guy and lay it out:

CAPR 52-10, para 4d
d. Ensure that at least two "approved" senior members are present at all overnight cadet
activities. Encourage at least two senior members to be present at all cadet activities (with the
exception of chaplain counseling or cadet orientation flights). This policy is for the protection of
the senior members as well as the cadets.

Two approved senior members.

Not "An approved senior member of each sex"

Would you CXL the activity if there were 9 female cadets and 1 male cadet and no male senior?

I won't quite go so far as to say that's sex discrimination (although I do suppose it is). But I will suggest that anybody who takes wild stabs and WAGs at what the regs require and/or allow without, you know, actually READING that reg, is asking for trouble no matter what.

ETA: Darn it, Ned, stop creating reasonable replies while I'm trying to do the same!