Duty Assignments

[arajca]

From the "It's about flippin' time" department:

Starting 03 Sep 2013, duty assignments will become available for cadet members. These assignments will be done via the current Duty Assignment module within eServices. A Cadet Duty Assignment report will also be available within the reports page of the Duty Assignment module.

A link to enter Cadet Duty Assignments will also be available within the Cadet Promotions module. Cadet assignments will show under the "Training" tab of the Member Search module.

For any additional inquiries, please view the cadet assignment area of the Duty Assignment module's instructions page, after this release. 

Let the comments commence!

[Майор Хаткевич]

All I can say is...finally.

[caprids153]

One thing I have found is that if a cadet hasn't met the "minimum suggested grade" for a position you can't add them into the system.  For example, if a cadet is a C/2nd Lt or C/1st Lt you can't add them in as your cadet commander or deputy commander as it is suggested that these positions should be held by a C/Capt.  Similar issues may be found with other staff positions. 

If it is suggested why is it mandatory to achieve this grade to hold the position on eservices?

[NIN]

One thing I have found is that if a cadet hasn't met the "minimum suggested grade" for a position you can't add them into the system.  For example, if a cadet is a C/2nd Lt or C/1st Lt you can't add them in as your cadet commander or deputy commander as it is suggested that these positions should be held by a C/Capt.  Similar issues may be found with other staff positions. 

If it is suggested why is it mandatory to achieve this grade to hold the position on eservices?

You can still appoint via a CAPF 2A.

I think there might be some room for latitude, here, but I think the intent is to remind units "Hey, C/A1C Snuffy, while maybe your 'senior cadet' technically isn't 'commanding' anything."

[Eclipse]

You can still appoint via a CAPF 2A.

Can you?

Won't that take the same path and then get bounced back?

[lordmonar]

You can still appoint via a CAPF 2A.

Can you?

Won't that take the same path and then get bounced back?

?

What path?

Fill out the 2a and file it in the personnel records.....done.

As for E-services not allowing to appoint people to the job.....I say that's a fail....whether we should be appointing C/A1C Snuffy or not.....I have appointed him and I need e-services to support my needs to manage my squadron.

[Eclipse]

There's not much point in doing a 2A that just dies in the personnel file, at least IMHO.

My guess is that the programming ran ahead of a revision to 52-16 (which we know is in the channel) like it has for
60-3 and that NHQ will start imposing and enforcing some standards for cadet staff appointments.

It's too long coming AFAIC.

[dwb]

From the instructions online:

Cadet duty assignments follow the minimum suggested grades outlined in CAPR 20-1, Organization of Civil Air Patrol, Part IV and CAPP 52-15, Cadet Staff Handbook, Appendix 1. It is designed to encourage unit commanders to tailor staff assignments to a cadet's skill and rank, even if it means leaving some of the higher staff positions vacant. Assigning cadets to rank- and experience-appropriate staff positions gives them a challenge they can achieve now, while also leaving open future assignments they can strive for and giving them an incentive to continue advancing in the cadet program.

Commanders can still appoint cadets to staff positions using the CAPF 2a, if they cannot do so using the eServices module.

See also: http://vawgcadets.org/2013/09/resource-spotlight-cadet-staff-handbook/

The Cadet Staff Handbook is designed around a key concept in CAP Cadet Programs doctrine: the idea that cadet staff positions should be tailored to a cadet's rank and experience in the cadet program. The corollary to this is that units should avoid appointing cadets to positions that do not match their rank (e.g., appointing a C/TSgt as Cadet Commander, or a C/2d Lt as a First Sergeant).

This principle is not without its critics. It's natural to want to appoint the highest-ranking cadet in the unit as Cadet Commander. Sometimes, a cadet has been fast-tracked to these higher leadership positions, so changing course would disrupt their path upwards and potentially impact a cadet's morale. Senior members may also insist on assigning a Cadet Commander under the well-intentioned notion that "the cadets should run the cadet program".

A better way to frame this is that the cadets should run as much of the cadet program as their rank and experience allow for, and senior members should mentor and fill in the rest. Over time, as cadets progress in rank and gain leadership experience, the senior members continue to take steps backward and hand more control over to the cadet staff.

(shameless plug)

Yes, NHQ is nudging units to follow their suggested (albeit not mandatory) guidelines.

[Eclipse]

From the instructions online:

Cadet duty assignments follow the minimum suggested grades outlined in CAPR 20-1, Organization of Civil Air Patrol, Part IV and CAPP 52-15, Cadet Staff Handbook, Appendix 1. It is designed to encourage unit commanders to tailor staff assignments to a cadet's skill and rank, even if it means leaving some of the higher staff positions vacant. Assigning cadets to rank- and experience-appropriate staff positions gives them a challenge they can achieve now, while also leaving open future assignments they can strive for and giving them an incentive to continue advancing in the cadet program.

Commanders can still appoint cadets to staff positions using the CAPF 2a, if they cannot do so using the eServices module.

And there are no circumstances in which they can't do so, ergo...

Excellent.

[Huey Driver]

I didn't see this mentioned anywhere, but I noticed that when a cadet has completed ICUT, SET, and is designated Cadet Communications Officer, they automatically become a ICUT Skills Evaluator (diamond symbol on 101 Card).

[JeffDG]

I didn't see this mentioned anywhere, but I noticed that when a cadet has completed ICUT, SET, and is designated Cadet Communications Officer, they automatically become a ICUT Skills Evaluator (diamond symbol on 101 Card).

I know that fact has made the rounds of DCs.

That's actually regulatory, those are the three requirements to be an evaluator for ICUT.

[lordmonar]

I didn't see this mentioned anywhere, but I noticed that when a cadet has completed ICUT, SET, and is designated Cadet Communications Officer, they automatically become a ICUT Skills Evaluator (diamond symbol on 101 Card).

As they should be.....according to the rules to be an ICUT Skills Evaluator.

[Huey Driver]

I didn't see this mentioned anywhere, but I noticed that when a cadet has completed ICUT, SET, and is designated Cadet Communications Officer, they automatically become a ICUT Skills Evaluator (diamond symbol on 101 Card).

As they should be.....according to the rules to be an ICUT Skills Evaluator.

Personally, I'd say "As they can be allowed"... not always "should be allowed".

Off of original topic... But do you know where those rules are? Just curious. Thanks!

[Brad]

I didn't see this mentioned anywhere, but I noticed that when a cadet has completed ICUT, SET, and is designated Cadet Communications Officer, they automatically become a ICUT Skills Evaluator (diamond symbol on 101 Card).

As they should be.....according to the rules to be an ICUT Skills Evaluator.

Personally, I'd say "As they can be allowed"... not always "should be allowed".

Off of original topic... But do you know where those rules are? Just curious. Thanks!

CAPR 100-1 section 5-2c:

c. Communications staff member recorded in eServices at any level may serve as mentors/evaluators. All mentors/evaluators must have completed ICUT and Skills Evaluator Training (SET) before they may supervise performance of skills and procedures of ICUT students, except as provided in paragraph e, below. The mandatory standardized checklists for mentors/evaluators will be found on the National Communications website.

Emphasis mine. It already is a "may", not "shall".

I still find it odd that the members are "automatically" appointed. Maybe someone did it without telling you. You don't get a notice, you just check your 101 card and SURPRISE! New little diamond by a qualification. Even I with a staff position of Wing Assistant Communications Training Officer, I still had to have my Wing DC appoint me as an evaluator in eservices for ICUT once the new evaluation system went live. I already had ICUT and SET at the time it went live.

This is to prevent the obvious issue of a cadet...or senior member...in a comms position who then takes SET but doesn't really have any real comms skills, e.g. a brand new assistant comms who's just starting out, suddenly notice he/she can evaluate ICUT! Yea, not gonna happen.

[Eclipse]

+1 This would be my guess.

No one should automatically be approved as an SET for anything - in most wings that bypasses at least two echelons
who may have an opinion.

There are plenty of people who are competent users who would make poor instructors.

[Huey Driver]

My thoughts exactly.

[arajca]

Regarding ICUT SETs...

Initially, it required a manual approval in part because no one had the quals on day 1 and there was the 6 month exception for Senior and Master rated Comm personnel without ICUT.

Also, there was a lot of discussion among the DCs about the ICUT SET approval process. There were several who wanted complete control. This is counter to the premise behind ICUT - being able to get members qualified in an easy, timely manner. We've heard (or been part of) stories of B-CUT and/or A-CUT training requiring an act of God, or some other deity. ICUT in it's current form was designed to counter this issue, in addition to providing a standardized training program.