What CAP RANK counts for and possibly should be used as...

[Major Carrales]

Some say that CAP rank stands for nothing.  Shall we make an objective, honest and serious analysis of what it is and can actually be used for?

I think we will see that it contrasts greatly with military rank.

I think the big disconnect betwix CAP RANK/GRADE and Military RANK/GRADE is in the purpose.  We are quick to assume that CAP Rank/Grade is somehow equitable to that of the military.  I think the precedent that causes this conclusion to be drawn is that we extend the honor of recognition of prior military rank.

However, and please reserve judgement...

Military RANK and pay-grade serves as both a command structure and method of payment (career ladder), thus each rank and grade may or may not come with an "office"...however, it does come with a "charge" and benefits of the RANK (RHIP)

CAP Rank is basically determined by, for the vast majority of people, progress through a five level program. 

We start as Lieutenants, finish the second level and become a captain to prepare for the third level after getting several criteria knocked out of the way.  Then enter the field grades representing the sucessful termination of even more criteria until one becomes a Lt Col having completed a series of training.   Higher officer is linked to an "office" or being a "staff officer" at a given level.

That pretty much sums of CAP rank (aside from special promotions to professionals and prior service)

Thus, when we look at a person's collar or shoulder marks, we should be able to judge their abilities, experience and expectations. 

NOTE: The following is based on about 20 minutes of though on the matter.  It does not describe anyone here or anywhere in CAP specifically...it can  be any CAP officer, it can also be no CAP officer.  It is also not complete or indicative of what is actually out there.  It should mak eyou think a bit on what the purpose of CAP Rank is and how varied it can get.  Not that as one goes up the chain there are "diametric opposites" in greater scope (or example a 2dLt can be the ambitous person planning to "move up to command" or the person with little scope on advancement wishing merely to serve in a squadron's program in a positive manner...a Lt Col can be either, or both, the young ambitious person or the old CURMUDGEON has been.)  The strange part is that all these types, and more, are out there and define their epaulet shoulder marks in that manner.

When I see a CAP 2d Lt what can I assume...

1) New Guy
2) possible "bump" for one of the criterias...but still (ideally) less than a year time-in-grade
3) long time member who is in it for reasons other than rank (good or bad), might like ES or Cadet Program administration as opposed to command, or jumping through hoops to change the color and shape of the insignia.
4) Possible new pilot?  Pilot new to CAP...pilot basic? Prior Service 2LT (from what branch?)

When I see a CAP 1st Lt...

1) Someone who has completed a TECH rating, now look at his pocket to see what badge he is wearing and what he does.
2) At least a year in CAP.
3) Maybe some squadron level officicer with no ambitions to rise to group or to command.  Comfortable in current spot...maybe slowing down to get that Senior Rating
4) Waiting for SLS and CLC.  Studying Course 13 for promotion to Captain
5) A pilot of certain qualifications
6) Prior service 1LT
7) A professional of certain qualifications

When I see a CAP Capt...

1) Some one dedicated to a unit or taking a leading role as a STAFF officer/Squadron Commander/Ops officer
2) Has done some Professional development (Course 13, Ben Davis, SLS)
3) May or may not go forward into the field grades.
4) Three year member or more
5) working on a Senior Rating in a Spec Trak
6) A Pilot of some note, CFI or the like.
7) A professional of some note, lawyer, doctor long time teacher
8 ) Studying for Loening, Group Staff.  Some what seasoned at the local levels
9) Prior ServiceCapt/ Naval Lieutenant
10) Former Cadets

When I see a CAP Major...

1) Some where over 7 years of CAP service
2) Possible past commander or group staff officer
3) Bought into CAP...had made expenses
4) Likely currently a commander or person of notable CAP experience
5) Studying to be a Lt COL and working on a Master Rating in a Spec Track.
6) A virtual expert in their spec track via experience
7)If has held the rank a long while coudl be burned out or stagnant in professional development
8 ) reaching the been there done that phase
9) lots of CAP training, Region Staff College and otherbig time stuff
10) Likely to be well known or at least a fimilar name at the WING level
11) Prior Serice Major/Lt Commander
12) Experienced Professional for appointment to that level

When I see a CAP Lt Col

1) Been there done that
2) expert on most if not all things CAP
3) Group commander or Wing staff...or prior such
4) Possibly burnt out, or burning out; could be a past "legend" or (saddly) a "has been" CURMUDGEON
5) Or, opposite of above, a relatively young "go getter" moving up the CAP chain of command.  Maybe a former cadet.
6) Possible future WING KING
7) Has something like 12 plus years of epxerience
8 ) WING Director/Region Level
9) Completed Professional development cycle, either turns inward (become inactive/less active/concentrates on "program growth" instead of PD; or turns outward (wants to help any and everyone) Wise
10) prior service Lt Col or Commander.

When I see a CAP Colonel

1) Wing King
2) Former Wing King
3) Region ViceRoy
4) Former Region Viceroy
5) Lots of wisdom

CAP General Officers

1) Take the best criteria from Field Grade and apply it here
2) someone who is ambitious, or was.
3) Someone who has time to dedicate to CAP
4) National Commander
5) Prior National Commander
6) Wise Prior National Commanders
7) CAP gurus 

Corrected to show working on a "senior rating" insead of "has a senior rating" for CAPT.

[captrncap]

Well said, Major!!!   

[Major Carrales]

Well said, Major!!!   

Thank you, may all the replies to this be as positive as yours.  

I seriously expect some discussion here on this, but I am well aware that when one stirs the pot one can get burned.     I am hoping that from this we can build an effective rubric for CAP RANK, or at least begin to talk about it.

[MIKE]

Point of order:  You don't need a senior rating for Capt/Level II... This is a requirement for Maj/Level III.

[Major Carrales]

Point of order:  You don't need a senior rating for Capt/Level II... This is a requirement for Maj/Level III.

Thanks, I think I corrected it.  Its somewhat precarious to type with one hand while lecturing a group of students on Alexander Hamilton and the Federalists.  I'm surpised I only had one such slip.

[Al Sayre]

The Anti-Federalists were right...

[Monty]

The Anti-Federalists were right...

agreed!

[davedove]

That's a pretty good summation.  Grade in CAP really doesn't have much to do with responsibility, it's generally a measure of progression in the Professional Development Program.

[Major Carrales]

The Anti-Federalists were right...

agreed!

I have always maintained that the modern US is only possible because by themselves and in isolation both the PURE Federalist and PURE anti-Federalist view are incorrect.  One has to meet in the middle.

This condition manifests itself in the current bi-polar political structure between LIBERALS and CONSERVATIVES.  Political stability seems to be derived from the "tug of war" between these political ideologies.

I am a CONSERVATIVE (upper case lettersr to denote that these are concepts), but I will conceed that a total victory for the CONSERVATIVE position might lead to a world where the LIBERAL could be hunted down and gutted...metaphorically as well as literally.  The reverse is also possible.

The best position, in terms of "watchdoggery" and genuine stability is to have a system where both LIBERAL and CONSERVATIVE ideas can mingle.  Somewhere, amid that political agendism, is the best solution.

[Major Carrales]

That's a pretty good summation.  Grade in CAP really doesn't have much to do with responsibility, it's generally a measure of progression in the Professional Development Program.

Thank you. 

The conclusion I ultimately am forced to draw is that if one looks at CAP rank from a "military point of view" it will never be looked at as valid rank.  One who sees the CAP rank structure as "totally flawed" as a military rank structure based on the Armed Services is really going an "apples to oranges" comparison, when they should be making more of a contrast.  One who sees the CAP rank structure as "totally flawed" as a military rank structure would, in fact, be correct.

Thus, it would be disingenuous to think that one should ever be "saluted" for one's CAP rank by anyone outside of CAP or that any military organization would ever look at you as more than a CAP Officer with RANK vaild only in CAP settings.  It is also precarious to think and expect any additional respect to come from the USAF because of its (CAP rank) existence or  nonexistence.

Simply put a CAP Lt Col is just that...a "CAP Officer" and nothing more to anyone outside of CAP.  Even a CAP Lt Col who is so because of prior service would really only be respected by anyone as a Lt Col (ret).  You are a CAP Officer...if you are a Captain you are still a Captain and shoudl be addressed so, but with the understanding that that is CAP grade.  Posers and pretenders are not welcome anywhere.  Be proud of your CAP service for what it is, not ashamed for what it is not.

If we wanted to make an effective use of our RANK structure we would better concentrate our energy on redefining these structures based on what we have today.

WANT TO INCLUDE NCOs and WARRANT OFFICERS?
Could these be used to solve certain isues in CAP Rank?...how?

There is a lot discussed here about NCOs and Warrant Officers in CAP.  If you look at my analysis these such ranks would really only have a purpose at the squadron level.

HEAR ME OUT...

Persons who would at the Squadron Level qualify as NCOs or WOs
Those that fall into critera or situation where they woudl break rank structure

Current CAP 2d Lt

2) possible "bump" for one of the criteria...but still (ideally) less than a year time-in-grade
3) long time member who is in it for reasons other than rank (good or bad), might like ES or Cadet Program administration as opposed to command, or jumping through hoops to change the color and shape of the insignia.
Possible new pilot?  Pilot new to CAP...pilot basic?

Current CAP 1st Lt...

3) Maybe some squadron level officers with no ambitions to rise to group or to command.  Comfortable in current spot...maybe slowing down to get that Senior Rating
5) A pilot of certain qualifications
7) A professional of certain qualifications

Current  CAP Capt...

6) A Pilot of some note, CFI or the like
7) A professional of some note, lawyer, doctor long time teacher

The illustrated segments above are person that might best be serviced by WARRANT OFFICER's RANK or NCO status.  There is absolutely no need to CAP Airmen, especially if they cannot become NCOs, these types would  best be served as a WO of some sort.

Those pilots that want to fly and really done want to command groups or wing programs could become WOs and be an instrumentality of the Squadron.  Later, if they choose to rise up the chain, they will have to relinquish the WO status to take command. 

If one wanted NCOs I would have them at the SQUADORN LEVEL.  The general consensus is that prior service NCOs woudl b e sort of like the "soul of the unit."  They would provide military bearing and do the things NCOs are known for, sort of a STAN/EVAL of the unit.  I could see having one GROUP LEVEL NCO and one WING LEVEL NCO and ONE NATIONAL NCO to administer this CAP program of which NCOs would be functions of the SQUADRON. 

One could not have it both ways.  If one wanted to to be a SQUADRON COMMANDER and was an NCO, they would have to relinquish that position to take command.   Once cannot have "quality control" types also part of what they control.  That would be a duality.  And NCO could rise to be the GROUP or WING NCO, but they would operate much like the chaplains do in their own chain.

That is if you wanted to even do such a thing as WOs and NCO.

If these suggests are not palatable, then I question anything differing from an all Officer CAP with NCOs in the honor position they have now.  Only make slight adjustments to the OFFICER program to reflect the issues.

[Chief Chiafos]

Here we are again - we have failed to define what we are.  Are we civilian or military?  Until we decide once and for all what we are, simple things like what ranks to use and how, become harder than nailing jell-o to a wall.

Once we decide what we are then the answers to most our problems will be self-evident and simple to institute - including ranks.

No man can serve two masters:  he will serve only one to the neglect of the other, or despise them both.

[Chaplaindon]

Chief ...

It's not for us to "define what we are ... civilian or military" CAP and its members --as of this writing (and I expect ad infinitum) is/are civilians.

We may act/dress in a manner befitting the military, some, even many (perhaps), may aspire or dream/wish of being military.

Nevertheless --regardless of clothing, wishes, dreams, etc.-- CAP members are civilians and thus CAP is a civilian organization.

As to the original question, "what CAP grade stands for?" I liken our grade to that of a firefighter (they can be lieutenants, captains, etc) or police/LEO (they can be corporals, sergeants, LTs, Capts, Majors, Colonels and so forth). Firefighter "rank" is a real thing under ICS on the fire ground. Our grade can be likewise within our operations.

Simply put, our grade is as real as we want to make it.

As for what the military thinks of us ... I could care less. They don't have to salute us and likewise we don't have to salute them.

Let's worry about soing our missions and leave the "what the neighbors think of us" alone.

[Major Carrales]

Chief and Chaplain Don,

First let me express a welcome to the Chief.  I have read much of your works this month here on CAP talk and offer congratulations as well as thanks for your service as a member of our armed forces and as a law enforcement official.

Chaplain Don is quite correct in saying that were are civilians in every sense of the word.  This was made very clear to me by a CAP-USAF officer who attended (proctored) a USAF graded SARex last year.

When a local reporter asked if we were "military...or what?"  one PAO member began with a sort of spiel about "paramilitary," "auxiliary" and other such language to which the CAP-USAF LT COL said "They are all civilians...nothing more.  Some might be retired military...but they are all volunteers."

The fact is the the word "Civil" is in our title, as in "Civil Defense."  I don't want to say it but the schizophrenia may be built into what we are.  It might be that, at most, we can reach a reasonable balance.  Some more workable solution.

Simply put, anyone who has the forlorn hope that the USAF will embrace us as "brothers" or "fellows" is operating under an illusion.   Our rank is designed for us...that is why I analyzed who was at each RANK in hopes we could mold that to a more reasonable solution to the Rank ISSUE.

We here all serve more than two masters as it is...our work, our family, Our Church and our community then "CAP."  I love it when I have the time to be a 100% CAPer, like during SUMMER VACATION and SPRING BREAK.  But how many non teaching people can do that.  We have to take long vacations at odd times to attend REDCAPs.  Then there are those professional development courses in distant places that require time off.

But, you know what?  We do it gladly.  That is the heart of a volunteer...and an unpaid one at that.

Chief, I am going to help you and support you in your visions...however, you must limit those visions to the realities of the organization.  We can make CAP more military...and we will!  However, we cannot be more than we are nor pose or pretend to be.

If you want NCOs...consider my proposals and those of others and reach a reasonable, viable and infraggable plan.  Than we will push it together, my friend.

Major Carrales

[CAP428]

This is an interesting thread with good posts.  But I see Senior Members' CAP grade/rank, though differing from cadet grade/rank in many many ways, also can serve a common purpose:  a motivational tool for members.

Whether you're a 12-year-old airman or a 60+ Lt Col or something, earning a new grade can be a good way to motivate yourself to do more, especially when you might have been slowing down or burning out.

[Major Carrales]

This is an interesting thread with good posts.  But I see Senior Members' CAP grade/rank, though differing from cadet grade/rank in many many ways, also can serve a common purpose:  a motivational tool for members.

Whether you're a 12-year-old airman or a 60+ Lt Col or something, earning a new grade can be a good way to motivate yourself to do more, especially when you might have been slowing down or burning out.

Agreed, there is a sense of pride in earning such an award.  I never took any "brevet" or advancement for professional skill (as a teacher at the time I could have been a 1LT early)  I liked going up the chain, the reason being that I was not cool with the fact that I would be a 1LT and know very little about CAP.

[Chief Chiafos]

Major C,

I respect your posts immensely and have thought a lot about what you have said - you are probably right.  CAP is a bastard child and will never be legitimate in the military world - no matter what we do.

I don't ever see a day when the Air Force will embrace us as 'brothers', my sights are much lower.  It is the embarrassment and contempt for CAP widely held in the Air Force that perhaps we can change.  Brothers? Not possible.  Partners? Maybe.  That is why I believe military skills are so important to CAP: uniform wear, customs and courtesies, a simple road to earning respect.

[A.Member]

As for what the military thinks of us ... I could care less. They don't have to salute us and likewise we don't have to salute them.

Well, you're right about the fact that ultimately we are a civilian organization but the above statement (my emphasis added) is not correct.   

While military personnel are not required to salute a CAP member, if a CAP member is wearing an AF-style uniform (the only time salutes are rendered or received) they will salute the President of the United States, all Medal of Honor recipients, and commissioned officers and warrant officers of the Armed Forces who are senior in rank.

You can brush up on customs and courtesies here:
http://level2.cap.gov/documents/u_082503084356.pdf

In doing so, you'll also find this statement:

As a member of the Civil Air Patrol, you represent the Air Force and the nation when you represent the CAP. Therefore, it is essential that you understand and follow established military customs and courtesies.

[Major Carrales]

Chief,

I too offer my most deep respect to you and your accomplishments.  I hope we can work together to improve the Civil Air Patrol.

I think the most we can ever expect from the USAF is gratitude.  Based on the current missions of CAP and past history the USAF will never allow civilian auxiliarists to hold an equal standing in the USAF.  We are part of their FAMILY, but a whole different branch.  They might exalt us to a position of honor or lower us to  position of scorn, but embrace us as equals...it cannot happen.  Partners? As you said...maybe.  Friends...we can only hope so. 

Uniform wear, customs and courtesies is a simple road to earning respect, and I hope we can implement things that will improve this.  However, we must understand that the RANK structure of CAP is its own device.

My main concern is the what some would call "waste" in revamping a program that's purpose is to measure progress through CAP.  If we create a new class where there are Airmen, NCOs, Officer and the like...and create criteria for each.  The shock of implementation maybe too much to the organization to bear. 

CAP officers are currently making many sacrifices for their local units.  Purchasing personal equipment in the area of COMMs, spending dollars ad infinitum on countless uniform items, pumping money into cadet programs so they will have the basics to function.  Adding additional burdens, such as week long classes to keep their long held and earned rank or striping them of their rank is a poor way to say thank you.

There have been many proposals this month, but none of them concentrates on the TRANSITION from the old to the new.

I would say that is where your focus needs to be, Chief.  If you have a plan hammered out...be it any of them here or in your personnel pondering; work on a viable implementation plan that will be easiest for the organization to bear.  No need to bleed the organization, especially if it still as to remain operational.

I will stay in CAP no matter what happens to the RANK structure or if there are WOs, NCOs, AIRMEN or the like.  'Tis infinitely greater for me to adjust to change than for the organization to adjust to my Visions.

[Chaplaindon]

A.member ...

If (and when) Customs and courtesies by CAP adult "officers" are seen by NHQ to merit inclusion in a regulation or at the very least a CAPM (e.g. 39-1) and not merely a pamphlet, I will consider this mandatory otherwise saluting is advisory and an optional "courtesy."

[DNall]

Customs & Coutesies are mandatory & refusing to render them when required to do so is cause for disciplinary action up to removal if neccessary. We work for the AF, we follow thier rules & example. I appreciate you expertise & contribution, but you can get on board or find another place to volunteer your time, and that goes for everyone.

[aveighter]

A.member ...

If (and when) Customs and courtesies by CAP adult "officers" are seen by NHQ to merit inclusion in a regulation or at the very least a CAPM (e.g. 39-1) and not merely a pamphlet, I will consider this mandatory otherwise saluting is advisory and an optional "courtesy."

Pretty myopic view there Chaplain.  And what a negative attitude from a supposed "man of the cloth".  With beliefs like the ones you frequently express I can only hope you do not present yourself in anything other than a corporate style uniform.  Your opinions are in extreme contravention to the history of CAP, the documents of the organization and the expressed opinions of the SECAF and the General Staff including Air University and 1st AF.

To any personnel from those operations reading this thread I offer my personal apologies for such unprofessional and vitriolic comments.  Many here are diligently striving to address the organizational shortcomings and deficits that result in such expressions.

Please allow us the time and give us the assistance needed to accomplish our daunting task.

Amen.

[ZigZag911]

A.member ...

If (and when) Customs and courtesies by CAP adult "officers" are seen by NHQ to merit inclusion in a regulation or at the very least a CAPM (e.g. 39-1) and not merely a pamphlet, I will consider this mandatory otherwise saluting is advisory and an optional "courtesy."

Chaplain:

A salute is a military greeting, and a sign of respect, not for the person, but for the office.

I presume that, for whatever reason, you did not understand that....I certainly hope that is the case, rather than that a chaplain would set such a negative example.

[RiverAux]

Pamphlets have just as much regulatory force as CAP regulations. 

[MIKE]

Pamphlets have just as much regulatory force as CAP regulations. 

1. c. Pamphlets. These are nondirective, informative type publications.

Emphasis added.

[RiverAux]

Oh, so we're not actually required to follow the specialty track training guides, all customs and courtesies, CAC rules, the Spaatz exam administration requirements, or CAP Core values?  Wow, I'll ask my commander to give me a Master in Flight Operations this week nevermind that I don't meet any of the requirements.

C'mon most of these "pamplets" are in everything but name only regulations.  Only a few of them are just "informative" publications.

[Major Carrales]

I could be wrong...but I think we are drifting here a bit.  Listing a bit away from the topic. 

[Guardrail]

I think CAP rank counts for the hard work, time, and exertions spent in working toward earning rank.  Rank should be used as an indicator of a person's performance, willingness to promote, and initiative to command.     

It's also an indicator of the level at which a person is capable of command, though there's more flexibility with this in CAP than in the military (no lieutenants or captains as SQ/CCs in the Air Force).

That's how I always thought of it as a cadet. 

[Dragoon]

Some say that CAP rank stands for nothing.  Shall we make an objective, honest and serious analysis of what it is and can actually be used for?

Major Carrales - I applaud you for bringing up the topic.  I think your judgements listed below on different CAP grades are a bit optimistic.  Here's a more cynical view.

When I see a CAP 2d Lt what can I assume...

1) New Guy

No argument here

When I see a CAP 1st Lt...

3) Maybe some squadron level officers with no ambitions to rise to group or to command.  Comfortable in current spot...maybe slowing down to get that Senior Rating

Well, or maybe a serving squadron commander.  Or in some cases, a Wing Level Director (either because he brings expertise from outside, or because he was the only guy who'd take the job!

When I see a CAP Capt...

1) Some one dedicated to a unit or taking a leading role as a STAFF officer/Squadron Commander/Ops officer

Or also likely a just a minor squadron staff officer (or even assistant) who completed level 2, and has no plans to ever take a leading role or command anything.

When I see a CAP Major...

2) Possible past commander or group staff officer

Well, maybe.  A fair number of specialty tracks don't require service above Squadron level for a senior rating.  For some, it's just 18 months or so of squadron time.  So this could be the same guy I mentioned for CAP Captain above, after hanging around a squadron and sitting through two days of CLC.

When I see a CAP Lt Col
8 ) WING Director/Region Level

Mebbe.  Mebbe not.  Most specialties don't require that level of service.  But...we know he's dedicated enough to CAP to complete ACSC or take time off for Region Staff College.  (which is why so many of our members stop at major...)

When I see a CAP Colonel

1) Wing King
2) Former Wing King
3) Region ViceRoy
4) Former Region Viceroy
5) Lots of wisdom

And at this level, rank finally means something - at least the guy did a Colonel-level job, and did it well enough to convince someone to make his Eagles permanent.


Here's more the way I see it.

2d Lt - new guy.

1st Lt - okay functioning at squadron level, but also likely to be a professional appointment new guy.  But ya never know, he may be a commander or group/wing big shot.  Check the ribbon rack.

Capt - he either got a professional appointment, or was dedicated enough to get through ECI-13.  His competence is still unknown, but he's probably got a few years under his belt and has some dedication to the program.  Likely, I'll be seeing this guy again at other CAP events (and just like the 1st Lt, he might be my CAP bosses boss!)

Major - Really not much different than Captain, as there is no "gatekeeper" test to Level 3.  He's extremely unlikely to be an professional appointment new guy.  Likely does a fair amount of CAP.  And the odds go up a bit that he holds (or has held) some position above squadron staff.  But it's still not a lock.  But I'd lay odds that this is a productive member.

Lt Col - old timer.  Loves CAP.  Folks at Wing at least know his name.  Dedicated enough to go to RSC or take ACSC.  Very likely to have experience I can learn from.  May or may not be able to lead his way out of a paper bag, though.

Col - he's got some years, knows folks way above my level, and has done at least one hard job.  Probably several, as it's hard to get the eagles without a pretty good resume.





Basically, rank infers years in CAP and some level of dedication.  Only at the higher grades does it sort of indicate proficiency.  It's more of an honorary thing.  Basically, an award like a clasp on your service ribbon rather than an indicator of responsibility, authority or leadership potential.

[Dragoon]

As to the original question, "what CAP grade stands for?" I liken our grade to that of a firefighter (they can be lieutenants, captains, etc) or police/LEO (they can be corporals, sergeants, LTs, Capts, Majors, Colonels and so forth). Firefighter "rank" is a real thing under ICS on the fire ground. Our grade can be likewise within our operations.

It could be, but it isn't.  An IC can hold any rank, and can easily be outranked by one of his Mission Staff Assistants.

Our rank conveys no authority or responsibility, backed up by CAP regs.  Fire/Police rank often does.

I don't see a way to tie our rank to emergency authority unless we require IC for all Lt Cols, Section Chief for all Majors, etc.

[arajca]

Oh, so we're not actually required to follow the specialty track training guides, all customs and courtesies, CAC rules, the Spaatz exam administration requirements, or CAP Core values?  Wow, I'll ask my commander to give me a Master in Flight Operations this week nevermind that I don't meet any of the requirements.

C'mon most of these "pamplets" are in everything but name only regulations.  Only a few of them are just "informative" publications.

If the pamphlet is used as the standard in a regulation, the pamphlet then become regulatory.

[Al Sayre]

As to the original question, "what CAP grade stands for?" I liken our grade to that of a firefighter (they can be lieutenants, captains, etc) or police/LEO (they can be corporals, sergeants, LTs, Capts, Majors, Colonels and so forth). Firefighter "rank" is a real thing under ICS on the fire ground. Our grade can be likewise within our operations.

It could be, but it isn't.  An IC can hold any rank, and can easily be outranked by one of his Mission Staff Assistants.

Our rank conveys no authority or responsibility, backed up by CAP regs.  Fire/Police rank often does.

I don't see a way to tie our rank to emergency authority unless we require IC for all Lt Cols, Section Chief for all Majors, etc.

This makes me think:

How about we make IC1's, IC2's, AL1's,AL2's LtCols
                                  OPS and Planning Section Chiefs, IC3's & AL3's Majors
                                  Other Section Chiefs & Branch Directors Captains
                                  Team/Unit Leaders 1st Lt's

and give them an ES Tab or something for their Uniform.

Gives people an incentive to participate in ES, and encourages them to attain higher ratings, and the rank would actually mean something.  The Caveat being no "pencil whipping" allowed.

[Dragoon]

This makes me think:

How about we make IC1's, IC2's, AL1's,AL2's LtCols
                                  OPS and Planning Section Chiefs, IC3's & AL3's Majors
                                  Other Section Chiefs & Branch Directors Captains
                                  Team/Unit Leaders 1st Lt's

and give them an ES Tab or something for their Uniform.

Gives people an incentive to participate in ES, and encourages them to attain higher ratings, and the rank would actually mean something.  The Caveat being no "pencil whipping" allowed.

I think you'd run afoul of the PD system.  In other words, it's a way to get Lt Col without getting even even Level 2.  And, technically, the PD system is there to train you to hold the grade.  Whether it does or not is another matter entirely.

[Major Carrales]

As to the original question, "what CAP grade stands for?" I liken our grade to that of a firefighter (they can be lieutenants, captains, etc) or police/LEO (they can be corporals, sergeants, LTs, Capts, Majors, Colonels and so forth). Firefighter "rank" is a real thing under ICS on the fire ground. Our grade can be likewise within our operations.

It could be, but it isn't.  An IC can hold any rank, and can easily be outranked by one of his Mission Staff Assistants.

Our rank conveys no authority or responsibility, backed up by CAP regs.  Fire/Police rank often does.

I don't see a way to tie our rank to emergency authority unless we require IC for all Lt Cols, Section Chief for all Majors, etc.

This makes me think:

How about we make IC1's, IC2's, AL1's,AL2's LtCols
                                  OPS and Planning Section Chiefs, IC3's & AL3's Majors
                                  Other Section Chiefs & Branch Directors Captains
                                  Team/Unit Leaders 1st Lt's

and give them an ES Tab or something for their Uniform.

Gives people an incentive to participate in ES, and encourages them to attain higher ratings, and the rank would actually mean something.  The Caveat being no "pencil whipping" allowed.

This would limit promotions to ES officers.   Hummmm...maybe this could be an element of an ES officers track?   But again, if it were an exclusive promotion track it would alienate everyone else.

[Al Sayre]

This makes me think:

How about we make IC1's, IC2's, AL1's,AL2's LtCols
                                  OPS and Planning Section Chiefs, IC3's & AL3's Majors
                                  Other Section Chiefs & Branch Directors Captains
                                  Team/Unit Leaders 1st Lt's

and give them an ES Tab or something for their Uniform.

Gives people an incentive to participate in ES, and encourages them to attain higher ratings, and the rank would actually mean something.  The Caveat being no "pencil whipping" allowed.

I think you'd run afoul of the PD system.  In other words, it's a way to get Lt Col without getting even even Level 2.  And, technically, the PD system is there to train you to hold the grade.  Whether it does or not is another matter entirely.

All it would take is a few paragraphs in the 50-17 and 35-5 adding this as an alternative to the myriad other ways to get promoted.  These people do actually have authority and should have commensurate grade YMMV.

[SAR-EMT1]

Let me flip the bit to the RLOs and the RLNCO's
Bear with me and take a second before answering:
Assume I answer the "military/civilian" question and say : 'Military'
From a RLO / RLNCO perspective: what is the EASIEST/ CLEANEST way to associate epulets to experience in a way befitting us and understood (if not toasted) by the RLAF ?
As for the corporate tag. I am pretending for the next 3 seconds it doesnt exist: my ID card has "AIR FORCE AUX" not "INC"
Feel free to flame me at the end of your contemplative post. 
I am young and stupid enough to speak my mind

[Dragoon]

Tie it to position.  Then choose the right guy for the position, based on experience and training.  Real Military types pretty much expect Lt Cols to be in charge of 1st Lts, not the other way around.

[davedove]

Before I reply, let me state that I have had over 20 years with the Army, as either enlisted or civilian.  While it looks strange to me to have a Lt. commanding a Lt. Col., does anyone that CAP works with really have a problem with it?  It seems to me they would be much more concerned with whether or not CAP gets the job done.  Maybe a lot of people here just have a hangup about what the grade is "supposed" to mean.

[ddelaney103]

CAP grade represents one thing - your perceived worth to the Corporation.

More PD is good, so we give bling for it.

Pilots are good and ones with more tickets are better, so we give bling for it.

Commanders are good, so we give bling for it.

Smoozing with Congresscritters and State Houses is great, so we give big bling for it.

Why?  Well, bling is cheap - we even get the member to buy the stuff from the Corp or its approved vendor so CAP makes money.

Officer bling carries extra weight because it makes you look like a real officer.  If we changed to an NCO or FO system your place in the pecking order wouldn't change, but you wouldn't be an officer, and a lot of people get cranky about that.

As a DoD civilian, I was in charge of soldiers. I went overseas and wore a uniform.  I wasn't an officer, but I did get respect for what I was and what I did.

The way to get respect from Big Blue is to be what we are: motivated volunteers who can bring a lot to the table.  Trying to dress up like daddy and being a "sorta officer" is just not the right path.  Let's give CAP grade to most of us, save AF grade for those holding a position of command responsibility, and march on.

[DNall]

Smoozing with Congresscritters and State Houses is great, so we give big bling for it.

what bling is that? Cause I'd like mine.

Officer bling carries extra weight because it makes you look like a real officer.  If we changed to an NCO or FO system your place in the pecking order wouldn't change, but you wouldn't be an officer, and a lot of people get cranky about that.

That's true, but everything being discussed on that subject involves keeping officers but reducing their numbers while putting everyone else in the enlisted end. That makes the officer status more meaningful, if nothing else then cause everyone wants in the place with the line out front, not the one you have free access too. The AF, who knows our standards for officer grades & progression, doesn't see it as meaningful, may even take offense to it at times, and that effects our ability to get work, cause even the truly deserving people aren't recognized thru the fog of everyone else. Would people grubble, well not so much if you grandfather them. Would people quit? You know I don't care. If FEMA proceeds with plans to credential people for meeting NIMS resource typing standards then it's forced down on us & sufddenly you gotta be the real deal & a whole lotta members can't live up to that so they'll be gone & we'll be rebuilding anyway, if you gotta face that enormous process, might as well lay this membership quality control program over the top of it & coe out the end in bad azz shape. No need to torture ourselves twice.

As a DoD civilian, I was in charge of soldiers. I went overseas and wore a uniform.  I wasn't an officer, but I did get respect for what I was and what I did.

The way to get respect from Big Blue is to be what we are: motivated volunteers who can bring a lot to the table.  Trying to dress up like daddy and being a "sorta officer" is just not the right path.  Let's give CAP grade to most of us, save AF grade for those holding a position of command responsibility, and march on.

That view would be fine, except that DoD civilians have a serious progression program that demands professional standards also, and they take many of the same professional development courses the military does. They then at the end of the day earn individual respect by proving it to the people they work with everyday. The folks in that unit know THEM so they jusdge THEM. The CGAux has the same thing, we don't. We get judged as an org by the worst among us. Airman sees CAP Major that can't lead a girl scout troop, suddenly that's all CAP Majors, and there's no way around that. We desperately need quality control & serious professional standards at each level. We go out & do jobs real similiar to the AF, not dropping bombs, but an ops officer is an ops officer, same as an IC is an IC, and they have training for that. All we have to do it pick quality leadership/mgmt candidates into a training program, exactly how any corporation in the country does it, and create leaders using the programs already sitting there for us to use. Why would you want to re-invent the wheel or spread your resources so thin or categorize your top people with the ones you don't trust to watch your lunch much less the border. I think you're going to find that as rough as some of this stuff sounds, people love structure & they respond to high standards. It's true that some people will leave if you make it hard work, but then a lot of other people are going to come in just as fast who are looking for that challenge & chance to contribute & be part of something really important. We can't just stagnate & sink lower & lower as the real world gets more professional. We have to get in the game & bring some serious folks ready to do serious work.

[Fifinella]

As for what the military thinks of us ... I could care less. They don't have to salute us and likewise we don't have to salute them.

I realize this is OT, but I find it deeply disturbing that a chaplain would say this. 
CAP REGULATION 265-2 (for chaplains) says:

Section A 2.  Ministry to the Armed Forces. CAP provides the USAF with trained civilian resources for executing non- combatant USAF missions. CAP chaplains remain civilian resources to the Chief of Chaplains, USAF. They may be called upon to supplement the resources of the USAF Chaplain Service. For these reasons The Covenant appropriately refers to ministry to people who serve in the Armed Forces of our Country.

Furthermore, in SECTION C - THE CODE OF ETHICS, it says:

I will respect the beliefs and traditions of my
colleagues and those to whom I minister.

I hope I misconstrued the apparent lack of respect for the traditions of the members of the Air Force to whom you may someday be called to minister.

Judy LaValley, CAP Capt., USAF veteran

[ddelaney103]

Smoozing with Congresscritters and State Houses is great, so we give big bling for it.

what bling is that? Cause I'd like mine.

You just need to do it full time.

From CAPR 35-5:

14. Wing Legislative Liaison Officers. Wing commanders may advance a senior member to the grade of lieutenant colonel concurrent with the member's appointment as the Wing Legislative Liaison Officer.

21+Lv1+Wing LLO=Go directly to Lt Col, do not pass GO.

Officer bling carries extra weight because it makes you look like a real officer.  If we changed to an NCO or FO system your place in the pecking order wouldn't change, but you wouldn't be an officer, and a lot of people get cranky about that.

That's true, but everything being discussed on that subject involves keeping officers but reducing their numbers while putting everyone else in the enlisted end. That makes the officer status more meaningful, if nothing else then cause everyone wants in the place with the line out front, not the one you have free access too. The AF, who knows our standards for officer grades & progression, doesn't see it as meaningful, may even take offense to it at times, and that effects our ability to get work, cause even the truly deserving people aren't recognized thru the fog of everyone else. Would people grubble, well not so much if you grandfather them. Would people quit? You know I don't care. If FEMA proceeds with plans to credential people for meeting NIMS resource typing standards then it's forced down on us & sufddenly you gotta be the real deal & a whole lotta members can't live up to that so they'll be gone & we'll be rebuilding anyway, if you gotta face that enormous process, might as well lay this membership quality control program over the top of it & coe out the end in bad azz shape. No need to torture ourselves twice.

As a DoD civilian, I was in charge of soldiers. I went overseas and wore a uniform.  I wasn't an officer, but I did get respect for what I was and what I did.

The way to get respect from Big Blue is to be what we are: motivated volunteers who can bring a lot to the table.  Trying to dress up like daddy and being a "sorta officer" is just not the right path.  Let's give CAP grade to most of us, save AF grade for those holding a position of command responsibility, and march on.

That view would be fine, except that DoD civilians have a serious progression program that demands professional standards also, and they take many of the same professional development courses the military does. They then at the end of the day earn individual respect by proving it to the people they work with everyday. The folks in that unit know THEM so they jusdge THEM. The CGAux has the same thing, we don't. We get judged as an org by the worst among us. Airman sees CAP Major that can't lead a girl scout troop, suddenly that's all CAP Majors, and there's no way around that. We desperately need quality control & serious professional standards at each level. We go out & do jobs real similiar to the AF, not dropping bombs, but an ops officer is an ops officer, same as an IC is an IC, and they have training for that. All we have to do it pick quality leadership/mgmt candidates into a training program, exactly how any corporation in the country does it, and create leaders using the programs already sitting there for us to use. Why would you want to re-invent the wheel or spread your resources so thin or categorize your top people with the ones you don't trust to watch your lunch much less the border. I think you're going to find that as rough as some of this stuff sounds, people love structure & they respond to high standards. It's true that some people will leave if you make it hard work, but then a lot of other people are going to come in just as fast who are looking for that challenge & chance to contribute & be part of something really important. We can't just stagnate & sink lower & lower as the real world gets more professional. We have to get in the game & bring some serious folks ready to do serious work.

People need to learn that paragraphs are your friend....

First, while DoD Civilians have access to PME, it's not required.  I've been able to move up w/o ACSC, though the Masters Degree version is on my list of things to do.

Second, I'm not getting the point of your last section.  As I see it, CAP needs to do two things:

Figure out what it's going to do.

and

Shape the org around that.

We need to get away from "Missions for America" and move into "We can put an airborne sensor/photo platform over anyplace in CONUS within two hours for less than $100/hr."  Our recruiting and training should be structured with a mission end goal in mind.

[SAR-EMT1]

Here again- We need a REVISED and PUBLISHED vision statement from our NHQ staff (and as I said in an earlier thread- this vision statement would be authored not only by our own MG but also by CC/ CAP-USAF)

[Dragoon]

We need high standards for our leaders.

But unless our standards are the same as those for USAF officers (and not just the schools, either, but the experience, level of responsiblity, etc), we will always face comparisons.  And we'll always come out on the short end of the stick.

Selecting and training high quality CAP leaders? Essential.  No one would argue.

Making them look like USAF officers?  Not essential.  It helps in some cases, and hurts in others.

CAP needs to be good at what it does, and present a professional appearance.

But WHAT exactly we need to be good at, and what is our professional appearance should be are worthy of some serious analysis.  Starting the missions we need to perform, the resources available (training time, money, equipment), and the level of skill and knowledge of our recruits.  Then pick the best answer that accomplishes the mission within those resource constaints.

If we did this, I think we'd come up with a very different set up than the one we have today.  And it might not look much like active duty military....


And yeah, a joint vision statement - with some real "meaty" details in it (no more "missions for america") would really help focus any transformation efforts.

[sparks]

Dragoon, you are correct.
Rank is a hot button topic but not the primary issue CAP leadership should be considering. First they need to figure out what the organization should be (the 20-1 is being rewritten so I assume it's changing). Then make the decision public via a vision statement, funding  and regulations. Once it's decided what CAP is the argument over rank or lack of it can start again. Who knows, the mission may support only ES and a rank structure for it or abandon military rank. We could use position descriptions only. If the title of Commander in Chief is good enough for the president maybe Incident Commander or Mission Pilot would also be enough for CAP.
I can feel the flames already.

[SAR-EMT1]

I can feel the flames already.

IS that why you chose "sparks" for your ID tag?   

[sparks]

No, sparks like in antique radio communication equipment or electronics behaving badly.

I suspect there will be sparks at the board meeting in a few months so maybe the moniker will be adopted by the upper echelon too.

[ZigZag911]

I suspect there will be sparks at the board meeting in a few months

Why??

[Dragoon]

Dragoon, you are correct.
Rank is a hot button topic but not the primary issue CAP leadership should be considering. First they need to figure out what the organization should be (the 20-1 is being rewritten so I assume it's changing). Then make the decision public via a vision statement, funding  and regulations. Once it's decided what CAP is the argument over rank or lack of it can start again. Who knows, the mission may support only ES and a rank structure for it or abandon military rank. We could use position descriptions only. If the title of Commander in Chief is good enough for the president maybe Incident Commander or Mission Pilot would also be enough for CAP.
I can feel the flames already.

That may be the most intelligent single post I've read on this forum.  (not the line about agreeing with me,  but the thought process in your second paragraph.  Figure out what you want to DO first, and then build the organization that best gets that done.)