Does the new Corporate Service Dress Uniform Violate the UCMJ and USC Codes?

[mikeylikey]

lordmonar......Thank you! 

[DNall]

That's correct at the base level of the Geneva Conventions. We are combatants. The changes apply to how the US choses to designate officers. By changing what they did, if you were captured then you would not be considered an officer, I don't know with the AF-style, I think it's the same. The idea being if you were in a POW camp, you as a CAP officer cannot be senior & take charge of the other prisoners. Obviously this is way off into never happen world, but someone over there cares about formailities & precedent. Which is fine.

It's about what happens to CAP when someone puts the blue slides & two line nameplate on the blue shirt & goes walking around in front of people in the AF, which most people believe is only a matter of time.

I forsee all of us in a few years being forced into the grey pants and CAP polo.  Ground teams get to choose whatever suits their taste and comfort off the rack at say Gander Mountain or EMS or some other outdoor adventurer type store.  Members that fly get the polo shirt and grey pants too. 

You assume if we piss them off that we'll still be doing GT missions. Even if there were money to support such a thing, we only get corporate missions now cause of our affiliation with the Air Force. Otherwise we're unqualified & not equipped right for work that there's paid experts out there willing to do.

[Hawk200]

Zooming the picture clearly shows two lines of text.

So does that equate to seeing them fifty feet away? From a distance it looks questionable. And the military is used to looking at us from a distance.

[Eclipse]

Zooming the picture clearly shows two lines of text.

So does that equate to seeing them fifty feet away? From a distance it looks questionable. And the military is used to looking at us from a distance.

So?

[Hawk200]

Zooming the picture clearly shows two lines of text.

So does that equate to seeing them fifty feet away? From a distance it looks questionable. And the military is used to looking at us from a distance.

So?

Blowing it off isn't helping us. How we look can be just as important as what we do. In the military, a lot of people don't consider you reliable if your uniform isn't up to snuff. A uniform that military personnel have bad opinions of is a bad thing. Doesn't matter if technically it's OK, it still generates problems.

[DNall]

So does that equate to seeing them fifty feet away? From a distance it looks questionable. And the military is used to looking at us from a distance.

You want hard to figure out? The Texas state air guard (SDF) uniform is exactly the AF uniform - blues, AF slides, etc - with only a distinctive nametag, nothing else.


I know that's apples & organges to compare them & try to read any mutual respect/value statemetn from the AF into the degree of varriation, but it is annoying to see CAP treated that way when we do so musch more productive stuff with defined missions, assets, contributions, etc.

[Hawk200]

So does that equate to seeing them fifty feet away? From a distance it looks questionable. And the military is used to looking at us from a distance.

You want hard to figure out? The Texas state air guard (SDF) uniform is exactly the AF uniform - blues, AF slides, etc - with only a distinctive nametag, nothing else.

I know that's apples & organges to compare them & try to read any mutual respect/value statemetn from the AF into the degree of varriation, but it is annoying to see CAP treated that way when we do so musch more productive stuff with defined missions, assets, contributions, etc.

I agree that's an issue, but that's an issue the Air Force needs to deal with. The Texas state Air Guard doesn't answer to us. We have a responsibility to ourselves, getting our own house in order. And we have to make sure we don't endanger our own missions, assets, and contributions.

[DNall]

No, I agree with that 100%. It's just frustrating to try to convince people that AF slides on a white shirt are a problem when the SDF over here is doing it on blue w/ a two-line nametag that's even less ditinctive than our two-liner, not to mention the three liner on blues or the gray version for adults. Feels hamstrung trying to make an argument that really seems like AF needs to correct the uniform process for CAP to be more congruant with the others they let wear their uniform.

[Eclipse]

Seems like lot of time worrying about a few nearsighted RealMilitary types.

OUR uniform meets OUR regulations.  What another service thinks or doesn't think about it is irrelevent, and I am sure no one cares.

Not to mention the fact that the issue being dicussed here is basically the perception of a nametag in a low-resolution photo from a bad light angle.

Our standard service dress is much easier to mistake, as would the TPU.

[gallagheria]

well, one major difference is that the SDF is subject to the respective state codes of military justice, just as the air national guards and army national guards. The SDF is military, versus the CAP is nonmilitary.

But as for the uniform issue itself, I agree that CAP should not be screwed over so much on small uniform issues when you can enroll in an ROTC course at a local college and be noncontracted yet still wear a legitimate military uniform that even says "U.S. Army" with all the bells and whistles and I am sure it is the same with Air Force ROTC cadets.

[Hawk200]

What another service thinks or doesn't think about it is irrelevent, and I am sure no one cares.

Not the first time I've been told I'm noone. And I'm sure all the other noones here probably do care.

Not to mention the fact that the issue being dicussed here is basically the perception of a nametag in a low-resolution photo from a bad light angle.

No, it's not the issue being discussed. The issue is that it can be mistaken for something else. Nearsighted is not looking at the bigger issues. Judging from your posts, I don't think you're going to acknowledge that.

But here is something to chew on. Why was it created in the first place? What need does the TPU fill that other uniforms didn't? I can't really see any. You're arguing for a uniform that has no justification to even exist. That should be the real discussion.

The TPU is a pet project, just like McPeak's changes. And most of those weren't welcome, either.

[DNall]

SDFs are a weird animal & there's already threads discussing that, but CAP is bound by more than we acknowledge & SDFs are not bound by UCMJ even when on state active duty. The larger point though is that they are unpaid volunteers doing much the same sort of work as us in much the same kind of organization. That makes them an interesting precedent with regard to uniforms, and one the AF should take a harder look at when considering CAP uniforms. That's just a side issue of the side issue on two-line nametags. Don't get bogged down on it.

It's not the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard, & CAP. We're not a separate service, we're part of the AF. We may have a split personality & function as a semi-independent corporation part of the time, but the other part of the time we are treated as AF civilian employees, and considered by international law to be uniformed military combatants. Technicalities aside though... It very much matters what AF thinks. We get missions, funding, & support from them out of the goodness of their hearts. You kick them around a little bit & you can just go walk your happy asz all the way home telling yourself how important you are & that they'll realize sooner or later. Meantime they've brushed away a fly buzzing in their ear & moved on with life in the real world. When you function at someones mercy & serve at their pleasure, you need to respect & exceed their expectations, which are based on their world, not yours.

[ColonelJack]

Quoting Hawk200:
"Why was it created in the first place? What need does the TPU fill that other uniforms didn't? I can't really see any. You're arguing for a uniform that has no justification to even exist. That should be the real discussion."

I can't speak to why it was created, but it does indeed fill a need -- the need for some members of Civil Air Patrol to feel that they, too, are members of the organization and to wear a uniform for that organization.  Folks like me, f'rinstance, who do not meet height/weight standards but contribute (or have contributed) in many ways to CAP's success.  Why should we not have a military-style uniform?  Because we're overweight?  Well, I would hold off on casting the stones before making sure that the weight problem isn't just overindulgence at McDonald's. 

Maybe the uniform was created because Maj. Gen. Pineda himself is getting a little too "large" for his AF blue suit.  Maybe it really was created as an end-run around the metal grade on the epaulet issue.  Maybe it was created for the reasons I stated -- so the larger-than-issue-size members can have a military-style uniform to feel as if they belong as well.  Maybe it was for all of these reasons; maybe for none of the above. 

Maybe I'm misinterpreting you, Hawk200, but for me, saying something created by higher headquarters "doesn't have the justification to exist" is a bit above my pay grade.  As I've said before, if you don't like the uniform, don't wear it.  That's why it's optional.  For folks like me -- who want to serve, and who want to feel as if we belong because we're dressed at least somewhat similar to everyone else -- the uniform is justified.

My two cents.  Your mileage will, of course, vary.

Jack

[ColonelJack]

And on the topic at hand (potential violations of UCMJ):

It seems to me as if those who say the Corporate uniform somehow violates the UCMJ are simply looking for reasons to do away with the uniform, rather than worry about whether someone is actually violating the law.  Saying, "See!  I told you!  Wearing AF rank slides violates the UCMJ, USC, and probably the Constitution too!  Now get rid of the whole idea!" is what I think they're trying to do, not raise questions about the legality of this and/or that.

Jack

[Major_Chuck]

I feel you'll find that there are as many pro and con opinions of the TPU as there are members of the Civil Air Patrol.  Whether you hate it, like it, or indifferent the fact is that the uniform is here and will most likely be around for a very long time.

So.  What next?  There are obvious design issues that I personally don't like.  (double breasted, CAP cutout rather than US, and the brushed nametag says Civil Air Patrol on it.  Fact is, it is a military appearing distinctive CAP uniform that meets the intended purpose.  If you chose not to wear it then don't.  It is however a uniform that some like and some are willing to pay the extra money for.

The issue now should be that it is worn correctly, neatly, clean and more importantly, proudly.  The uniform and the wearer represents the Civil Air Patrol, the Auxiliary, United States Air Force.

You can hash out the blue rank slides, metal pin on rank until you are blue in the face but it won't change the fact that the uniform is here and has been accepted by a growing number of our members.

-Chuck

[Major Carrales]

You can hash out the blue rank slides, metal pin on rank until you are blue in the face but it won't change the fact that the uniform is here and has been accepted by a growing number of our members.

I do not own said uniform, but when it first came out I was indifferent.  Since then it has been clear to me that there is a segment within CAP that has a need for such a uniform.  There is also a segment that seems to be wearing it who do meet USAF standards and, for some reason, wear it because they like it.  What do y'all make of that?

Also, when this first came out...I pointed out that it wasn't as "unpopular" are people thought and that it was being seen and purchased by an ever growing number.  I was basically labled a crackpot and told "where is your proof?"

Well, we have had significant time that it has been available for sale at Vanguard, we  have WING/REGION CONFERENCE CYCLE coming up.  If we take HONEST accounting of how many we see...we should have an answer.

[AlphaSigOU]

Well, we have had significant time that it has been available for sale at Vanguard, we  have WING/REGION CONFERENCE CYCLE coming up.  If we take HONEST accounting of how many we see...we should have an answer.

Maj. C. - I've had one on order at Vanguard since late December, and it's currently held up at the manufacturer so they can put on the distinctive CAP buttons before they ship it to Vanguard and then to me. I'm hoping I have it received in the next couple of weeks so I can get the thing tailored and sleeve braid put on before the Wing conference. Got all the doodads (including hard rank) for it already.

[DNall]

...it does indeed fill a need -- the need for some members of Civil Air Patrol to feel that they, too, are members of the organization and to wear a uniform for that organization. 

The majority of senior members do NOT wear the AF-style uniform. Therefore, if anything you should be complaining that their choice to do so is separating them from the pack. Thats not a need. It has already been stated that the purpose of this uniform was to put everyone into a para-military uniform as part of an attempt to slowly re-militarize CAP. You just can't actually do that while going against the military & doing things your own way cause you think you're smarter than everyone else on the planet.  

As I've said before, if you don't like the uniform, don't wear it.  That's why it's optional.  For folks like me -- who want to serve, and who want to feel as if we belong because we're dressed at least somewhat similar to everyone else -- the uniform is justified.

See above... and what you wear reflects on me. If one CAP officer wears the wrong slides on the wrong shirt in front of the wrong person, whamo, we're all screwed royally, and what did we gain from pushing our luck?

Just because a lot of pressure has been put down on members to accept it & it really isn't that bad, better than the grays, none of that makes it right. That just makes it shrewd. We need to address issues rank-in-file have with it & take away any ammunition (UCMJ/USC) that could be used if someone mixes things up in the dark one early morning.

[Major Carrales]

Well, we have had significant time that it has been available for sale at Vanguard, we  have WING/REGION CONFERENCE CYCLE coming up.  If we take HONEST accounting of how many we see...we should have an answer.

Maj. C. - I've had one on order at Vanguard since late December, and it's currently held up at the manufacturer so they can put on the distinctive CAP buttons before they ship it to Vanguard and then to me. I'm hoping I have it received in the next couple of weeks so I can get the thing tailored and sleeve braid put on before the Wing conference. Got all the doodads (including hard rank) for it already.

So, y'think I should save up for one?  Is it the "wave of the future?

[AlphaSigOU]

I am half-tempted to put on a set of old CAP blue shoulder marks on my TPU shirt just to see the reaction. (Have a set of 1st Lt, Capt and Maj in old-style blue. And I'm not selling 'em.)