ES Quals

[Eclipse]

2) Fix Sq operations. Three aspects to this:

A) We mostly meet on weeknights which is in itself a very limiting factor versus a one full wknd OR a couple Sats a month. There's just not enough time to get anything done. 15min opening, 15 more for closing, 5min to transition between activities... a third of your time ends up wasted, & half the schedule is non-critical training. The way we operate is very inefficient, but not so easy to change.

Its very easy to change. Who determines the ops temp of the local unit?  The Unit CC.  Want to meet on one weekend instead of a weeknight?  Do it.  There are no rules to this.

If your time is wasted, its because you are LETTING it be wasted

B) We're required to do all the same administrative load as a real active/guard/res Squadron, yet every one of them has a full-time administrator & paid trained staff officers, not to mention a real Sq is a company sized element, not 30-40 people on the books 15 active. As many reports & if you try to follow 20-1 or any staff structure model, you're in for trouble. It's working flat out just to keep your head above water. That's not realistic. What is realistic is calling these Platoon sized elements Flights & pinning a few together under a shared staff you call a Sq & charge with a streamlined version of that administrative load. Let everyone else focus on getting the missions done at the tactical level inside a vision handed to them by someone on the operational level based on the big picture defined by someone on the strategic/institutional level. That's how military structures are supposed to work. We're understaffed &8 trying to do too much at the bottom.

Fine - FIX it.  Push recruiting, get more people.  And for the record, the unit's administrative needs are roughly linear to the activity of the membership.  If the Unit CC chooses to allow hyper-active membership, but not spread the load of administration around, that's his problem, not a program problem.  the 1/2 on the books who don't do anything, also don't require any paperwork.

C) Member quality control & training is an issue. I won't get into it much, but it's disgraceful that CAP doesn't do more to prepare our people for the roles they have to face. It's no wonder we don't get strong leadership at each progressive level.

"CAP" doesn't prepare anybody any more then the "military" prepares anyone.  It is the Unit CC's who are responsible.  Period.  If they don't make it happen, no one will, and you reap what you sow.

Got a bunch of GOB pilots who won't do anything but fly, and complain all the time about no missions?
There's a simple tool for that.   Suggest they use is and that they be careful is doesn't hit them on the way out.

Membership is a PRIVILEGE.  The opportunities CAP affords require work and effort, and the benefits reaped are in direct proportion.

Sure, good-natured gnashing of teeth about the last stroke 12-28 form required in triplicate?  Of course.

But there is one thing that will never be the same as the RealMilitary®, anytime you want, 24x7/365
you can decide you've had enough, walk out the door and never look back.

[flyguy06]

A lot of this is semantics. I mean my 60hrs/mo versus someone else's 20, does that make me better than them? No way. Even if I measured that by the percentage of their free time & money they could give, would THAT make me better? No, and what the hell even asking such questions. What does ES active mean? 10 missions a year? We get 100 in my group & I probably get called for a third of those. I freakin hate ES. I was in love with the stuff early on, but between non-distress & weeks of looking for dead bodies, I just don't care anymore. So if I do 2-3 times more ES that you & have a few thousand hours of real-world mission experience, does that make me better than you? Nope. Who freakin cares. There's not an answer in any of that, just frustration that if you'd back up & look at the big picture, try to see it from the other guy's perspective, you'd realize it's meaningless.

You want a solution, I'll be happy to talk to you about that. I can see two big problems here.

1) ES training program is screwed all to hell. It's so incredibly frustrating for members to find their way thru the process & stay current. A paid agency wouldn't treat their members like that, a volunteer fire dept wouldn't treat their members like that, the red cross doesn't treat their members like that. This isn't a crucible thru which they pass to be worthy. This isn't something they must earn so they will get a reward. This is us needing to convert good will to properly trained people in the most efficient way possible so we can maximize the numbers out in the force. That means kill all elitism! Streamline & standardize the training into simple straight forward courses, present these on a regular basis, provide lots of organization & structure, lots of guidance for people trying to navigate this process. Fix that system & while you're at it, get in line with NIMS so we can do some really meaningful & life saving work.

2) Fix Sq operations. Three aspects to this:

A) We mostly meet on weeknights which is in itself a very limiting factor versus a one full wknd OR a couple Sats a month. There's just not enough time to get anything done. 15min opening, 15 more for closing, 5min to transition between activities... a third of your time ends up wasted, & half the schedule is non-critical training. The way we operate is very inefficient, but not so easy to change.

B) We're required to do all the same administrative load as a real active/guard/res Squadron, yet every one of them has a full-time administrator & paid trained staff officers, not to mention a real Sq is a company sized element, not 30-40 people on the books 15 active. As many reports & if you try to follow 20-1 or any staff structure model, you're in for trouble. It's working flat out just to keep your head above water. That's not realistic. What is realistic is calling these Platoon sized elements Flights & pinning a few together under a shared staff you call a Sq & charge with a streamlined version of that administrative load. Let everyone else focus on getting the missions done at the tactical level inside a vision handed to them by someone on the operational level based on the big picture defined by someone on the strategic/institutional level. That's how military structures are supposed to work. We're understaffed &8 trying to do too much at the bottom.

C) Member quality control & training is an issue. I won't get into it much, but it's disgraceful that CAP doesn't do more to prepare our people for the roles they have to face. It's no wonder we don't get strong leadership at each progressive level.

So... if you want to complain about the aspects so we can all better understand them, that's fine. If you want to talk theoretical solutions, that's fine too. Just not sure what's trying to be accomplished here.

DNall,
Your post is focused soley on ES. I am talking being a member of CAP as a whole. Cadet encamments, National Cadet Special Activities, Model Rocketry events. Thats what I am talking about when I say I wsh I could do more. Weekly meeting are fine. Some units meet monthly which Idont agree with.

[ZigZag911]

DNall has a valid point about the Byzantine complexity of our ES qualification system....it is far from straightforward or transparent.

He also has a good point about the administrative load placed on "squadrons" (which in USAF is a  command considered roughly equivalent to an army or marine battalion  -- in the Army that's multiple companies, anywhere from 600-1200 people).....when what we have is a platoon equivalent organization (USAF = 'flight', possibly even 'detachment'....small leadership element, low admin overhead).

No one disputes the necessity of accountability....the question here is at what level the formal, written reporting should be required. I would argue Group....and before anyone says there are wings that don't have them, I'd suggest consider establishing them to relieve the squadrons of administrative pressure....let thelocal unit squadrons concentrate  tactical & training functions in one or more of  the 3 programs.

Also, lordmonar is right about needing to pick and choose......the average member can't give a lot of 'quality time' to everything....I still think every officer needs a basic grounding in all 3 missions.

[Eclipse]

...I still think every officer needs a basic grounding in all 3 missions.

I'm with you there...

[RiverAux]

How is our system not straightforward or transparent?  For every single specialty there is a list of tasks.  For each task there are several pages in a task guide that tell you exactly how to do that task.  Then, that same task guide tells you exactly what you will need to demonstrate and how it will be done to become qualified in that task. 

If that isn't enough, there are some big texts that provide additional background information on the job. 

Seems easy to me. 

[DNall]

Your post is focused soley on ES. I am talking being a member of CAP as a whole.

When I say I don't have a non-CAP wknd in six months & work 60hrs/mo, that's mostly cadet related. I don't conduct ES training anymore, just go on the missions now & then when there's no one else & so my cadets can get some exposure. I've made larger than average contributions in ES & AE at times in my CAP career & I still help with those aspects of the org on a back burner level, but now & for most of my time I've been cadet focused. I'm getting tierd of that at the unit level now. Id' probably move exclusively to a Gp/Wg level position if I were staying put, but I'm not & I don't know what kind of role I'll be able to or want to play after I get done.

DNall has a valid point about the Byzantine complexity of our ES qualification system....it is far from straightforward or transparent.

He also has a good point about the administrative load placed on "squadrons" (which in USAF is a  command considered roughly equivalent to an army or marine battalion  -- in the Army that's multiple companies, anywhere from 600-1200 people).....when what we have is a platoon equivalent organization (USAF = 'flight', possibly even 'detachment'....small leadership element, low admin overhead).

No one disputes the necessity of accountability....the question here is at what level the formal, written reporting should be required. I would argue Group....and before anyone says there are wings that don't have them, I'd suggest consider establishing them to relieve the squadrons of administrative pressure....let thelocal unit squadrons concentrate  tactical & training functions in one or more of  the 3 programs.

You're required to do the same number of reports regardless if your Sq has 5 or 500 members. Some of the paperwork we have is far too complicated, and everything from electronic forms (scanning attachments) to jacked up eServices is a PITA that frustrates, overpowers, & drives away people. More then that though, it wastes thousands upon thousands of volunteer hours that should be mission focused. Th elocal unit should be gunning the mission & the next echelon up should be supplying PAO, Recruiting, supply, logistics, transportation, PD, CP, AE, Chap, etc. Your local meetings should be focused on ES teams or a cadet flight both of which should be simply executing a plan handed to them by the staff officer at the next level. That next level should meet once or twice a month with people from all those other units sharing resources to fill those staff jobs & do one set of reports to Wg. That's much better streamlined use of resources. I'll jump right on that just as soon as someone's dumb enough to make me wing CC.

The ES training system is horrible. It's frustrating to a lot of people & on the individual rather than the system. It's very inefficient use of resources, that doesn't get us all the training we need & requires some stuff we don't really use, mainly though it's jsut frustrating & drives people off after taking so incredibly long to get them qual'd & on to advanced quals.

[Eclipse]

Th elocal unit should be gunning the mission & the next echelon up should be supplying PAO, Recruiting, supply, logistics, transportation, PD, CP, AE, Chap, etc. Your local meetings should be focused on ES teams or a cadet flight both of which should be simply executing a plan handed to them by the staff officer at the next level. That next level should meet once or twice a month with people from all those other units sharing resources to fill those staff jobs & do one set of reports to Wg. That's much better streamlined use of resources. I'll jump right on that just as soon as someone's dumb enough to make me wing CC.

Yep, agree 100% - which is why this is what my unit / Group is doing today.

If your Wing/Group/Unit are not, hold THEM accountable, not CAP as a whole.

The ES training system is horrible. It's frustrating to a lot of people & on the individual rather than the system. It's very inefficient use of resources, that doesn't get us all the training we need & requires some stuff we don't really use, mainly though it's jsut frustrating & drives people off after taking so incredibly long to get them qual'd & on to advanced quals.

Again, just because your local units are having issues, do not assume you speak for the organization as a whole.

With even the barest initiative, a new member can go from slick-sleeve to GTM3 in 6 months easily, including missions.  Same goes for aircrew.

I have no idea what you are talking about with the training being confusing.

[DNall]

Th elocal unit should be gunning the mission & the next echelon up should be supplying PAO, Recruiting, supply, logistics, transportation, PD, CP, AE, Chap, etc. Your local meetings should be focused on ES teams or a cadet flight both of which should be simply executing a plan handed to them by the staff officer at the next level. That next level should meet once or twice a month with people from all those other units sharing resources to fill those staff jobs & do one set of reports to Wg. That's much better streamlined use of resources. I'll jump right on that just as soon as someone's dumb enough to make me wing CC.

Yep, agree 100% - which is why this is what my unit / Group is doing today.

If your Wing/Group/Unit are not, hold THEM accountable, not CAP as a whole.

Gps don't do the staff work for Sqs, they may help you out if you're in a jam, & they try to run Gp level projects that take some pressure off you, but their purpose is regulatory. They are there to mitigate teh Wg's span of control cause there are too many units too spread out. And the Wg exists to make sure you're folling regs & doing everythign required of you, while they try to frum soemthign up w/ the state. They are not there to do the work for you.

The thing is, our local units are required to do far too much support work for far too small an organization. You don't need 10 coaches on a basketball team. What happens at locl unit level, that's enlisted & tactical level work. You don't need 15 staff officers. You need to focus on the job & nothing else. You should then have 5 units give or take strung together to share resources as one Sq. 20% of the work spread on a staff drawn from 5 times the number of people. That's how it needs to be done.

It is very much a CAP wide problem that the reporting, administrative, & logistics requirements on me require more staff that I have or can possibly get, and ever once of energy is devoted to keeping our head above water on that just so the unit can stay alive, and no time is left to focus on ES or CP. It's just burning people out for nothing & wasting time. That's terrible mgmt. I run my company that way I'd be out of business.

The ES training system is horrible. It's frustrating to a lot of people & on the individual rather than the system. It's very inefficient use of resources, that doesn't get us all the training we need & requires some stuff we don't really use, mainly though it's jsut frustrating & drives people off after taking so incredibly long to get them qual'd & on to advanced quals.

Again, just because your local units are having issues, do not assume you speak for the organization as a whole.

With even the barest initiative, a new member can go from slick-sleeve to GTM3 in 6 months easily, including missions.  Same goes for aircrew.

I have no idea what you are talking about with the training being confusing.[/quote]
This is not a matter of local units. Don't assume that because you have an organized infrastructure that it works that way everywhere.

We have stuff scheduled, but it's the responsibility tof the member to figure out what they need & get it done in the limited offerings at the Sq or Gp level & make sure it's recorded for credit. Anything past that is someone holding their hand & that's more work on this scale than anyone has time to do.

People should be hooked into a unified single source training program that tracks training for them in a user friendly way. The whole online tracking of tasks is kind of a waste of time. What we have, both online & in real life, is as far from user-friendly as possible. What we've done is take same concept of throwing the a copy of regs at a new staff officer & telling them to figure it out. The responsibility to get qualified should never be on the student. They should never have any control in teh process at all. The training should not be a few things here & there as you feel like it. It should be one formal organized course from start to finish.

[flyguy06]

well, in GA, Groups mainly consist of one peson, thr Gp Commander. There is no real Group staff. They dont meet or anything. The Group CC may ask somone in a squadron to be for example the Group cadet programs officer, but he satys in his assigned squadron and really just relays information fom Wing tothe other units when he can. WHat I am saying is their is no dedicated "Tats all I do" Group staff other than the Group Commander

[ZigZag911]

well, in GA, Groups mainly consist of one peson, thr Gp Commander. Ther eis no ral Grop staff. They dont meet or anything. The Group CC may ask somone in a squadron to be for example the Group cadet programs officer, but he satys in his assigned squadron and really just relays information fom Wing tothe other units when he can. WHat I am saying is their is no dedicated "Tats all I do" Group staff other than the Group Commander

I understand...for this system to work, some of the more administratively oriented squadron officers would need to help form a group staff....the point is that one or two 'subject matter experts' would be preparing a single consolidated report on any given subject as required.

[Dragoon]

well, in GA, Groups mainly consist of one person, thr Gp Commander. There is no real Group staff. They dont meet or anything. The Group CC may ask somone in a squadron to be for example the Group cadet programs officer, but he satys in his assigned squadron and really just relays information fom Wing tothe other units when he can. WHat I am saying is their is no dedicated "Tats all I do" Group staff other than the Group Commander

Bingo, and this relates to a large number of other threads on this board.

People have a (natural) desire to remove all the "BS" and "red tape" from the squadrons and let higher HQ do all that for them.

The problem is WE CAN'T GET ENOUGH GOOD PEOPLE TO WORK AT HIGHER HQ!

Why?  Simple.  Squadrons are more fun.

I absolutely agree that CAP would run better if squadrons didn't have to worry about admin burdons.  It's the right thing to do.

But unless someone's going to float us $20 million or so to hire wing and group staffs, we're going to have to come up with more incentives to get the talent OUT of the squadrons and INTO group and wing.  So they can do all this hard but necessary overhead work.