Unit Uniform Supplements

[stratoflyer]

What is the official word on Squadron only uniform items. Examples:

A baseball cap embroidered with the unit charter unit to be worn with BDU's.
or
Shoulder chord for cadet of the month at the squadron, only to be worn for that month.

I've found that some squadrons issue supplements to CAPM 39-1 that apply only to when the cadet is participating at squadron activities.

According to CAP 39-1:

5-5. Shoulder Cords. Shoulder cords may be worn by cadets only to denote special honor positions or may be authorized by the wing commander for special purpose activities (see Table 1-4). Not more than one shoulder cord will be worn at one time, and it will be worn on the left shoulder (Figure 5-2). Shoulder cords may be worn by cadets at all times. Shoulder cords will be worn along the shoulder seam and fastened from the underneath, inside the shirt.

Is there some open interpretation for this sort of thing? If so, could be used to boost morale.

[lordmonar]

Squadron Teeshirts are okay.....shoulder cords must get wing CC approval.

And yes....squadron supplements only apply to members of that squadron. 

When you go to a wing or higher event....they may require you to adhere to their supplements.

[CadetProgramGuy]

Squadron Teeshirts are okay.....shoulder cords must get wing CC approval.

And yes....squadron supplements only apply to members of that squadron. 

When you go to a wing or higher event....they may require you to adhere to their supplements.

If you push hard enought to get Squadron Suppliments, use your CAC to get it to a Wing Suppliment.  They are easy enough to draft and present.  That way you can have wing conformation.

[Dad2-4]

In general I disagree with most Squadron and Wing supplements to 39-1. IMHO it allows for too much variance from "uniform"-ity, and that it's often motivated out of misplaced nonconformity. I'm sure many of us have encountered others wearing something unusual with the justification of, "That's the way we do it at *** Squadron," or some variation thereof. And of course we have way too many people who rarely if ever read 39-1 to begin with.
A black squadron t-shirt I can understand because it can't be distinguished under a BDU shirt.

[mikeylikey]

Ummm......unless you want to wind up with Orange Ball Caps, and Ranger tabs and whistles.......don't send anymore uniform junk up for CAC approval.  Use what we have written in 39-1, no need to invent more useless items for our members to buy. 

[lordmonar]

The CAC is NOT the proper route for a squadron uniform request.

The CAC is supposed to make recommendations on running the cadet program.....and that is all.

....and Mikeylike....I don't thing the CAC is responsible for the PAWG's uniforms.

[mikeylikey]

The CAC is NOT the proper route for a squadron uniform request.

The CAC is supposed to make recommendations on running the cadet program.....and that is all.

....and Mikeylike....I don't thing the CAC is responsible for the PAWG's uniforms.

Your right, I meant CoC (as in Chain of Command), but read CAC in a previous post and had a minor brain hemorrhage.   

We honestly don't need any more uniform items added to the ever expanding list of uniforms.  In fact, we should be removing some items.

     

[davedove]

We honestly don't need any more uniform items added to the ever expanding list of uniforms.  In fact, we should be removing some items.
   

But what would we have to talk about here on CAP Talk if they did that.

[CadetProgramGuy]

You are all corrent, we DON'T need any more 39-1 variations.  Gosh knows we have enought already (489 variations to date...j/k)

However, if you are wanting shoulder cords for specific items then wing suppliment is the way to go.  CAC may or may not be the route.  CAC is strong in some wings, and non existant in others.

Anyways they are all just thoughts.

[Slim]

I think what the OP is asking is if units have any specifications to what is in the 39-1.

For example, at my unit we specify black t-shirts with BDUs, have a specified time frame for winter/summer combinations (sleeves up/down, ties with service uniforms, etc), and we specify that the squadron patch is the only one to be worn on the upper right pocket of the BDUs.  We also specify proper alternate attire for cadets and seniors who don't yet have CAP uniforms.

Not really supplementing the 39-1, but we do specify which of the required items we wear at our specific unit.

[IceNine]

I think what the OP is asking is if units have any specifications to what is in the 39-1.

For example, at my unit we specify black t-shirts with BDUs, have a specified time frame for winter/summer combinations (sleeves up/down, ties with service uniforms, etc), and we specify that the squadron patch is the only one to be worn on the upper right pocket of the BDUs.  We also specify proper alternate attire for cadets and seniors who don't yet have CAP uniforms.

Not really supplementing the 39-1, but we do specify which of the required items we wear at our specific unit.

That is the definition of a supplement, while it may not be written.  Supplements are designed to restrict given options stated in the reg being supp'ed.  And while these things are up for scrutiny by the masses here on CT if it's working do it.  My old unit had cords for different levels of cadet achievement for the month (I explained it here before), brown shirts for basic cadets, black for cadet and senior staff (provided with squadron logo), we strongly encouraged the unit patch but did not require it.

All of these things were informal and if questioned by a member of the unit we would have had no leg to stand on because it was not sanctioned.  Just keep that in mind, unless approved by higher HQ (may require NHQ approval) you have no real recourse "officially" if someone refuses to play by your rules but abides by 39-1.

Example, I refuse to wear black socks with my Boots... I've been to encampment, and had my old unit try to make me but they have no recourse, because as mentioned above no supplement was ever created

[lordmonar]

I think what the OP is asking is if units have any specifications to what is in the 39-1.

For example, at my unit we specify black t-shirts with BDUs, have a specified time frame for winter/summer combinations (sleeves up/down, ties with service uniforms, etc), and we specify that the squadron patch is the only one to be worn on the upper right pocket of the BDUs.  We also specify proper alternate attire for cadets and seniors who don't yet have CAP uniforms.

Not really supplementing the 39-1, but we do specify which of the required items we wear at our specific unit.

No...you are exactly right....that is what a supplement is supposed to do.

It is used to spell out any local variations to the regulation.  What combos are worn when, Black T vs Brown.  Squadron Cap vs Patrol Cap.

It can also be used to spell out special cords (if approved by wing CC).

[afgeo4]

Wow guys! WRONG!

Variations on regulations don't exist. Regs are Regs. NO VARIATIONS.

Supplements DO NOT restrict wear of authorized items. No one can restrict the wear of items that are authorized by NHQ in CAPR-39-1.

Supplements exist for:

Additional authorizations of uniform items to be worn in unit(s) under responsibility of authorizing commander.

Such as: Squadron caps, special t-shirts, etc.

No one can say you cannot wear something that is authorized in 39-1. PERIOD. If they do, they are in violation of the regulation. The only thing they can tell you is that you may wear additional items authorized by the local commander.

Having said that, if your unit CC wants to authorize items for wear, he/she should check 39-1 and all Wing and Group (if applicable) supplements to make sure the item isn't already authorized for wear or specifically restricted for wear. After that, a supplement may be added for an item by the squadron CC. If the supplement is in compliance with above command supplements then there's no reason to go to CAC or use the Chain of Command.

[SarDragon]

Is it not the prerogative of any unit commander to prescribe a uniform of the day? If it is, then he/she may restrict wear of a specific item on a specific occasion.

[PHall]

Wow guys! WRONG!

Variations on regulations don't exist. Regs are Regs. NO VARIATIONS.

Supplements DO NOT restrict wear of authorized items. No one can restrict the wear of items that are authorized by NHQ in CAPR-39-1.

Supplements exist for:

Additional authorizations of uniform items to be worn in unit(s) under responsibility of authorizing commander.

Such as: Squadron caps, special t-shirts, etc.

No one can say you cannot wear something that is authorized in 39-1. PERIOD. If they do, they are in violation of the regulation. The only thing they can tell you is that you may wear additional items authorized by the local commander.

Having said that, if your unit CC wants to authorize items for wear, he/she should check 39-1 and all Wing and Group (if applicable) supplements to make sure the item isn't already authorized for wear or specifically restricted for wear. After that, a supplement may be added for an item by the squadron CC. If the supplement is in compliance with above command supplements then there's no reason to go to CAC or use the Chain of Command.

You sir are the one who is wrong.

While the Unit Commander can not authorise items to wear that are not in the 39-1, they can restrict the wear of some items for standardization purposes.
i.e. They can require wear of a Squadron Baseball Cap while in the BDU uniform while at unit meetings.

Ref. CAPM 39-1, Table 1-1, Note 1.

[IceNine]

As mentioned above and please let me elaborate... While variation on the regulation is not the best term to describe what we are talking about it does serve the purpose.

The point of a supplement in it's purest form is to define gray lines in regulations.  For instance, 2 options for t-shirts are black or brown, 2 options for BDU socks white and black, very vague guidance on "grey pants".  All of these can be addressed in a supplement to 39-1.

What could not be done however is writing a supplement that says ribbons will not be worn on the service jacket.

Supplements make regulations more strict, or defined. they cannot however make the reg's less restrictive

[mikeylikey]

^ then the question should be asked.............why doesn't the original REG spell out specifics.  Why leave it to individuals who may rotate through the same position within 2 months of each other for 5 years.  EXAMPLE:  Pondinky Composite SQD has just gone through another change of command ceremony, the twelfth time in the past one year.  Each time a new Commander steps up and changes the black T-Shirt to Brown, and vice versa. 

This is a big problem we have.  TOO much local addendum and additions, and deletions from the regs.  That is why I am a firm believer that any and all uniform supplements, changes, OI's should have the National Commanders Signature on them.  Take it out of the hands of the Wing and Region Commanders, unless they are just forwarding it through the chain of command with their support.

Really.....if this is about a shoulder cord, seek region guidance or wing guidance.  If this is about wearing black or brown T-Shirts with BDU's, I have too say let the individual member decide.  We have way too many uniform combinations too even think we can present a uniform appearance in the first place!!!

[lordmonar]

Strange....but looking at the things a unit commander has authority is no different than an AD unit commander.

The regulation does not need to be more restrictive.  High turn over is just a hazard of the job.

As for having to go to the national CC for approval for each and ever minor variation......that is just plain stupid sir!

Do I really need to ask the commander if I can let my guys roll up their sleeves?  Or let's wear blues with ties next week.....but wait....what will Gen C say?

[Dad2-4]

I little bit over the top there. BDUs with rolled up sleeves are already authorized, as are ties with blues. Indicating a uniform-of-the-day doesn't require a written reg or supplement. Nor should a member be disciplined for wearing something else unless there's clear evidence that they're doing so intentionally to be disruptive.
The way I see it, as others have also stated, go by 39-1 to start with and be very careful and sparing with making additions or deletions on the wing, group, or squadron level. Brown or black t-shirt, white or black socks, and other nit-picking issues should never be an issue.

[IceNine]

to be very clear however, the only time these things become issues is when someone knows the difference.

If from day one of joining cadets and SM's are told this is how we do things they will never challenge it.

However, if you switch units, go outside of your unit etc then they become issues

[Eclipse]

If from day one of joining cadets and SM's are told this is how we do things they will never challenge it.

However, if you switch units, go outside of your unit etc then they become issues

Something else to put on a t-shirt.  If our commanders were more inclined to

read the regs
stick to the book
adjust with humility when someone finds something they got wrong

This would be a much quieter board.

[MIKE]

IIRC the language changed somewhat from the 1997 CAPM 39-1.  

IMO there is too much "optional" crap for members to pick and choose to wear or not wear... or commanders to require citing uniformity i.e. "required optional" wing SSI, or unit patches to t-shirt colors.

But also, requiring that someone not wear something optional... starting with the base uniform is IMO, not totally unreasonable for units.  I'd rather you not wear all kinds of crap on your service uniform or BDU/Field Uniform for both utility, uniformity and cost, but I'm not anal about t-shirt color unless you are wearing the wrong shade of brown... Pet peeve.

[mikeylikey]

but I'm not anal about t-shirt color unless you are wearing the wrong shade of brown... Pet peeve.

That purplish brown some members pick up......looks bad.  AAFES and Walmart sell the correct color brown shirts in packs of 3 for around $6.00-$9.00  Not a bad investment!! 

I don't agree with CAP activity Commanders saying "Only brown shirts will be worn", when 39-1 leaves it up to the individual member to choose.  CAP is not an AD organization, costs should be as minimal as possible.  I had a huge "conversation" with an overzealous Encampment Commander a year ago, when he decided he would make his own uniform decisions that he was not permitted to by 39-1. 

Sometimes, common sense is misplaced by those promoted to leadership positions.  Cost and safety must always be at the forefront of any uniform reg or supplement.  Maybe I am over thinking the situation, but when the cost of Encampment reaches $175.00, and the cadet has to purchase brown shirts and black boot socks that tacks on another 20-30 BUCKS when the said cadet already has socks and T-shirts, just in another color that is prescribed by 39-1. 

For example........I have 45 BDU Covers sitting in my unit.  However, when a Cadet or Officer joins they must buy a Orange Ball Cap at 10 bucks, a wing patch for 7 PLUS all the other junk that is not written as optional in 39-1.  So right off the bat a new member in my PAWG unit can save 17 dollars if they were not made (MADE) to buy useless uniform items. 

[lordmonar]

Well then let's start right there.

First off......39-1 says you cannot require cadets to wear any uniform execpt the basic issue stuff unless it is provided free of charge.

So 99.999999 of all CAP NCSAs/Encampments are not in compliance with the regulation to begin with.

Second.....I too think that activity directors should not be going too far out of their way in forcing cadets to comply with arbatrary unformity deals.  But I have no problem with unit commanders, group commanders and wing commanders to establish policies and standards under their jurisdiction.

So patrol caps vs ball caps.....wing patches all on vs all off or member option......brown t-shirts, black t-shirts, unit t-shirts are all good and very much within the preview of the unit commanders.

Same thing with cadet officers and the service CAP.....I can certainly see a unit commander mandating all officers or no officers wearing them.
Provided that they are supplied to the cadets if the required.

Yes...CAP can be an expensive endevor.....but that is the breaks......so long as the cadets and their families know what they are getting into before they pay their dues.