Outdated Regs

[davedove]

I know it takes a while to actually update the CAP Regs, but shouldn't some supplements be published to account for the automation that has taken place.

For instance, the regs still state that a CAPF 2a needs to be done to award the Membership Ribbon to a member.  However, the national database clearly states that the Membership Ribbon has been awarded as soon as the paperwork is recorded there.  Requiring the 2a seems like a duplication of effort and unnecessary forms being filled out.

Granted, sometimes the paperwork is recorded faster than other times, and the form could be used as a temporary measure, but for normal prodecures it seems redundant to me.

[Matt]

Well: yes.

National is getting behind themselves again.  Lets face it: National could stand to redo almost every reg to update for the tmies, but it doesn't mean that it will happen.

As for the 2a, simple rule to follow: If it ain't on paper -- it didn't happen.

[Becks]

Well: yes.

National is getting behind themselves again.  Lets face it: National could stand to redo almost every reg to update for the tmies, but it doesn't mean that it will happen.

As for the 2a, simple rule to follow: If it ain't on paper -- it didn't happen.

Pretty much, you always want to remember to keep hardcopies of you promotion/personnel actions in your file, that way you always have the ability to back it up at least on a local level.

[ncc1912]

As for the 2a, simple rule to follow: If it ain't on paper -- it didn't happen.

I take exception to that.

Granted, you should keep certificates, diplomas, promotion and certification documentation, but too many of CAP's awards are given as tokens to a completion of some level of training or achievement.

To issue a 2A for a ribbon that accompanies a Level I completion (Membership Ribbon) or completing your technician rating in some specialty (Leadership Ribbon) is redundant.  It would be very similar to a cadet needing both a CAPF 52-1 and a 2A to wear the Curry, Arnold, Feik and Wright Brothers Ribbons.

As for the updating of regs: that is a several step process that the, now,  limited personnel at NHQ have very little time for. 

On the other hand, most members don't know that they alone can affect change and don't necessarily have to wait for NHQ to act.  Drafts of updates of any regulation can be proposed [by anyone] to the National Committees for consideration and subsequent proposal to the National Board:  the deciding body.

All that NHQ does is draft the vast majority of these regs, as time allows, for proposal and act as the office of primary responsibility (OPR) for all CAP publications.

If you think something is wrong, draft a change and send it through the channels.

[capchiro]

As far as submission of changes to the Reg's, the last time I did that it took over 10 years for the changes to go through channels and be approved and show up in the Reg's, so don't hold your breath.

[ncc1912]

As far as submission of changes to the Reg's, the last time I did that it took over 10 years for the changes to go through channels and be approved and show up in the Reg's, so don't hold your breath.

... ' Did vouch for expediency.  

I had a similar experience, but it was four years.

[arajca]

The NB is looking at changing how regs are approved. The new process will go something like this:
NB/NEC approves concept/policy for regulation/uniform/aircraft paint scheme/etc.
CAP/CC assigns writing/revising of reg to appropriate OPR, if not already assigned
OPR writes reg/change/etc and submits to CAP/CC for signature
CAP/CC reviews to make sure reg meets NB/NEC policy/concept decision
CAP/CC approves reg
Reg gets posted and takes effect

After step 1, the process can take as little as a week.

[SarDragon]

As for the 2a, simple rule to follow: If it ain't on paper -- it didn't happen.

I take exception to that.

Granted, you should keep certificates, diplomas, promotion and certification documentation, but too many of CAP's awards are given as tokens to a completion of some level of training or achievement.

To issue a 2A for a ribbon that accompanies a Level I completion (Membership Ribbon) or completing your technician rating in some specialty (Leadership Ribbon) is redundant.  It would be very similar to a cadet needing both a CAPF 52-1 and a 2A to wear the Curry, Arnold, Feik and Wright Brothers Ribbons. [remainder redacted]

My local Personnel Officer just did a comparison between local records and MIMS, and found that no one in the unit has credit for the Leadership Ribbon in MIMS, although 17 members have at least a Technician rating. Apparently it's not an automatic thing like completion of Level I. We are working on an answer.

[ncc1912]

As for the 2a, simple rule to follow: If it ain't on paper -- it didn't happen.

I take exception to that.

Granted, you should keep certificates, diplomas, promotion and certification documentation, but too many of CAP's awards are given as tokens to a completion of some level of training or achievement.

To issue a 2A for a ribbon that accompanies a Level I completion (Membership Ribbon) or completing your technician rating in some specialty (Leadership Ribbon) is redundant.  It would be very similar to a cadet needing both a CAPF 52-1 and a 2A to wear the Curry, Arnold, Feik and Wright Brothers Ribbons. [remainder redacted]

My local Personnel Officer just did a comparison between local records and MIMS, and found that no one in the unit has credit for the Leadership Ribbon in MIMS, although 17 members have at least a Technician rating. Apparently it's not an automatic thing like completion of Level I. We are working on an answer.

The answers is probably rather simple:  lack of human intervention.

NHQ has close to 27,000 officer (senior) records to maintain with a workforce smaller than your local small-town DMV (or equivalent) office.  Also, if your members earned their technician rating prior to ~5 years ago, it is likely that it isn't in MIMS because there was a change in the way that the records were kept at NHQ.

Basically, PD (the ones who keep track of specialty tracks) and DP (the ones who keep track of ribbons etc.) didn't really "talk" to each other until recently.  This was a forced change out of necessity.  Even though they talk now, no one went back to fix everyones records because it would be a manual change and I don't think they have the time.

If you want to force the issue and get MIMS updated, you can just call them (NHQ/DPM) and have them update your unit's info, but they may (not vouching for the likelihood) request some supporting documentation or an old STR (corrected in red ink and signed) if you have one.  They may even have you call NHQ/PD.  Who knows?

[DNall]

Have you looked at the national staff directory? It seems to me that quite a few people work there. I personally know the membership serives dept has 13 people including supervisors. That's more than enough to deal w/ 100k records. There's just not that much for them to do. The personnel actions are taken at other levels & just confirmed by them as they flow in. Frankly a more effective automated systems would do wonders for everyone, but I think they're well staffed at HQ, maybe eve over staffed on the whole. I could see your point if they were actually digging into all those records at once to get them updated to reality, but that's not the case.

[Major Carrales]

CAPM 39-1, alone is as affected by this as they come these days.  If some Officer is not as internet savy as us or if there is an OLD SCHOOL squadron that is not as "paperless," the various policy letters totally change it all.

That one needs to be rewritten also in seeing that that issues is been a constant source of contention.

Some of my unit has called it akin to "adding pages to the Bible" as you go.

[ncc1912]

Have you looked at the national staff directory? It seems to me that quite a few people work there. I personally know the membership serives dept has 13 people including supervisors. That's more than enough to deal w/ 100k records. There's just not that much for them to do. The personnel actions are taken at other levels & just confirmed by them as they flow in. Frankly a more effective automated systems would do wonders for everyone, but I think they're well staffed at HQ, maybe eve over staffed on the whole. I could see your point if they were actually digging into all those records at once to get them updated to reality, but that's not the case.

The four people that work in DPM are the only people who really deal with the records and since ~65% of the members in the national database are not going to be members one year from now (based on current retention rates), I can see why they see little value in correcting all those records.  Effort vs. return.

If you ask them, they'll more than likely fix your record for you.

[Major_Chuck]

National is way behind on updating their regulations.  TP needs to direct them to at least check for currancy and change the date at a minimum.  Too busy with other matters I guess

[shorning]

Have you looked at the national staff directory? It seems to me that quite a few people work there. I personally know the membership serives dept has 13 people including supervisors. That's more than enough to deal w/ 100k records. There's just not that much for them to do. The personnel actions are taken at other levels & just confirmed by them as they flow in. Frankly a more effective automated systems would do wonders for everyone, but I think they're well staffed at HQ, maybe eve over staffed on the whole. I could see your point if they were actually digging into all those records at once to get them updated to reality, but that's not the case.

Overstaffed?  Not hardly.  Their entire staff doesn't work on data entry.  Unless you've ever worked at "echelons above reality" you generally don't understand all the staffing and other areas they are responsible for.  How many squadrons are in the same amount of disarray with fewer people to manager and far less responsibility?  It's easy to point fingers at NHQ, but they aren't your problem.

As has already been said, you need them to fix something?  Give them a call.  They'll be glad to help.  BTW, I got that straight from a NHQ staffer this weekend.

[RiverAux]

There isn't any real need for national to keep personnel records regarding most individual awards anyway.  I don't see this as a priority as they certainly can be kept at other levels and the individual should have copies of everything anyway.

Now, maintaining ES-related training records at the national level is much more mission critical since CAP members can and do get sent on missions to other Wings and those other Wings have a need to ensure that the folks that show up are actually qualified. 

I'm not saying that it isn't nice to have a national computerized database of all CAP awards, etc. for each member, but I'd rate it fairly low on the totem pole of things they need to do.

[DNall]

I've always found the staff to be dedicated, but I have some experience on a board of trustees for a larger non-profit (apples to oranges granted) with more money flying around in the field & we had a very small paid staff. The shear number of employees listed int eh directory shocked me a bit. Enough I think it's worth looking to see what really is required. It seems to me that the underlying system is a wreck & could be streamlined & simplified resulting in less staff required to do a better job. I also question if some aspects of their work could be done by volunteers and/or the intern-like posts we utilized. I don't know if AF could help at all, but I tend to think they'd run the place better given the chance, but I don't know if that's true or not. I just think it's worth looking at.

[shorning]

I don't know if AF could help at all, but I tend to think they'd run the place better given the chance, but I don't know if that's true or not. I just think it's worth looking at.

::offtopic::  Where is the Air Force going to get the manpower?  We've allocated our resources elsewhere.  If anything, we'd contract it out or hire civilians...oh, wait...they've already done that.

[DNall]

I meant more in terms of consolidating some functions w/ CAP-USAF staff - sharing some people in both directions. Plus hell I don't know. My cousin graduated from the Academy this last year, he's been to the basic course, and now he's sitting at Dover updating slides & anything else they can find for him to do before he reports to flight training in March. We used to utilize people between assignments, a lot of our older regs were written that way, maybe some of those folks could be available to CAP tasks maybe not, I don't know. There's some other things too. For instance, I don't know if we need our own printshop when we could print things at cost thru the AF. Lie I said, it seems liek the whole operation could be streamlined. I'm okay with there being a large staff, but I'd prefer them in strategic positions directly in support of programing & member issues.

[ncc1912]

Overstaffed?  Not hardly.  Their entire staff doesn't work on data entry.  Unless you've ever worked at "echelons above reality" you generally don't understand all the staffing and other areas they are responsible for.  How many squadrons are in the same amount of disarray with fewer people to manager and far less responsibility?  It's easy to point fingers at NHQ, but they aren't your problem.

As has already been said, you need them to fix something?  Give them a call.  They'll be glad to help.  BTW, I got that straight from a NHQ staffer this weekend.

:clap:

[ncc1912]

As for the 2a, simple rule to follow: If it ain't on paper -- it didn't happen.

I take exception to that.

Granted, you should keep certificates, diplomas, promotion and certification documentation, but too many of CAP's awards are given as tokens to a completion of some level of training or achievement.

To issue a 2A for a ribbon that accompanies a Level I completion (Membership Ribbon) or completing your technician rating in some specialty (Leadership Ribbon) is redundant.  It would be very similar to a cadet needing both a CAPF 52-1 and a 2A to wear the Curry, Arnold, Feik and Wright Brothers Ribbons. [remainder redacted]

My local Personnel Officer just did a comparison between local records and MIMS, and found that no one in the unit has credit for the Leadership Ribbon in MIMS, although 17 members have at least a Technician rating. Apparently it's not an automatic thing like completion of Level I. We are working on an answer.

While your at it, you may want to check to see if they have credit for their technician rating in their respective specialty track.

Given the criteria for the Leadership Ribbon, I think written proof/documentation of your technician rating will suffice.

[ADCAPer]

The NB is looking at changing how regs are approved. The new process will go something like this:
NB/NEC approves concept/policy for regulation/uniform/aircraft paint scheme/etc.
CAP/CC assigns writing/revising of reg to appropriate OPR, if not already assigned
OPR writes reg/change/etc and submits to CAP/CC for signature
CAP/CC reviews to make sure reg meets NB/NEC policy/concept decision
CAP/CC approves reg
Reg gets posted and takes effect

After step 1, the process can take as little as a week.

I personally think that would be a huge mistake, and you don't have to look any further than the Wing Banking Fiasco to see why. I can agree that a period of years is to long to wait for a change, but a matter of days would be a disaster.

There are simply too many variables involved with the way that local squadrons operate to allow changes to national policy to occur in a week. This is why 5-1 requires national to publish proposed changes for a 60 day comment period, so any unforeseen issues can be worked out before a regulation goes live.

Of course, as the whole world has witnessed in the last couple of months, CAP Regulations apparantly only apply when it suits Nationals or a Wings needs. I'm still trying to decipher how a rewrite of the national Finance Regulations managed to rate an Emergency Revision.