Qualifying Staff Position as a Cadet

[DeputyDog]

In my unit, I am actively encouraging cadets to go for the communications badge. Also, there are a few cadets that I am working on getting the Basic Emergency Services Officer Qualification Badge.

So my question is this: can a cadet use their time as a cadet emergency services officer (like the cadet safety officer, etc.) towards the position requirement for the badge, or do they need to do their service requirement as an unit assistant emergency services officer?

[Capt M. Sherrod]

That's the CC's / Approving Authority's discretion.

[arajca]

Slightly off topic, but...
The Comm badges (all three) and the ES Basic badge ar ethe only ones a cadet can earn. Period. Safety, Admin, etc., cadets cannot earn.

That being said, I don't see a reason why a cadet has to be the "Cadet ES Offier" instead of the "Assistant ES Officer". Personally, I would credit a cadet serving in either role the same, including the staff time requirement for the badge. I would also be very careful to make sure they are completing the requirements (except those that are only for seniors like SLS, Lvel II, etc) as they progress. I expect seniors to meet the requirements - for example, I have a senior member who finally completed GTM3 after working on it for a year and his one year clock started when he completed the rating, not when he started training for it, to his chagrin.

[DeputyDog]

That being said, I don't see a reason why a cadet has to be the "Cadet ES Offier" instead of the "Assistant ES Officer".

It is the way the squadron has it set up. They have a cadet safety officer and a cadet administration officer as well, instead of having them as assistants. There is one cadet in the unit that is both one of the two unit assistant emergency services training officers (recent appointment) and the cadet emergency services officer (for almost a year).

I would also be very careful to make sure they are completing the requirements (except those that are only for seniors like SLS, Lvel II, etc) as they progress.

I've been using the professional development checklists that you made to track it. That makes it so much easier! 

[lordmonar]

52-16 prohibits cadets from occupying any jobs listed in 20-1.....so by regulations they must be "assistants to" a senior member holding down that job.

(2) Advanced Positions. Cadets may not serve in any of the senior member staff positions listed in CAPR 20-1, but they may serve as assistants to those senior staff officers. Phase I and II cadets who serve as staff assistants may not use that service to fulfill the staff duty analysis requirements of Phases III and IV.

[DNall]

^ I would generally advise against assigning cadets in any grade as Sq asst XYZ officers. I think that's inappropriate for a couple reasons.

A cadet needs (and is required to) focus first & foremost on the cadet program. That's why there are regulations about failing to progress & such. I don't care how into ES/comm/etc a kid may be, they are there to do the cadet program & that's it. Anything beyond that is secondary & comes way down the list of priorities. The priority for them to focus on the CP does take precendece over the ability of the Sq to operate. In other words, if you don't have a comm officer, you can't find one, and you have to have one, got this kid that can do it very well, but he may not promote as fast if he's distracted by the additional responsibility... that kid cannot be the asst comm officer. If you're in that situation, it's your fault, not the cadets, and you need to spend your time recruitng adults. I'm always very hesitant to allow cadets to do anything that detracts even a little from that. You have to weigh that side of it first.

Second, regarding a Sq asst pos versus cadet staff pos... a cadet XYZ officer works for the cadet commander. An XYZ program is handed to them & they execute it under supervision for the cadet component of the Sq. A Sq Asst XYZ officer works for the adult XYZ officer. Their job is to execute the Sq XYZ program for all members. That means they will be in charge of adults while working in that area, regardless if the adult XYZ officer is there or not. Even if that's logistics or comm where you aren't doing things that are inherently dangerous, that person is in the supervisory position & legally responsible for things like safety. If a cloths rack falls on somebody, you can't tell the judge a 16yo kid was the legally responsible supervisor on the part of the whole organization. It's almost never appropriate to put a cadet in an asst position. I've seen a few very rare cases with very senior cadet officers, mostly in college, but even then it's done with very tight controls.

Never ever should an enlisted cadet be put in these kinds of positions. Just cause there's a bunch of stuff listed in 20-1, just cause your sq has needs that need filling, and just cause cadets may want to do the work... none of that is an acceptable reason to let it happen. I'm all for cadets branching out beyond the basic cadet program to get other training/experience that may help them in other ways (including earning badges), but it has to be done very carefully & in a limited way.

sorry, just needed to get that in there. I know how easy it is for people ot lose sight of priorities when everyone's going in different directions.

[Capt Rivera]

52-16 prohibits cadets from occupying any jobs listed in 20-1.....so by regulations they must be "assistants to" a senior member holding down that job.

(2) Advanced Positions. Cadets may not serve in any of the senior member staff positions listed in CAPR 20-1, but they may serve as assistants to those senior staff officers. Phase I and II cadets who serve as staff assistants may not use that service to fulfill the staff duty analysis requirements of Phases III and IV.

So, I guess a C/lt col (spats testing soon (i hope)) cant be a PAO? Shes more capable  then many OLDER adults and is a adult by US standards (18+) She is a Jr in college. So because she has not moved to senior Officer status, she CAN'T be anything but an assistant?

[MIKE]

Yep, remaining a cadet is a choice... if she doesn't want the limitations imposed by cadet membership after the age of 18 she should submit an annotated CAPF 12 and fingerprint card... but you cant take the Spaatz if you're a senior.

[DNall]

52-16 prohibits cadets from occupying any jobs listed in 20-1.....so by regulations they must be "assistants to" a senior member holding down that job.

So, I guess a C/lt col (spats testing soon (i hope)) cant be a PAO? Shes more capable  then many OLDER adults and is a adult by US standards (18+) She is a Jr in college. So because she has not moved to senior Officer status, she CAN'T be anything but an assistant?

This is what I was trying to say (ungracefully I guess). Is it really more important for her to focus her CAP energy on getting her Spaatz, or for you to have a competent PAO? If you had to choose one or the other (no possibility to have both), which would take precedence? Regs both say & imply in several places that the ONLY reason she's in CAP is to advance in the cadet program, not unit operations.

I really don't have a problem with her being Asst PAO at this stage of her career (18+, in college, C/LtCol), but I'd only allow that if I knew for an absolute fact that it wasn't delaying or in any way harming her ability to promote. And even then I'd only let her be an assitant, not the asst in name only & really doing the full job cause the person slotted as primary doesn't actually show up or is incompetent kind of thing. Even after she passes the test, if she chooses to remain a cadet, the program says she's there to give back to the cadet program as an experienced cadet leader, not as jsut one more support staffer.

[lordmonar]

Okay...here is my take on your delema.....as a commander what is your primary mission focus?

Providing a good Cadet Program or having a good PAO program?

I vote for Cadet Program.  Getting your cadets to focus on advancement and progressing in the program when they are ready should be a primary focus.

If you get a great PAO...what are you taking away from the cadet?

[Capt Rivera]

i was more so questioning the reg... the reg aside i believe this cadet could do anything she wanted. I hate that she is limited by this. o well. i guess the adults [seniors/old people] who wrote it know best. I thought part of the program is for cadets to learn to make choices in how they spend their time.

now for those who will say she chooses to remain a cadet? Why should she give up the many benefits of the cadet program to be able to do more if she is capable and motivated to do so. Whats sad is she can choose to join another Org, have that position and stay in cap as a cadet... Yes, still her choice to do it or not...

my point is... at some point, we should step back and allow cadets to take on even more if they want to. there is nothing wrong with that in my opinion. in other words why should we stifle anyone if they would otherwise CHOOSE to do more, experience more or other wise use talents/skills they already have.

Ever have someone tell you that your incapable of doing something without a factual reason as to why you cant?

cadet: why cant i
me: your a cadet
cadet: why cant I, I can get this job for a news company, etc why not in cap
me: You can choose to become a officer if you want to do this job in CAP
cadet: I don't understand
me: well, the reg says cadets can't do this, someone suggested cadets should concentrate on on the cadet program and only that. be focused get your spats done
cadet: Im an adult, i can choose to join the military right this moment, I can do just about anything including get a mortgage but I can't choose to do a job listed in (insert reg) because someone thinks i might not be able to handle it...? let me guess the person who wrote the reg probably was not in the cadet program at all. (or thought it was too hard) Do they know a 13 year old got her spats? but I cant do this because I MIGHT fail at time management? Is this program here to teach me leadership? how can i lead someone without leading my own life? and if i never experience failure, how can i learn to get back up when i fall?
me: I agree with you, but yeah... this is CAP & you've been in CAP long enough, ... need i say more?
Cadet: No

[afgeo4]

Ok... so if a squadron, composite or cadet, doesn't have an assigned Senior Member as the "ES" officer then the duties automatically fall to the CC, right?

If the CC then assigns a cadet as an "Assistant ES Officer", then doesn't the cadet in all actuality become the ES officer? Not for the purposes of a unit inspection, of course, but otherwise... the cadet performs all the duties and reports directly to the CC, right?

[afgeo4]

i was more so questioning the reg... the reg aside i believe this cadet could do anything she wanted. I hate that she is limited by this. o well. i guess the adults [seniors/old people] who wrote it know best. I thought part of the program is for cadets to learn to make choices in how they spend their time.

now for those who will say she chooses to remain a cadet? Why should she give up the many benefits of the cadet program to be able to do more if she is capable and motivated to do so. Whats sad is she can choose to join another Org, have that position and stay in cap as a cadet... Yes, still her choice to do it or not...

my point is... at some point, we should step back and allow cadets to take on even more if they want to. there is nothing wrong with that in my opinion. in other words why should we stifle anyone if they would otherwise CHOOSE to do more, experience more or other wise use talents/skills they already have.

Ever have someone tell you that your incapable of doing something without a factual reason as to why you cant?

cadet: why cant i
me: your a cadet
cadet: why cant I, I can get this job for a news company, etc why not in cap
me: You can choose to become a officer if you want to do this job in CAP
cadet: I don't understand
me: well, the reg says cadets can't do this, someone suggested cadets should concentrate on on the cadet program and only that. be focused get your spats done
cadet: Im an adult, i can choose to join the military right this moment, I can do just about anything including get a mortgage but I can't choose to do a job listed in (insert reg) because someone thinks i might not be able to handle it...? let me guess the person who wrote the reg probably was not in the cadet program at all. (or thought it was too hard) Do they know a 13 year old got her spats? but I cant do this because I MIGHT fail at time management? Is this program here to teach me leadership? how can i lead someone without leading my own life? and if i never experience failure, how can i learn to get back up when i fall?
me: I agree with you, but yeah... this is CAP & you've been in CAP long enough, ... need i say more?
Cadet: No

Same reason why they don't let Chief Master Sergeants with 35 of experience in leadership, tactics, and life become Wing Commander in the Air Force.

Because that's not how it works.

Explain to the cadet that in life, we all choose our paths, but we don't always get the paths we choose. Some things aren't fair, but they exist for a reason. He/she may not know the reason. Even you may not know the reason, but there is a reason.

By the way, if someone at NHQ actually took the time to write that specific instance into the regs, there must have been a large issue involving exactly that instance where it hurt CAP. Otherwise, I don't think anyone would have thought of actually putting in the work to print it.

[lordmonar]

Riveraj,

I get the 'why can't I" arguments all the time.  "I'm 18 why can't I drive the CAP van?"  "I'm 18 why do I have to get my parents signature on my CAPF 31?"

Simple answer.....cross over.  Cadet stuff is for cadets....and senior stuff is for seniors.

Is this limiting?  Sure....but there is a reason for it.  By placing a cadet as a staff member at squadron/group/wing level you break down the cadet/senior relationship.  You are placing cadets in authority over seniors.

Second...by opening up too many opportunites to distract cadets from the cadet program you are doing them a disservice.

[lordmonar]

Ok... so if a squadron, composite or cadet, doesn't have an assigned Senior Member as the "ES" officer then the duties automatically fall to the CC, right?

If the CC then assigns a cadet as an "Assistant ES Officer", then doesn't the cadet in all actuality become the ES officer? Not for the purposes of a unit inspection, of course, but otherwise... the cadet performs all the duties and reports directly to the CC, right?

Integrity first. 

Technically correct...but instead of trying to circumvent regulations...why not find or train an ES officer instead and allow the cadet to continue on his/her cadet career?

[afgeo4]

Ok... so if a squadron, composite or cadet, doesn't have an assigned Senior Member as the "ES" officer then the duties automatically fall to the CC, right?

If the CC then assigns a cadet as an "Assistant ES Officer", then doesn't the cadet in all actuality become the ES officer? Not for the purposes of a unit inspection, of course, but otherwise... the cadet performs all the duties and reports directly to the CC, right?

Integrity first. 

Technically correct...but instead of trying to circumvent regulations...why not find or train an ES officer instead and allow the cadet to continue on his/her cadet career?

There's no integrity conflict here. The commander placed the most trained and experienced person in the position.

You know full well that it is VERY difficult to find people for positions sometimes. You also know that placing a person in a position without training in performing the duties of that position is setting that person up for failure. I think we've had enough experience with that in CAP (yes, sometimes we just have no other option).

As it is, my belief is to fill the job with the best person available for that job. To me, that is integrity. Doing the right thing, even when no one is looking. If I have to give the person a different title to comply with regulations, then so be it. I will always place mission and people before and above regulations.

In my opinion, by denying the cadet the staff position he/she deserves, a position which cannot at the time be filled by anyone else, I am denying not only the cadet, but the rest of the unit. The entire unit deserves the best we can provide for them. The best in care, the best in training, and the best in equipment. Being volunteers, it simply means the best we can provide given our resources, but I guess that's true of anywhere.

[DNall]

That line is in the reg to protect cadets from themselves & from leaders that lose sight of priorities.

This cadet must put 100% effort into the cadet program, period. If that means you cannot fill a PAO position, or harms your unit, that's too bad. The line is in the reg specifically so that you cannot use cadets as a cruch for your lack of recruiting adults.

I'm sorry to put it bluntly. You're the leader here though, and your responsibility is to recruit adult members to fill staff slots, period. Cadets are not to do those things, because it detracts from the cadet program on a larger scale. The integrity of the cadet program & cadet experience is more important than your unit staying open, much less operating well.

I can't go be a student at PJOC or powered flight academy. Those are cadet activities, meant for cadets, not for adults. I may be able to go & help, but that's it. No one's question that. You can't just rationalize why it'd be okay the other way around, it just isn't, and I think you really know that.

[Major Carrales]

Let Cadets participate in Public Affairs as an exercise of their leadership, they will have to be assistants and cannot fill a staff role.

However, never stifle a cadet's desires to "do more than the sum of their existance as a cadet."  If they are good journalists, let them follow that within the CAP frame work.

I say let them continue to do PAO duties, but remind them that they are not the Staff Officer.

[Capt Rivera]

That line is in the reg to protect cadets from themselves & from leaders that lose sight of priorities.

So your saying that you know better for this cadet the she does?
since I don't agree with the reg, I've lost sight of priorities? 

[is that what your saying? just asking, cause it might be seen as "bashing", haha I wouldn't want to see another topic get locked, especially because of you, that would be sad]   

one of my priorities is to keep members. To do that, they must be engaged, motivated and feeling that they are getting return on their money and time investment.

I think it should be rephrased to something of it being a cadets choice, that it cant be directed but requested. That it is recommended not to take that course of action because of blablabla.... that a cadet needs to  be of a certain rank/age etc... Hell make it ALMOST impossible....

When we go and say across the board that someone is limited based on, someone else's past performance, [a reason for the reg to be written] what makes that different from class·ism, racism etc...  we are saying an entire grouping of people can't possible succeed at this, because of a status in the program?

i think it funny that 18 officer, with no experience etc can do any # of jobs... but a 18,19, or 20 yr old cadet who is more then capable, who chooses to stay a cadet for personal reasons, can't.

Maybe this is something to keep this cadet in the program... Have you ever had a cadet get to this level and get bored? not feel challenged? not feel like they are actually making a contribution & is a burden because as a cadet, officers need to support her at all times...

feel free to tell me how I am failing as a commander to make the cadet program engaging/ exciting etc...

the point I am getting at is NHQ can & should make it a challenge to earn the honor/privilege to contribute more, but to make it impossible because in the past others failed is the disservice... To me every generation seems to be smarter then the past and able to handle more, I firmly believe that when the cadet program goes through its next set of revisions that this item gets looked at.

[BillB]

Riveraj.....One of the biggest problems with cadet regulations, is they are written by people far removed from cadet programs. How many former cadets are on any committee to rewrite cadet regulations? Last time I checked there were none. Take the regulation on Cadet Advisory Councils. It was originally written by three seniors who were former cadets. In the 1970's it was rewritten by the officers of the SER Cadet Advisory Council, taken to the National Board by the Region Commander and approved. Since that time it's been rewritten by National staff or CAP Colonels, far removed from the cadet program.
To often it's assumed that cadets are immature and not capable of any activity that has any responsibility. To use a metaphor, cream rise to the top. So it is in the cadet program. The more qualified cadets become readily visable, but there is little for them to do since they are barred by regulation from bettering their qualifications and experience.