C/AB Uniforms

[davidsinn]

I've heard that some units make C/AB's wear their uniform with the top buttons secured. My question is why?

[Eclipse]

I've heard that some units make C/AB's wear their uniform with the top buttons secured. My question is why?

On which uniform?  The FCU service dress? 

With a tie?

Its certainly against regs, sounds like "hardkewl" nonsense.

[davidsinn]

I've heard that some units make C/AB's wear their uniform with the top buttons secured. My question is why?

On which uniform?  The FCU service dress? 

With a tie?

Its certainly against regs, sounds like "hardkewl" nonsense.

Sorry. BDU. It came from a comment on one of the gallery pics of a member.

[Eclipse]

Still sounds silly, first I've ever heard of it.

[davidsinn]

Still sounds silly, first I've ever heard of it.

http://captalk.net/index.php?action=mgallery;sa=item;id=5#com21 Makes even less sense then putting the basics in brown tshirts while the rest of the unit wears black. At least that while dumb, (somewhat) follows the regs.

In my unit the basics wear the bdu with cutouts, both tapes, wing patch(INWG 39-1sup), flag and top button undone. Oh and we let them wear the inexpensive black "t" they can get at Walmart.

[ricks]

It probably comes from the movie "An Officer and a Gentleman" wherein the officer recruits have their fatigues buttoned all the way up. It is amazing how many cadets take their lead from movies.

[jimmydeanno]

In my unit the basics wear the bdu with cutouts, both tapes, wing patch(INWG 39-1sup), flag and top button undone. Oh and we let them wear the inexpensive black "t" they can get at Walmart.

Wait...you have them wear the uniform correctly?  What kind of weird logic is that?

[davidsinn]

In my unit the basics wear the bdu with cutouts, both tapes, wing patch(INWG 39-1sup), flag and top button undone. Oh and we let them wear the inexpensive black "t" they can get at Walmart.

Wait...you have them wear the uniform correctly?  What kind of weird logic is that?

You laugh but I've seen and heard of some weird stuff man. Not in my unit. Not while I'm running the cadet program. Did I mention they are not allowed to wear the uniform until they have all the insignia on it and possess boots and a BDU cap?

[Larry Mangum]

California is the third state I have lived in sicne I joined CAP and it is the first state I have run across that makes new cadets wear a "recruit" uniform until they have completed  a basic training and earned their curry. This uniform consists of black or Navy slacks(not exactly sure on the color) and a white dress shirt, black belt and dress shoes. 

[jimmydeanno]

I could see a unit doing that.  Simply because they'd rather have th :)em wear the uniform correctly, or not at all.  I think it reinforces the lesson of wearing your uniform properly.

I'd rather have a unit do this than have them create some modified BDU techniques. Just sayin'.

[davidsinn]

California is the third state I have lived in sicne I joined CAP and it is the first state I have run across that makes new cadets wear a "recruit" uniform until they have completed  a basic training and earned their curry. This uniform consists of black or Navy slacks(not exactly sure on the color) and a white dress shirt, black belt and dress shoes.

How do you earn your Curry without demonstrating that you can wear the uniform correctly?

[Eclipse]

California is the third state I have lived in sicne I joined CAP and it is the first state I have run across that makes new cadets wear a "recruit" uniform until they have completed  a basic training and earned their curry. This uniform consists of black or Navy slacks(not exactly sure on the color) and a white dress shirt, black belt and dress shoes.

We do that here for cadets who haven't received their FCU yet, but I have to ask, if you don't let them wear  their uniform until after Curry, how do they earn it, since part of Curry is proper uniform wear?

^ Dave beat me to it.

[jimmydeanno]

^It also defeats the purpose of having the C/AB collar insignia...

[davidsinn]

^It also defeats the purpose of having the C/AB collar insignia...

SMWOG still need something to wear....Why is the senior insignia and the cadet insignia the same anyway? Yes I know different color name tags but still?

[Ned]

California is the third state I have lived in sicne I joined CAP and it is the first state I have run across that makes new cadets wear a "recruit" uniform ( . . .).

This is not a California Wing policy.

Local units may indeed provide for some sort of interim "uniform" until the FCU uniform arrives and is complete.

But that is a local unit call.

Ned Lee

[Hawk200]

Oh and we let them wear the inexpensive black "t" they can get at Walmart.

I'm glad someone else focuses on the actual pub instead of what they think it should be.

I'm getting pretty annoyed at how that myth of "only staff is allowed to wear black" keeps propogating. It's not in the manual, it's not a rule, and pushing it forward is continuing a lie. It doesn't benefit anyone to have only certain people wear certain T-shirt colors.

[Eclipse]

I'm getting pretty annoyed at how that myth of "only staff is allowed to wear black" keeps propogating. It's not in the manual, it's not a rule, and pushing it forward is continuing a lie. It doesn't benefit anyone to have only certain people wear certain T-shirt colors.

That's a new one on me as well. 

It never cease to amaze me the elaborate and interesting ways our people can make life more difficult than it has to be. 

[Airrace]

This is not a California Wing policy. Our sqadron allows them to come in civilan dress until they get the uniform.

[CAPC/officer125]

At my squadron, we have them wear a white t-shirt and nice blue jeans with tennis shoes until they get a uniform. It is usually not a problem for them to get their uniform before they promote. Also the male hair need to be in in regs and we prefer the females to at least have their hair up.

[Larry Mangum]

This is not a California Wing policy. Our sqadron allows them to come in civilan dress until they get the uniform.

Okay, I buy it must be a local policy, but it is interesting that I have seen it on cadets in, southern california, from multiple units.  I am not even saying it is a bad thing, as it gives them uniformity and a sense of belonging until they get a uniform. 

I was simply commenting on what I have seen localy.

[lordmonar]

Oh and we let them wear the inexpensive black "t" they can get at Walmart.

I'm glad someone else focuses on the actual pub instead of what they think it should be.

I'm getting pretty annoyed at how that myth of "only staff is allowed to wear black" keeps propogating. It's not in the manual, it's not a rule, and pushing it forward is continuing a lie. It doesn't benefit anyone to have only certain people wear certain T-shirt colors.

Well let's be clear here.  Commanders can dictate what T-shift you will wear.  They can say everyone is in brown, everyone is in in black, A-flight is in Brown and B-fight is in Black of they can say nothing at all.

It is perfectly acceptable....although useless IMHO...to have "staff" in black T-shifts and everyone else in Brown....It is not a "lie" but policy and  local commander has the power and resposibility to set that policy.

[Eclipse]

Well let's be clear here.  Commanders can dictate what T-shift you will wear.  They can say everyone is in brown, everyone is in in black, A-flight is in Brown and B-fight is in Black of they can say nothing at all.

It is perfectly acceptable....although useless IMHO...to have "staff" in black T-shifts and everyone else in Brown....It is not a "lie" but policy and  local commander has the power and resposibility to set that policy.

Not quite - the only uniform combinations that can be dictated (for cadets) are those which are issued by either NHQ, the unit, or the activity.

If the unit issues brown shirts and dictates their wear, no problem.  If they don't, and the cadet shows up with black, they have no leg to stand on.

[DC]

At my squadron, we have them wear a white t-shirt and nice blue jeans with tennis shoes until they get a uniform. It is usually not a problem for them to get their uniform before they promote. Also the male hair need to be in in regs and we prefer the females to at least have their hair up.

One of the requirements to promote to C/Amn is to be able to satisfactorily wear a uniform. You can't do that if you don't have one, ergo, everyone should have a complete uniform prior to promoting...

[NC Hokie]

Not quite - the only uniform combinations that can be dictated (for cadets) are those which are issued by either NHQ, the unit, or the activity.

I'm not knocking you or anything but I'd really like to see a regulation that supports this assertion.  Here's why...

NHQ requires proper wear of a CAP uniform to complete any achievement in the cadet program (CAPR 52-16 paragraph 2-4f).  They supply the FCU, but the FCU as issued does not come with accouterments or shoes (not to mention a service coat or outerwear). Since the uniform must be complete in order to be worn properly, someone else has to supply these items.  See the problem?

[CAPC/officer125]

At my squadron, we have them wear a white t-shirt and nice blue jeans with tennis shoes until they get a uniform. It is usually not a problem for them to get their uniform before they promote. Also the male hair need to be in in regs and we prefer the females to at least have their hair up.

One of the requirements to promote to C/Amn is to be able to satisfactorily wear a uniform. You can't do that if you don't have one, ergo, everyone should have a complete uniform prior to promoting...

Yes, but at my squadron we either get them their uniform within a couple of weeks of joining or they take long enough to get their Curry, that we don't worry about them not being in uniform IAW regs come promotion time.

[DC]

At my squadron, we have them wear a white t-shirt and nice blue jeans with tennis shoes until they get a uniform. It is usually not a problem for them to get their uniform before they promote. Also the male hair need to be in in regs and we prefer the females to at least have their hair up.

One of the requirements to promote to C/Amn is to be able to satisfactorily wear a uniform. You can't do that if you don't have one, ergo, everyone should have a complete uniform prior to promoting...

Yes, but at my squadron we either get them their uniform within a couple of weeks of joining or they take long enough to get their Curry, that we don't worry about them not being in uniform IAW regs come promotion time.

You might want to think about your post, specifically the part I put in bold and underlined. Regulations are not something to be ignored when they simply become inconvienient.

With that, I rest my case.

[Eclipse]

Not quite - the only uniform combinations that can be dictated (for cadets) are those which are issued by either NHQ, the unit, or the activity.

I'm not knocking you or anything but I'd really like to see a regulation that supports this assertion.  Here's why...

NHQ requires proper wear of a CAP uniform to complete any achievement in the cadet program (CAPR 52-16 paragraph 2-4f).  They supply the FCU, but the FCU as issued does not come with accouterments or shoes (not to mention a service coat or outerwear). Since the uniform must be complete in order to be worn properly, someone else has to supply these items.  See the problem?

1-5. Uniform Combinations. Various combinations of CAP uniforms are authorized in order to allow
for various climatic conditions, availability of uniforms, etc., but no member is obligated to equip
himself/herself with all or even a major part of the combinations described in this publication. Members
will equip themselves with the basic uniform. The minimum basic uniforms for male and female cadets
and senior members, which will satisfy most occasions, are listed below. Members may obtain and wear
the additional uniform items authorized in this publication on an optional basis. Uniform clothing may
be altered to improve fit. However, alterations must not change the intended appearance of garment as
designed. It is the member's personal responsibility to equip himself/herself with a proper uniform.
Commanders may assist if they have the capability, through use of unit funds and/or donations or by
acquiring surplus uniforms. Cadets are required to have the minimum basic uniform. A commander
may require cadets to wear other optional uniform items only if the purchase is voluntary or if the
uniform is supplied without expense to the cadet. The omission of a specific item or appearance standard does not automatically permit its wear.

a. Minimum Basic Service Uniform. Male: Short-sleeve, light blue shirt; dark blue trousers; blue
belt/silver buckle, blue flight cap; black shoes, and socks. Insignia: CAP nameplate, shoulder patch,
collar/lapel insignia, embroidered epaulet sleeve, and flight cap emblem. Female: Short-sleeve light
blue blouse; Dark blue skirt or slacks; flight cap; neutral nylon hose; black shoes; black handbag.
Insignia: CAP nameplate, shoulder patch, collar/lapel insignia, embroidered epaulet sleeve, and flight
cap emblem.

The regulation is specific that a member must have the MBSU, for cadets that's short-sleeved blues, so per regulation, they must complete the outfit in whatever way they can, generally at the cadet's expense.

Beyond the MBSU, a unit or activity CC cannot mandate any other uniform parts or combos unless they supply the item or the expense is voluntary.  This comes up all the time in relation to encampments and similar - someone is always saying we can't mandate BDU's for economically challenged cadets who can't afford them.

They are correct and we do anyway.  In 6 years as an encampment commander, no one has challenged me on this, but if they did, I'd have no alternative but to allow the cadet to participate in the full activity in service dress.  That's what the regs says.

[Daniel]

We make our cadets button the top button and wear their tie with it! -Kidding of course

My squadron commander is REALLY big on Uniform wear

Couldnt this be considered hazing,

as your "picking" on a ranking

[SarDragon]

At my squadron, we have them wear a white t-shirt and nice blue jeans with tennis shoes until they get a uniform. It is usually not a problem for them to get their uniform before they promote. Also the male hair need to be in in regs and we prefer the females to at least have their hair up.

One of the requirements to promote to C/Amn is to be able to satisfactorily wear a uniform. You can't do that if you don't have one, ergo, everyone should have a complete uniform prior to promoting...

Yes, but at my squadron we either get them their uniform within a couple of weeks of joining or they take long enough to get their Curry, that we don't worry about them not being in uniform IAW regs come promotion time.

You might want to think about your post, specifically the part I put in bold and underlined. Regulations are not something to be ignored when they simply become inconvienient.

With that, I rest my case.

I think you misinterpreted. I had to read it twice before I figured out what was intended. To rephrase, they don't have to worry about a new cadet being out of uniform because they are pretty much assured of having a complete uniform come promotion time.

[SarDragon]

We make our cadets button the top button and wear their tie with it! -Kidding of course

My squadron commander is REALLY big on Uniform wear

Couldnt this be considered hazing,

as your "picking" on a ranking

Huh?

We're having a general discussion of uniform practices, correct or otherwise, and have made no specific accusations about any person by name. I think you need to reread the definition of hazing, and absorb it a little better. I think it would be pretty difficult to haze someone on an internet forum.

[davidsinn]

We make our cadets button the top button and wear their tie with it! -Kidding of course

My squadron commander is REALLY big on Uniform wear

Couldnt this be considered hazing,

as your "picking" on a ranking

Huh?

We're having a general discussion of uniform practices, correct or otherwise, and have made no specific accusations about any person by name. I think you need to reread the definition of hazing, and absorb it a little better. I think it would be pretty difficult to haze someone on an internet forum.

I think Cadet Lewis is going clear back to my OP which puts C/AB in a unique uniform from the rest of the cadets. I do not agree that it's hazing but I can see where he gets the idea from.

[jimmydeanno]

I think it would be pretty difficult to haze someone on an internet forum.

I think it would be pretty easy, really. 

Hazing. Hazing is defined as any conduct whereby someone causes another to suffer or to be exposed to any activity that is cruel, abusive, humiliating, oppressive, demeaning, or harmful.

It really isn't that difficult to do something that would qualify over the internet.

[NC Hokie]

1-5. Uniform Combinations. Various combinations of CAP uniforms are authorized in order to allow
for various climatic conditions, availability of uniforms, etc., but no member is obligated to equip
himself/herself with all or even a major part of the combinations described in this publication. Members
will equip themselves with the basic uniform. The minimum basic uniforms for male and female cadets
and senior members, which will satisfy most occasions, are listed below. Members may obtain and wear
the additional uniform items authorized in this publication on an optional basis. Uniform clothing may
be altered to improve fit. However, alterations must not change the intended appearance of garment as
designed. It is the member's personal responsibility to equip himself/herself with a proper uniform.
Commanders may assist if they have the capability, through use of unit funds and/or donations or by
acquiring surplus uniforms. Cadets are required to have the minimum basic uniform. A commander
may require cadets to wear other optional uniform items only if the purchase is voluntary or if the
uniform is supplied without expense to the cadet. The omission of a specific item or appearance
standard does not automatically permit its wear.

Thanks for the citation.  That has to be one of the most poorly written jumble of words I've ever seen, which explains why I never "saw" the interpretation you and others have seen.  For example, the first two sentences are mutually exclusive in that the first claims no obligation for members to equip themselves with any uniform while the second dictates that all must have a basic uniform.  Ambiguous much?

The highlighted line is just as bad.  How is a commander supposed to require cadets to wear an optional uniform item if the purchase of that item is voluntary?  Logic says that the commander can't, but the regulation says that he can!

The rewrite of 39-1 can't get here too soon!

[Eclipse]

Thanks for the citation.  That has to be one of the most poorly written jumble of words I've ever seen, which explains why I never "saw" the interpretation you and others have seen.  For example, the first two sentences are mutually exclusive in that the first claims no obligation for members to equip themselves with any uniform while the second dictates that all must have a basic uniform.  Ambiguous much?

The highlighted line is just as bad.  How is a commander supposed to require cadets to wear an optional uniform item if the purchase of that item is voluntary?  Logic says that the commander can't, but the regulation says that he can!

The rewrite of 39-1 can't get here too soon!

I have to honest, I've never found that to be ambiguous or conflicted.  It says what its says, some people just don't like that or read something different into the text.

(It also says that for seniors, Aviator Whites or blues are required as their MBSU, but few have ever read that, let alone pay any attention.)

[BillB]

What would happen if a cadet showed up for an encampment with onlyblues? Since you can't require a cadet to purchase BDUs, what would happen?

[Eclipse]

What would happen if a cadet showed up for an encampment with onlyblues? Since you can't require a cadet to purchase BDUs, what would happen?

They'd be allowed to complete the activity, and have to spend time learning how to care for their uniform themselves.  For activities which might ruin the service dress, you can always scrounge up extra uniform parts from other people's gear.

Afterwards there would be very "direct" conversations with that cadet's unit CC, as when they sign the 31 they are indicating that the cadet is full capable of participating in that activity, and allowing them to show with just service dress shows a lack of attention to detail, or a lack of compassion for that cadet.

Neither is acceptable in a unit CC.  I've had plenty of situations where I was photo-shopping name tapes and name tags for cadets with a "wet" Curry, that's understandable, but to allow a cadet to come unprepared for an activity which has a clear packing list is unacceptable.

There's a lot of different ways a situation like that can be handled in advance - the options are more limited day-of.

[NC Hokie]

I have to honest, I've never found that to be ambiguous or conflicted.  It says what its says, some people just don't like that or read something different into the text.

It says what it says quite poorly.  I get the meaning but the wording is confusing and ambiguous.  Regulations need to be clear, concise, and free of any ambiguity so that there is only one possible interpretation.  Anything else leads to chaos.

What would happen if a cadet showed up for an encampment with onlyblues? Since you can't require a cadet to purchase BDUs, what would happen?

They'd be allowed to complete the activity, and have to spend time learning how to care for their uniform themselves.  For activities which might ruin the service dress, you can always scrounge up extra uniform parts from other people's gear.

Afterwards there would be very "direct" conversations with that cadet's unit CC, as when they sign the 31 they are indicating that the cadet is full capable of participating in that activity, and allowing them to show with just service dress shows a lack of attention to detail, or a lack of compassion for that cadet.

Neither is acceptable in a unit CC.  I've had plenty of situations where I was photo-shopping name tapes and name tags for cadets with a "wet" Curry, that's understandable, but to allow a cadet to come unprepared for an activity which has a clear packing list is unacceptable.

There's a lot of different ways a situation like that can be handled in advance - the options are more limited day-of.

Who's responsible for making sure that the cadet has the uniform specified in the activity packing list?

[davidsinn]

They'd be allowed to complete the activity, and have to spend time learning how to care for their uniform themselves.  For activities which might ruin the service dress, you can always scrounge up extra uniform parts from other people's gear.

Afterwards there would be very "direct" conversations with that cadet's unit CC, as when they sign the 31 they are indicating that the cadet is full capable of participating in that activity, and allowing them to show with just service dress shows a lack of attention to detail, or a lack of compassion for that cadet.

Neither is acceptable in a unit CC.  I've had plenty of situations where I was photo-shopping name tapes and name tags for cadets with a "wet" Curry, that's understandable, but to allow a cadet to come unprepared for an activity which has a clear packing list is unacceptable.

There's a lot of different ways a situation like that can be handled in advance - the options are more limited day-of.

Who's responsible for making sure that the cadet has the uniform specified in the activity packing list?

First the cadet themselves, second the unit commander shouldn't send a cadet to encampment that is not prepared.

[Eclipse]

Who's responsible for making sure that the cadet has the uniform specified in the activity packing list?

First the cadet themselves, second the unit commander shouldn't send a cadet to encampment that is not prepared.

Yep - that's why we require CC approval.  You have no idea how many CC's feel its "not their problem".

[Hawk200]

Well let's be clear here.  Commanders can dictate what T-shift you will wear.  They can say everyone is in brown, everyone is in in black, A-flight is in Brown and B-fight is in Black of they can say nothing at all.

OK, now keep that in mind.

It is not a "lie" but policy and  local commander has the power and resposibility to set that policy.

The stipulation that only "staff" (a definition which also seems a little loose) may wear black T-shirts is not documented. It is not in a policy letter. It is not in a supplement. It is not in any known publication. It's not even written down on a restaurant napkin or an old gumwrapper.

If a policy is pushed that has no legitimate confirming documentation, it is indeed a lie. One that needs to be dealt with.

[Ned]

If a policy is pushed that has no legitimate confirming documentation, it is indeed a lie. One that needs to be dealt with.

That seems a bit harsh.

Why can't a commander set a policy verbally?

As long as it is effectively communicated, it doesn't seem to matter whether it is printed, typewritten, or copied in longhand by monks.

When I'm in command, I personally tend to put important policies in writing.  But not every directive, order, or policy is going to be written down.  That's just kinda the way it is in real life, too.

And I'm not sure that underwear color ranks up there with my most important policy decisions as a commander. 

But to characterize an unwritten (but official) policy as a "lie" seems a bit much.

Ned Lee

[NC Hokie]

Who's responsible for making sure that the cadet has the uniform specified in the activity packing list?

First the cadet themselves, second the unit commander shouldn't send a cadet to encampment that is not prepared.

Yep - that's why we require CC approval.  You have no idea how many CC's feel its "not their problem".

That answer is inconsistent with your earlier statements (Reply #21 and Reply #26) that activity CCs are responsible for supplying uniforms that they require cadet participants to have.

[Eclipse]

Who's responsible for making sure that the cadet has the uniform specified in the activity packing list?

First the cadet themselves, second the unit commander shouldn't send a cadet to encampment that is not prepared.

Yep - that's why we require CC approval.  You have no idea how many CC's feel its "not their problem".

That answer is inconsistent with your earlier statements (Reply #21 and Reply #26) that activity CCs are responsible for supplying uniforms that they require cadet participants to have.

No its not.  Reread.

[Hawk200]

If a policy is pushed that has no legitimate confirming documentation, it is indeed a lie. One that needs to be dealt with.

That seems a bit harsh.

Why can't a commander set a policy verbally?

As long as it is effectively communicated, it doesn't seem to matter whether it is printed, typewritten, or copied in longhand by monks.

When I'm in command, I personally tend to put important policies in writing.  But not every directive, order, or policy is going to be written down.  That's just kinda the way it is in real life, too.

And I'm not sure that underwear color ranks up there with my most important policy decisions as a commander. 

But to characterize an unwritten (but official) policy as a "lie" seems a bit much.

Ned Lee

Well, let's look at it that way. Prove that the policy exists. Without consulting the commander in question. What if he or she is out of town? At home, sick in bed? At work, in a meeting and can't be disturbed? Laying in a hospital bed, not concious? What if no one else has any recollection of the commander saying it?

You tell me something that I don't have any means of verifying, how do I know that it's actually the commander's policy, and not just something you made up? I've dealt with a number of made up rules with no actual basis in reality. We shouldn't advocate such a practice.

I don't believe the policy exists in the first place. No one can prove to me that it does. Proving that it does exist isn't hard at all. Proving that something doesn't is almost impossible.

I will also point out that you mentioned something "effectively communicated".  "...printed, typewritten, or copied in longhand by monks" is written, and can be referenced. These days, a policy letter or supplement can be typed up, published, posted on a website, and have emails sent informing all the members of the wing with internet access within minutes. Since you can do that, why wouldn't you?

[NC Hokie]

That answer is inconsistent with your earlier statements (Reply #21 and Reply #26) that activity CCs are responsible for supplying uniforms that they require cadet participants to have.

No its not.  Reread.

I have.  Here's what I found...

Not quite - the only uniform combinations that can be dictated (for cadets) are those which are issued by either NHQ, the unit, or the activity.

Beyond the MBSU, a unit or activity CC cannot mandate any other uniform parts or combos unless they supply the item or the expense is voluntary.  This comes up all the time in relation to encampments and similar - someone is always saying we can't mandate BDU's for economically challenged cadets who can't afford them.

They are correct and we do anyway.  In 6 years as an encampment commander, no one has challenged me on this, but if they did, I'd have no alternative but to allow the cadet to participate in the full activity in service dress.  That's what the regs says.

Who's responsible for making sure that the cadet has the uniform specified in the activity packing list?

First the cadet themselves, second the unit commander shouldn't send a cadet to encampment that is not prepared.

Yep - that's why we require CC approval.  You have no idea how many CC's feel its "not their problem".

In the first two quotes, you indicate that the activity CC is responsible for supplying any required uniforms that cadet participants do not already have, yet the third quote finds you agreeing with the idea that the cadet and his unit CC are responsible for them.  Which is it?

[CAPC/officer125]

At my squadron, we have them wear a white t-shirt and nice blue jeans with tennis shoes until they get a uniform. It is usually not a problem for them to get their uniform before they promote. Also the male hair need to be in in regs and we prefer the females to at least have their hair up.

One of the requirements to promote to C/Amn is to be able to satisfactorily wear a uniform. You can't do that if you don't have one, ergo, everyone should have a complete uniform prior to promoting...

Yes, but at my squadron we either get them their uniform within a couple of weeks of joining or they take long enough to get their Curry, that we don't worry about them not being in uniform IAW regs come promotion time.

You might want to think about your post, specifically the part I put in bold and underlined. Regulations are not something to be ignored when they simply become inconvienient.

With that, I rest my case.

I think you misinterpreted. I had to read it twice before I figured out what was intended. To rephrase, they don't have to worry about a new cadet being out of uniform because they are pretty much assured of having a complete uniform come promotion time.

Yes, is what I intended to say. Sorry for the easily misinterpreted words. My cadet always have both a full set of blues and a full set of BDUs before they promote. Making sure they have their blues is especially something that is big at my squadron because that is the required uniform they wear for their review boards (which we have for EVERY achievement). We are also a big ES squadron (we received Wing GT of the Year this year) so BDUs are a must.

[davidsinn]

At my squadron, we have them wear a white t-shirt and nice blue jeans with tennis shoes until they get a uniform. It is usually not a problem for them to get their uniform before they promote. Also the male hair need to be in in regs and we prefer the females to at least have their hair up.

One of the requirements to promote to C/Amn is to be able to satisfactorily wear a uniform. You can't do that if you don't have one, ergo, everyone should have a complete uniform prior to promoting...

Yes, but at my squadron we either get them their uniform within a couple of weeks of joining or they take long enough to get their Curry, that we don't worry about them not being in uniform IAW regs come promotion time.

You might want to think about your post, specifically the part I put in bold and underlined. Regulations are not something to be ignored when they simply become inconvienient.

With that, I rest my case.

I think you misinterpreted. I had to read it twice before I figured out what was intended. To rephrase, they don't have to worry about a new cadet being out of uniform because they are pretty much assured of having a complete uniform come promotion time.

Yes, is what I intended to say. Sorry for the easily misinterpreted words. My cadet always have both a full set of blues and a full set of BDUs before they promote. Making sure they have their blues is especially something that is big at my squadron because that is the required uniform they wear for their review boards (which we have for EVERY achievement). We are also a big ES squadron (we received Wing GT of the Year this year) so BDUs are a must.

Please tell me you do not hold up a promotion because they only have one uniform complete.

[DC]

At my squadron, we have them wear a white t-shirt and nice blue jeans with tennis shoes until they get a uniform. It is usually not a problem for them to get their uniform before they promote. Also the male hair need to be in in regs and we prefer the females to at least have their hair up.

One of the requirements to promote to C/Amn is to be able to satisfactorily wear a uniform. You can't do that if you don't have one, ergo, everyone should have a complete uniform prior to promoting...

Yes, but at my squadron we either get them their uniform within a couple of weeks of joining or they take long enough to get their Curry, that we don't worry about them not being in uniform IAW regs come promotion time.

You might want to think about your post, specifically the part I put in bold and underlined. Regulations are not something to be ignored when they simply become inconvienient.

With that, I rest my case.

I think you misinterpreted. I had to read it twice before I figured out what was intended. To rephrase, they don't have to worry about a new cadet being out of uniform because they are pretty much assured of having a complete uniform come promotion time.

Yes, is what I intended to say. Sorry for the easily misinterpreted words. My cadet always have both a full set of blues and a full set of BDUs before they promote. Making sure they have their blues is especially something that is big at my squadron because that is the required uniform they wear for their review boards (which we have for EVERY achievement). We are also a big ES squadron (we received Wing GT of the Year this year) so BDUs are a must.

Oh, okay, good. The way you had it worded it sounded like y'all didn't care if they had their uniform or not when it came time to promote.

Sorry for going off on you like that.

[CAPC/officer125]

At my squadron, we have them wear a white t-shirt and nice blue jeans with tennis shoes until they get a uniform. It is usually not a problem for them to get their uniform before they promote. Also the male hair need to be in in regs and we prefer the females to at least have their hair up.

One of the requirements to promote to C/Amn is to be able to satisfactorily wear a uniform. You can't do that if you don't have one, ergo, everyone should have a complete uniform prior to promoting...

Yes, but at my squadron we either get them their uniform within a couple of weeks of joining or they take long enough to get their Curry, that we don't worry about them not being in uniform IAW regs come promotion time.

You might want to think about your post, specifically the part I put in bold and underlined. Regulations are not something to be ignored when they simply become inconvienient.

With that, I rest my case.

I think you misinterpreted. I had to read it twice before I figured out what was intended. To rephrase, they don't have to worry about a new cadet being out of uniform because they are pretty much assured of having a complete uniform come promotion time.

Yes, is what I intended to say. Sorry for the easily misinterpreted words. My cadet always have both a full set of blues and a full set of BDUs before they promote. Making sure they have their blues is especially something that is big at my squadron because that is the required uniform they wear for their review boards (which we have for EVERY achievement). We are also a big ES squadron (we received Wing GT of the Year this year) so BDUs are a must.

Please tell me you do not hold up a promotion because they only have one uniform complete.

No we don't.
I really don't worry about the uniform problem because they have a complete set of each uniform, minus the tapes and tags, within the first 2 weeks after they join. Our supply officer is a big stickler about making sure the cadets are taken care of, at least when it comes to uniforms. And with the tags and tapes, some of my cadets don't attempt their Curry until several months after they join, so they have the complete uniform before they go in front of the board.

[RiverAux]

Is there any real reason we couldn't change the regulation to make BDUs a required item for cadets?  As it stands right now, I'm fairly confident in saying that just about every cadet in CAP has a BDU uniform that they have either purchased themselves or have had issued to them by the unit.  That being the case, it would make sense to me to just make it a requirement to remove the ambiguity around this issue. 

Since they're already being bought or provided by the unit, cost isn't an issue. 

[Eclipse]

You're either adding words that aren't there, or simply misunderstanding.  What I've said is clear and consistent with the regs.

In the first two quotes, you indicate that the activity CC is responsible for supplying any required uniforms that cadet participants do not already have,

That is not remotely what I said.  (In regards to cadets) A unit or activity CC cannot mandate the wear of anything other than the MBSU unless they provide that uniform to the cadet, or the cadet volunteers to acquire and wear it.  This doesn't mean the CC has to provide anything.

It also doesn't mean the CC can't post UOD's, since regardless the majority will always step up, but it does mean that any cadet so inclined can ignore the UOD at his discretion unless the one prescribed was issued by CAP.

This is generally a non-issue because a) many units have access to used uniforms, and b) most cadets are capable of funding their own BDU's, but the fact remains that, by reg, if mom said "We can't afford it..." or even "we don't think we should have to buy that..." and the cadet decided to be a ground team member, there is nothing prohibiting them from wearing blues in the field, and nothing I can shake out to mandate the wear of BDU's. (That cadet, however, would be responsible for maintaining the MBSU in proper condition, and if they ruined it camping, I'd be comfortable making them replace it).

In regards to this thread, if I absolutely want cadets to wear a black t-shirt, I have to provide it to them, otherwise any cadet who doesn't own one (or even feel like wearing one) could wear a brown shirt and I'd have no recourse. 

yet the third quote finds you agreeing with the idea that the cadet and his unit CC are responsible for them.  Which is it?

In terms of responsibility, what I said was that when a Unit CC signs a Form 31, they are indicating to the activity CC that this respective cadet is prepared for and capable of participating in that activity, including mitigating any uniform issues.  That doesn't mean they have to march to a surplus store and buy anything, but it does mean they are at least peripherally aware of the requirements of the activity, and if they know the cadet is not capable, or is missing required equipment, they let the activity CC know in advance.

As a commander (unit or otherwise) I can't force a cadet to buy anything but the parts required to complete the FCU, period.  If I want anything more than that (BDU's, rainbow shirts, service coats, flightsuits, whatever), I have to give it to them, or ask nicely and hope they step up.

If they can't afford it or aren't inclined to cooperate, that doesn't mean I have to buy them (or the squadron).

[Eclipse]

Is there any real reason we couldn't change the regulation to make BDUs a required item for cadets?

Since they're already being bought or provided by the unit, cost isn't an issue.

I'd sign that, but in one sentence you just doubled the on-paper cost of being a cadet.  Frankly I think the cadets would be better served getting BDU's (or ABU's soon) than the service dress. 

12 year olds are far better at keeping a garment which already looks dirty clean, than dress pants and shirts.

Let them wear their ribbons and cords on the BDUs, and issue them a MBSU when they make NCO or maybe officer.  It would mean more and you'd know at a glance in ranks who the higher-speed movers are.

[Ned]

Well, let's look at it that way. Prove that the policy exists. Without consulting the commander in question. What if he or she is out of town? At home, sick in bed? At work, in a meeting and can't be disturbed? Laying in a hospital bed, not concious? What if no one else has any recollection of the commander saying it?

Maybe I'm missing something here.

As near as I can tell, your position is something to the effect of "any policy that isn't written down is a lie'. 

My position is that many, if not most, of a commander's policies, directives, and orders are communicated verbally and not in writing.

And that verbal directives are just as valid as writen policies.

You tell me something that I don't have any means of verifying, how do I know that it's actually the commander's policy, and not just something you made up? I've dealt with a number of made up rules with no actual basis in reality. We shouldn't advocate such a practice.

I don't believe the policy exists in the first place. No one can prove to me that it does. Proving that it does exist isn't hard at all. Proving that something doesn't is almost impossible.

I will also point out that you mentioned something "effectively communicated".  "...printed, typewritten, or copied in longhand by monks" is written, and can be referenced. These days, a policy letter or supplement can be typed up, published, posted on a website, and have emails sent informing all the members of the wing with internet access within minutes. Since you can do that, why wouldn't you?

I can only agree that any policy has to be effectively communicated to be effective.

But that applies equally to written and verbal policies.  I could write a policy down and keep it in my desk drawer.  That is no more effectively communicated than a verbal policy whispered into my closet in the dead of night.

But the key is communication and understanding by subordinates, not whether something is written or not.

[Hawk200]

As near as I can tell, your position is something to the effect of "any policy that isn't written down is a lie'. 

I was probably a little too general on that. The problem I'm seeing is "policies" that no one seems to know where it came from.

There are wing commanders that are puzzled about the "staff only" black T-shirt rule. You'd think that when it comes to something that is supposed to be approved by the Wing CC and that person doesn't know about it, it's probably something suitable to fertilize with.

All in all, if a supposed policy has no one and nothing to corroborate it, and it keeps getting passed down, it's a lie. Even an outdated policy that keeps getting passed down when no longer valid is a lie. Then again, maybe "myth" is a more appropriate term.

[lordmonar]

As near as I can tell, your position is something to the effect of "any policy that isn't written down is a lie'. 

I was probably a little too general on that. The problem I'm seeing is "policies" that no one seems to know where it came from.

There are wing commanders that are puzzled about the "staff only" black T-shirt rule. You'd think that when it comes to something that is supposed to be approved by the Wing CC and that person doesn't know about it, it's probably something suitable to fertilize with.

All in all, if a supposed policy has no one and nothing to corroborate it, and it keeps getting passed down, it's a lie. Even an outdated policy that keeps getting passed down when no longer valid is a lie. Then again, maybe "myth" is a more appropriate term.

T shirts do not have to be approved by the wing commander.  And many policies do not have to "come" from anywhere.  Squadron policy to wear BDU cap vs a squadron ball cap, brown t-shirts vs Black.  Ties on between october and may. Not one of these have to come from anywhere.

If a sqadron CC wants his basic cadets in brown T-shirts and his staff in black...he needs no more justification then simple preference.

[Hawk200]

Not one of these have to come from anywhere

Obviously, I haven't made the point clear. Of course they have to come from somewhere. That's the difference between made up and legitimate.

An example of a conversation concerning the black T-shirt:

"Cadets only wear a black T-shirt if they're on staff."

"Really, who says?"

"Uhh....I don't know. But it's in the regs."

"OK, show it to me."

"Well, I don't know where. But everyone knows that."

"They do? How does everyone know if isn't written down?"

"Well, one of the staff told me that."

"Did they? But they didn't show it to you?"

"Uhh...no."

"So how does everyone know that?"

End conversation (which has repeated more times than I've even bothered to count).

What it boils down to is if you cannot prove that a policy exists (which could be something written down, or just a commander that says "Yeah, I said that"), then it's not a policy. Period. Anything that can't be verified is not enforceable in any way shape or form. Therefore, it shouldn't be set forth as policy. At best, it's a myth; at worst, it's a lie.

Is that clear?

[BillB]

Eclipse and Hawk are correct, Ned is wrong. A verbal policy, verbal order are by normal useage like ICL's and exprire after 90 days (except in Florida Wing where they are permenant) CAPR 10-1 covers written policies, there is no regulation on verbal policies. How can a CC require cadet Jones to wear black t-shirts if cadet Jones was not told of the verbal policy?  According to one former National Commander, a verbal order is only issued when a CC has no access to a typewriter or computer. Checking with several USAF Admin types, it's normal for a verbal order to expire after 90 days, however there is no regulation on this. A Squadron policy requiring black t-shirts for staff must be posted for all to see, which doesn't happen with verbal orders.
A CC telling a cadet the UOD next week is PT clothing is a verbal order that expires next week. This is an example of a legal verbal order. But saying to several cadets that orange T-shirts are for cadets with a GES on their 101 would expire after 90 days unless the CC puts it in writing and it's posted.

[notaNCO forever]

Eclipse and Hawk are correct, Ned is wrong. A verbal policy, verbal order are by normal useage like ICL's and exprire after 90 days (except in Florida Wing where they are permenant) CAPR 10-1 covers written policies, there is no regulation on verbal policies. How can a CC require cadet Jones to wear black t-shirts if cadet Jones was not told of the verbal policy?  According to one former National Commander, a verbal order is only issued when a CC has no access to a typewriter or computer. Checking with several USAF Admin types, it's normal for a verbal order to expire after 90 days, however there is no regulation on this. A Squadron policy requiring black t-shirts for staff must be posted for all to see, which doesn't happen with verbal orders.
A CC telling a cadet the UOD next week is PT clothing is a verbal order that expires next week. This is an example of a legal verbal order. But saying to several cadets that orange T-shirts are for cadets with a GES on their 101 would expire after 90 days unless the CC puts it in writing and it's posted.

Just a question, you state that their is no reg on verbal policy, but then latter on you say verbal policies expire after 90 days; what one is it? You seem to have contradicted yourself. It might be so for the Air Force, but as has been stated, we don't follow Air Force regs. Of course, I think we should use Air Force regs as a guideline, but, to my knowledge, their is nothing that says we have to.

[Larry Mangum]

Just a question, you state that their is no reg on verbal policy, but then latter on you say verbal policies expire after 90 days; what one is it? You seem to have contradicted yourself. It might be so for the Air Force, but as has been stated, we don't follow Air Force regs. Of course, I think we should use Air Force regs as a guideline, but, to my knowledge, their is nothing that says we have to.

Guys, there is a big difference between a verbal order and a verbal policy.  Plicies by their very nature set in place a series of actions or events that persist over a long time.  An order on the other hand normaly is tied to a specifc task or person. An example of this would be, "Cadet, take a detail and retire the colors." A policy on the other hand is as described in some of the other postings, for example, "Cadet staff will wear black T-shirts, non cadet staff will wear brown T-shirts."

The majority of all orders will be given verbally.  Policies on the other hand should be in writting, so they can be refered back to once questions arise over compliance.  It is almost impossible to go back and verify a verbal policy for accuracy.  That does not mean that there is not a place for temporary policies; making an area during a Search a non-salute area is a good example of a verbal policy as it is of short duration and focused.

I know a lot of you get this and will see this post as redundant, but I thought some clarity would help.

[Eclipse]

The majority of all orders will be given verbally.  Policies on the other hand should be in writting, so they can be refered back to one questions arise over compliance.  It is almost impossible to go back and verify a verbal policy for accuracy.  That does not mean that there is not a place for temporary policies; making an area during a Search a non-salute area is a good example of a verbal policy as it is of short duration and focused.

To back this up further, wearing a specific color of shirt for a specific reason would defineintly fall under
"Squadron SOP" and proper posting of Unit SOP's are an SUI item.

[majdomke]

We are in CAWG and do something slightly similar. For new recruits, until they get a uniform, they wear plain black t-shirt with blue jeans. They will need the t-shirt eventually anyhow. Once they do have their uniform, we do wear with top button buttoned until promoted to C/Amn. It's not a tradition I started but the cadets seem to take pride in unbuttoning the top button upon promotion. It's part of the ceremony.

[JayT]

We are in CAWG and do something slightly similar. For new recruits, until they get a uniform, they wear plain black t-shirt with blue jeans. They will need the t-shirt eventually anyhow. Once they do have their uniform, we do wear with top button buttoned until promoted to C/Amn. It's not a tradition I started but the cadets seem to take pride in unbuttoning the top button upon promotion. It's part of the ceremony.

So you have a tradition of violating regulations at the very beginning of a cadets career in the spirite of 'I didn't start it........."

[Hawk200]

We are in CAWG and do something slightly similar. For new recruits, until they get a uniform, they wear plain black t-shirt with blue jeans. They will need the t-shirt eventually anyhow. Once they do have their uniform, we do wear with top button buttoned until promoted to C/Amn. It's not a tradition I started but the cadets seem to take pride in unbuttoning the top button upon promotion. It's part of the ceremony.

So you have a tradition of violating regulations at the very beginning of a cadets career in the spirite of 'I didn't start it........."

In all fairness, it isn't a violation of a regulation. There is nothing in 39-1 about the top button.

I've only ever seen three people in the military that wore the top button buttoned, and they were trying to be different. They were also the the same people that pegged pant legs. It was pretty obvious that they were trying to garner attention, and that attention was mostly negative.

In general, it's a uniformity thing. It does go against common practice of leaving it open. Having one group button it and another leaving it open is inconsistent, and inappropriate. It may not fall under the definition of hazing, but it is an attempt at elitism.

[Eclipse]

pegged pant legs

And that would be...?

[Ned]

Eclipse and Hawk are correct, Ned is wrong.

Boy, you'd think I would get that often enough at work. 

A verbal policy, verbal order are by normal useage like ICL's and exprire after 90 days (. . .).

Umm, what?

I must have missed that class.  Is the policy that "verbal policies expire in 90 days" a verbal or written policy?   

Remind me, where is that written down?

Oh wait . . .

[T]here is no regulation on verbal policies.

Nevermind.

How can a CC require cadet Jones to wear black t-shirts if cadet Jones was not told of the verbal policy? 

Ummm, by telling Cadet Jones to wear black t-shirts?

According to one former National Commander, a verbal order is only issued when a CC has no access to a typewriter or computer.

I guess that must be that former National Commander's policy.  Which he is certainly entitled to follow.

And it certainly makes sense that national, region, and wing commanders should issue written policies whenever feasible.  Because we all agree that policies - whether written or verbal - must be effectively communicated.  And most folks don't get to chat with the National Commander, so writing would probably be the best way to go.

But local unit commanders issue most of their policies verbally, because they can effectively communicate orally with unit members.  Of course, they can also write them down if they feel it is more appropriate.

Checking with several USAF Admin types, it's normal for a verbal order to expire after 90 days, however there is no regulation on this.

Well then, that must work very well for USAF Admin types.

A Squadron policy requiring black t-shirts for staff must be posted for all to see, which doesn't happen with verbal orders.

Non-concur.  A Squadron policy requiring black t-shirts must be communicated to all concerned.  That can be done in several ways, including a written posting, or simply telling everyone about the policy.

Ned Lee

[NC Hokie]

We are in CAWG and do something slightly similar. For new recruits, until they get a uniform, they wear plain black t-shirt with blue jeans. They will need the t-shirt eventually anyhow.

+1 for the same exact reason.  It also does a nice job of visually separating the new cadets from the visitors.

[Hawk200]

pegged pant legs

And that would be...?

Instead of blousing them, the pant leg is wrapped tight around the leg, usually by folding it, and tucking it into the boot. It's still expressly forbidden in 2903.

[majdomke]

So you have a tradition of violating regulations at the very beginning of a cadets career in the spirite of 'I didn't start it........."

So, if you could please direct me to the regulation that states top buttons are not to be buttoned in BDU's, I would appreciate it.

[Larry Mangum]

So you have a tradition of violating regulations at the very beginning of a cadets career in the spirite of 'I didn't start it........."

So, if you could please direct me to the regulation that states top buttons are not to be buttoned in BDU's, I would appreciate it.

It is not a violation, it is simply a unit tradition.  I would suggest that it be included in the squadron SOP though, because sooner or later some will challenge it and you need to be able to refer them to something other then a verbal  "Because, that's how we do it." 

It can prevent issues from blowing up. When we moved here from Washington, one of my cadets got into trouble because  he failed to salute the water fountain after getting a drink. The unit tradition was that this was done to drill customs and courtesies into them.  It was spelled out in an SOP, but he was never told of this until he violated the tradition and nor was he issued an SOP. 

I am not saying that I approve of somthing like that as a tradition, but it is no sillier than requiring the top button to be buttoned until their first promotion. But I do believe that if you are going to hold someone accountable, that it needs to be in written form, i.e. an SOP in this case.

BTW, the cadet who was chastised, had already earned the grade of C\SSgt at the time.

[D2SK]

So you have a tradition of violating regulations at the very beginning of a cadets career in the spirite of 'I didn't start it........."

So, if you could please direct me to the regulation that states top buttons are not to be buttoned in BDU's, I would appreciate it.

1LT Jon Domke,

If we are going to be purists...what's a 1LT ?  CAP has 1st Lt's. 

[Eclipse]

...one of my cadets got into trouble because  he failed to salute the water fountain after getting a drink. The unit tradition was that this was done to drill customs and courtesies into them.  It was spelled out in an SOP, but he was never told of this until he violated the tradition and nor was he issued an SOP.

Where are the ADULT leaders in this organization?

If I got wind one of my units was doing something like this, let alone actually publishing an SOP to that effect, there would be an immediate, direct conversation, and that SOP wouldn't be spoken of again.

[majdomke]

...

[majdomke]

It's the darn Army messing with me... too many years training with the Army will cause you start acting like them or even using their rank abbreviations... No insult intended to any of my Army brothers. Although I was AF, I trained with Army and was stationed with them overseas. Things have a tendency of wearing off on you over time...

Larry,
As for an SOP, yes we do have one. We also publish a Cadet Guide that includes that info. It's not like I made it up or anything, I questioned it myself when I started.

[lordmonar]

...one of my cadets got into trouble because  he failed to salute the water fountain after getting a drink. The unit tradition was that this was done to drill customs and courtesies into them.  It was spelled out in an SOP, but he was never told of this until he violated the tradition and nor was he issued an SOP.

Where are the ADULT leaders in this organization?

If I got wind one of my units was doing something like this, let alone actually publishing an SOP to that effect, there would be an immediate, direct conversation, and that SOP wouldn't be spoken of again.

And I assume that This Policy is actually published so that all your commanders understand your command philosophy.

[lordmonar]

Okay....I have a prime exapmple of an unwritten rule that we all follow.

Do you or do you not a salute Medal of Honor receipiant?

Cite the appropriate CAP, USAF, DOD or any other regulation.

[Rotorhead]

We are in CAWG and do something slightly similar. For new recruits, until they get a uniform, they wear plain black t-shirt with blue jeans. They will need the t-shirt eventually anyhow. Once they do have their uniform, we do wear with top button buttoned until promoted to C/Amn. It's not a tradition I started but the cadets seem to take pride in unbuttoning the top button upon promotion. It's part of the ceremony.

I find it amusing that everyone is so willing to bust the concept of a "uniform" just so they can be "different."

[Rotorhead]

When we moved here from Washington, one of my cadets got into trouble because  he failed to salute the water fountain after getting a drink.

I think if I found myself in a squadron that saluted the drinking fountain, I'd choose another, more professional unit very quickly.

[Larry Mangum]

The following are excerts from their SOP:

COL Aqua Procedure

The squadron drinking fountain has been named COL
Aqua. When using the drinking fountain, all cadets will
report to the drinking fountain using the reporting
procedure specified below.
Stand 2 paces away from and facing the fountain, salute
and say, "Sir, Cadet (Rank and Last Name) reporting as
ordered."
Approach fountain and consume liquid. When finished,
take 1 step back, salute and depart.

Section 4: Privileges of Rank
Terms of Address. The proper term of address for anyone
is their proper rank and their last name. First names are
not to be used. Airmen will be addressed as "Cadet,"
NCOs will be addressed as "Sergeant" or "Chief," and
officers will be addressed as "Sir" or "Ma'am."

Saluting. Cadets will salute all Senior Members and Cadet
Officers. In addition, they will salute when reporting, or
when paying respect to the colors. When in doubt, salute!

Squaring. Cadets will square all corners, in a flanking
manner, when indoors, until they attain the rank of cadet
officer. At this point, squaring is optional.

On the Black. All cadets will walk on the right side of any
hallway, until they attain a position on the cadet command
staff. At this point, walking on the black is optional.
Walling. While inside the building during SQ47 meetings
and activities, Cadets will halt and place their backs to the
wall for all Senior Members and Cadet Officers, until the
person has passed, then proceed along the corridor.

Boonies. BDU Boonie covers may be worn by C/SSGTs
and above, only in the field, and never on a military base,
unless otherwise specified.


As you can see they are kind of off base.

[Rotorhead]

All this does is serve to minimize actual C&Cs and drive away cadets who are mature enough not to put up with such foolishness.

[NC Hokie]

The following are excerts from their SOP:

COL Aqua Procedure

The squadron drinking fountain has been named COL
Aqua. When using the drinking fountain, all cadets will
report to the drinking fountain using the reporting
procedure specified below.
Stand 2 paces away from and facing the fountain, salute
and say, "Sir, Cadet (Rank and Last Name) reporting as
ordered."
Approach fountain and consume liquid. When finished,
take 1 step back, salute and depart.

Section 4: Privileges of Rank
Terms of Address. The proper term of address for anyone
is their proper rank and their last name. First names are
not to be used. Airmen will be addressed as "Cadet,"
NCOs will be addressed as "Sergeant" or "Chief," and
officers will be addressed as "Sir" or "Ma'am."

Saluting. Cadets will salute all Senior Members and Cadet
Officers. In addition, they will salute when reporting, or
when paying respect to the colors. When in doubt, salute!

Squaring. Cadets will square all corners, in a flanking
manner, when indoors, until they attain the rank of cadet
officer. At this point, squaring is optional.

On the Black. All cadets will walk on the right side of any
hallway, until they attain a position on the cadet command
staff. At this point, walking on the black is optional.
Walling. While inside the building during SQ47 meetings
and activities, Cadets will halt and place their backs to the
wall for all Senior Members and Cadet Officers, until the
person has passed, then proceed along the corridor.

Boonies. BDU Boonie covers may be worn by C/SSGTs
and above, only in the field, and never on a military base,
unless otherwise specified.


As you can see they are kind of off base.

Wow!  Col Aqua is just plain weird but I don't see anything wrong with it, after all, kids will be kids.  The sections on saluting and terms of address are fine (I might even borrow them), as is the bit about walking on the black.  The rest...

I was a rat in the Virginia Tech Corps of Cadets many moons ago.  We squared our corners (and did many other silly things) but we no longer had to do so once we were "accepted" into the corps approximately 1/2 way through our first year.  I have no real problem with the practice, but I do think that making cadets do this until they pin on C/2d Lt is excessive; the BEST cadets will be stuck doing this for nine months (with JROTC experience), but many will be doing this for their entire cadet career.  The same goes for walling, although the practice might be somewhat less silly if the corridors are narrow.

As to the boonie hat thing...unless they're wearing BBDUs they are blatantly disregarding regulations, and no amount of local discretion can excuse that.

[BillB]

Boonies are not authorized for CAP period. Wearing a boonie cover is not authorized under any condition. The National Board tried to get USAF approval, and it was turned down.

[Eclipse]

Boonies are not authorized for CAP period. Wearing a boonie cover is not authorized under any condition. The National Board tried to get USAF approval, and it was turned down.

Boonies are authorized for wear with the blue field uniform.

c. Blue boonie hat. A dark blue boonie hat may be worn with the blue field uniform when participating in extended outdoor operations and authorized by the activity director. Grade insignia will be worn as currently worn on the blue BDU cap .

Note: Cadet and senior member officers who choose to wear the dark blue field uniform with the blue BDU cap may wear the ultramarine blue embroidered grade insignia centered 1/2 inch above the visor. Grade insignia is not authorized on any of the CAP baseball caps. Grade insignia is not authorized on the blue BDU cap for cadets or senior members who do not hold officer grade.

[BillB]

Correct the blue boonie can be worn with the blue field uniform. BUT The Squadron SOP says boonie can be worn with the BDU. Cadets may wear the blue boonie with the blue field uniform, but there is no authorization to wear a boonie of any color with BDUs.

[Eclipse]

Correct the blue boonie can be worn with the blue field uniform. BUT The Squadron SOP says boonie can be worn with the BDU. Cadets may wear the blue boonie with the blue field uniform, but there is no authorization to wear a boonie of any color with BDUs.

Yes.  Your statement was that Boonies were not allowed period.

[majdomke]

Just went to a SAREX two weeks ago where an entire squadron of participants showed up wearing camo boonies with their BDU's. On top of that, they wore hiking boots instead of military combat boot style.

[Eclipse]

Just went to a SAREX two weeks ago where an entire squadron of participants showed up wearing camo boonies with their BDU's. On top of that, they wore hiking boots instead of military combat boot style.

Did you or anyone else make an issue of it?

[majdomke]

I was outranked by a Major and not really in a position to say anything directly. I did comment that I wasn't aware boonies were authorized for the mission. The response I got was they had authorized them for their squadron members. What would you do or should I have done in that situation? I should also mention there were numerous high ranking CAP officers there including a group commander.

[Eclipse]

I was outranked by a Major and not really in a position to say anything directly. I did comment that I wasn't aware boonies were authorized for the mission. The response I got was they had authorized them for their squadron members. What would you do or should I have done in that situation? I should also mention there were numerous high ranking CAP officers there including a group commander.

It depends, frankly, on your place in the universe.  At least you made mention of it.

Were I the GBD and they wanted to go on a GT, they'd fix the issues or go home, then there would be "direct" conversations with the Wing CC and their chain of command.  I won't jump the chain or end around it, but I'll rattle it without thinking twice, and I expect my peers to do the same for me.  A unit CC cannot authorize the violation of regulations, and those that "do" should think twice about allowing those violations outside their unit activities.  These things tend to shine light in places you may not want it.

Bottom line, you don't want to get into a shouting match in the ICP, but you should also not accept these kinds of things for anyone under your command or AOR.

I'm not surprised in the least that there were higher ranking officers and commanders there, but this is another case where the grade doesn't mean much beyond watching your "sirs and salutes".  The positional grade in the mission base is the only thing that matters.

For those of you who perpetrate this kind of "fun", take heed - people notice.

[DC]

Hiking boots? WTF...

Boonies I can half understand, it's a common mistake, but hiking boots?

That's just weird.

[majdomke]

Trust me, I would love to wear boonies out here. We are in the central valley of CA and summertime temps easily go over 100 when we are out on missions. I keep hoping a praying CAP and USAF can work something out on this. As for the hiking boots... they were actually telling me and my team that we couldn't cut it on the mission wearing our regulation boots. I had to step up and let them know that we had just gone up to over 6000' the weekend before searching for the wreck of a B-17 from 1941. We crossed several miles of rough and rugged terrain and 4-16' high brush. All without the need for hiking boots or leg gaiters like they were wearing. A good pair of quality combat boots with bloused pants does the trip just fine for the military and should do the same for us.