CAP Talk

So, CAP drank the KoolAid too huh?  Really, we need a National diversity committee in CAP?  For crying out loud.

Well it was a topic on this board not to far in the past. I've noticed a lot of our topics tend to come up in NB meetings lately. Gentlemen, Ladies, I think we have a mole. ;D

How about  just doing CAP stuff

Quote from: Strick on May 11, 2010, 11:55:30 PM
How about  just doing CAP stuff

I know female unit commanders. I've met minority commanders. I've even met female minority commanders. CC/CAP is female. Where's the problem?

and your point.....

Here is the problem, I have been a CAP member for 17 years, yet can not be on this committee?!?!?!  Just because I never accepted promotions as a Senior Member "as quickly" as I should have. 

This sticks, in fact....I may Command one of the most diverse Squadrons in all of CAP.  I myself am a minority (under the Fed Govt rules and regulations).

So, don't include anyone that is not a Major or Lt Col.  I fear we will just see the same folks we have seen in the past step forward for this committee. 

Now I am somewhat mad.   :'(

Quote from: Strick on May 12, 2010, 12:14:03 AM
and your point.....

Was directed toward the whole concept of the committee. I don't think we have a problem with glass ceilings. I think it's a waste of time.

I don't think we have a real diversity problem per se, it is more of an urban recruiting problem.  I think we have the potential to have huge squadrons (both cadet and senior) in our urban areas but don't seem to be able to take advantage of the opportunity provided by these areas with large populations.  If we were, there would very likely be greater minority representation in CAP overall. 

Quote from: RiverAux on May 12, 2010, 12:23:05 AM
I don't think we have a real diversity problem per se, it is more of an urban recruiting problem.  I think we have the potential to have huge squadrons (both cadet and senior) in our urban areas but don't seem to be able to take advantage of the opportunity provided by these areas with large populations.  If we were, there would very likely be greater minority representation in CAP overall.

Is there a geographical component?

Are white folk a minority in Southern California?

Quote from: Flying Pig on May 11, 2010, 11:48:04 PM
So, CAP drank the KoolAid too huh?  Really, we need a National diversity committee in CAP?  For crying out loud.

You got a source for those of us who don't (yet) know what you're talking about?

Quote from: NC Hokie on May 12, 2010, 01:12:26 AM

Quote from: Flying Pig on May 11, 2010, 11:48:04 PM
So, CAP drank the KoolAid too huh?  Really, we need a National diversity committee in CAP?  For crying out loud.

You got a source for those of us who don't (yet) know what you're talking about?

http://www.magnetmail.net/actions/email_web_version.cfm?recipient_id=126983107&message_id=1007878&user_id=CivilAir

The problem I see is that this committee will be used to direct an affirmative action that will be used to make sure that minorities will be promoted or moved into certain positions whether they are qualified or not.  As far as I know, there is nothing in CAP that limits or restricts anyone (including any minority) from upward movement in CAP.  Now by having a diversity committee, we will have to have results from the committee and since I propose that eligible and qualified members are now being promoted, the only solution will be to move or push unqualified members upward.  Unless someone can show me discrimination in CAP, I find this to be nothing but yet another affirmative action movement.. But JMHO

Quote from: AirAux on May 12, 2010, 01:27:27 AM
Unless someone can show me discrimination in CAP, I find this to be nothing but yet another affirmative action movement.. But JMHO

Agreed!!!!!   Give me a strong case history and relevant examples with documentation and I will support this endeavor! 

This is an interesting thread.  I was a spectator at the winter NB meeting when this concept was introduced by our national commander.  I have no objection to a diverse membership and, of course, a diverse leadership.  However, as has been said in earlier threads, what is our current demographics in relationship to the populations where our units are located?  Do we need to start units in areas which are underserved?  Do we try to recruit in areas where minority populations are more prevalent?  Can the school programs serve to increase the diversity of our membership?  I would like to think these kind of questions will be dealt with in committee discussions. 

I truly doubt this would be "another affirmative action" program.   But, I'm not sure of the motivation for such an initiative.  Our current national commander and, our previous national commander were not "GOWB's"  We have more women in leadership positions now than at any other time in our history.  The rainbow is brighter than ever before and, there is no dimming in sight. 

I hope the committee will be able to find ways to bring more qualified members into CAP and increase the retention rate of all our members; no matter what "group" they belong to.

Just my $.02

Isn't Diversity just code for Political Correctness?
I am glad that the important issue of a Diversity Committee is part of
the agenda when more important issues face CAP.  I would think
reinventing CAP for the 21st Century might be more important.
Are we really in the business of AE, Cadet Programs, SAR or just making CAP into a real sluggish, overgrown, overreaching corporation?

^^^^

Uhhh, like the push in the Federal land management agencies 20+ yrs ago

CAP's turn......20+ yrs later

Committee Member Criteria:

Quote
Exceptionally qualified candidates who do not share all the characteristics listed below are welcome to apply. Volunteers who serve on this committee will share most of the following qualification requirements:
 Be executive leaders (CEO/President/Chair/Vice Chair/VP/Chief Officer etc.)
 Be nationally recognized for their promotion of Diversity
 Be willing to attend at least four in-person meetings during the next twelve months
 Be willing to attend at least one conference call not to exceed 90 minutes each month
 Civil Air Patrol Major rank and above
 Attained the Garber Award
 Three or more years as a Civil Air Patrol senior member in good standing. Senior members with outstanding diversity credentials will be considered on an individual basis.

I would have to say that I'm not so sure this criteria will best serve the purpose of this committee- yes, part of this is in reference to the CAP rank and PD level required.

It also sounds like they are trying to put together a high-profile/celebrity Diversity Dream Team with the aspects of President/CEOs and the "nationally recognized" parts.


As someone involved with the higher echelons of Scouting, it seems that CAP is trying to do something similar to what the BSA did by putting together committees to then target and facilitate units in minority areas, inner city, non-English speaking, and things of that nature in the hopes of getting the kids (who otherwise would not be involved) involved with a constructive program and perhaps instill positive lessons vs the negative things that they may pick up on the street and as such addresses things such as crime, lack of role models, lack of direction, etc.

Before I say that I support this National committee or not, I'd like to see a bit more about what this is going to be used for. Are they just trying to do more outreach or are they trying to start Affirmative Action policies, etc.



Edit...

I just read further about some of the aspects of this committee and copied and pasted a few below that seemed to be promoting Affirmative Action, etc.

Quote
8) The establishment and maintenance of fair promotion and command opportunities for ethnic and gender-specific members of the Civil Air Patrol.

9) An assessment of pre-command staff and activity assignments of ethnic and gender-specific members of the Civil Air Patrol.

10) An assessment of command selection of ethnic and gender- specific members of the Civil Air Patrol.

14) The existence and maintenance of fair promotion, assignment, and command opportunities for ethnic and gender-specific members of the Civil Air Patrol at the levels of, company and junior grade, field and mid-grade, and general officers.

YGTBFSM!

Quote from: Strick on May 11, 2010, 11:55:30 PM
How about  just doing CAP stuff

Couldn't agree more.  This is merely the latest in a string of idiotic ideas to come from National.

I'm glad we've found a solution to this...

... uh...

problem, wait, what problem?

One way to look at this is that apparently they have the time and energy to put into it.

So things must be going pretty good, and under control.  I.e., no emergencies.

After reading the above description about the committee, I think I understand the true nature of it's existence.  If I am right, the answer will be coming in the next 5 or six weeks..... I will say nothing more on this topic. :-X

Quote
Exceptionally qualified candidates who do not share all the characteristics listed below are welcome to apply. Volunteers who serve on this committee will share most of the following qualification requirements:
 Be executive leaders (CEO/President/Chair/Vice Chair/VP/Chief Officer etc.)
 Be nationally recognized for their promotion of Diversity
 Be willing to attend at least four in-person meetings during the next twelve months
 Be willing to attend at least one conference call not to exceed 90 minutes each month
 Civil Air Patrol Major rank and above
 Attained the Garber Award
 Three or more years as a Civil Air Patrol senior member in good standing. Senior members with outstanding diversity credentials will be considered on an individual basis.

Why do I have the feeling that these characteristics were chosen with a specific set of people in mind?

Quote from: NC Hokie on May 12, 2010, 01:00:11 PM
Why do I have the feeling that these characteristics were chosen with a specific set of people in mind?

Not specific...diverse.  Sheesh.

I can't believe that every post here is pretty much in agreement on this! And now that the diverse membership of CAP Talk have unified, we can dissolve the committee  ;D

I live in a smaller metro of 100k people, and our city has a nationally recognized "Diversity Council" in place. It was even featured on the Today Show! All I've learned out of the many tax-paid community events and required programs in our public schools is this...

1. It makes people of privilege or wealth feel warm and fuzzy about themselves.

2. It gives minorities special attention and a different set of "rules" to live by.

3. Any decision or action made based on the differences of a person or group, even with good intentions, is STILL racism!

"How about just doing CAP stuff."   :clap:

I don't care weather another member is black, brown, white, red, yellow or green. I don't care if they are male or female. I don't care what their choice of romantic partner is. All I care about is: can you do the job you agreed to do and are you causing trouble or not? And no I don't consider somebody else being offended at your race/gender/orientation, as you causing trouble. That's the other person causing trouble in that case.

They are looking for a select group of people with the same quals to head up a commitee about diversty..............how about a new squadron commander, a cadet, a AEO memeber, es officer, Cafdet programs officer, pilot, nurseectc.........they Type of people that make up CAP!!!!!!!!!!!!

Huge waste of time!!

Someone needs to learn how to spell/proofread.  :o

(http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/Desk_of_National_CC_copy_A5AFC3BFC33ED.jpg)

EDIT - That was fast.  ;D

So...this is strange...

I don't have any statistics on this, but how many Wing Commanders and up are/have been a "minority" in the last few years?

I know the last wing commander we had was African American, no one made a big deal about it (nor should they have).

What about units? I know a number of "Minority" units due to location/population make up. It's kinda natural. How do you solve this? Tell people that they can't join unit A because their X-race quota is met, but units B and F are in need of more Xs?

This just creates problems all around.

If we were to establish units in "deep urban" locations, that's all fine and dandy by me. But what about socioeconomic factors? CAP isn't free. It's not as expensive as a Football team or Cheer-leading, but it's not cheap either. So what do we do? Do we waive/discount their membership dues? Do we also issue them BDUs for the cadets for free? Do we also sponsor those cadet's activity fees? Do we send them to NCSAs for free? Where do we get the money for it?

I'm only 20, I'm all for "equality, diversity, etc", but what will this solve?


On a final note, I know ILWG Spring Encampment let a Russian cadet be the C/Commander, so I think we're ok on that front. :P

If the purpose of a "Diversity Committee" is to ensure that CAP as a group is not discriminating against individuals based on race, creed, religion, sexual orientation, etc., I can almost understand it. Almost, since I reject ab initio the idea that CAP has this as a problem. If on the other hand, the idea is to implement recruitment efforts to build a membership that more closely reflects the ethnicity profile of the general population, I find the idea of racial quotas and preferences racist, bigoted, un-American, and repulsive. 

Major Lord

I like how they make it seem like there are minority members standing in line for command and staff level positions who may be getting passed over based on race, creed or ethnic issues.  In my experience when a unit is looking for a commander the member who missed the meeting that night usually finds themselves as the next commander! >:D

Quote from: Flying Pig on May 12, 2010, 10:10:08 PM
...In my experience when a unit is looking for a commander the member who missed the meeting that night usually finds themselves as the next commander! >:D

LOL, very true!
BTW, did you miss a meeting one and found yourself "volunteered"?  >:D

CAP, Incorporated - Solving problems they invented.

The only real issue CAP really has is bringing the cadet program into the inner cities, but in all honesty that's nothing more than NHQ adopting some best practices from some of the wings that already have units in urban areas, like NYWG and National Capitol Wing.

In 20 years, KSWG's had 2 female commanders, 2 black commanders (one as Tuskeegee airman), an Okie, a West Pointer and a couple bozos of the first order and then some. We were freaking diverse long before someone told us we had to be, fer crissakes!

A few comments in favor of this committee and its requirements.

1) The criteria sets the stage for actual professionals who know WTH they're talking about to do the job properly.  Imagine having people at the National level that actually have the ability to think strategically and have experience doing it.  Our NHQ staff is not the place to develop people with potential to do the job.  At this point, I would argue that we need people who can already do it.

2) Diversity doesn't necessarily mean that it's an "affirmative action" program designed to fill the halls with unqualified minorities just for the sake of political correctness.  If I were on the committee;

a) I would take a look at our demographics and wonder why our NB is comprised of 95% white old men. 

b) Why are the millennials and Gen-Xers the most under-represented generation in our organization?

c) How is this going to affect our leadership in years to come? 

d) Why isn't our program appealing to minorities? 

e) Is there something about the way we present ourselves that is causing people from certain social classes or backgrounds to not join?

f) Why are the majority of our members ISTJs?  How do we get more INFPs to balance us out?

g) Does that particular personality type make an effect on the regulatory nature of our organization?  Is it too regulatory and therefore unattractive to people who are a bit different?

All those examples above include expanding out diversity without even bringing into consideration the "we need more black dudes on the National Board."

Your eloquence is exemplary!

Bravo!

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 13, 2010, 04:43:35 AM
...
b) Why are the millennials and Gen-Xers the most under-represented generation in our organization?
...

I'd be happy to discuss that with you.  I've been pressing that issue for some time now.

This whole Diversity thing ... sometimes makes me wonder if they don't mean "Divisive" instead. Sure seems like at times when this gets pushed, thats exactly what ends up happening.

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 13, 2010, 04:43:35 AMb) Why are the millennials and Gen-Xers the most under-represented generation in our organization?

You already answered that:

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 13, 2010, 04:43:35 AMour NB is comprised of 95% white old men.

:)

In all seriousness, the reason our NB is old white men is because middle class retirees are the only ones who can afford to be a Wing CC.

Think about it: you need to attend two board meetings per year, plus the Wing/Region CC Course once, plus the weekly teleconferences with the CAP/CC, plus tend to the hundreds (if not thousands) of E-mails and dozens of phone calls you'll get every month.

And that's just your responsibility to the upper echelons, it doesn't even factor in building a Wing staff, attending conferences and other local activities, overseeing the operations of the Wing, fighting with the Region for A/C and vehicle assets, etc.

Wing Commanders tend to be older because they're the people with the time on their hands.  They're predominantly white and male because that was the primary demographic in the professional/managerial roles amongst Baby Boomers.

Where you need to look are to the Group Commanders (for Wings that have them) and the "Director of X" personnel at the Wing level.  Those are the people next in line for corporate officer roles.  And I think you'll find that they're a more diverse group.  At least, they are in my Wing.  Then again, New York is a diverse population; we're obviously going to have more minorities in leadership positions than, say, Nebraska.

I'm surprised that people are so strongly against this.  It could be done well or badly, IMO.

What would be wrong with, for instance, improving recruitment efforts among demographics that are underrepresented in CAP?  Maybe this committee can figure out whether there's reasons that these groups are underrepresented that are nobody's fault, but accidents of history that could be fixed (e.g. CAP mostly being advertised by word of mouth in a relatively segregated city).

One potential area that I would think this committee could look into, is socioeconomic diversity.  It costs a lot to actively participate in CAP, at least the ES stuff I've done.  Maybe there are ways to alleviate that.

Personally, I would love to see more women join.  Maybe this is a local thing, but when I go to senior-side squadron meetings, I am the only woman there 90% of the time (the other 10% of the time our Legal Officer is there).  I was the only woman in my mission scanner class.  I was the only woman in my ICS-300 class.  I have been the only woman at a SAREX before, and I was the only woman on my recent ELT-hunting mission.  I'm not sure I've been to a CAP function that was more than 25% women.  Maybe there is no reason that women aren't joining.  But maybe there is one!  And if it turns out to be a legitimate problem or misunderstanding or lack of knowledge that could be fixed, it might increase the size of our talent pool.

Lack of diversity can be self-perpetuating.  A prospective member of [group] looks around and sees very few members of [group] in the local squadrons.  The prospective member starts to wonder if there's something about the organization that drives members of [group] away.  S/he doesn't know that there's anything wrong, and hasn't seen anything wrong in the meetings that s/he has checked out, but s/he perceives an increased risk that something is wrong.  And, since s/he is going to be investing a lot of time, money, and energy in this, maybe s/he decides to find a different service organization where there's not this potential risk.

I largely agree with jimmydeano's post.  Also, I turn up in most of the "underrepresented" classes that he mentions or implies, including INFP.  ;D

Being against "diversity" is like being against "safety".   Having a committee to figure out ways to improve our gene pool is a good idea HOWEVER, if it is a front for some political goal, I think it would be a great disservice to CAP and it's members. 

BTW; has anyone read "CAP Insights" on the subject?

Ok, so now I'll shut up.... ;D

Quote from: FW on May 13, 2010, 02:26:06 PM
Being against "diversity" is like being against "safety".   Having a committee to figure out ways to improve our gene pool is a good idea HOWEVER, if it is a front for some political goal, I think it would be a great disservice to CAP and it's members. 

BTW; has anyone read "CAP Insights" on the subject?

Ok, so now I'll shut up.... ;D

I'm against safety.  I figure, everybody else is a safety officer, so why do I need to be one too?  All the safety troubles in 1999 and 2000...I caused them cuz I figured people were being too safe.   >:D

Quote from: Star-Maker on May 13, 2010, 01:49:42 PM
I'm surprised that people are so strongly against this.  It could be done well or badly, IMO.

What would be wrong with, for instance, improving recruitment efforts among demographics that are underrepresented in CAP?  Maybe this committee can figure out whether there's reasons that these groups are underrepresented that are nobody's fault, but accidents of history that could be fixed (e.g. CAP mostly being advertised by word of mouth in a relatively segregated city).

One potential area that I would think this committee could look into, is socioeconomic diversity.  It costs a lot to actively participate in CAP, at least the ES stuff I've done.  Maybe there are ways to alleviate that.

Personally, I would love to see more women join.  Maybe this is a local thing, but when I go to senior-side squadron meetings, I am the only woman there 90% of the time (the other 10% of the time our Legal Officer is there).  I was the only woman in my mission scanner class.  I was the only woman in my ICS-300 class.  I have been the only woman at a SAREX before, and I was the only woman on my recent ELT-hunting mission.  I'm not sure I've been to a CAP function that was more than 25% women.  Maybe there is no reason that women aren't joining.  But maybe there is one!  And if it turns out to be a legitimate problem or misunderstanding or lack of knowledge that could be fixed, it might increase the size of our talent pool.

Lack of diversity can be self-perpetuating.  A prospective member of [group] looks around and sees very few members of [group] in the local squadrons.  The prospective member starts to wonder if there's something about the organization that drives members of [group] away.  S/he doesn't know that there's anything wrong, and hasn't seen anything wrong in the meetings that s/he has checked out, but s/he perceives an increased risk that something is wrong.  And, since s/he is going to be investing a lot of time, money, and energy in this, maybe s/he decides to find a different service organization where there's not this potential risk.

I largely agree with jimmydeano's post.  Also, I turn up in most of the "underrepresented" classes that he mentions or implies, including INFP.  ;D

Awesome, we could have a CAP version of a free lunch program.  All of us who can afford the regular rates still get to pay and those of us less fortunate can get discounted rates on Encampment, Airplane Hourly rates, etc.  Wait, then the rest of us would get stuck paying the bill for the other members who cant.....Am I noticing a trend?
Perhaps if its important to them, individual Squadrons could work out scholarship type programs to sponsor cadets to activities.  No, those scholarships go to the best cadets, not just the cadets with no money so that wouldn't work either.  Seniors don't get scholarships in my book.  If your financial position prevents you from participating, either scale back your participation to an affordable level, or work on improving yourself. 

Oh Darn..  No matter how you slice it, someone has to pay for it.  The day I have to start footing the bill for another adult to participate, Im done.

Quote from: Flying Pig on May 13, 2010, 02:41:34 PM
Awesome, we could have a CAP version of a free lunch program.  All of us who can afford the regular rates still get to pay and those of us less fortunate can get discounted rates on Encampment, Airplane Hourly rates, etc.

Or we could just use it as yet another reason to put a high priority on alleviating burdens on our membership.  HOWEVER, you can give me this discounted airplane hourly rates.  Just me, though.   ;D

Well, to shoot jimmydeanno's eloquence in the foot, what are INFP's and ISTJ's??  And to mess with Star-Maker, looking at your signature stuff, it looks like you are active in CAP and have been in for a little while.  Why haven't YOU recruited more females??  I would think you would be the perfect recruiter for this.  Why aren't women joining?  You should be in the perfect situation to either know or find out.  The reason the old white haired white men are so numerous on the higher levels is that generation is the one that has given the most over the years and continues to do so.  CAP has aged with them.  Most of the younger me-gen's are too busy asking, "What's in it for me?" instead of what can I do to help.  I see no discrimination in CAP and see no reason for a diversity committee made up of a hand-picked crew of cronies with a particular agenda in mind.  This is unneccessary.  As they said in The Losers, "Don't start none, won't be none.".   

Quote from: AirAux on May 13, 2010, 03:19:30 PM
Well, to shoot jimmydeanno's eloquence in the foot, what are INFP's and ISTJ's??

Myers-Briggs personality types.  For others unfamiliar:

Quote
As an ISTJ, your primary mode of living is focused internally, where you take things in via your five senses in a literal, concrete fashion. Your secondary mode is external, where you deal with things rationally and logically.

ISTJs are quiet and reserved individuals who are interested in security and peaceful living. They have a strongly-felt internal sense of duty, which lends them a serious air and the motivation to follow through on tasks. Organized and methodical in their approach, they can generally succeed at any task which they undertake.

ISTJs are very loyal, faithful, and dependable. They place great importance on honesty and integrity. They are "good citizens" who can be depended on to do the right thing for their families and communities. While they generally take things very seriously, they also usually have an offbeat sense of humor and can be a lot of fun - especially at family or work-related gatherings.

ISTJs tend to believe in laws and traditions, and expect the same from others. They're not comfortable with breaking laws or going against the rules. If they are able to see a good reason for stepping outside of the established mode of doing things, the ISTJ will support that effort. However, ISTJs more often tend to believe that things should be done according to procedures and plans. If an ISTJ has not developed their Intuitive side sufficiently, they may become overly obsessed with structure, and insist on doing everything "by the book".

The ISTJ is not naturally in tune with their own feelings and the feelings of others. They may have difficulty picking up on emotional needs immediately, as they are presented. Being perfectionists themselves, they have a tendency to take other people's efforts for granted, like they take their own efforts for granted. They need to remember to pat people on the back once in a while.

ISTJs are likely to be uncomfortable expressing affection and emotion to others.

QuoteThe reason the old white haired white men are so numerous on the higher levels is that generation is the one that has given the most over the years and continues to do so.

Is that anything like giving themselves about 13 trillion in tax breaks for the last 40 years, establishing handout programs that are poised to completely consume our nation's income in about 30 years?  The only thing I see boomers giving us is debt.  Boomers are very much about themselves - hate to tell you.

Those same "old white haired men" also managed to spend CAPs endowments on a racecar, fail to institute proper fundraising methods, and only seem to focus on uniforms and ribbons while spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on destination meetings to do so.

QuoteCAP has aged with them.  Most of the younger me-gen's are too busy asking, "What's in it for me?" instead of what can I do to help.

The only reason that CAP has "aged with them" is because of them.  If they're in charge and have been, then we can definitively point to them as the reason for everyone one of our shortcomings, no?

Harvard Business Review, this month, has an article about mentoring and leading Gen-Xers and Millennials.  It notes that Millennials are the most civic minded, selfless generation since the WWII gen.  Of course your perspective is going to be different because you view them as "being about themselves" because they refuse to blindly follow someone just for the sake of following them.

They do this because your generation has created environments where you can't be truly loyal to something because that something will always view you as expendable.  The same article gives a great example.  A gen-xer is given the opportunity for promotion within a company.  They don't show any signs of being excited because they know there is a stipulation.  The boss says, "But you'll have to relocate to Topeka."  Instead of taking the promotion, the gen-xer quits. 

You see that as only being interested in themselves.  In reality, the Gen-Xer has seen how your generation uses them as a means to an end with layoffs (unlike in your time growing up) actually meaning that you'll never be rehired.  So, gen-xer moves all the way out to Topeka and then gets there just in time for a re-org that gets them layed off.  I suppose you would say that they should be happy that they have a nice apartment in Topeka.

It also points out that the boomers like to train Gen-Xers for a position and then hire their children. 

QuoteI see no discrimination in CAP and see no reason for a diversity committee made up of a hand-picked crew of cronies with a particular agenda in mind.  This is unneccessary.

Diversity does not equate to discrimination.  CAP isn't racist and has good anti-discrimination policy.  We have folks of varying backgrounds, but statistically, they're pretty much all the same people with different backgrounds. 

People need to stop the "affirmative action" perspective, because that isn't what it is.

I don't understand how finding ways to include more people in our organization is a bad thing.

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 13, 2010, 04:25:16 PM

QuoteCAP has aged with them.  Most of the younger me-gen's are too busy asking, "What's in it for me?" instead of what can I do to help.

The only reason that CAP has "aged with them" is because of them.  If they're in charge and have been, then we can definitively point to them as the reason for everyone one of our shortcomings, no?

Harvard Business Review, this month, has an article about mentoring and leading Gen-Xers and Millennials.  It notes that Millennials are the most civic minded, selfless generation since the WWII gen.  Of course your perspective is going to be different because you view them as "being about themselves" because they refuse to blindly follow someone just for the sake of following them.
...

I'm going to have to agree with jimmy on this one.  This was a HUGE topic at the National Conference on Volunteering and Service last year.  It was heavily discussed and I've been spending a lot of time studying it and working in this area since.  It's easier for me because I am one.  There is a massive generational gap in CAP - in some units more than others (wings included, maybe especially). 

So, if these are the points on the agenda:

8) The establishment and maintenance of fair promotion and command opportunities for ethnic and gender-specific members of the Civil Air Patrol.

9) An assessment of pre-command staff and activity assignments of ethnic and gender-specific members of the Civil Air Patrol.

10) An assessment of command selection of ethnic and gender- specific members of the Civil Air Patrol.

14) The existence and maintenance of fair promotion, assignment, and command opportunities for ethnic and gender-specific members of the Civil Air Patrol at the levels of, company and junior grade, field and mid-grade, and general officers.

How these are not to be construed as "affirmative action" if there is not a discrimination problem in CAP at the present time??  These are unneccessary if we are not discriminating now.. 

What is with this terminology?  "gender-specific" - isn't most everyone of a specific gender?

Perhaps not as we now have the transgender species.. I wonder what the quota will be on them?? 

Quote from: FW on May 12, 2010, 01:51:10 AM
This is an interesting thread.  I was a spectator at the winter NB meeting when this concept was introduced by our national commander.  I have no objection to a diverse membership and, of course, a diverse leadership.  However, as has been said in earlier threads, what is our current demographics in relationship to the populations where our units are located?  Do we need to start units in areas which are underserved?  Do we try to recruit in areas where minority populations are more prevalent?  Can the school programs serve to increase the diversity of our membership?  I would like to think these kind of questions will be dealt with in committee discussions. 

The questions you present above, may not have in reality a good answer.  The key issue is members time available & money to form new units.   Also I hate to say this but even the Armed Forces found some zip codes in large cities are not cost effective to recruit from because of the high dropout rate prior to first duty station.   

Unfortunately we can't save everybody (or get everyone to join CAP to mirror the population diversity) and those involved currently with inner city school programs will tell you its' a real challenge.

RM

Quote from: AirAux on May 13, 2010, 03:19:30 PM
And to mess with Star-Maker, looking at your signature stuff, it looks like you are active in CAP and have been in for a little while.  Why haven't YOU recruited more females??

Working on it.  :D  I've got a couple of friends who are interested, after hearing me talk about it.  Both are undergrads, so I'll press them further after finals are over.

Quote from: AirAux on May 13, 2010, 05:32:08 PM
Perhaps not as we now have the transgender species.. I wonder what the quota will be on them?? 

Just to clarify, transgender people do have a gender.

Quote from: Flying Pig on May 13, 2010, 02:41:34 PM
Awesome, we could have a CAP version of a free lunch program.  All of us who can afford the regular rates still get to pay and those of us less fortunate can get discounted rates on Encampment, Airplane Hourly rates, etc.  Wait, then the rest of us would get stuck paying the bill for the other members who cant.....Am I noticing a trend?
Perhaps if its important to them, individual Squadrons could work out scholarship type programs to sponsor cadets to activities.  No, those scholarships go to the best cadets, not just the cadets with no money so that wouldn't work either.  Seniors don't get scholarships in my book.  If your financial position prevents you from participating, either scale back your participation to an affordable level, or work on improving yourself. 

Oh Darn..  No matter how you slice it, someone has to pay for it.  The day I have to start footing the bill for another adult to participate, Im done.

I was under the impression that seniors who have achieved a senior rating in a specialty track can already get some CAP scholarships: http://www.capmembers.com/cadet_programs/opportunities/scholarships/index.cfm

But I was more thinking along the lines of, is there anything we can do to make CAP cheaper for everyone?  That would encourage socioeconomic diversity.  Maybe there is not, but maybe there is, in which case, I bet a lot of members would appreciate it regardless of wealth.

Or, to look at the other side of the coin, maybe people assume that CAP is more expensive than it actually is, and/or that certain costly optional things are mandatory, and don't join for that reason.  If that were a problem, it could be fixed by marketing.

There is a time when the gender of the transgender is in a state of trans and therefore of a neutral or perhaps pleural gender.  This state can last for quite some period of time depending upon finances and procedures.  It ain't an overnight miracle.. and to be truthful, I am not sure it is ever fully corrected or completed.. It's so hard to correct God's work.. To put it biologically, it is never as perfect as God could have done if he hadn't messed up in the first place (Forgive me Father, for I am only quoting others here)..     Oh, PSS, Thank you for the recruiting effort, keep it up..

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 13, 2010, 04:25:16 PMHarvard Business Review, this month, has an article about mentoring and leading Gen-Xers and Millennials.  It notes that Millennials are the most civic minded, selfless generation since the WWII gen.  Of course your perspective is going to be different because you view them as "being about themselves" because they refuse to blindly follow someone just for the sake of following them...

And for additional perspective, the following are excerpts about Millennials/Nexters (born 1982 - 2000) from some generational training material I have:

Quote
Nexters were born into technology, first using computers as toddlers[1]. Their parents were very focused on them and tended to over-plan their lives...

...Their fun-loving parents indulged them as children, giving them a role in family purchasing and travel decisions as never before seen. Nexters are seen as self-absorbed, with a stronger sense of entitlement then Xers. Having grown up as latchkey kids and children of divorce they are independent, competitive, eager to spend money, and place enjoying life over work. Nexters are seen as optimistic, confident, social, and tolerant[1]...

...Nexters are collaborative and prefer to have several mentors. They are effective in teams with strong leadership; however they do not like to be micromanaged. Having been bombarded by stimuli their entire lives nexters can multitask well[1]...

... They also perform best with structure and may not relate well to the independent Xers and boomers; however nexters do have affinity with seniors...

...Nexters prefer to have time to orient to a new job. Training should create a clear picture of the work environment, both positives and negatives[1]...

...Nexter learning shares the same major obstacle as Xers' learning; it's expensive... Nexters may not learn and apply skills as quickly as the organization needs if given too much discretion on learning speed. The follow-up exercises require the involvement of others, taking them away from executing their core role jobs. However, the biggest disadvantage to this learning method is one shared by all those previously suggested: it doesn't bring the four workplace generations together under one cohesive learning strategy...

Common Attributes
Common Attribute: Need to multitask to be engaged/Need constant audio/visual stimulation to be engaged (A,C,D)
Perception: Flighty, not paying attention, not accountable.

What this means for employers

• Using PowerPoint, printed handouts and one way lectures do not impress millennials – see the employer as non-innovative (c)
• If stimulation and rewards are not present in training, job performance could suffer (d)
• Learn better to quicker paced, high interaction training that provides choices. (d)
• Leads to selective hearing based on the abundance of images/resources.
• Employers also need to train employees the perception of their multi-tasking: That listening to your iPod or texting at a meeting could be perceived as a lack of respect and offensive to others. (g)
• Train them on technology etiquette – what is expected of them and what they can expect from others
• According to a study by Spherion (staffing firm in FL) – "90 percent of 18-24 year olds feel that listening to an iPod while working improves their job satisfaction and productivity"

jimmydeano: 

I don't necessarily disagree with your points - they are good ones.  However, I see absolutely no need for a 'Diversity Committee', particularly in the way it's been communicated thus far, to address those points - nor will it.   As it stands, the Diversity Committee communication states (my emphasis):

QuoteThe committee shall conduct a comprehensive evaluation and assessment of CAP's current demographics and its policies and practices that provide opportunities or erect barriers to the recruitment, retention and advancement of women and minorities. The committee shall produce a plan with specific, measurable, actionable, realistic, and time sensitive goals to achieve a membership and leadership proportionally representative in gender, race, and ethnicity of the general population of the United States in the Civil Air Patrol.

What does that sound like to you?  It sounds like a different objective than the one you suggest. 

Furthermore, as someone pointed out earlier, it continues on to essentially define the make-up of this committee so as to ensure that it's comprised of those same old white guys.  A diversity council with a non-diverse committee.  Cool.

...or perhaps when they say "Senior members with outstanding diversity credentials", they really mean "women and minorities"?

Big thumbs down on the whole idea.

Quote from: FW on May 12, 2010, 11:43:20 AM
After reading the above description about the committee, I think I understand the true nature of it's existence.  If I am right, the answer will be coming in the next 5 or six weeks..... I will say nothing more on this topic. :-X

Didn't retired USAF Brig Gen Wilma Vaught also make a presentation recently to the board on "diversity" :o

Interestingly, when BG Vaught was the Commander of Military Entrance Processing Command, she was a regular visitor to our processing station in Baltimore where I was one of the officers assigned to this joint service activity, since she maintained her home in the Washington D.C. area even while station at Great Lakes NB IL.  The officer staff on two ocassions went to lunch and supper with her.  She was a fine officer who was very perceptive about the organization she lead and always kept the 65 processing locations & two sector commands on their toes :clap:

General Vaught is now primarily involved with "Women In Military Service For America Memorial" and you all might want to take some time to read her biography.  I think this will give you an idea about what her presentation about "diversity" was all about.
RM
           

A. - not a bad summation you quoted.  I've done better than they, though.   >:D  Where is it from?

Non-Profits receiving FEDERAL MONEY have to show a diversity breakdown and provide their "non0discrimination action plan" to get OBAMA Money now.

Come on people, do none of you read the daily papers, watch the news tickers on FOX, MSNBC, CNN etc??

This is all about CAP continuing to get federal funding, nothing more and NOTHING LESS.

So, Spike, you're saying that we are going to develop an affirmative action plan and that's all?  No implementing that plan or anything disasterous??  I guess Obama will go right along with that, huh?  You don't really believe that do you??

Quote from: Spike"non0discrimination action plan"

So... Can we then just add a bullschmit "Non-discrimination Statement" to the end of our bullschmidt "Safety Pledge" that's already required to be said at every meeting/activity and call it good? I'd like federal funding to continue OR even improve! :)

And please... The title of "President" should also be used when reffering to our current, or any past Commander in Chief here. Don't let this jack the thred, I'm just saying it's the proper thing to do.

^ What US Code section states "citizens will address the President as "President"??  Guess I just got used to saying the name of the person because everybody and their Mother would just say "Bush" a few months ago.......

Makes you think.........

Quote from: Spike on May 24, 2010, 05:37:29 PM
^ What US Code section states "citizens will address the President as "President"??  Guess I just got used to saying the name of the person because everybody and their Mother would just say "Bush" a few months ago.......

Makes you think.........

He's not my commander in chief since I'm not in the military. Yes he is the president but I just say the man's name. It's quicker. I do that for all of the presidents weather I'm a fan of them or not.

CAP just ought to accept it if they are receiving the freebies the USAF is giving them along with any Federal grant FEMA, State or local.

Sure it's unwarranted in a corporate 501(c)3 as everyone here likes to claim....but the "corporation" is receiving those "free" aircraft to do all those "Missions for America" aren't they?  So get in line with everyone one else and accept it

The Federal Agencies went through this approx 20-35 yrs ago

CAP........just do the same

Obama is not our Commander in Chief.  You need to learn the chain of command for our organization.  We are a corporation and he isn't the president or chairman of the board.. And to get back to the main beef, we have no discrimination problem in CAP yet, but we will have if we start appointing people to positions based upon gender or race.. 

Ok, nevermind the "Commander in Chief" bit. I was just trying to not be repetitious with the word President.

QuoteWhat US Code section states "citizens will address the President as "President"??

Really? You need a regulation to be respectful? C'mon, man...
I very rarely threw out just "Bush" in reference to #43 -- especially when in the roll of a CAP member. Just like I never say "Courter" without General in front of her name. The "Courtesy" part of our "Customs and Courtesies" - as CAP members AND citizens - shouldn't slack EVEN when it comes to politicians... And I don't even like politicians!!  >:D

And now back to the thread...

I didn't catch it, but how many people will serve on Diversity Committee?

Do you think it will be an accurate representation of our membership's sex, age, race, religionand culture makeup?
Or will it be purposefully lacking of the older white male members that are most attracted to our organization. If they don't need or want these types of members, why don't they just say so - Be honest and direct with something like this for once!

Quote from: alamrcn on May 24, 2010, 07:13:21 PM

Or will it be purposefully lacking of the older white male members that are most attracted to our organization.

Looking at the requirements they listed, the board will only be made of those types of people.

Quote from: alamrcn on May 24, 2010, 07:13:21 PM

QuoteWhat US Code section states "citizens will address the President as "President"??

Really? You need a regulation to be respectful? C'mon, man...

There may not be anything that says "citizens will..."  That sounds a bit too authoritarian to me, free speech and all that.  But I have no doubt of there being something that details the official form of address.

Yeah, OK.  There is NOTHING enforceable the requires me, as a private citizen, to address any member of government by any title.  I can call Obama "Big Funky B" if I want to.  There may be some etiquette outlined somewhere, but no law.

Quote from: JC004 on May 23, 2010, 02:30:59 AM
A. - not a bad summation you quoted.  I've done better than they, though.   >:D  Where is it from?

The quotes are from some generational training materials designed for leaders at a Fortune 100 company.   However, many large companies have similar training programs.   As a matter of fact, I came across this article today:
Millenials At Work, Kraft's Innovative Approach To Mentoring (http://www.supermarketguru.com/index.cfm/go/sg.viewArticle/articleId/1274)   

Quote from: Flying Pig"Big Funky B"

LOL, love it...
I'm not sure if you go by Bob or not, but you should add that to your signature line as your either your middle name, or an "aka" tag.

So, I guess we'll see how fast this committee is put together, and if it's mostly going to be on paper and run through e-mails. The federal funding point was a good one, and I agree that it may be just for that purpose.

As we've ALL said here:
We don't care who or what your are statistically or biologically...
Do you want to pay $60/year, volunteer as much of your own time as your comfortable with, and follow our rules... You're hired! If you want to volunteer even more of your time and money, and are fairly good at your CAP duties... You're promoted!

The issue with a  diversity (political correctness) committee is the minority group forces its desire/decisions on the majority under  the
guise of fairness.  I would be very offended to be promoted just because I was this or that, and not on qualifications or merit.  I have seen this happen in the military and business.  I honestly  hope the
leadership of this organization doesn't head down this road.     

Quote from: A.Member on May 25, 2010, 08:01:40 PM

Quote from: JC004 on May 23, 2010, 02:30:59 AM
A. - not a bad summation you quoted.  I've done better than they, though.   >:D  Where is it from?

The quotes are from some generational training materials designed for leaders at a Fortune 100 company.   However, many large companies have similar training programs.   As a matter of fact, I came across this article today:
Millenials At Work, Kraft's Innovative Approach To Mentoring (http://www.supermarketguru.com/index.cfm/go/sg.viewArticle/articleId/1274)

hmmm.  ty.

Quote from: JC004 on May 27, 2010, 04:24:42 AM
hmmm.  ty.

np :)

Theres a Kraft plant where I am.  Great place to scope out vehicle stops and nab wanted parolees and dopers. Keep up on the mentoring!

I have to admit that I am a little disappointed by the reaction of some of the other CAPTalkers here.  Some one says the word “Diversity” and the talk immediately goes to affirmative action.  Does CAP need to be more diverse?  Unquestionably.  We need to focus on recruiting more socio-economically challenged individuals, particularly from urban areas.  But CAP also fails to reach Blacks and Hispanics on a cultural level as well.  See post I made some time ago:

Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on February 09, 2010, 04:51:35 AM
I disagree about race not playing a part.  Yes, this is the 21st Century, but race is still important, particularly within the cadet ranks.

Civil Air Patrol is for all people.  There was another thread about this (I'm not going to go find it), but the vast majority of cadets appear to be Caucasian.  The demographics would be able to help tell us if we are reaching all audiences.  For example, I live in Little Rock, AR.  We run about 50-50, with a very small Hispanic and virtually non-existent Asian population.  However, when I first joined LRCS, there was only one Black cadet out of 15.  That told me we were not reaching 50% of our recruiting pool.  I also noticed that we would occasionally have Black prospects, but they wouldn't come back after the first meeting.  I ended up calling a couple back and the parents said they were not comfortable because there weren't any Black cadets or seniors in the group.

I wanted the demographics to more reflect the community.  First I recruited my wife (who is Black, I'm Caucasian) and my step-daughter.  Then, I began a focused recruiting drive in the LR Schools that resulted in a very mixed Open House.  It has been almost a year, but the results are paying off.  Now we have 10 Black cadets out of 47 cadets.  My wife, now a 2nd Lt., has told me that the parents of Black prospects almost always ask her all the time about how race is handled in the squadron, if her daughter likes the program, what she thinks of how the black cadets are treated, etc.  The issue of race relations/ratios is very important to the Black community in what seems to be an almost all White program.  My wife said the only reason she was comfortable with her daughter participating was because of me.

Unfortunately, we have had a few of the original cadets drop out because they didn’t like the changes.

I think the squadron has improved with the changes.  We have also seen an increase in the number of senior members who are of minority. I still think that it is important for CAP to look at demographics, including race, to see how effective our recruiting efforts are and where we need to improve.  After all, we are the American Civil Air Patrol.

I disagree with the Diversity Committee as charged.  I think the gender and race representation for commanders is demographically representative of the current senior member / grade representation.   And the key to true diverse leadership is proper training so as to take advantage of promotional opportunities when they arise.  CAP does a good job of that with its’ ProDev Program.  Where I think we need a Diversity Committee is in the area of recruiting and retention.

Before I was married to a Black, I was married to a Hispanic.  I have seen both cultures from an “inside” perspective.  I understand both of these cultures, along with my own (Midwest Caucasian); I have also learned how to inter-culturally commuinicate.  I am currently working on putting a CAP School Enrichment Program into a public school that is 90% African American and Hispanic.  One of the reasons I am being taken seriously by the school administration is because of my reputation at the LRPD as a culturally diverse individual and leader.  Additionally, under my leadership, our racial and gender diversity at the squadron has improved 300%

Unfortunately, because I am not a mover & shaker, nor high enough in CAP grade, my thoughts, insights, and expereince will be ignored by those with the power to make changes.  We will have some folks that are familiar with diversity training, some folks that intend to do good, and some that are intent on whitewashing the situation.  But will this committee have anyone that has lived diversity, has faced the challenges of integrating into another culture, can communicate this insight?  Probably not.

Without changes, CAP will still be 78% Caucasian and the Blacks & Hispanics won’t be participating.  (Caucasian percentage would be higher if it was not for the SEPs across the country)  THAT is what we need a Diversity Committee about, NOT about whether our commanders are gender and racially diverse.  Unfortunately, I do not see the Diversity Committee doing anything other than paying lip-service to the idea of diversity.  Only directing resources at changing the way we do business will change my opinion.

Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on May 28, 2010, 07:05:26 PM
I have to admit that I am a little disappointed by the reaction of some of the other CAPTalkers here.  Some one says the word "Diversity" and the talk immediately goes to affirmative action.  Does CAP need to be more diverse?  Unquestionably.  We need to focus on recruiting more socio-economically challenged individuals, particularly from urban areas.

Absent funding to support that idea, how, exactly, would you like to do that?

Putting a recruiting table up and passing out applications in historically underserved areas doesn't provide the money, transportation, or even the interest in CAP just because NHQ says it should.

Airports and military installations have dried up significantly over the last 20 years - those were the places that supported CAP and generated interest.  At least in my AOR, the reason there is no unit in "x" area is because there is little interest there.

Quote from: A.Member on May 25, 2010, 08:01:40 PM

Quote from: JC004 on May 23, 2010, 02:30:59 AM
A. - not a bad summation you quoted.  I've done better than they, though.   >:D  Where is it from?

The quotes are from some generational training materials designed for leaders at a Fortune 100 company.   However, many large companies have similar training programs.   As a matter of fact, I came across this article today:
Millenials At Work, Kraft's Innovative Approach To Mentoring (http://www.supermarketguru.com/index.cfm/go/sg.viewArticle/articleId/1274)   

QuoteAccording to a study by Spherion (staffing firm in FL) – "90 percent of 18-24 year olds feel that listening to an iPod while working improves their job satisfaction and productivity"

Here I am, typing this at work with one headphone in, connected to my iPod. :)

Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on May 28, 2010, 07:05:26 PM
We need to focus on recruiting more socio-economically challenged individuals, particularly from urban areas.  But CAP also fails to reach Blacks and Hispanics on a cultural level as well. 

Eclipse covered the money angle pretty well. The problem is not a racial one, but a cultural one. Picture an inner city youth. His race is irrelevant but do you honestly think the values we hold dear are compatible with the ones glorified in inner urban culture? We can not be everything to everyone so we should just be what we are. If we don't have units in location XYZ then why force it?

Quote from: Eclipse on May 28, 2010, 07:10:14 PM

Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on May 28, 2010, 07:05:26 PM
I have to admit that I am a little disappointed by the reaction of some of the other CAPTalkers here.  Some one says the word “Diversity” and the talk immediately goes to affirmative action.  Does CAP need to be more diverse?  Unquestionably.  We need to focus on recruiting more socio-economically challenged individuals, particularly from urban areas.

Absent funding to support that idea, how, exactly, would you like to do that?

Putting a recruiting table up and passing out applications in historically underserved areas doesn't provide the money, transportation, or even the interest in CAP just because NHQ says it should.

Airports and military installations have dried up significantly over the last 20 years - those were the places that supported CAP and generated interest.  At least in my AOR, the reason there is no unit in "x" area is because there is little interest there.

It doesn't have to be fixed with direct funding from National.  We didn’t get any money.  The biggest part of our success was speaking to the culture of the prospects.  Of making them feel comfortable with us.  Of demonstrating that we recognize the different culture and communicating in the logic of the culture.  We have kids of all races come in that are not economically advantaged.  We have to convince them that CAP is WORTH the spare money the family has. 

With help & training from NHQ, this can be spread out to all the squadrons; an example of something they have already done is print the Parents Guide in Spanish for Hispanics.  That’s an obvious.  What isn’t so obvious would be an example of emphasizing the Moral Leadership portion when speaking with Blacks over saying the cool summer activities they can do.  Or being sure to address the majority of conversation with the male head-of-household when speaking with a Hispanic family, emphasis how the cadet would learn skills (leadership, exposure to different careers, etc) for job opportunities.

Quote from: davidsinn on May 28, 2010, 07:45:58 PM

Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on May 28, 2010, 07:05:26 PM
We need to focus on recruiting more socio-economically challenged individuals, particularly from urban areas.  But CAP also fails to reach Blacks and Hispanics on a cultural level as well. 

Eclipse covered the money angle pretty well. The problem is not a racial one, but a cultural one. Picture an inner city youth. His race is irrelevant but do you honestly think the values we hold dear are compatible with the ones glorified in inner urban culture? We can not be everything to everyone so we should just be what we are. If we don't have units in location XYZ then why force it?

So we shouldn't even try to get those youths that might see us as an alternative to what the sterotype of inner urban culture is?

CAP is here.  If there are people in those areas interested in starting a unit, apply for a charter and start a unit.  Seems to me that nobody is interested.  My Squadron is located smack in the middle of the HOOD!  Right next door to the mental hospital and County Social Services and across the street from an inner city church.  Guess what.......not many of the locals have joined. Nor has its location prevented me from recruiting some outstanding members and also being CAWGs top Squadron and Pacific Regions Squadron of Merit. And believe me, I have a pretty diverse group. (Hey, what good are awards if you cant use them to support your argument!) ;D

Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on May 28, 2010, 07:51:52 PM

Quote from: davidsinn on May 28, 2010, 07:45:58 PM

Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on May 28, 2010, 07:05:26 PM
We need to focus on recruiting more socio-economically challenged individuals, particularly from urban areas.  But CAP also fails to reach Blacks and Hispanics on a cultural level as well. 

Eclipse covered the money angle pretty well. The problem is not a racial one, but a cultural one. Picture an inner city youth. His race is irrelevant but do you honestly think the values we hold dear are compatible with the ones glorified in inner urban culture? We can not be everything to everyone so we should just be what we are. If we don't have units in location XYZ then why force it?

So we shouldn't even try to get those youths that might see us as an alternative to what the sterotype of inner urban culture is?

I've had cadets with similar attitudes to that culture. They were nothing but trouble and actually caused harm to my unit by driving off other cadets. If a cadet would like to join us as a way to get out then I welcome them. I will not change my values nor compromise the program to do it though.

I have told many people that if they want to join, fine.  We are not social workers, psychologists or probation officers.  The program stays how it is.  If you want to join your welcome as long as you meet the requirements.  Beyond that, you dont play nice or try to make the program something its not, there is the door.

QuoteDoes CAP need to be more diverse?  Unquestionably.

I ask this in a philosophical, not judgemental mannor... Why?
How would targeting groups that lack numbers in our membership benefit our program? I understand how this may be important in other things, but I'm wondering about Civil Air Patrol's specifically.

QuoteWe need to focus on recruiting more socio-economically challenged individuals, particularly from urban areas.

When we recruit, we target high probability groups of like-minded people with similar interests related to Civil Air Patrol's programs. People at airshows, military related events, schools and community service events are all potential members. Where could we focus on minority and urban recruiting? The YMCA and Boys and Girls Club are two places I can think of where there are fewer white suburbanites than the other places I mentioned.

Quote from: Flying Pig on May 28, 2010, 08:16:40 PM
I have told many people that if they want to join, fine.  We are not social workers, psychologists or probation officers.  The program stays how it is.  If you want to join your welcome as long as you meet the requirements.  Beyond that, you dont play nice or try to make the program something its not, there is the door.

Absolutely.  We should not compromise who we are - at all. Nowhere have I said that we should change the program at all.  I have not made a singe change in the program for our new Black & Hispanic cadets.  What I am saying is that CAP should at least make efforts to diversify - which means we have to figure out why CAP is 78% Caucasian when America is not 78% Caucasian. 
FlyingPig - have you reached out to the youth pastor of the inner-city church next to your squadron about holding a recruiting presentation at the church?  When you were still pushing a sled around the city, did you not see some diamonds that would have been wonderful cadets if they only knew about the program?  I know I did - hundreds of them. 

Quote from: davidsinn on May 28, 2010, 08:09:22 PM
I've had cadets with similar attitudes to that culture. They were nothing but trouble and actually caused harm to my unit by driving off other cadets. If a cadet would like to join us as a way to get out then I welcome them. I will not change my values nor compromise the program to do it though.

Are all inner-city youth bad?

Quote from: alamrcn on May 28, 2010, 11:13:36 PM
I ask this in a philosophical, not judgemental mannor... Why?
How would targeting groups that lack numbers in our membership benefit our program? I understand how this may be important in other things, but I'm wondering about Civil Air Patrol's specifically.

Really???  Would not CAP be better if our cadets were exposed to people of different cultures / ethnicities?  How would that exposure be bad?  Can we not learn from these cadets of color just as we learn from Caucasian cadets?  Isn’t our job to prepare cadets for the future – which includes interacting with people of all races, creeds, religions, etc? 

**Comment redacted due to emotional content **

And we don’t need a Diversity Committee?  I’m beginning to think that CAP needs Diversity Training.

Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on May 28, 2010, 07:50:28 PMWith help & training from NHQ, this can be spread out to all the squadrons; an example of something they have already done is print the Parents Guide in Spanish for Hispanics.  That's an obvious.  What isn't so obvious would be an example of emphasizing the Moral Leadership portion when speaking with Blacks over saying the cool summer activities they can do.  Or being sure to address the majority of conversation with the male head-of-household when speaking with a Hispanic family, emphasis how the cadet would learn skills (leadership, exposure to different careers, etc) for job opportunities.

Its called "Character Development" now, and while I'm certainly not one to be PC about these things, I believe the preferred term is "African American".

Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on May 29, 2010, 12:14:30 AM
Absolutely.  We should not compromise who we are - at all. Nowhere have I said that we should change the program at all.  I have not made a singe change in the program for our new Black & Hispanic cadets.  What I am saying is that CAP should at least make efforts to diversify - which means we have to figure out why CAP is 78% Caucasian when America is not 78% Caucasian.

As of 2008, the US population is 75% white, I'd say that's pretty close.

Frankly, your attitude, or at least the way you are coming off in these threads, is exactly the concern - you're assuming "diversity" means ethnicity, and I'd be willing to be that isn't what NHQ is about either.

CAP is local, and my units represent their local demographics, with a skew towards male, because for the most part, males are interested in the military, aviation, and things with lights and buttons.  The opportunities are available to all, and those opportunities dried up in many areas because there simply was no interest in them, and with CAP especially, the effort and initiative to be successful.  My wing has had more units dry up near military bases and in traditionally WASPish areas as in the "inner city" you keep referring to.

Why?  Because there is no culture of public service and effort anymore, we have built an entitlement society and we are reaping what we have sown.  We all want badges for showing up, and anything that takes two thoughts or can't be done "online" is "too much hassle".

"Diversity" means a lot more than ethnicity, and CAP isn't going to fix the culture of the military, aviation, industry, and inter-gender relations with some posters and a committee.

QuoteReally???  Would not CAP be better if our cadets were exposed to people of different cultures / ethnicity's?

I consider Civil Air Patrol to be a culture, and a member's color or other social difference outside the CAP program irrelevant. Is a cadet's CAP experience with a member of another race going to be any more or less beneficial than with one of his own race? Let me be VERY clear, I am NOT talking about separatism at all! I'm just trying to figure out exactly what would actually be the benefit of intentionally trying to diversify recruitment rather than just let it happen on its own.

QuoteCan we not learn from these cadets of color just as we learn from Caucasian cadets?

Of course we can! We can learn to march, use a compass, or build a model rocket from a member of any color... Or am I missing that a member of a different race would do these things differently?

Not understanding why we should purposefully seek out diversity in membership, rather than just let it happen naturally, doesn't make me a biggot in need of special "training". I just don't care about a member's race or culture or sex... I care about how they can set that stuff aside and just do their CAP duty along side me.

Quote from: Eclipse on May 29, 2010, 12:53:55 AM
Frankly, your attitude, or at least the way you are coming off in these threads, is exactly the concern - you're assuming "diversity" means ethnicity, and I'd be willing to be that isn't what NHQ is about either.

CAP is local, and my units represent their local demographics, with a skew towards male, because for the most part, males are interested in the military, aviation, and things with lights and buttons.  The opportunities are available to all, and those opportunities dried up in many areas because there simply was no interest in them, and with CAP especially, the effort and initiative to be successful.  My wing has had more units dry up near military bases and in traditionally WASPish areas as in the "inner city" you keep referring to.
...

"Diversity" means a lot more than ethnicity, and CAP isn't going to fix the culture of the military, aviation, industry, and inter-gender relations with some posters and a committee.

Yes – Diversity does mean more than that – but that is not what NHQ is looking at.  Here is paragraph three of the Diversity Committee Charter (emphasis mine):

3. Objectives and Scope of Activities: The committee shall conduct a comprehensive evaluation and assessment of CAP's current demographics and its policies and practices that provide opportunities or erect barriers to the recruitment, retention and advancement of women and minorities. The committee shall produce a plan with specific, measurable, actionable, realistic, and time sensitive goals to achieve a diverse membership and leadership in the Civil Air Patrol.

I understand that squadrons are local, and some squadrons may not have a diverse population to recruit from; but let's take a look at the pictures used in NHQ publications:
Great Start: 8 cadets, 1 of whom is a minority
Cadet Staff Handbook: 3 cadets, 0 minority
Respect on Display (the most diverse publication): 11 cadets, 2 of whom are a minority
Investing in America's Youth: 38 cadets, 2 of whom are a minority

Let's say you use Investing in America's Youth as a recruiting tool.  What do you think a prospect (who is a minority) thinks when they see there are only two minorities out of all those cadets? 
They DON'T think "Hmm, there are only two minorities in this publication.  I don't think I'll join because there aren't more pictures of minorities." 
They DO think "Hmm, I don't see hardly anybody like me, so I probably won't like CAP."  People join organizations because they can see themselves in them.  When presented with pictures that don't show people like them in the picture, they will subconsciously not want to join becasue they can't see themselves in the picture.

Conversely, look at all the females in the pictures.  They are well represented and therefore davidsinn has a squadron of almost all girls. 

All I am saying is that Blacks and Hispanics are under-represented in CAP.  We need to look at why that is.
Should we change the program – No. 
Should we change what CAP does – No. 
Should we change the CAP culture – No. 
Should we abandon or ignore our current recruiting "pool" – No.
Should we change anything about CAP - Yes, but not for the sake of race or gender. 
However, I know there are youth and adults in the community that would benefit CAP that are of non-Caucasian descent that CAP is currently not reaching.  Like Eclipse said –

Quote from: Eclipse on May 29, 2010, 12:53:55 AMWhy?  Because there is no culture of public service and effort anymore, we have built an entitlement society and we are reaping what we have sown.  We all want badges for showing up, and anything that takes two thoughts or can't be done "online" is "too much hassle".

He's right - there is not a culture of public service anymore.  Do we not try to influence that through our organization?  We may not be able to fix it, but do we still not make a difference by instilling some sense of public service in our youth?  So what is wrong with making a targeted attempt at recruiting, retaining, and working with minority groups that are under-represented in CAP?  Is it because the issue of race and gender are taboo in America?  Is it because people don't deem the results worth the energy expended?  WHY?
Our core values are INTEGRITY (to act on a conviction in the belief of this country that all people are worthy of RESPECT), VOLUNTEERISM (to give of oneself for the betterment of the community), RESPECT (to recognize each person's fundamental worth and value diversity), and EXCELELNCE (to surpass what is expected and strive for better results).  Can someone tell me how some of the previous thoughts expressed in this thread do not violate our core values?

I'm sorry, but I just do not see why a lot of people are so against the idea of actively working to make CAP a more diverse organization.

Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on May 29, 2010, 02:34:13 PM
...but I just do not see why a lot of people are so against the idea of actively working to make CAP a more diverse organization.

Its not that people are "against it", its that mandates from on high like these tend to be more chaff than wheat, but cause a lot of extra work for everyone.

I suppose that I'm for any initatives that might help us recruit more members, but why not focus on a major problem that we have right now? 

CAP is critically short of mission pilots on a nationwide basis.  We have only 3.8 mission pilots per corporate aircraft, which puts us in the "Red" zone according to our readiness standards (Red<4, Yellow 4-4.9, Green >5).  We don't have a single region in the Green and most are in the Red. 

While I am never shy of giving CAP a hard time for focusing too much on pilots, even I recognize that we barely have enough to guarantee mission availability.  If we need any special committee to focus on recruitment issues, it should focus on why we barely have enough pilots to take care of business.  I suspect the increasing focus on regional response is primarily because so many wings no longer can handle their own missions due to lack of mission pilots. 

The diversity thing just hasn't worked out for America.  If you look at stats, since the civil rights movement started, the percentage of young black men serving time in prison has continually increased and is many times the rate of young white or even latino, which has also increased.  The percentage of black, unmarried females has likewise increased.  Many, many latinos are here illegally and are therefore criminals.  With the new cadet standards regarding social security number proof and higher scrutiny on cadet arrests it would be hard to cater to some of these groups.  It's all about values and the values of our minorities have sunk since the beginning of civil rights and the sense of entitlements.  Blacks have a much higher percentage of recipients than others on government giveaway programs, such as supplemental security income. Many of these have to do with a failure of family values and it is not CAP's responsibility to attempt to instill these in a group of 12 year olds.  Sounds racist.. only reality.. Unfortunately, these are not opinions, just statistics..   Oh, by the way, learning to speak more to the male figure of a latino family is reinforcing their cultural differences, not reinforcing the concept that this is America and if you want to be here, you should do it our way and not the way it is back home.  We can't be everything to everybody.. Maybe we should all learn to speak Spanish so we can better recruit them??  I guess we will then change all of our material to Spanish so they feel right at home..Oh, wait, this isn't home.  This is America..

Yup, that was as ignorant, racist, and disgusting as you thought.

Quote from: AirAux on May 29, 2010, 03:38:15 PM
The diversity thing just hasn't worked out for America.  If you look at stats, since the civil rights movement started, the percentage of young black men serving time in prison has continually increased and is many times the rate of young white or even latino, which has also increased.  The percentage of black, unmarried females has likewise increased.  Many, many latinos are here illegally and are therefore criminals.  With the new cadet standards regarding social security number proof and higher scrutiny on cadet arrests it would be hard to cater to some of these groups.  It's all about values and the values of our minorities have sunk since the beginning of civil rights and the sense of entitlements.  Blacks have a much higher percentage of recipients than others on government giveaway programs, such as supplemental security income. Many of these have to do with a failure of family values and it is not CAP's responsibility to attempt to instill these in a group of 12 year olds.  Sounds racist.. only reality.. Unfortunately, these are not opinions, just statistics..   Oh, by the way, learning to speak more to the male figure of a latino family is reinforcing their cultural differences, not reinforcing the concept that this is America and if you want to be here, you should do it our way and not the way it is back home.  We can't be everything to everybody.. Maybe we should all learn to speak Spanish so we can better recruit them??  I guess we will then change all of our material to Spanish so they feel right at home..Oh, wait, this isn't home.  This is America..

Always a great idea to personally attack when you can't argue the facts.  Well done, and so classical.  Get your head out of the sand and admit what isn't working.  Then and only then will you be able to look for new and better solutions to an evergrowing problem..

Quote from: AirAux on May 29, 2010, 03:38:15 PMThe diversity thing just hasn't worked out for America. 

We can't be everything to everybody

At the squadron level there's only some much resources that can be allocated to any new program implementation (e.g. cadets in inner city have no transportation to meetings so you are picking them up and returning them home for EVERY activity).   

My guess is that this program will likely be an ATTEMPT to diversify the membership a bit more and ensure compliance with federal funding diversity mandates.  Hopefully it won't be another report or answering queries from high headquarters as to why the squadron membership doesn't mirror the minority population in the squadrons' operating area.  I just sense that at many squadrons there isn't an interested in this type of "targeted" recruitment.  There's just too many other issues that come up that is begging for volunteers' time.

Again we can't save everybody and there's plenty of other programs for minority inner city youth (funded by grants & us taxpayers) than CAP and are much easier for those inner city youths to participate in versus CAP very strict cadet program that is costly to the cadets' parents/guardians (check out the price of dress black shoes for the cadet uniform). (If there's local ROTC programs in schools that will also affect any minority teenagers recruitment).  As far as senior members go if you have the appropriate aptitude & attitude, I think that regardless of ethnic background, race,  or gender you can advance in the program.

I never seen any push back in my unit if a minority joined/wanted to join.  We've had minority members drop out of the program and the commander/deputy commander for seniors/cadets have done followups to find out why (as is done with any non minority member that drops out).

RM   

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on May 29, 2010, 04:58:11 PMAt the squadron level there's only some much resources that can be allocated to any new program implementation (e.g. cadets in inner city have no transportation to meetings so you are picking them up and returning them home for EVERY activity).

If this committee allocates money to drive the vans to pick them up, I would volunteer in a second to drive...

So I think that we definitely need to keep something in our minds that we tend to forget whenever talking about "equality."

http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2000/dp1/2kh00.pdf

In 2000, on 12.3% of blacks returned the census, while 75.1% of the population returned the census with "white" marked. I said it that way to account for the fact that many did not return the census.

However, this makes an important point. Why, exactly, is it realistic for us to go for the idealized "30% white, 30% black, 30% Hispanic" demographic for our organization when the country as a whole would not support that? If every squadron in the country was expected to maintain that level, it would probably be impossible due to the simple fact that there are a LOT more white people here than there are people of other races.

That doesn't mean that we should turn our heads away from the race issue. But recruiting and promoting people of different races in CAP isn't going to make them have more babies. We are still going to have the same percentage of people to work with that we always have.

In order to get above that 12.3% (ish, since we can assume some sampling error), we would actually have to go above and beyond in order to recruit black people at the EXCLUSION of other races, since we would somehow have to make the organization more attractive to blacks than to other races in order to ensure that the percentages were skewed in favor OPPOSITE to the entire US population.

As long as we are within the same percentages as the US population, I really don't think that a diversity program should even be an issue for us. It's not like a smaller percentage of the CAP population being minority status in relation to whites is keeping the minority population percentages down...

Just as an interesting side note, here in MS where all us racist rednecks live, out of our MP's, about 10% are black, out of all pilots in the wing, it comes out to about 8-9%. While it doesn't reflect the state general population numbers, I'm pretty sure it exceeds the % population of minority pilots living in the state.  I'd be curious to see what the nationwide FAA stats are, i.e. what % of all pilots are members of a minority.  Every airport I've ever been to in the U.S. the vast majority of pilots I see are white guys.  I think maybe the right question to ask is what are our current numbers, and do they reflect our target recruiting population? How do we even know what our actual minority membership population is?  The data section on the application is voluntary, so some folks may not have even filled it out.

Nathan,  you hit on a good point, and something CAP generally doesn't do very well - i.e. work from data instead of assumptions.

If this committee is coming in the door with the intention to see where CAP stands in terms of diversity, and then work from there, I'd support it.  IMHO, I believe they will find that for the most part we reflect the population of the areas our units serve, at which time
someone can decide if that's actually an issue, where the issue is, and solicit ways to fix it.

However if they are walking in with the assumption that "CAP's diversity is broken", despite anecdotal evidence to the contrary, well we're cooked before we start.

Quote from: Eclipse on May 29, 2010, 12:53:55 AM
...I'm certainly not one to be PC about these things, I believe the preferred term is "African American".

That's the problem with us today, trying to be PC.  You're either a black American or African.  The vast majority of black people in the US have no ties to Africa.  That would be like you moving to Africa.  Are you going to call yourself an American African?  When we open our doors for recruiting, we open them to everyone.  We don't target a particular person based on the color of their skin.  It's not our fault if the majority of our members is one color or the other.  I'm not going to try and force someone to join CAP, based on the color of their skin, just so my squadron has a more diverse membership.  people will join CAP based on our program, regardless of the color of their skin.  It's our responsibility to try and present the organization everywhere, which in turn will give us the opportunity to be more diverse in our membership.

Quote from: brasda91 on May 30, 2010, 06:39:03 AM

Quote from: Eclipse on May 29, 2010, 12:53:55 AM
...I'm certainly not one to be PC about these things, I believe the preferred term is "African American".

I'm not going to try and force someone to join CAP, based on the color of their skin, just so my squadron has a more diverse membership.  people will join CAP based on our program, regardless of the color of their skin.  It's our responsibility to try and present the organization everywhere, which in turn will give us the opportunity to be more diverse in our membership.

I would agree.  Locally, relatively recently the AF Reserve Base held a "Hispanic Youth Leadership Symposium" to expose them to the USAF Reserve, and I'm sure as potential recruits.   Of course this was held during the weekdays, by fulltime paid Air Reserve Technicians, and we didn't know about it at CAP.  HOWEVER, most of the unit's senior members are working during the weekdays and cadets are in school, so staffing any type of information booth would be a real challenge :-[
RM

Quote from: Eclipse on May 30, 2010, 03:47:44 AM
Nathan,  you hit on a good point, and something CAP generally doesn't do very well - i.e. work from data instead of assumptions.

If this committee is coming in the door with the intention to see where CAP stands in terms of diversity, and then work from there, I'd support it.  IMHO, I believe they will find that for the most part we reflect the population of the areas our units serve, at which time
someone can decide if that's actually an issue, where the issue is, and solicit ways to fix it.

However if they are walking in with the assumption that "CAP's diversity is broken", despite anecdotal evidence to the contrary, well we're cooked before we start.

I think we could also make these same trends if we were to take data on the religious preferences of all members.

I don't have the data in front of me, but it's common knowledge that Christianity is by far the most popular religion in the US. I don't know where the other religions and atheism rank, but I doubt it's within the range of Christianity.

So... if we end up with a predominantly Christian CAP, does that mean that CAP is run by a bunch of Christians who are insensitive to other religions or to those who don't follow a religion? Of course not. It just means that out of our selection pool, if we were to assume that religion plays no part in the willingness to join CAP, that there are a lot more Christians that are going to join simply because there are a lot more Christians in the pool of potential recruits.

I like to think that CAP is as blind to religion as it is to race, so I would think that to prove that there is an issue with unfair recruiting practices in relation to race, we would first have to show that CAP recruiters in some given area actually are somehow taking religion into account during recruiting.

I'm going to use the term "target race" to indicate some race that CAP feels is underrepresented in the organization and would like to see with higher numbers. Please don't take it to mean anything more than that.

1) Is the squadron away from a particular area (schools, neighborhoods) that has a high demographic of the "target race" that we want to better represent?

2) Is some cultural or social aspect competing with us for time or niche in the recruits life? For instance, do gangs in the area recruit primarily from the "target race"? Is there a race-specific organization or club in the area, possibly hosted through a school?

3) Do members of the "target race" often correlate highly with members of a certain religion that may have practices that conflict with CAP, either on a moral basis (joining any military organization) or simply a time basis?

4) How many members are actually in the squadron? If there are only five cadet members, then not having 0% of them being back cadets is not nearly so suspicious as a squadron that has 100 cadets having 0% black cadets.

After that, we can start looking toward the squadron.

1) Is the squadron ensuring that they market themselves honestly, as an organization with no direct ties or commitment to military service?

2) Is the percentage of the "target race" members that visit the squadron approximately the same as the number that actually sign the papers to join?

3) Is there a "problem member" in the squadron, such as a locally-known racist that may be a passive deterrent to "target race" membership?

4) Is the squadron engaging in activities that may seem to segregate certain races? This is where being politically correct weighs in either too much or too little. I've heard of blacks in a squadron getting angry because a squadron worked a St. Patrick's Day parade, but not an event during MLK day.

5) Could the squadron be intentionally not recruiting in some areas? If not, why? I know in one unnamed state that a squadron wouldn't recruit in what they deemed to be "dangerous parts of town", despite the fact that these parts of town had a much higher demographic of blacks than the schools they usually recruited from.

And so on and so forth.

Most of these issues can be solved fairly easily by having a recruiter you trust in position and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, calling each member who either quits or stops showing up to see WHY they stopped showing up. If a prospective member chooses not to join, have someone candidly ask them what would have changed their mind.

If the problem is that the squadron doesn't have any members of the "target race", then that may or may not be something that can be solved. But if the member says that he/she felt uncomfortable because of, using the above example, the St. Patrick's day parade issue, then that MIGHT be something that can actually be rectified.

I'm not in favor of going above and beyond to appease everyone. However, I also know where to draw the line when there is a good change that can be made. For instance, in most cases, not working an event on MLK day isn't really a problem with racial stereotyping. It's just not something that someone things about. And if I have a black officer who wants to work an event on that day, and can tell me an event that would be beneficial to get involved in, then why not work it?

Which is why I think that some sort of national oversight of diversity isn't really going to accomplish anything. Nationally, I can't think of a single policy that would benefit every squadron without hurting another one. If I were to see anything like this happen, I would much rather see it happen at the wing level alone, and only really as a safety net to make sure that there actually isn't anything suspicious going on with racial demographics. So, if the Wing Diversity Officer (ha) decides that a squadron having 10% less black members than the percentage of blacks in the state, then the squadron would get an inquiry about their recruiting practices and follow-ups to members who chose to leave. If there is an issue to fix, then the squadron is asked to fix it, and the Wing Diversity Officer's job is complete.

I honestly don't think even a special title is needed as long as squadrons have the proper oversight from their commanders in the first place, but if we have to have SOMETHING, then the more local, the better.

Good points, Nathan. 

Here is a copy of a post I made in April in a different thread - with data.

Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on April 18, 2010, 07:54:27 PM
Of course, with the Census this year we will get more accurate data, but based on the U.S. Census estimates from July, 2008 (latest available), the break down is like this:

General Population         USAF                                         CAP                     
White:  65.6%                  White:  73.3%                           White:  78.2%
Black: 12.2%                    Black: 14.6%                             Black: 6.5%
Asian:  4.3%                    Asian: 2.6%                              Asian: 3.0%
Hispanic 15.4%                 Hispanic 10.7%  (Approximate)     Hispanic 10.1%

Gen Pop Source: Annual Estimates of the Resident Population by Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin for the United States: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2008  Column: July, 2008
USAF Source:  Air Force Personnel Statistics
CAP Source:  Cadets: By the Numbers


So, based on that, it looks like Hispanic cadets 2:3 of Hispanic general population and Black cadets are 1:2 of Black general population and the Asian cadets are almost 1:1 of Asian general population.  (Remembering of course that Hispanics are technically an ethnicity, not a race and are categorized under race by skin tone)

In my opinion (and mine only), this data tells us that CAP needs to actively target Black & Hispanic audiences.  Which (in conjunction with another thread) means that we need to develop some PSAs and recruiting material specifically targeted towards those groups.

What do you guys think would be the best way to target these audiences and what do you think are the biggest reason we do not have a strong showing by these groups / how do we overcome that?

Again, why do we need to target them, or any other particular race of people? DO they need special recruiting? Special posters?  Do these ethnic groups need special invitations or can they find out about CAP like all of the other members do?

Quote from: Flying Pig on June 01, 2010, 12:20:28 AM
Again, why do we need to target them, or any other particular race of people? DO they need special recruiting? Special posters?  Do these ethnic groups need special invitations or can they find out about CAP like all of the other members do?

The question is whether we have a percent of minority membership in CAP that is acceptable when compared with the national percentage. If we have a percentage statistically significantly lower than the national average, why? If it is due to poor recruiting practices (ie, recruiting in an area that is predominately white and ignoring nearby "black communities"), then that would definitely be a solvable issue.

However, I don't think either of the questions have been answered concretely yet.

E Pluribus Unum. 

Work on that one.

Diversity is, at best,  the path of an intellectual simpleton and, at worst, a tool for tyranny.

Quote from: Nathan on June 01, 2010, 01:24:49 AMThe question is whether we have a percent of minority membership in CAP that is acceptable when compared with the national percentage.

And if we don't, then so what?

We should be recruiting whomever we can, wherever we can, whenever we can. This notion that we must be doing something "wrong" if we're not picking up some magical number of minorities as we do so, is laughable to me.

At this time I don't care much about diversity in the top of the hierarchy but I am concerned about a lack of diversity in the Cadet ranks. Census figures that compare the proportion of each group in total population to the proportion of CAP members is not very relevant for Cadets because a much larger proportion of the under 18 population is minority than is the general population.

Because JrROTC is school-based, unless a school, has a unit, a kid is out of luck.  At least in California, JrROTC is concentrated at schools in poorer areas. I would have thought this was because middle-class kids have little interest but, in fact, in my town, the most affluent high school has the largest contingent. My conclusion is that the lack of JrROTC in richer kids' schools is at least partially due to middle class liberal opposition to military service.

Here's a map of JrROTC units in Los Angeles County public schools

http://idea.gseis.ucla.edu/publications/images/Military_Science05.jpg

Kids who attend public schools in each of the districts with an orange  (maybe it should be yellow) flag have no JrROTC units. CAP could service these students, but has ineffective outreach as well as a lack of adult leaders.

It should be noted that JrROTC instructors are paid, I think half by the Service and half by the school district. In a real sense, it is the CAP's situation as a corporation that causes this. If it really was the US Air Force Auxiliary, adult leaders to Cadet units could be paid and independent Cadet units would be available for these kids.

I like teenage kids well enough, but I personally wouldn't be an unpaid adult leader of Cadets in CAP. Those who do it well have my highest praise but I wouldn't do it for free. And, BTW, I'm a former Mitchell Cadet.

PM sent.
My apologies for the publicness.

JROTC instructors are retired military personnel, with a very select few Reserve. They receive what is basically their retirement check from the military, and the other half of what they would make on AD is paid by the school (the school usually pays them about as much as the average teacher, unless a Captain/Colonel O-6 maxed his retired pay out ^_^). The school also provides the benefits. No offense to CAP, but JROTC instructors are paid for a [consarn] good reason.

Mods are probably going to close this, it's way off topic.

EDIT: JROTC info is good to go ^_^