Benefits and Allowances for a Better Brighter Air Force Auxiliary

[SAR-EMT1]

OK..one last topic before I head off to work - IN TWO PARTS- Please don't answer part one without some sort of answer for part 2...
PART 1:

ASIDE FROM JOB PROTECTION WHILE ON MISSIONS, WHAT 4 THINGS WOULD WE WANT TO SEE FROM THE CONGRESS /  AIR FORCE TO MAKE US A BETTER PART OF THE "TOTAL FORCE" ?   Strictly speaking in terms of administrative / personnel type items.

Thoughts?  Changes?  Discussion?

PART 2:
Your personal plan to get these items up and in place in the QUICKEST, MOST PAIN FREE AMOUNT OF TIME? -AE not decades from now.

Winner gets cookie.  LOL


Personally Id like to see:

1. Job Protection for missions
2. Annual uniform allowance / free uniform program for SENIORS identical to current program for new cadets
3. Better "more official Photo ID" - see earlier thread
4. Official Database to track CP and PD achievements
5. Published Vision Statement CO-AUTHORED BY CC/CAP AND CC/CAP-USAF


I'd implement by first establishing a Wing Review board, and work to promote a buzz in the state legislature through the Congressional Liason Officer, and State Director.  Once that is rolling begin full court press through State Director and Wing to Region.
Though- if there was any way to skip past Region and go directly to 'GO' (NHQ / AETC ) and collect my 200 dollar uniform allowance someone please clue me in.

[DNall]

Personally Id like to see:

1. Job Protection for missions
2. Annual uniform allowance / free uniform program for SENIORS identical to current program for new cadets
3. Better "more official Photo ID" - see earlier thread
4. Official Database to track CP and PD achievements
5. Published Vision Statement CO-AUTHORED BY CC/CAP AND CC/CAP-USAF

Something about your ID that keeps you from getting the job done or that would let you do it better? There's a lot of reasons I think it should be changed but it's not top fove critical

Unforms? Don't you have some? Are uniform costs preventing any significant number of people from participating? An active CAP member is spending between a few hundered & a few thousand dollars a year, verus uniforms that last a long time & don't cost all that much.

Database? Isn't eServices a database? It does track PD, you want cadet info on there too. That's just making it more complicated then it has to be, but okay.

Vision statement would be nice as the lead element of a new communications effort, but the comms are how they are on purpose. If the CC comes out & says how he's trying to change CAP over the objections of the NB & intends to replace anyone that gets in his way, well then half the people are going to freak. As it is he can keep you guessing & dodge massive problems by accepting lower ones. Far as getting the AF to be part of the process, they'd have to agree with where CAP leadership says we're going & that's not the case. Right now Air Staff is working on defining where they want CAP to go in the future, and if they ever figure it out they'll make us do it. In the meantime the powerless CAP leadership can make noise if it really wants to. Personally, I'd prefer to see CAP members add to the discussion.

Anyway... bad list! Want a better one (no particular order):

1) Job protection is big, look into GS9 per diem for deployment on AFAM over over 48hrs

2) IMMEDATELY adopt 2-year transition plan to NIMS-WSAR standards (typeIII = GMT3, II=2, I=1), work with NASAR on getting internal instructors, FEMA TTT, Adopt right now the FEMA UDF & Fixed-wing standards (upgrade gear to match - see below)

3) Get us some wide distribution advanced gear, like FLIR on every 182, twin running repeater & P25 comm support to put state/local back on teh air after disasters, CRBNE detection gear (check sandia)

4) address quality control & training... few threads on this.

5) With gear & quality force work range of missions critical to US interests. HLS, new AF mission types, meaningful stuff.

[RiverAux]

2) IMMEDATELY adopt 2-year transition plan to NIMS-WSAR standards (typeIII = GMT3, II=2, I=1), work with NASAR on getting internal instructors, FEMA TTT, Adopt right now the FEMA UDF & Fixed-wing standards (upgrade gear to match - see below)

How about we wait until these standards have actually been made official before we try to meet them? 

I think job protections are going to have be addrerssed at the state level though you never know -- it is possible that some national level protections could be adopted for emergency responders that could include us.  Better do it soon though before homeland secuirty goes the way of civil defense. 

[Earhart1971]

The answer is, CAP getting paid like the National Guard.

The pool of volunteers in is drying up, nobody can take time off work without being paid.

Squadrons need heavy local sponsorship or we need better Federal Funding.

[Earhart1971]

Dnall, in addition to your thoughts on Aircraft Equipment.

Don't we need to start getting paid more per hour of flying time?

And how about paid Training too?

I don't know  how CAP will be able to do all we are doing at the present state of funding.

The organization will collapse like this.

We are expected to execute our many missions like the Air National Guard with no funding.

Does the Air National Guard run a Cadet Program?

[DrJbdm]

Dennis, Where can I find the NINS standards that you've talked about?  also how would you transition CAP into those Standards?

I know the current ICS standards are pretty lax all the way around, I'll admit I don't know anything about the new NIN standards being proposed, but I would be interested in seeing the standards and how they differ from what we have now.

What's the latest info on those standards, are we as a nation any closer to them being implemented?

[arajca]

It's NIMS not NINS. National Incident Management System. Google "NIMS" abd you'll find alot of information. Or search these forums - we've discussed it at length a few times.

As for nationwide implementation, this year DHS/FEMA starts cutting off funds and reimbursements for state and local agencies who are not NIMS compliant. So FEMA may call your agency out, but if you're not NIMS compliant, you ain't getting paid. So most state and local agencies are either compliant, very close to compliant, or have decided they don't want FEMA's money.

CAP has fought this issue for years and finally realized there is no way CAP will win exemptions or special treatment in NIMS. The NB finally decided to comply with NIMS, although National hasn't put together a compliance plan, yet.

[DNall]

2) IMMEDIATELY adopt 2-year transition plan to NIMS-WSAR standards (typeIII = GMT3, II=2, I=1), work with NASAR on getting internal instructors, FEMA TTT, Adopt right now the FEMA UDF & Fixed-wing standards (upgrade gear to match - see below)

How about we wait until these standards have actually been made official before we try to meet them? 

WSAR is done & official. Team standards for UDF & fixed-wing pilot/aircrew have been out, the individual standards are in the upcoming section & I understand will also have a medical/PT requirement.
Links:
WSAR Team standards
WSAR individual training requirements
(more details on this topic in the ES section of the forum)

CAP compliance plan is in the works. Obviously is has to start w/ just getting the right level people thru the right ICS courses (IC100-800, see nice chart in one of the ES threads). That'll include the need for in-house trainers, so send lots of people to FEMA instructor course. The resource typing & credentialing is a bit more difficult. Ground Team turning into WSAR is big problem that'll take two years. UDF, Aircrew, etc is more just a pain to work out the details on.

[davedove]

I understand will also have a medical/PT requirement.

Looking through the standards, it seems many have the statement about these requirements being set by the Agency Having Jurisdiction.  That would tell me that if CAP is setting these standards for their own people, there may be no change to the current requirements, in other words, none.

Overall though, if we want to play in the game, we are going to have to follow the rules.

[DNall]

It specifies PFT requirements, CAP can't just say no. When the indiv standards come out for UDF I think it'll include some kind of PFT also, amd aircrew (scanner/observer) will have some kind of medical requirement in addition to some training. The big thing there is the aircraft gear for dif resource levels.

[RiverAux]

The SAR credentialling document is a draft.  The resource typing is official, but won't result in changing much in CAP though we will need to revise 60-3 to reflect terminology changes and will need to start tracking things differently. 

[DNall]

The SAR credentialling document is a draft.  The resource typing is official, but won't result in changing much in CAP though we will need to revise 60-3 to reflect terminology changes and will need to start tracking things differently. 

I understand how this can be confusing, but the document above is not a draft. NIC is currently in the process of developing credentialing standards for all 120 typed resources. The SaR grouping was the first to be tackled. It was published in November & is final. The other 9 sections are in development & will come out one at a time over this year. Drafts are only circulated inside the working group & to registered stakeholders. The individual qualification standards in that document are final & will have to be complied with, otherwise we will not be permitted in the operating area or on FOBs or other controlled facilities or allowed access to resources such as water & MREs. You have to meet their standards to be part of their team & that's all there is to it.

[RiverAux]

From the NIMS Alert Nov 21 2006 announcing the SAR credentials

NIMS Integration Center Releases Criteria for Credentialing Search and Rescue
(SAR) Personnel As part of our nation's efforts to strengthen catastrophic response capabilities in line with the National Incident Management System (NIMS), FEMA's NIMS Integration Center has released initial minimum criteria for SAR Personnel to be deployed using a national credentialing system.
The purpose of this release is to solicit comments and constructive feedback for an open period not to exceed 45 calendar days from the date stated in this NIMS Alert. Information on how to submit your comments via e-mail is located at the end of this Alert.......
The SAR Working Group will review all responses submitted and as appropriate make any needed revisions with a final NIMS release of the Criteria for credentialing SAR personnel.

If they were soliciting comments Nov 21 for 45 days that means the document is a DRAFT. 

[DNall]

Two things, that comment period is required, but the document has been thru the ringer for over a year with most of the industry involved in getting it hammered out. Secondly, that comment period is over Friday. As with all FEMA typing & credentialing documents, it's a living thing that can change over time, but this version is quite solid. CAP is not getting any kind of special treatment, we will comply with what they say & it will be what's in this document. IF, and I mean a great big fat IF anything at all is changed, it's going to be to add other equiv alternatives in some of the individual training requirements. You want to wait a week & see waht comes out, that's fine, but it's misleading to tell people who don't know what's going on that this isn't what's really going to be enforced, cause it is.

CAP GTMs will be required to pass one of the PFTs listed, they will be required to complete the related FEMA courses & get the outside certifications (SarTechII being the easiest & most like what we do now). None of this is unreasonable, but it does require much greater focus of your CAP time to that one thing, which is as it really should be.

[Major_Chuck]

1.  Operational Oversight moved from Air University and AETC to Air Force side of National Guard Bureau.

How to Achieve:  Air Force and NGB would have to bite off.  No easy way to do this however.

2.  National Commander appointed by one of three individuals depending upon how item #1 turns out.
Secretary of the Air Force, AF Chief of Staff, or Chief of the National Guard Bureau.  Appointee would not be sitting Region or Wing Commander.  Appointee would come from Board of Governors, not NEC or National Board.

How to achieve:  Again, not easy and would require massive overhaul of current system.

3.  Total elimination of the term 'senior member'.    Never refered to, never implied, never uttered.

How to achieve:  Easily adopted.  Can be stricken from electronic media/forms/etc.

4.  Standards.  Everyone held accountable to the established standards.

5.  Ditto on the Vision Statement.  Implement one that is not so vague as "Missions for America".  Define what our role is and what is expected of us.

[O-Rex]

(more details on this topic in the ES section of the forum)

Then let's beat them to death on that forum and move on . . . .

Back to the Subject at hand: 

1. Job Protection for missions - Love to see it-would require major legislation.  Until then, save up your vacation days.....

2. Annual uniform allowance / free uniform program for SENIORS identical to current program for new cadets - USAF enlisted get initial issue at no cost, then get an annual uniform allowance, USAF officers don't.  CAP cadets get a free uniform program - CAP seniors don't.  For those wanting a more "USAF officer-like" existence, there you have it: The cachè of being an "officer" with all the regalia (literally) comes at a price.

3. Better "more official Photo ID" - see earlier thread Don't need it to impress the ladies, I'm just happy to now have a card that I don't have to whip out in tandem with my driver's license.  Sooner or later, they'll come out with a v2.0, and clean the graphics up a bit.

4. Official Database to track CP and PD achievements: Member services could use some tweaking, but don't expect anything like your Mil. virtual OPMF: we don't have the administrative infrastructure to do that on a national level, and until they rehire the 30% of paid NHQ staff, don't expect it, either.

5. Published Vision Statement CO-AUTHORED BY CC/CAP AND CC/CAP-USAF

here it is, with USAF blessing:

Vision Statement: "America's Air Force Auxiliary, Civil Air Patrol, building the nation's finest force of citizen volunteers - performing Missions for America"

Mission Statement: "To serve America by performing Homeland Security and humanitarian missions for our communities, states, and nation; developing our country's youth; and educating our citizens on the importance of air and space power."

[afgeo4]

Job security while activated or on missions.
Meal allowances while activated or on missions.
Uniform allowance.
Records in DEERS allowing for AAFES.com shopping and unlimited BX priviledges including Class VI.
Issued pagers for ES alerts.
G10 vehicles for corporate use including region and wing cc's (frees up vans/pick-up for tactical use and allows commanders to travel around to units more).
National budget (separate) for recruiting including vinyl recruiting covers for corporate vehicles and national TV campaign.
CAC type ID
Allowances for telephone/computer (high bandwith) access to ALL units.

[CAP428]

I see no reason for job security while on missions.  It is a volunteer organization.  If you do not have the time to volunteer while simultaneously holding a job, then change to a job where you can, or don't volunteer.  You must pick and choose your battles.

As far as stuff like meal allowance, uniform allowance, free computers and stuff for units:  it is not feasible.

The whole point in having a civilian auxiliary for the Air Force is that it is volunteer, and thus frees the USAF from spending so much money on things that can be efficiently done by a civilian auxiliary and save them cash.  We may not like it, but it really does come down to money.


To answer the original question:
Part 1:
I would like to see a more official photo ID as well.  Someone asked why that would let us do our job better.  I don't know about you, but when I've shown my card to anyone, they laugh and say it looks like I made it on my computer.  It detracts from professionalism, and is not "official" enough looking to rid doubt in the minds of people in authority when necessary.  If we are trying to do a job and those in charge are constantly doubting whether we are official, it hinders progress.

Part 2:
Send it up the proper channels/chain of command.


Again, and I know I'll be jumped all over for this, but we are a civilian auxiliary of the Air Force.  We have a huge amount of potential to serve greatly and serve a real purpose to help the armed forces and America as a whole.  I think we can have a very close relationship with the Air Force, certainly one that is closer than what we have now.

But I think seeing us as a part of the total force, meaning on the same level as the active duty and reserve forces, etc, is delusional.  We will never be accepted as "equals" with the armed forces.  We can help, but we can't be the same.

Being idealistic is great when just thinking and getting ideas...but when it comes to carrying it out, you must be R E A L I S T I C.

[SAR-EMT1]

CAP428

If you look at the Coast Guard Auxiliary they are seen as part of the total force. Their IDs are better, they get more on-base privileges etc...and its because they are USED MORE by the USCG. (Heck, I know many Aux Officers who routinely are OOD or Comms Officer at CG stations.)
MY main goal is to get CAP up to that same level in regard to our relationship with the Air Force.

[ddelaney103]

CAP428

If you look at the Coast Guard Auxiliary they are seen as part of the total force. Their IDs are better, they get more on-base privileges etc...and its because they are USED MORE by the USCG. (Heck, I know many Aux Officers who routinely are OOD or Comms Officer at CG stations.)
MY main goal is to get CAP up to that same level in regard to our relationship with the Air Force.

Never.  Going.  To.  Happen.  (Period, STOP, check please)

Why?  Several reasons - the biggest being that the AF does not have as much use for us as the CG has for their AUX.  We can do a few missions the AF likes us to do, but almost none of the are AF Core missions.  We can't put angry iron on target, nor can we do anything in the overseas zones in which the AF works.

OTOH, CGAUX can work on almost any job the CG has.  Most of their AUX are in the same locations the CG is working - waterways and coastlines.  The AF may base B-2's in MO, but that's not because they expect to exercise sovereign options in the Mississippi River Valley.  Most of the CG work their AUX does is neither military nor armed.  They are an _operational_ force multiplier that we will never be.

Can we be closer to the AF?  Sure.  Can we be more useful to the AF?  Sure.  Will we ever get to the CGAUX level of connectedness with Big Blue?  No.