CSAG May Meeting Agenda

[Luis R. Ramos]

PHALL-

What you are telling me is that if there is a need for a soup line you cannot use 13-year-olds to give food to victims?

Then again, what is wrong with getting a 13-year-old qualified as a GTM 3 or UDFT? When the certifications expire at the end of his 3rd year, he is 16 and ready to work according to California's example. Just in time for his renewals. By then, he will have attended several training exercises, being more practiced in ES.

Flyer

[JeffDG]

On the promotions, I would like to offer a modest proposal:

Replace TIG with Highest Level of Responsibility.  Other PD requirements remain.

I'm going to start with "Commanders" here.  Let's define that "Base" as the Wing Commander is a Colonel.  For every level up or down from that, the Commander is eligible for one level up or down from Colonel in terms of grade, so that gives us:

National:  MGen
Region:  BGen
Wing:  Col
Group:  Lt. Col
Squadron:  Maj
Flight:  Capt

Staff:
3 Types of "Staff":  Command, Senior and Junior
Command staff are eligible for one level below the commander at their echelon.  Roles I see as "Command Staff" are Deputy Commander, Vice Commander, Chief of Staff.

Senior Staff:  Those defined at a "Wing" level as "Director Of XXX", Operations, Emergency Services, Cadet Programs and the like.  Eligible for up to 2 below the commander of their echelon

Junior Staff:  Those not defined as "Director of " at the Wing level.  Like "Emergency Services Training Officer", they are eligible for 3 below the commander at the echelon

Assistants:  1 below the role they are assisting

So, a Wing Chief of Staff:  Eligible for Lt Col.  Wing Director of Operations:  Eligible for Major
Group Deputy Commander:  Eligible for Major
Squadron Deputy Commander:  Eligible for Capt
Squadron Assistant ES Training:  SM!  (Squadron/CC can be a Major, so Junior Staff is 2nd Lt, so asst is SMWOG
National Assistant ES Training:  Maj

Again, this still requires the other PD requirements and only overrides the TIG requirements.  I think it could replace the whole advance promotions system...if you recruit a CPA to be Wing Director of Finance, fine, he does some PD courses and is eligible for Major regardless of TIG.

You can keep the rank after a "successful" tour at the echelon based upon the commander's judgement of successful tour.

This way, if you see someone with Lt Col on their shoulder, you know that they have served at a senior position in CAP at some point in time...

[Ned]

Concerning the agenda item that would require cadets to complete CAPT 116 training, I see two different questions being discussed here:

The first is CP philosophy. 

For the first time in over 50 years, the leadership is considering revising the mission of our successful cadet program to include mandatory ES training in addition to our traditional areas of Leadership, Aerospace Education, Character Development, and Physical Fitness.  This is potentially a fundamental change and should be considered carefully.  The background portion of the agenda item addresses the need to expose cadets to the other missions of CAP, and to expand the available ES resources of CAP by increasing the number of cadets that could participate in an emergency.

The first issue (exposure to other missions) is certainly worthwhile.  But the leadership may not be aware that a comprehensive ES overview is already required of all cadets by way of the Staff Duty Analysis required for Achievement 14.  Which requires, among other things, a cadet to do one of the following:  become qualified as a GTM or mission staff assistant and plan and conduct an ES training exercise for the unit, research an outside SAR agency and write a report, or write a staff study discussing cadet contributions to ES and homeland security.  Cadets also demonstrate knowledge of ORM techniques in the ES arena.

The second issue is one of practicality - whether requiring this particular training is the best way to expose cadets to the ES mission and expand the trained ES volunteer pool.

Initially, as others have noted, the agenda item calls specifically for CAPT 116 to be accomplished before the Wright Brothers milestone.  The large majority of cadets in this cohort are in the 12-14 age group; roughly 7-9 grade.  As all of you know, taking the 116 test requires a pretty close reading of both CAPR 60-3 and 173-3, and the test contains some fairly detailed questions about reimbursements rates on AFAM, the WMIRS an OPS Qual systems, and modification of advanced technology equipment.  It is a tough test based on some fairly arcane reading material.

Indeed, running a simple Flesch readability test (the DoD standard used for manuals and regulations) on CAPRs 60-3 173-3 shows scores that require that the readers be high school juniors or seniors to comprehend the materials.  This is a mismatch that is a potential show stopper for cadet progression.  It may be unfair to require a seventh grader to pass a test on regulation that would hard for some college students to read.  The most likely result to further slow or eliminate cadet promotions beyond senior airman.

I am also not yet convinced that requiring our 12 and 13 year olds to pass CAPT 116 will significantly increase CAP's ability to field trained volunteers in emergencies.  It just seems unlikely that highly trained and motivated 12 and 13 year olds would be made available by their parents and units to serve in a Katrina or Deepwater Horizon type scenario, or that we would have suitable and useful work for them to do upon arrival.

So while cadet exposure to ES and increasing cadet involvement in ES are certainly laudable goals, I trust the leadership will find alternative ways to reach them. This particular agenda item seems more likely to hurt individual cadets that help CAP overall.

Ned Lee
CP Enthusiast 

[NIN]

So while cadet exposure to ES and increasing cadet involvement in ES are certainly laudable goals, I trust the leadership will find alternative ways to reach them. This particular agenda item seems more likely to hurt individual cadets that help CAP overall.

^^ This

[Eclipse]

I am also not yet convinced that requiring our 12 and 13 year olds to pass CAPT 116 will significantly increase CAP's ability to field trained volunteers in emergencies.  It just seems unlikely that highly trained and motivated 12 and 13 year olds would be made available by their parents and units to serve in a Katrina or Deepwater Horizon type scenario, or that we would have suitable and useful work for them to do upon arrival.

It won't.

But the test takes about 15 minutes in an online / open book fashion.

It's not an onerous requirement, there should be no gnashing of teeth about it, and frankly I'm a little surprised that you have an issue with it.

We should also be careful about trying to draw a line between large-scale, hazardous duty situations like Katrina and Deep Water and
an initiative that seeks to simply add familiarization to a cadet's universe, not to mention that the vast majority of potential growth for
CAP ES is in DR ops such as sandbagging, shelter ops, damage assessment and well-being checks, all of which cadets can be involved with
little drama.

This particular agenda item seems more likely to hurt individual cadets that help CAP overall.

How an earth is this going to "hurt" anyone?

[PHall]

PHALL-

What you are telling me is that if there is a need for a soup line you cannot use 13-year-olds to give food to victims?

Then again, what is wrong with getting a 13-year-old qualified as a GTM 3 or UDFT? When the certifications expire at the end of his 3rd year, he is 16 and ready to work according to California's example. Just in time for his renewals. By then, he will have attended several training exercises, being more practiced in ES.

Flyer

That's right, if they are not Registered Emergency Services Workers, then they can't participate per CalEMA.
CalEMA calls the shots for all ES and DR activity in the State of California.

Getting a 13 year old's hopes up by training them in GTM and/or UDF and then not using them for up to three years just results in very frustrated cadets who usually end up being former members long before their 16th birthday.

[Eclipse]

As all of you know, taking the 116 test requires a pretty close reading of both CAPR 60-3 and 173-3, and the test contains some fairly detailed questions about reimbursements rates on AFAM, the WMIRS an OPS Qual systems, and modification of advanced technology equipment.  It is a tough test based on some fairly arcane reading material.

I might as well go ahead and take exception with this assertion, too.

116 doesn't require close reading of anything, it's an online, open book test that touches superficially on ES concepts.
And it is one that hundred if not thousands of cadets already takes every year, with no issue and no drama.

Whether its the drill manual, uniform wear, other related regulations, or the apparently Ph.d-level 116 test, when cadets >want<
to do something, these things become "simple and easy", and when they don't, they are "hard".

The next thing we'll have here is an assertion that because not every cadet has a computer at home that this is an "onerous" requirement.

We're talking about 15 minutes sometime in two years!

[NIN]

It won't.

But the test takes about 15 minutes in an online / open book fashion.

It's not an onerous requirement, there should be no gnashing of teeth about it, and frankly I'm a little surprised that you have an issue with it.

We should also be careful about trying to draw a line between large-scale, hazardous duty situations like Katrina and Deep Water and
an initiative that seeks to simply add familiarization to a cadet's universe, not to mention that the vast majority of potential growth for
CAP ES is in DR ops such as sandbagging, shelter ops, damage assessment and well-being checks, all of which cadets can be involved with
little drama.

This particular agenda item seems more likely to hurt individual cadets that help CAP overall.

How an earth is this going to "hurt" anyone?

There is a big difference between "get ES qualified to continue to progress" and "get familiarised with ES"

Familiarisation = "Hi, this is ES.  This is what it looks like, this is what it does, this is how you can get involved in it. What are your questions?"

Qualification = "You have to jump thru these X additional hoops, sign offs, tests and additional training. Oh, and you gotta do it to get promoted."

If you're in CA, its superfluous for cadets in any event. Its "Get qualified to not be able to do anything anyway."

Wicked motivating, that.  What was that about "not wasting volunteer's time?"

[Eclipse]

Getting a 13 year old's hopes up by training them in GTM and/or UDF and then not using them for up to three years just results in very frustrated cadets who usually end up being former members long before their 16th birthday.

Hmmm.  Tough one.

Oh Wait, no it's not.  Then don't get their hopes up.

Train them with the information that this is general knowledge in preparation  for when they can use it.

[NIN]

Oh, come on Bob. Really?

Under that kind of logic, we ought to have C/SSgts trained to be Finance Officers too, even though they can't be a finance officer as a cadet.

Because, you know, its training for when they could use it.

[Eclipse]

If you're in CA, its superfluous for cadets in any event. Its "Get qualified to not be able to do anything anyway."

First.  The other 47 wings (or whatever), really don't care what is "superfluous in CA", so let's not use that as the core of anything.
Seriously - in one breath they say they don't do ES at all, in the next they make up their own GT uniform.  Set the standard and manage the exceptions.

Second, if Achievement 14 is too soon, make it for one where the curve is expected later, or, only in states with specific restrictions,
make it aged based (Ach 14 or 16 years of age, whichever comes later).

[ZigZag911]

On the ES issue:

Phase 1 is probably too soon, but I think completion of Phase 2 should require GES, Phase 3 should require one ES specialty qualification.

For seniors, GES should be part of Level 1, the single ES qual should be in Level 2.

Senior grade re-structuring:

WIWAC we had warrant grades, most seniors started out there; as a result, generally took five or six years to become a captain, ensuring our higher ranking folks actually had some CAP experience.

Instituting FO grades for all new seniors would have the same effect.

While we're on the subject, let's lose ALL the special promotions, appointments,whatever, for everyone, in every job...period.

[NIN]

Bear in mind: I don't think that cadets shouldn't be trained in ES (barring state laws, etc).  I did a lot of ES as a cadet. It was excellent. Loved it.

I think its a bad idea to tie it to cadet promotions.

Familiarisation? Sure.  They're supposed to get that at encampment, anyway, and in my old unit, CBT included a short orientation to ES (this is what it is, this is what it does, this is what you need to do if you want to get involved...)

*Requiring* an ES qual for a cadet promotion around Phase I is, IMHO, an additional hoop to jump thru when CAP already has a major Phase I retention issue.  CAP should be finding ways to eliminate barriers to those things that we *know* encourage retention (Encampment, O-flights), not finding additional requirements to heap on new cadets.

In many states (I think you'll find the number is a lot higher than you think), youth are barred from participation in field ES-type work.  That leaves mission base ES work. Wow. Exciting!

[lordmonar]

Adapt, over come, compensate.  Again....making the entire squadron show up just so the 2 guys who need or want the training is assinine "service before self".

No charge on the fix.

Change it back...because you are wrong!   It is SERVICE BEFORE self when I donate my 3 hours a week to the cadet program, taking care of the units records and those things i want to do......it is BULL [mess]!  That you say I am not keeping to my core values of Volunteer Service because I don't want to spend yet another week end doing something I have no interest in or no ability in!

I resent your attitude and I call you out a not understanding how to manage and lead volunteers!

Sorry......but this really hits my button!

[Luis R. Ramos]

Hmmm.  Tough one.

Oh Wait, no it's not.  Then don't get their hopes up.

Train them with the information that this is general knowledge in preparation  for when they can use it.

:clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:

Flyer

[NCRblues]

On the promotion issue:

This proposal isn't going to change the current culture of " I checked the boxes now promote me even though I never show up" problems.

In all honesty, this proposal will increase the good ol boy network. If it is passed and approved slots for RSC and the already limited NSC will be a highly political and competitive commodity. I mean honestly, NSC for Lt. Col is way overboard! I can not even afford to travel 3 states away for RSC let alone try and travel to NHQ for a week in May.

I can solve the problem, allow commanders to really command their wings/regions and increase the amount of "no, you will not be promoted at this time" without fear of IG complaint after IG complaint because " I earned that promotion". Force the commanders to document why the promotion is being denied and give it a timeline for an up or down vote by 30-60 days after the initial request. Stop promoting undeserving people to higher grade, and problem solved. Stop adding requirements to those of us with limited funds, but hard workers at whichever level they serve at.

[Eclipse]

I resent your attitude and I call you out a not understanding how to manage and lead volunteers!

"Leading" is not "doing what's popular or what people want".

It's doing what is best for your people and/or the organization.

Trying to make this personal, which is for some reason where people always go on this kind of thing, or asserting your "thing" should be enough,
misses the point entirely.  If anything it makes my point even more.

[abdsp51]

Valid points by some, but I stand by my stance that mandated ES for all especially those with no interest or desire to do ES is a waste of resources period.  And from what I have seen the organizations ES curriculum is a joke.  And trying to force it on people is not good for people or the organization and face it we are at the whim of the state agency/agencies responsible for ES period.  I can support ES by teaching those who want to learn it and do it skills that will help.  I can also support it by placing standards and enforcing standards and discipline with out directly in any shape  or form having any ES training what so ever.  Therefore I can support the mission without participating in it and forcing it upon people which ultimately is best for people and resources.

[Eclipse]

If its "a joke", then why are we kidding ourselves?  Why not simply discontinue it entirely?

Of course the aircraft, much of the military affiliation, and about 1/2 the senior membership are heavily invested in this "joke", so that
disappears with it.

Members are happy enough to utilize the resources, people, and positive affiliation that comes with ES, but once you start telling
people to actually "do" something, then we have pushback.

[Jaison009]

As a manager (cover 14 counties) for the American Red Cross in Disaster Services I can see a strong usage of both cadet and senior members in general to assist in the NGO realm of Disaster Relief as a support agency. I think that it needs as much (maybe more) emphasis as GT/UDF ( I was a GTL as a Cadet, wearing a GTM, Senior and ran numerous real GT missions in Alaska, loved it but I am realistic about the mission and where ES is most useful). I will not stir the NASAR vs CAP discussion but there are improvements that can be made all around and intergrating DR even more than before would be highly beneficial to the agency and useful real world.

Valid points by some, but I stand by my stance that mandated ES for all especially those with no interest or desire to do ES is a waste of resources period.  And from what I have seen the organizations ES curriculum is a joke.  And trying to force it on people is not good for people or the organization and face it we are at the whim of the state agency/agencies responsible for ES period.  I can support ES by teaching those who want to learn it and do it skills that will help.  I can also support it by placing standards and enforcing standards and discipline with out directly in any shape  or form having any ES training what so ever.  Therefore I can support the mission without participating in it and forcing it upon people which ultimately is best for people and resources.