Bye bye NCOs???

[Eclipse]

Agreed, but that doesn't change the fact that the CAP grade is mostly a misunderstood distraction, and in many case self-defeating.

I got call the BS flag on that.

"a misunderstood distraction"
"Self-defeating"

I'm gonna have to ask you to "show me".

Stand up at your next squadron meeting and look around. 
Make a list of every activity occurring that is in any way enhanced, or even impacted, by the grade on the shoulders.

The new average member walking in the door has no understanding past the movies of the purpose of military grade,
and they have zero as to how it works in CAP.  From day one, CAP does little-to-no training whatsoever to help
members better understand their place and role, and in fact, they make things worse by posting members at inappropriate
levels for their grade, assigning commands to lower-ranking members, and having practically no expectation of performance
beyond the checkboxes for promotions.

Except there are plenty of "unwritten" expectations for promotions, except they aren't allowed, except they are used anyway.

Promoting people who've done nothing but check boxes is self-defeating and disincentivises those who actually do the real work.

Promoting people who walk in the door with zero CAP experience before they've done anything in a relevent context is self-defeating
and rewards people for zero contribution, setting up the relative "value" of the grades.

Holding back hard-working members for years because "they aren't ready" is self-defeating and disincentivises those who actually do the real work.
Aren't ready for "what", exactly?  To be a wing-level staffer?  He's been one for three years.  Assume more responsibility?  He's an IC with
dozens of major real-worlds, not to mention there's nothing left to "assume".

Having a two-tiered uniform, one with military plumage and regalia and one with less, sets the tone that the single most important
factor in a member's career isn't their hard work, but the number on a scale.  That is self-defeating, disincentivises those who actually do the real work,
and when largely ignored by the very leadership charged with setting those rules, sets the tone that not all regulations are required.

So...

If the grade is simply a check-box delineation of PD work and TIG, then it is being used incorrectly and in contrast to the structure it seeks to emulate.
However in typical CAP "conflict avoidance", the organization wants to have it both ways, which in turn sets up it's own hypocrisy and confusion
in both the minds of the members and people we deal with externally.

Any response to the effect of "well it's never stopped us from accomplishing the mission" trivializes the issue and indicates the
person saying that either doesn't understand or chooses to ignore the fact that the mess that is our grade structure and uniforms,
things which should be a part of baseline identity, do, in fact, negatively impact CAP's ability to perform the mission in as much as they
negatively impact our external standing in the communities we wish to serve and complement, as well as member moral and initiative.

As said before, just because it's not the biggest whole, doesn't mean it's not letting in water.

By the way, you never answered "why" we need grade.

[lordmonar]

We need grade for several reasons.

1)  Human nature needs some sort of outward signal of dominance.
2)  We are the Auxiliary of the US Military
3)  We want to "play" at being USAF members.
4)  We want it.

Eclipse....you are a "mole hill" sort of a guy.   

[Eclipse]

Grade = "Dominance"?  Which CAP are you in?

The word "Commander" is all CAP has in that regard and it's all they need.

Mole hill?  How about it's time NHQ started accepting the reality of the mess we're in and tried to make some
meaningful changes instead of making it worse?

[Flying Pig]

Grade = "Dominance"?  Which CAP are you in?

The word "Commander" is all CAP has in that regard and it's all they need.

Mole hill?  How about it's time NHQ started accepting the reality of the mess we're in and tried to make some
meaningful changes instead of making it worse?

My position has always been that rank means nothing in CAP.  In CAP everything is position based.   CAP rank is a professional development recognition or prior service recognition.  But just like cadets, Senior also get ribbons for completing PD levels.  You could easily be a CAP Lt Col and have never been responsible for anything in your entire CAP career, while your Sq Commander is a 22yr old 2Lt.  Let that CAP Lt. Col stand up in a meeting and say "Look Lt... this is how its going to happen."  I would respond.."OK Joe, you, can you go grab me a soda, my throat is dry." 
I'm not up for changing it.  I say just leave it ALL alone.  However, even based on my thoughts on CAP rank, I was still proud to receive my Captain bars but its nothing more than a personal pride.  Doesn't really mean anything to anyone else. The fact that Im the guy who has the key to the door and the filing cabinet is what matters.

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

Having a two-tiered uniform, one with military plumage and regalia and one with less, sets the tone that the single most important factor in a member's career isn't their hard work, but the number on a scale.  That is self-defeating, disincentivises those who actually do the real work, and when largely ignored by the very leadership charged with setting those rules, sets the tone that not all regulations are required.

:clap:      :clap:      :clap:

That's a slow clap!

[Private Investigator]

Who do you think makes the coffee at BoG meetings?

Lieutenant Colonels.  Well, one of them, anyway.

("That was cream and one sugar, General?)

Ned, you are always spot on   :clap:

[Flying Pig]

CAP really boils down to mutual respect for other peoples accomplishments and responsibilities.   If my job was to make coffee.....  Then I made coffee.  If my job was to stock the refrigerator, then I did it.  If the wing commander came by my unit along with the wing staff for a commanders call, they got the respect they were due for their positions they held in the organization up to and including the rank on their shoulders.  Did people stand back and say "Wow... look... its a Colonel!"  No, they were more interested in the fact that he was the wing commander.  I never heard anyone say "Well we are all just volunteers"  or "Yeah, any one of us could do that job."  But even as an accomplished adult who has met and worked with a lot of great people in my time, I still thought it was cool to have the Wing Commander in my building.  It was with the same awe that I recall being at the Wing Conference in Fresno and realizing the master of ceremonies at the banquet was "Ned" and saying "So thats him ehhhhh?"   :clap:

I think all this stuff about ranks, and NCOs and WO's and O's just detracts away from all of that, and I sincerely hope CAP doesn't end up with a separation of classes, which to me, is where is appears to be headed by design.  In the end, we are all people donating our personal time to achieve the same goal.  If people want to be called MSgt or Captain is really irrelevant.  I just hope I don't see new members brought in later on under the new system adopting the mindset that certain jobs are below their rank.  Because thats what I see this encouraging.

[ColonelJack]

Heck ... the man who was GAWG CC when I rejoined in 2009 was someone I'd gone to high school with.  And it was still coolness in the extreme to have the Wing Commander visit the squadron.  (Even though I called him "Colonel" around the cadets, when there was a second to talk he was just "Jay".)

Jack

[lordmonar]

That's why we have the fourth core value.

I don't think ranks detract away from getting the mission done.....because in the "real CAP" as opposed to CAPTALK it really does not come up all that much.

Sure every now and then you get someone who has drama over getting or not getting a promotion. 

But really....everyone just does their job.

If someone things doing work is beneath their rank......okay....I'm sure that Group/Wing/Region/National needs your expertise....thanks for playing. 

[BuckeyeDEJ]

You could easily be a CAP Lt Col and have never been responsible for anything in your entire CAP career, while your Sq Commander is a 22yr old 2Lt.  Let that CAP Lt. Col stand up in a meeting and say "Look Lt... this is how its going to happen."  I would respond.."OK Joe, you, can you go grab me a soda, my throat is dry." 

While it's true that our missional roles are disconnected from grade and rank, which is The Big Deceptor in our fine CAP, I'm not sure you can say that a lieutenant colonel (full disclosure: I'm one) can rise through CAP's ranks without having any responsibility at all. I think I may be picking nits here, but you don't make light colonel without having done SOMETHING in CAP. And with the occasional exception of a lieutenant colonel who's long past his or her shelf life, and serves as little more than a relic who's willing to help in some way (shouldn't those people be on the retired list?), anyone in field grade should be stepping up and willfully taking added responsibilities becuase they have the experience and the knowhow. Or are expected to have it.

Many times, we pick the willing-but-inexperienced member (the new guy, or one of the new guys) to be a squadron commander because either no one else wants it or they're underqualified in some way or another. A light colonel in that situation is along for the ride, or prefers a back-seat role, and that's (generally) wrong. We must expect people in field grade to step up and be engaged, not just be happy to be a personnel officer for a newly minted first lieutenant (given the grade in order to be a unit commander). It's one thing to be an O-5 personnel officer when the old man and his deputy (or deputies, in a composite squadron) are also wearing silver oak leaves. It's yet another for someone to say "been there, done that, got the T-shirt" and decide "it's someone else's turn" when all it really does is ensure burnout for a new member who could have given so much more to CAP than grow fatigued and jaded quickly as a squadron commander after a year or so.

Said company-grade officer should be serving an apprenticeship under a field-grade officer — whether it's as a personnel officer or supply officer or whatever, but in a position where increased responsibility is bestowed where needed — and developing slowly into a more effective CAP asset.

As for the "fourth core value," all it really does in CAP is underpin the first one. If you've ever read Air Force doctrine, you'll know that respect is part of integrity already.

Now as far as a CAP enlisted system, it's fine time. There's no reason many people we promote to butterbars should have that grade. Give them an opportunity to serve that puts them at a lower expectational threshold and watch them succeed.

[Flying Pig]

Now as far as a CAP enlisted system, it's fine time. There's no reason many people we promote to butterbars should have that grade. Give them an opportunity to serve that puts them at a lower expectational threshold and watch them succeed.

  OH..... now you've done it. 

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Now as far as a CAP enlisted system, it's fine time. There's no reason many people we promote to butterbars should have that grade. Give them an opportunity to serve that puts them at a lower expectational threshold and watch them succeed.

  OH..... now you've done it.

Nah, I don't think so. I'm not afraid to touch the third rail here, and while it may get me in hot water, let's face it — we don't equip our CGOs as well as we could. And many people we consider for second lieutenant aren't officer material. This is a handy alternative, once the program is better established. There's nothing wrong with developing our own Mustangs, for that matter.

We need to develop our people more and not just throw them into assignments, certainly not into command assignments, where burnout is an issue. We lose good people because their willingness to serve early in their CAP careers is capitalized upon — we take advantage of it, rather than grow and nurture it and then let it work for them AND for us. I don't know how many squadron commanders I've seen like that, and even a few group commanders, and it doesn't have to be like that at all. Let's get our senior, experienced people to realize they're the ones with the knowledge and the expectations, and use them as their grade and rank commends them.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

The Navy Sea Cadets do not even consider a member for Ensign until they have been in a year with the title of "instructor."

http://www.seacadets.org/faqs#BecomingAVolunteer

They may well have something there.

[THRAWN]

The Navy Sea Cadets do not even consider a member for Ensign until they have been in a year with the title of "instructor."

http://www.seacadets.org/faqs#BecomingAVolunteer

They may well have something there.

Eh. Still not as good as the CG Aux system. It has the "badge of dominance", lets you know who is in positions of authority and responsibility, and prevents the coffee making lieutenant colonel from existing...

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

The Navy Sea Cadets do not even consider a member for Ensign until they have been in a year with the title of "instructor."

http://www.seacadets.org/faqs#BecomingAVolunteer

They may well have something there.

Eh. Still not as good as the CG Aux system. It has the "badge of dominance", lets you know who is in positions of authority and responsibility, and prevents the coffee making lieutenant colonel from existing...

IF you can remember all the abbreviations, and remember that you still call someone wearing chickens, silverballs, etc. "Jack" or "Jane" as they hand you your cuppa Joe.

[Storm Chaser]

The longer I've been in CAP the more I tend to agree with Eclipse on this matter. I'm not opposed to military-style grades in CAP, but I don't agree with CAP's current implementation of the grade system. I believe that for grades to be effective, a major overhaul is needed.

[THRAWN]

The longer I've been in CAP the more I tend to agree with Eclipse on this matter. I'm not opposed to military-style grades in CAP, but I don't agree with CAP's current implementation of the grade system. I believe that for grades to be effective, a major overhaul is needed.

+1

[Garibaldi]

The longer I've been in CAP the more I tend to agree with Eclipse on this matter. I'm not opposed to military-style grades in CAP, but I don't agree with CAP's current implementation of the grade system. I believe that for grades to be effective, a major overhaul is needed.

Generally speaking, this is a major obstacle to overcome. It's not a private matter between CAP and USAF but something that needs to be looked at.

[THRAWN]

The Navy Sea Cadets do not even consider a member for Ensign until they have been in a year with the title of "instructor."

http://www.seacadets.org/faqs#BecomingAVolunteer

They may well have something there.

Eh. Still not as good as the CG Aux system. It has the "badge of dominance", lets you know who is in positions of authority and responsibility, and prevents the coffee making lieutenant colonel from existing...

IF you can remember all the abbreviations, and remember that you still call someone wearing chickens, silverballs, etc. "Jack" or "Jane" as they hand you your cuppa Joe.

You can still use the same "titles"(captain, lieutenant colonel, etc), but they would be granted in the same manner as the CG Aux (i.e specific staff slot, command, etc). And we sure as shootin' don't need an "NCO Corps".

[pierson777]

If the system was overhauled to have grade indicate level of duty, then perhaps they could simply change the PD level requirements for staff duty assignment to staff duty assignments at and higher echelons.  Currently, someone could rise to the grade of Lt Col while serving in a position like the squadron assistant historian.  (no slight intended towards historians). 

How about making the PD level's required staff assignments be at higher echelons (group, wing, region)?  Then grade promotion to Maj and Lt Col would indicate higher levels of responsibility.