Bye bye NCOs???

[THRAWN]

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.

Ideally, it should be that way. It does work IF the checklists are being followed, and IF they're not being pencil whipped. Lieutenants and captains should run squadrons, captains and majors run groups, and majors and lieutenant colonels should run wings. Should, in the land of ponies and rainbows...

[JeffDG]

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.

Ideally, it should be that way. It does work IF the checklists are being followed, and IF they're not being pencil whipped. Lieutenants and captains should run squadrons, captains and majors run groups, and majors and lieutenant colonels should run wings. Should, in the land of ponies and rainbows...

Actually, very few of the PD tracks require higher level service for any of the levels.  Those that do require that are exceptions, certainly not the rule.

[lordmonar]

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.

Ideally, it should be that way. It does work IF the checklists are being followed, and IF they're not being pencil whipped. Lieutenants and captains should run squadrons, captains and majors run groups, and majors and lieutenant colonels should run wings. Should, in the land of ponies and rainbows...

Actually, very few of the PD tracks require higher level service for any of the levels.  Those that do require that are exceptions, certainly not the rule.

IIRC the ONLY PD track that requires higher level service is Emergency Service.   Everything else can be done at the squadron level with some participation in group and wing activities. 

[LSThiker]

IIRC the ONLY PD track that requires higher level service is Emergency Service.   Everything else can be done at the squadron level with some participation in group and wing activities.

No Master Historian requires Group or higher.

[Private Investigator]

IIRC the ONLY PD track that requires higher level service is Emergency Service.   Everything else can be done at the squadron level with some participation in group and wing activities.

No Master IG requires Wing or higher.   

[Private Investigator]

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). 

JMHO, but Major and higher should mean you have Command experience, in the past or present. 

[LSThiker]

JMHO, but Major and higher should mean you have Command experience, in the past or present. 

You can get to Lt Col in the USAF without any command experience.  Just saying.

[a2capt]

PAWG had limits on field grade officers a while back, and it got plucked from them.

That makes a lot more sense in the active duty military where people tend to move up or out, but in this organization, there are only so many slots.

[Panache]

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.

Agreed.

[UH60guy]

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.

Agreed.

Hear, hear.

Overhaul
Maj , CAP

[Майор Хаткевич]

It seems like most want functional grades, at least to the extent of showing experience. We do that now, but we really show non-CAP experience. I got 1st Lt because of my Earhart. A CFI got Capt because of his job. An accountant got Major because of his job. A former Air Force Colonel got Lt Col because of his AF experience. In all of these cases, the receiving end is basically clueless about what a SM is, the culture, or what any of it means. You can make an argument that a 21 year old former cadet is the closest to know how CAP works of the bunch, simply due to being around. But it was STILL an eye opener for me.

My first few meetings as an active SM consisted of hanging around, checking stuff out. The SMs, unless doing ES training were just...there. Sure some staff were doing administrative work, some flight crew may have been planning a training mission, but for the most part, people just wanted to get out of the house for the night. On the cadet side, cadets were doing their thing, and the CP SMs were doing a lot more "active" stuff by default. Because I had my separation for four years of college, I didn't feel like a cadet, but also felt out of place on the SM side. I asked questions about things that were happening. I suggested corrections when I knew something was off (drill, uniforms, etc).

But overall? I was adrift at sea, with little understanding for at least 6-8 weeks of what I'm doing with my 2+ hours a week.

Now imagine a new member who joined without any CAP experience. They see what I see, but have even less of an understanding. Even the former AF Colonel might be confused about most of it. So why do we give advanced rank to these (former cadets included) people? The military reasons are pay, respect, authority (JAGs, Medical, etc). In CAP? No one in their right mind will put a new CFI Captain in charge of anything. He doesn't know what he needs to be doing! So now you have a 4 year member who earned captain through PD and CAP experience, watch a guy with a PPL+ CFI get the same almost instantly while being useless to CAP in any meaningful way for at least 6-12 months to get a baseline understanding.

I have a lot of respect for certain Captains, Majors, and Lt Cols because I know the path they took to get there. The 1 year in Maj or Lt Col? I respect the person, but their CAP experience a lot of times leaves a lot to be desired.

[Private Investigator]

JMHO, but Major and higher should mean you have Command experience, in the past or present. 

You can get to Lt Col in the USAF without any command experience.  Just saying.

That is apples and oranges or CAP and USAF. My point is in CAP a Lt Col should know something beyond Petticoat Junction Squadron or the fact that they were "Squadron of the Year" in 1994.   

[Private Investigator]

It seems like most want functional grades, at least to the extent of showing experience. We do that now, but we really show non-CAP experience. I got 1st Lt because of my Earhart. A CFI got Capt because of his job. An accountant got Major because of his job. A former Air Force Colonel got Lt Col because of his AF experience. In all of these cases, the receiving end is basically clueless about what a SM is, the culture, or what any of it means. You can make an argument that a 21 year old former cadet is the closest to know how CAP works of the bunch, simply due to being around. But it was STILL an eye opener for me.

My first few meetings as an active SM consisted of hanging around, checking stuff out. The SMs, unless doing ES training were just...there. Sure some staff were doing administrative work, some flight crew may have been planning a training mission, but for the most part, people just wanted to get out of the house for the night. On the cadet side, cadets were doing their thing, and the CP SMs were doing a lot more "active" stuff by default. Because I had my separation for four years of college, I didn't feel like a cadet, but also felt out of place on the SM side. I asked questions about things that were happening. I suggested corrections when I knew something was off (drill, uniforms, etc).

But overall? I was adrift at sea, with little understanding for at least 6-8 weeks of what I'm doing with my 2+ hours a week.

Now imagine a new member who joined without any CAP experience. They see what I see, but have even less of an understanding. Even the former AF Colonel might be confused about most of it. So why do we give advanced rank to these (former cadets included) people? The military reasons are pay, respect, authority (JAGs, Medical, etc). In CAP? No one in their right mind will put a new CFI Captain in charge of anything. He doesn't know what he needs to be doing! So now you have a 4 year member who earned captain through PD and CAP experience, watch a guy with a PPL+ CFI get the same almost instantly while being useless to CAP in any meaningful way for at least 6-12 months to get a baseline understanding.

I have a lot of respect for certain Captains, Majors, and Lt Cols because I know the path they took to get there. The 1 year in Maj or Lt Col? I respect the person, but their CAP experience a lot of times leaves a lot to be desired.

Very good points. Everytime CAP attempts a 'mentor' program it fails. The better Squadrons have somewhat of a mentor program or at least a "nice" guy/gal who will help the newbies. When I was an IG I would visit a Squadron every two years and the problem they had on the previous visit was still there. 

[Eclipse]

My point is in CAP a Lt Col should know something beyond Petticoat Junction Squadron or the fact that they were "Squadron of the Year" in 1994.

Agreed.  Should.

However unfortunately, owing to the lack of performance expectations and no "up or out policy" in CAP,
a significant number of FGOs haven't been active in a decade.

These "valued members" randomly pop up whenever they feel like "playing CAP" completely "non-current"
in process and procedure, or for that matter what the wing is doing at all.

And many wings are so desperate to fill staff slots, that they get assigned to difficult, subjective
jobs that no one else wants, warm the chair for a few months, maybe whine a bit about BITD, and
then fade out again with the same warning as they faded in.

You can set a clock by some of them, and the only function they serve is to inject a little chaos
to no actual value.

[AirAux]

CAP collects alot of dough in dues from those old gray guys and some do no harm other than ride the rails.  No harm no foul??

[Eclipse]

CAP collects alot of dough in dues from those old gray guys and some do no harm other than ride the rails.  No harm no foul??

If they want to stay as empty shirts, fine, put them in an uncounted membership category off the wing's books and
cash their checks.

But counting them as members, or worse, then they pop-up ill informed every six months or so to take a
staff job, there's plenty of "foul and harm".

[AirAux]

Catch 22, new members that don't know that they are doing, old members that forgot what they are doing, and midstream members that don't care what they are doing.   

[Eclipse]

Catch 22, new members that don't know that they are doing, old members that forgot what they are doing, and midstream members that don't care what they are doing.

Agreed - one of the top ten reasons CAP's attempt to emulate the military model doesn't work.
Inactive, ill-formed FGOs are allowed to wander in and out of the ranks at will.

I understand there's no way to staff a volunteer organization with such mandates, but an up-or-out policy
coupled with some expectation of annual proficiency and activity would go a long way towards fixing this.

Never.

Happen.