CSAG Agenda

[Eclipse]

One of the "harms" is the credibility gap caused when dealing with other agencies, especially the military.

#1 CAP problem?  No.  But it's on the list, and has caused more then a few people to ask the "second question",
which then tends to expose other foibles.

When you can't get something as important and yet basic as your grade structure correct, it tends to
color people's opinions about other issues as well - whether the vector is an organization unable to
get the simple details right, or one which is constantly distracted by trivialities which should be
a simply baseline of operations.

This is where the uniform, grade, and similar problems hurt us most, and in ways not readily
apparent sometimes until you have a chance to have a personal conversation and find out
why "so and so never calls", etc.

[SunDog]

Ahhh, yes. . .point taken. Hard to keep them away from strangers/guests when necessary; they look and smell like senior management until they start to speak. . .

[RiverAux]

One of the "harms" is the credibility gap caused when dealing with other agencies, especially the military.

#1 CAP problem?  No.  But it's on the list, and has caused more then a few people to ask the "second question",
which then tends to expose other foibles.

Half the problem is that many CAP members incorrectly believe the hype that we're actually top heavy when in fact data shows that its nowhere near as bad as people think ("everybody's a Lt. Col.")

[Eclipse]

One of the "harms" is the credibility gap caused when dealing with other agencies, especially the military.

#1 CAP problem?  No.  But it's on the list, and has caused more then a few people to ask the "second question",
which then tends to expose other foibles.

Half the problem is that many CAP members incorrectly believe the hype that we're actually top heavy when in fact data shows that its nowhere near as bad as people think ("everybody's a Lt. Col.")

To a certain extent we are, perhaps not numerically, but certainly operationally - this is the corner members pile up into
and then stay for 20-30 years sometimes, not necessarily doing much of anything.

[a2capt]

The meeting ended less then 8 hours ago...

Yup, plenty of time if someone was taking notes.. to post something.

[Alaric]

The meeting ended less then 8 hours ago...

Yup, plenty of time if someone was taking notes.. to post something.

Why would they want to do that, its much more fun to burden the membership without warning 

[JeffDG]

The meeting ended less then 8 hours ago...

Yup, plenty of time if someone was taking notes.. to post something.

Why would they want to do that, its much more fun to burden the membership without warning 

Well, considering that the CSAG doesn't have the authority as a body to direct members to the men's room, it's not really an issue. 

The only "authority" remaining with CSAG is appointment of CAP representatives on the BOG, and maybe some awards.  Everything else they do is purely advisory.

Now, don't get me wrong, the individual members of CSAG still exercise command authority, what I'm saying is that a vote of the CSAG is advisory in nature, not directive.

[LGM30GMCC]

Regarding some of the proposed changes to the rank structure:

The National Promotions Review Working Group actually recommended eliminating the advanced promotions for pilots too. Apparently there is push-back that will cause us to have a harder time recruiting pilots. You can make your own assessment of that view.

The retention of temporary promotions for Lt Cols serving as Wing Legislative Officers was for external political purposes. People listen to Lt Cols...they don't listen to 2d Lts. This happens in the RM too. Sometimes there is a bit of game playing to appease the masses. While there are plenty of folks who do not like that type of game, sometimes its worth biting the bullet to get ahead. The compensation though, and mitigation to 'Oh! I'll promote my buddy to this position so he can be a Lt Col forever!' group (which I have seen executed) is to make the requirements for Lt Col immediately come into effect if that person leaves the job. If they get fired, or weren't doing it, and their political buddy leaves Wg/CC, they do not get to remain a Lt Col.

There was discussion about removing advanced promotion for RM officers as well. However, until CAP cleans out its ranks of bad officers there is a problem that can make it very difficult to recruit military officers. (Current or retired) If you have someone with years of military training and experience (preferably one who is good at it) that then meets up with a crappy CAP officer trying to throw their CAP rank around (Again...it happens) it can give a very sour note. One which can then damage CAP's relationship with the RM. (RM officers talk with each other, and among a lot of company grade officers CAP does not have the best reputation.) A good RM officer who comes across a good CAP officer generally will have no problem respecting that rank, they're kinda trained to that.

Just eliminating RM 'advanced promotions' for military officers would very likely just not pass muster with the USAF. Some may think this is unreasonable, but that's the simple truth of the matter. I don't foresee that changing for many years though making more stringent requirements for CAP officers is a good start.

As for the NOAA/USPHS/etc...yes they are commissioned officers, but there is a different breed feeling between the 7 uniformed services and the 5 armed forces. Heck the armed forces have hard enough getting along with each other and getting along with the total force! (Though that has been steadily changing as the active-force has been drawn down. We have all been learning to work together. I actually had a ANG Capt/FBI Agent in my in-residence SOS class, it was pretty cool!)

[Майор Хаткевич]

Interesting note...there are 3000 SMs in 000. That's 10% of our SMs who are effectively not there. What I'm really baffled by are the almost 1000 cadets...You are either a cadet or your not. Why is that even an option?

[arajca]

Interesting note...there are 3000 SMs in 000. That's 10% of our SMs who are effectively not there. What I'm really baffled by are the almost 1000 cadets...You are either a cadet or your not. Why is that even an option?

Because there are many not-yet-former cadets who joined and decided CAP was not right for them or had conflicts with school/sports/life after joining and are not going to formally quit and are not worth the 2B process headaches, but are not going to do anything CAP related. They get transferred to the 000 units to remove them non-safety compliance problem from the units until their membership lapses.

[Cliff_Chambliss]

I guess I am one of the 3000 hanging around in 000 just waiting for my membership year to finish.  When AL Sqdn 34 folded several months back I had already made the decision to terminate CAP.  With that thought in mind I could not/would not go to another unit and "ghost" til end-date, nor would I be much good going into a unit and performing a job knowing I was at best temporary.  So over the past few months while in 000, Captalk has been my one remaining link to CAP. 

[Tim Day]

Regarding some of the proposed changes to the rank structure:

The National Promotions Review Working Group actually recommended eliminating the advanced promotions for pilots too. Apparently there is push-back that will cause us to have a harder time recruiting pilots. You can make your own assessment of that view.

The retention of temporary promotions for Lt Cols serving as Wing Legislative Officers was for external political purposes. People listen to Lt Cols...they don't listen to 2d Lts. This happens in the RM too.

...

My opinion on this has yet to be swayed. If you treat (and task) every Lt Col like a Lt Col, you'll soon weed out those who should not be wearing Lt Col. In other words, expect O5s to demonstrate O5-level responsibility. The respect for grade from other organizations won't come from increasing TIG. It'll come from our ability to hold those of us with senior grade to the standards for that grade.

We already have a leadership expectations chart for cadets. Why not create one for senior members? If a RM O5 prospective SM knows that as a CAP O5 he'll be expected to not only pursue his professional development but contribute xx hours per year to Wing and higher activities, but as an O1-O3 he'll be left alone to hang with his squadron buddies, he'll be able to make an informed decision about whether he wants to request his special promotion.   

[Eclipse]

I'd like to see anything but anecdotal evidence that CAP grade is a significant factor in recruiting from the military.
I would put forth that anyone from the military community who is "too excited" about CAP grade probably doesn't
understand CAP and needs to be educated.

We don't really have a recruiting problem, we have a retention problem, and much of that retention problem
stems directly from the way we implement our grade and authority structure.

So conferring commensurate grade to a military Lt Col and then making him SnackO to a 2d Lt Unit CC is
somehow "better" then just having that Lt Col join as a 2d Lt himself and being the SnackO?

In the former, it exposes the weakness and brokeness of our structure from Day 1, the latter at least
presents that all new members are created equal in regards to CAP, and they will rise or fall based on
their contribution(s), not mostly irrelevant outside qualifications.

[LGM30GMCC]

Take a look at the CSAG Minutes from November 2013 Starting on Page 32. That's what the NPRWG recommended.

[LSThiker]

My opinion on this has yet to be swayed. If you treat (and task) every Lt Col like a Lt Col, you'll soon weed out those who should not be wearing Lt Col. In other words, expect O5s to demonstrate O5-level responsibility. The respect for grade from other organizations won't come from increasing TIG. It'll come from our ability to hold those of us with senior grade to the standards for that grade.

We already have a leadership expectations chart for cadets. Why not create one for senior members? If a RM O5 prospective SM knows that as a CAP O5 he'll be expected to not only pursue his professional development but contribute xx hours per year to Wing and higher activities, but as an O1-O3 he'll be left alone to hang with his squadron buddies, he'll be able to make an informed decision about whether he wants to request his special promotion.   

We have expectations for cadet leadership positions, true, but not requirements.  So, while I may not agree with a C/Col having never been a cadet commander, it is entirely possible that said cadet has never held a leadership position in CAP.

The only problem is that even in the military, O-5s are not the same.  In the USAF, an O-5 could be a squadron commander.  However, in the Army, an O-5 could be a battalion commander.  Or that USAF O-5 may have never been in a line leadership position.  Same grade, but vastly different responsibilities.

Even not mentioning the real military, what happens if that CAP Lt Col no longer contributes XX hours per year to wing but still remains active at the squadron due to work or family health related issues? 

[Eclipse]

I'd be totally on board with participation and performance expectations for grades.

As I've said before, it doesn't matter >why< you aren't there, you're either carrying a corner or you are not.

That doesn't mean not being compassionate about people's personal circumstances, but
whether you are too sick (long term), too busy, or too disinterested to be involved at a meaningful level
there is still work to be done and duties to perform, work generally dumped back on those "compassionate"
commanders who wind up allowing for everyone's circumstances, and then burning out and quitting.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Interestingly...the Eaker award writeup from national states that to earn it a cadet MUST have served as a Cadet Commander. I'd argue the SDA program doesn't quite work it that way, but here you have it.

[Tim Day]

Even not mentioning the real military, what happens if that CAP Lt Col no longer contributes XX hours per year to wing but still remains active at the squadron due to work or family health related issues?

They retain their grade and eventually either retire or recover, just like we do with Wing CCs and in the RM. It doesn't hurt us to have Lt Cols around who have contributed, it hurts us to have members around who never contribute.

[LSThiker]

They retain their grade and eventually either retire or recover, just like we do with Wing CCs and in the RM. It doesn't hurt us to have Lt Cols around who have contributed, it hurts us to have members around who never contribute.

Okay, so it is not XX hours to wing, but rather XX hours to CAP.  Who actually certifies these senior members are performing to the standard?

If we have members around who "never contribute", then why not transfer them to the 000 squadrons?

[LSThiker]

I'd be totally on board with participation and performance expectations for grades.

As I've said before, it doesn't matter >why< you aren't there, you're either carrying a corner or you are not.

That doesn't mean not being compassionate about people's personal circumstances, but
whether you are too sick (long term), too busy, or too disinterested to be involved at a meaningful level
there is still work to be done and duties to perform, work generally dumped back on those "compassionate"
commanders who wind up allowing for everyone's circumstances, and then burning out and quitting.

How is this any different than the work generally dumped back on those commanders that have members simply quit?