2009 National Board Agenda

[Airrace]

Here is the agenda.  Courtesy of your friendly national finance officer

Thanks for taking the time to post the link. I looks like they are going to have a busy agenda.

[pixelwonk]

Wondering why we are assuming that it actually does work for the Aux just because one anonymous person has a favorable opinion of it.

Having been in both organizations concurrently at one time or another, I guess I can declare myself of having an equal authority on the matter then. FWIW, I've spent time in Flotilla, Division, National and direct CG augmentation billets.
I'd say that it doesn't work any better than what we've got right here, right now.  In some areas it's worse, with a lot of wasted administrative time being spent on rotating local commanders in and out of their positions because there has to be an election every year and nobody wants it.  It's the higher levels where we see those who love all the politics and are just aching for a command or an appointment by their elected buddies into the high-silver GOB network.
Add the Changes of Watch, new staff officer appointments, and oh yea... forms to go with everything. Yay forms! 

I am relieved that the proposal would leave squadron and group commanders appointed, but if it's good enough for them, it's good enough for the rest of the higher ups.  CAP-USAF already got to the core of the issue way better than I though:

Non-concur.  The concept of unity of command would be significantly degraded if, for
instance, the wing commander was answerable only to the members of his wing.  The
ability of the national commander or any region commander to implement national
policies and goals would be hindered if appointment/removal authority was removed
from their discretion.  Wing and region commanders are not just corporate officers
representing their constituents at the national board.  They are also commanders in a
military style hierarchy.  As such, the organizational construct must also reinforce loyalty
up the chain toward the shared goals of the corporation.

emphasis, mine.

Then again, when there is no CG Aux chain of command, save for a bunch of "chains of leadership and management," I suppose election may work for you. 

You know, get a kick out of CAP people who get mad at me for introducing concepts and ideas that work in CG Aux as something that might benefit CAP while at the same time I get grief from Auxies about bringing some CAP concepts to them.

Kidding aside, I agree that we should always be on the lookout for good ideas.  Radical changes of culture without hard data to back up the reasoning for doing so wouldn't fare well in either organization. 
Comparing CAP to the CG Aux is really like comparing apples to "International Oranges" and is kinda getting old.

[IceNine]

HOLY MOLY!
Agenda item 3:  Region commanders elected by the Wing Commanders. 
Wing Commanders elected by the members of their Wing. 
Squadron/Group commanders still chosen by Wing CC. 

CAP-USAF and National LO non-concurs. 

This would be absolutely wonderful.  As I've said before, I've seen this system work fairly well in the CG Aux, another paramilitary style organization.  And it is the way almost every club or other private organization in the country works.  Sure, there will be problems, but there are problems now. 

However, I think it would have been better to start introducing elections at the squadron level (with maybe allowing a veto by the Wing CC).  Once we get used to that, then start moving the electoral system upward.

I'm not sure how I personally feel about this one, I would say at the least the proposal is a little off base if we are trying to align with USAF command format.

In USAF from the information I can find is generally something like

Squadron Commander- 1Lt-Lt.Col
Group Commander- Col.
Wing Commander Brig. Gen
Numbered AF- Maj. Gen-Lt. Gen
Maj. Comm- Gen.

If we were to align with that I could definitely see the logic.  If this were my proposal I would make it on the basis that CAP is much more like a numbered AF than a Maj. Com as some have asserted.

I can see both sides of this. 

1) All this does is increase perceived authority but doesn't actually change anything.

2) Interface with local public service and military command <COULD> see increased interest if the wing commander wore a star.  The public and non-affiliated officials attach a whole different subset of preconceived notions.

[RiverAux]

I'm not sure of the relative size of an Air Force vs a Major Command, but with nearly 60,000 people and 550+ aircraft we're pretty large and any sort of attempt to align us with AF would probably result in grade increases for high-up CAP leaders. 

But, you can only take that process so far before you move into territory about what is the appropriate rank for squadron commanders and there you run into that wall where we can have a squadron commander of just about any rank. 

[dwb]

Yes, while the organization itself is pretty large (about 56k members last I knew), the units within the organization can be quite small.

For that reason, direct AF comparisons don't always work.  No Wing in the USAF is as small as Rhode Island Wing in CAP.  But we still call it a Wing, and the Commander is still a Colonel.

I think our grade structure is adequate.  The NB's time can be better spent looking at other issues, rather than wringing their hands thinking about how many stars the CAP/CC should have.

[FW]

^ Exactly, Dan.

I was a wing/cc back then and remember well this agenda item when originally brought to the table.  The 10 year postponement was more of a joke than a serious proposal but, here we are today rehashing this very old, musty and pungent piece of stupidity  old business.

Other than for some giggles, the NB will most likely dispose of this quickly.

[Cecil DP]

 So why aren't we pushing for the grade of Colonel for those with the GRW award and a certain amount of time in grade? It could be an amendment to the proposed agenda item.

[lordmonar]

I don't really see the need to bump the National CC up to 3-star...but there is a logical argument that the regional commander's should be 1-stars.

When the NB and the USAF bumped up the National CC to 2-star they should have looked at making the change for the regional commanders.

[Larry Mangum]

Since CAP does the majority of its work for 1st AF and it is commanded by a 2 star, should CAP be commanded by a 3 star? Somehow I doubt it.

[ZigZag911]

You could make the argument that CG Aux is led by a 3 star (whatever title they give it) and it is a smaller organization.

1st AF CC = Maj Gen is comparing apples & oranges; CAP-USAF CC is a colonel!

However, personally I think 2 stars is fine for CAP National CC...not so sure about 1 star rank for region CCs...eventually they'd want to make it permanent, then we'd have all these generals running around as former region commanders...

[DrJbdm]

   I agree, region CC's should be 1-stars. The deputy region CC is already a Colonel. it just makes sense.

   I think the National CC should prob stay a 2-star, easier to sell to the AF. Of course none of those other postions mentioned need 1-star rank in my opinion.

[Strick]

I think the issue of making more GENRALS in CAP is a no go for the AF.   

[Cecil DP]

The 2008 edition of CAPR 35-5 says that the AF doesn't have to approve CAP Gen promotions, only that they have to approve the CAP General grade structure. SO if this is at the NB I would assume that it has already been vetted by the AF.

[heliodoc]

Yep

CAP really needs to be worrying about adding stars don't they?

Must be something better to do with the agenda, isn't there?

[FW]

The 2008 edition of CAPR 35-5 says that the AF doesn't have to approve CAP Gen promotions, only that they have to approve the CAP General grade structure. SO if this is at the NB I would assume that it has already been vetted by the AF.

This is very old business, is not serious and, the CAP-USAF commander's comments are self evident. 
Maroon Epalets anyone?   

[Strick]

Just what we need more freakin Generals.   Lets just make suadron commanders Colonels and Group Commanders Colonels.   Also while we are at it , lets come up with more badges and special head gear.   I also propose that we appoint a CAP advisor to the POTUS.  Prehaps he can be put on the schedule to carry the football(nuke codes).  Lets start to work on real issues like recruting and funding.

[Strick]

When its all said and done the AF will make us wear golf shirts with those little stick on vistor name tags.

[jimmydeanno]

If its so old what is the purpose of keeping it on the agenda?  A vote takes just as long as a motion to table it...

[Gunner C]

It makes about as much sense as to make the region chaplain a full colonel and keeping the region chief of staff a lt colonel.

Keep CAP/CC a two-star; if a region CC needs to be a general, then do it on a case-by-case basis.  BUT, if there's going to be any promoted, they'd better be cream of the crop, well schooled, and know how to be general officers.  Heck, with that standard, we'd have darned few GOs.

[heliodoc]

Being from the RM community, I really find this stuff about CAP and more staaaaaarz and Generalships to be rather humorous in today's economy and higher training standards.  Makes CAP look more like bling hunters and ribbon rackers every day of the week reading some of these posts

Some CAPers may go on even to say...."We need stars and bling to keep from keeping "good leaders from leaving the organization" argument.

I have seen PLENTY of excellent Officers and Enlisted leave the military through either normal retirements and moving on.

Adding more stars to the CAP argument... "We need them"  really is a time waster and for all theat planning on more stars is approximately another 365 days wasted in that arena, that no one will ever get back.....but whatever, its like playing card games on the computer......A TRUE time waster