AM I a wannbee???????

[MIKE]

flyguy06, you need to put things in perspective of what CAP actually is to many members before you get all bent out of shape over titles of address... least you be labeled as the title of this thread would suggest.

Also, I beg to differ about your assertion about the U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary.  The one possible exception being commodores as far as titles are concerned.

[SarDragon]

It appears that your little Army microcosm differs wildly from the rest of the world.

I have spent almost my entire life in close proximity to the military. I have first hand experience in the social customs of the Navy (dependent and active duty), USAF (stationed on an air base for three years), and the Marine Corps (stationed on one of their bases for three years, and currently attend functions on one every so often). I have a number of officer friends from all three of these services. The customs and courtesies I see are very similar to what I have seen in CAP since my cadet days.

Do you require all cadets to address you formally when you see them in a civilian clothes environment? I, and many other SMs I know, selectively permit the use of reduced formality when a particular cadet has shown the ability to maintain the distinctions noted above. It's all in knowing where and when.

The basic idea I see is that there is a time and a place for each level of compliance.There is also a need for the junior folks to understand the "system".

Speaking of the officers for the moment, I have seen mostly first names on "home turf". Outside that environment, salutes and formal forms of address are exchanged more regularly as the occurrence of "strangers" increases, or the formality of the occasion demands.

Among just enlisteds, I actually see more day-to-day formality than I see among officers. That goes for all the services mentioned above. It's a part of the professional attitude you speak of.

In an officer-enlisted mix, things get more complex. In uniform "at work", it goes pretty much by the rules - salutes and proper forms of address are the norm. Out of uniform, or in social situations in uniform, the rules can get bent a little, at the convenience of the senior. I have been accorded the privilege of addressing officers by their first names in a number of instances, because they know that I know "the rules", and can differentiate between the various situations.

Leading all this back to CAP, the senior-cadet mix is the most critical situation, because they need to learn and use all the rules, before they learn the selective enforcement situations. Beyond that, it's whatever the traffic will bear, as long as the underlying principles are maintained.

From where I sit, I don't see anything broken on a wide spread basis in CAP. There may be individual pockets of significant noncompliance, but those should be corrected locally.

YMMV.

[RiverAux]

I don't think I've ever heard a "wannabe" charge in real life in reference to seniors.  In reference to cadets trying to act like Full Metal Jacket, that has been a topic of discussion. 

I have heard the term "secret squirrel" used derisively quite often in my real CAP life. 

I do fall in the camp that doesn't care about their motivation so long as their actions are in accordance with what we expect, or should expect, of CAP members. 

[Eclipse]

We are the USAF Aux when performing missions under a USAF assigned mission number.  We are the CAP Corp when we do everything else.

Which is administrivia in relation to insurance coverage and maybe Posse Comitatus status.  Otherwise, nothing else changes, and certainly not our uniforms or terms of address.

If you're leaning on the mission symbol for an excuse to be lax in your bearing, appearance, or professionalism, you're not doing it right.

[aveighter]

I wannbee wannabee a spell-check user so my atrocious spelling and syntax doesn't  obliterate my ability to communicate effectively.

[RRLE]

I point the CG Aux who are all adult volunteers.

You would be wrong most of the time. Only District Commodores, the equivalent of your Wing King, and higher are addressed with a title before their name. And there is no penalty for not doing so. All other elected and appointed leaders are addressed by first name.

[vento]

We are the USAF Aux when performing missions under a USAF assigned mission number.  We are the CAP Corp when we do everything else.

Which is administrivia in relation to insurance coverage and maybe Posse Comitatus status.  Otherwise, nothing else changes, and certainly not our uniforms or terms of address.

If you're leaning on the mission symbol for an excuse to be lax in your bearing, appearance, or professionalism, you're not doing it right.

You will not get any argument from me here, I agree with your statement 100% and that's why I've referenced the "Respect on Display" pamphlet.

The point I was trying to make is that we are not always USAF AUX as some tend to think we are at all times, we may have started that way but our mission (or customer) has since changed. For example when performing some CD missions in California, we are definitely not working as USAF AUX. We do what we do and address our officers the way we do because we are the "Civil Air Patrol", not merely because we are the USAF AUX. And please don't get me wrong, I have the utmost respect for the service man and woman in the RM.

[Eclipse]

I point the CG Aux who are all adult volunteers.

You would be wrong most of the time. Only District Commodores, the equivalent of your Wing King, and higher are addressed with a title before their name. And there is no penalty for not doing so. All other elected and appointed leaders are addressed by first name.

Is your "Quote" button broken?

It seems to work ok for the rest of us...

[Fubar]

I have heard the term "secret squirrel" used derisively quite often in my real CAP life.

This is frequently thrown around at my local GA airport. Apparently a number of folks have tried to strike up conversations with CAP members before/after missions and the crews refuse to provide any information about what they're up to, even when on training missions or proficiency flights. Seems like a missed recruiting opportunity to me.

[Dad2-4]

I agree with the comment that I've only heard "wannabe" in reference to overly gung-ho cadets who want to play real military and throw rank around. All of the SMs I've worked with seemed to have a clear understanding of our mission and place in the grand military related community.
In the squadrons I've been in, most, not all, of the officers call each other by our rank even in casual settings just because we've gotten into that habit. At CAP functions we all address each other by rank because there's always cadets around. No big deal.

[flyguy06]

we need a formal basic trainng program for new senior members. Right now all we have is a computer based level one that all you have to do is read and answer some questions. there is no practical evaluation process or standardized training. We need that.

Could you expand on what your are hoping for here?

I assume you are not talking about some sort of mandatory Annual Training / OCS like the ACA performs, but something a little more local and portable.

yes Ned. i am talking about some time of centralized program on the Wing level like an SLS where new Senior members cango for two days and learn customs and curteousies, how to wear the uniform properly, military traditons and ceremonies, and things such as that.

Yes, sort of like OCS without all the physical activitiy and the whole yelling thing.

[flyguy06]

flyguy06, you need to put things in perspective of what CAP actually is to many members before you get all bent out of shape over titles of address... least you be labeled as the title of this thread would suggest.

Also, I beg to differ about your assertion about the U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary.  The one possible exception being commodores as far as titles are concerned.

My reference to the CG Aux wasnt about titles. It was about how they have no problem wearing a uniform that looks exactly like their parent organization yet we in CAP want to wear a civilain style uniform.

[flyguy06]

This has nothing to do with Army vs. Air Force or anything like that. Loking at this thread you'd think i am the only one in CAP with this opinion. Well I am not. This subject was actually brought to me by other senior members. I just happen to agree withthem.

Its not about being saluted or calling me sir. I get that in the RM. Its about adhearing to a standard. Doesnt matter if cadets are around or not. You dont abide by the standards when cadets are around and them not do it when they are not. what kind of lesson in integrity is that teaching?

Again, I am not saying every waking moment we need to address each other by rank and name. of course ininformal situations, or off duty, or outside of CAP obviously you wouldnt do that,. but when in uniform on CAP duty we should. Wheather cadets are present or not.

Thats all  Iam saying.

[RRLE]

My reference to the CG Aux wasnt about titles. It was about how they have no problem wearing a uniform that looks exactly like their parent organization yet we in CAP want to wear a civilain style uniform.

You will get into this same arguement in the Aux. On their main discussion board, they are having this arguement right now. There is a significant number of Auxies and Coasties who think the Aux should wear a different uniform for many of the same reasons it is brought up in CAP: members who wear it incorrectly, out of shape etc. And since the Aux and the Coast Guard work more directly with the public there is the on-going discussion of Auxies impersonating (deliberately or not) Coast Guard officers and deceiving the pubic.

The Aux doesn't have a Corporate Uniform like CAP but it does have a Blue Blazer outift, two polo shirt outfits and a t-shirt option.

The organizations are different but the issues are the same.

[James Shaw]

Am I a wannbee because I choose to wear the military style uniforms as opposed to the blue golf shirt or CAP distinctive uniform? and because I want to be addressed by my rank?

I would have to agree with you 100%. For me it all depends on the situation and what I am doing at the time. When I am around cadets I prefer to be addressed by my rank and last name to help the cadets learn and understand. Thats what we are here for. If I am at a CAP meeting such as the NB than I am more formal with rank and names. If I am in a less formal setting such as a seminar class or something than I am less formal.

When we have a meeting for the Medal of Valor Association we go by firstnames and less formal. We have current and former members.


For me it is going to depend on the environment I am in.

I dont think it makes you a wannabee it makes you a professional.

[RiverAux]

There is a significant number of Auxies and Coasties who think the Aux should wear a different uniform for many of the same reasons it is brought up in CAP

By significant, he means about 3 of the 10 or so people that are active on the board (and maybe only 1 that is actually currently in the Aux) plus a troll that recently weighed in. 

There is absolutely 0 discussion in real world CG Aux about switching to a different uniform and I'm positive that not a single Auxie I know would want to do so. 

[flyboy53]

Please remember we are CIVIL Air Patrol.  You aren't in the military.  Don't let your rank go to your head .   Perhaps it's just my experience,  but it seems that I find that there's more "goof balls"  wearing the AF style uniforms,  versus the corporate type options. 
RM

Pardon me, but we are still a federally-chartered volunteer organization that reports to the Air Force and given the honor of wearing that uniform. As such, there are also three federally or Air Force-assigned missions that require a military organizational hierarchy of ranks, units and titles. I realize that there are just as many civilianized "grey suiters" in this organization as there are those who lean to the Air Force Aux side -- as I do and I'm a wannabe -- but failure to abide by that hierarchy and demand respect for a rank or title does a great dis-service to the cadets and smacks at any type of professionalism that we try to aspire to. So many cadets have such a poor perception of senior members now, why give them more ammunition leading to dissension and disrepect in the ranks.

[RRLE]

RiverAux,

After your parsing of your own recent poll to get the number you wanted, I wouldn't take any of your so-called stats for much use.

As a matter of fact, Tony Morris who at the time was a Deputy Department Chief of "I" and went on to become the NADCO (National Directorate Commodore) of Member Services, which included personnel and uniforms - often entertained the idea of distinct uniforms on the old Member Forum - which he also moderated.

The 'baby blue' VE uniform was developed because some elements of both the public and the Aux thought the Working Blue Uniform was too intimidating. And it is a current member who is constantly bewailing the 'swat' ODU and the companion boots. And he isn't the only current member not enamoured with that uniform. In fact, most of the critiicism on the board and agiation for a different uniform comes from current members.

[Eclipse]

...most of the critiicism on the board and agiation for a different uniform comes from current members.

Who else would care?

[RiverAux]

In fact, most of the critiicism on the board and agiation for a different uniform comes from current members.

Actually it is not, but I invite any CAPTalkers who would like to fact check this to look at military.com and see for yourself.  The CG Aux board is pretty much dead and what remains is dominated by people that are no longer in the Aux (some voluntarily and at least one who was forced out) plus a few random ex-CG, non Aux members who weigh in every now and again.  The few actual current Aux members are usually shouted down pretty quickly whenever expressing any positive opinions about the organization.  Imagine a situation where CAPTalks two primary trolls represented about a quarter of those who participated, rather than just being a small minority as they are here.

I'll let the Aux angle drop now.