Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 24, 2017, 03:43:27 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10

 1 
 on: Yesterday at 11:31:02 PM 
Started by Cicero - Last post by Mordecai
Cicero, if you really think that the reestablishment of Ground Alert is going to result in an increase in Chaplain requests you are seriously misinformed.
I pulled Alert in SAC for 12 years including 6 years at Offutt AFB and never once saw a Chaplain in the Alert Facility.
Mostly because the Chaplains didn't have the Top Secret Security Clearance required to even enter the facility and they were not on the Entry List either.

Why would they be needed in a secure area? Where did he say they would be needed there?

 2 
 on: Yesterday at 10:57:38 PM 
Started by Cicero - Last post by PHall
Cicero, if you really think that the reestablishment of Ground Alert is going to result in an increase in Chaplain requests you are seriously misinformed.
I pulled Alert in SAC for 12 years including 6 years at Offutt AFB and never once saw a Chaplain in the Alert Facility.
Mostly because the Chaplains didn't have the Top Secret Security Clearance required to even enter the facility and they were not on the Entry List either.

 3 
 on: Yesterday at 10:49:26 PM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by Eclipse


That...is a win...

Are you expecting our numbers to be pared down?

Yes, and I understand it has happened before.

I was not a member, but I was told on more then one occasion that in the mid-90's
when NHQ started doing FBI checks and required all members to submit fingerprints,
a non-trivial number of people either self-selected to avoid embarrassment or we
found to have "issues" that disqualified their membership.

This is a definite step in the right direction. If not a single member is terminated,
great, we've got a new baseline.

 4 
 on: Yesterday at 10:39:17 PM 
Started by Cicero - Last post by Fubar
I don't know that I agree with your assertion that there will be an increase in demand for services, but based on what you're describing there will be a greater need for mental health professionals, something that is definitely outside of CAP's wheel house. We can't even seem to do CISM.

 5 
 on: Yesterday at 10:10:29 PM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by EMT-83
One and done for background checks certainly isn't best practice.

 6 
 on: Yesterday at 10:03:35 PM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by etodd


That...is a win...

Are you expecting our numbers to be pared down?

 7 
 on: Yesterday at 09:57:28 PM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by Eclipse
"Dear Valued CAP Member

The industry best practice for nonprofit volunteer organizations, as well as most government agencies, is to conduct background rescreening every five years. As the U.S. Air Force’s newest Total Force partner, it is imperative that CAP always maintains the support, confidence and trust of our parent organization. To demonstrate due diligence and get CAP into the five-year rescreening cycle, we have contracted with Verified Volunteers, a highly respected company that regularly completes background screening for numerous volunteer organizations, including Big Brothers Big Sisters, Girl Scouts, and Pop Warner Football.

Initially, approximately 13,500 members screened prior to 2014 will be rescreened. These background checks will be conducted electronically; a fingerprint card and the normally required paperwork are NOT required. The rescreening process will begin in the next several weeks and will be completed in early 2018.

National Headquarters will use its currently-established process to review any information received. Members will, of course, have the opportunity to provide documentation or additional information before a final decision concerning membership eligibility is reached.

Please note that CAP Regulation 39-2, paragraph 3.2.2.2, requires all members to notify National Headquarters within 30 days of any changes on the membership application that may affect membership eligibility. Although we know this would be a very rare occurrence, an arrest after joining CAP that has not been reported to National Headquarters should be reported now, prior to the rescreening process. This could reduce the amount of time required to adjudicate any findings and help to ensure continuous participation in Civil Air Patrol.

Once these initial rescreenings are completed, all Civil Air Patrol senior members will be rescreened every five years, concurrent with their membership renewal date starting in 2019. Initial screening for new members will still be accomplished through the current screening process.

Thank you for your support as we make this important change to our membership screening process.

Sincerely



MARK E. SMITH
Major General, CAP"


That...is a win...

 8 
 on: Yesterday at 09:49:04 PM 
Started by NIN - Last post by SarDragon

;tldr:  if all questions are to be asked only to local squadron, why have this forum?


Great Q. I'll answer this one first, and then work through the rest.

We are here to exchange information, anything from local how-tos to national level stuff. This exchange can be via questions from our members, or a voluntary sharing of information of interest.


IMPO, the primary source of information should be regs and standards (formalized), perhaps a squadron mentor (informal), or a forum to ask intelligent questions in the hope of receiving intelligent answers (also informal.)

My squadron CO is a busy man.  I'm new to CAP and may be blond, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist an aerospace officer to see that the adage of 80% of the work falls on 20% of the people holds true.  (Or 90% of the work on 10% of the people).  Either way, my squadron CO is a busy man, as are the other core seniors. 


I agree wholeheartedly.

My reference to the chain of command involves everyone in that chain, not just the commander. Cadets should start with their lowest level "supervisor", and escalate upward as necessary. Seniors should start with the staff officer most closely related to the problem area. The commander is a last resort.

If any of these folks don't know an answer, it is incumbent upon them to aid in resolving the issue. Simply answering "I don't know" and ending the discussion, a response heard all too often, is poor leadership.

You'll find that answers are more forthcoming if it's made clear that the person asking the question isn't simply being lazy.

"I checked 39-1, but it's still not clear" or "My PDO doesn't know, so I'm asking here" will probably open the floodgates.

I'm a firm believer in teaching someone to fish instead of just handing over the catch of the day. Long term, it will make them a better member. That's much better than instant gratification in my book.

This pretty much says it all.

 9 
 on: Yesterday at 09:12:41 PM 
Started by KG7YTS - Last post by SarDragon
It's a CAP thing, not a church thing, so it's random and usually cadets.

Back in my day as a cadet, it was at our Squadron Chaplain's church that we all went to. We didn't just randomly go to church in uniform.

(I wasn't the most church-going lad in my youth, so this was treat!)

Same thing here, on the first Sunday in December. Most of the squadron, seniors and cadets, would attend.

 10 
 on: Yesterday at 08:14:22 PM 
Started by NIN - Last post by Commo
People get the "chain of command" response because that should be the primary source of information for all members. If someone comes on here and asks questions without having consulted that primary source, then you are doing them and yourself a disservice.

I respectfully disagree with this statement: that no one should ask questions here without having already asked the squadron CO. 

IMPO, the primary source of information should be regs and standards (formalized), perhaps a squadron mentor (informal), or a forum to ask intelligent questions in the hope of receiving intelligent answers (also informal.)

My squadron CO is a busy man.  I'm new to CAP and may be blond, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist an aerospace officer to see that the adage of 80% of the work falls on 20% of the people holds true.  (Or 90% of the work on 10% of the people).  Either way, my squadron CO is a busy man, as are the other core seniors.  I can, and do, email them with questions when reading the regs is incomplete, contradictory, or both.  For those questions with incomplete/contradictory regs, this forum *should* be a great resource because that question has likely been asked before, but for the examples I'm thinking of, I did not ask the forum.  Why?  1) I didn't want to start a uniform topic that would likely become Yet Another Uniform Topic,  2) an answer of "go read 39-1", when I already have and it's unclear, or 3) an expected answer of "go ask your chain of command".

Don't get me wrong: I'm a firm believer in doing your own research first before asking a question.  Pointing someone towards a manual with a direction to their answer will provide more knowledge than just the answer.  It will also provide a more complete answer to a more complete question.  However, with the current state of CAP regs (outdated, incomplete, contradictory, or maybe best understood with an underlying GOB/GOG "Well, that's how CAP has always done it), it is darn difficult to find all the answers there.

I agree: sometimes the answer should be a gentle / firm / less so response of "Have you googled that?"  (Sometimes the answer is obvious... although sometimes google provides the answer only if you know the correct CAP terminology to use.  New seniors and cadet parents do not).

I also agree: sometimes the correct answer is a local procedure.  A forum response could be a correct answer to one wing but not to the poster (so wrong), or a correct answer to a question out of context (which is then wrong, too).

I disagree: some of the "ask your chain of command" responses to questions that seemed like poster had done homework but still had questions, and topic was not of a local procedure.

;tldr:  if all questions are to be asked only to local squadron, why have this forum?

Respectfully,

Commo




Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.322 seconds with 15 queries.
click here to email me