initial term limit for squadron commanders?

[smilindrew]

What is the initial term limit for a squadron commander? And are these national Regs? Or can wing dictate their own rules?

[FlyTiger77]

You'll find the answer in CAPR 20-1, para 14c which states in pertinent part: "...These commanders serve a four-year term of office..."

[AirAux]

And then it's out the door whether there is a satisfactory replacement or not, with threats to close the squadron, and not even a thank you to the exiting commander..  Another bright idea from those above that don't even know the program or how it works..

[Eclipse]

Strongly non-concur.

A unit with no replacement CC after 4 years is, by design, failing.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Strongly non-concur.

A unit with no replacement CC after 4 years is, by design, failing.

+1.

[Lord of the North]

And then it's out the door whether there is a satisfactory replacement or not, with threats to close the squadron, and not even a thank you to the exiting commander..  Another bright idea from those above that don't even know the program or how it works..

Not True!.  CAPR 20-1 para 14c states "c. The wing commander appoints group, squadron, and flight commanders. These commanders serve a four-year term of office. Upon completion of the initial term, the Commander may be appointed to subsequent four-year terms with the approval of the Wing and Region commander."  (my emphasis).

[Eclipse]

Yes, and I can tell you the likelihood of that being approved approaches zero.

After 4 years an active, successful CC is cooked, and an inactive one should be replaced, so why even entertain the idea?

[lordmonar]

Yes, and I can tell you the likelihood of that being approved approaches zero.

After 4 years an active, successful CC is cooked, and an inactive one should be replaced, so why even entertain the idea?

Because you can....and failing or not....you got to keep squadrons open or the WING will fail in its mission.

[Eclipse]

In this case they already have (failed), no point in perpetuating it.

Not that it won't happen - why follow the clear intent of the regulation when you can maintain status quo and  avoid an uncomfortable conversation?

If you haven't gotten your "plan" in place so that it lives past you in four years, you never will.

If you have, time to move on and give someone else a chance.

And if in four years you haven't recruited enough people to replace you and put a transition plan in place,
then you really need to go.

Perpetuating failure is failure and one of the top reasons we can't get out of the circular rut we're in.

BTW "beloved" and "respected" does not necessarily equal "successful".

[Майор Хаткевич]

Besides,

Each time a CC spot opens in our wing, everyone gets the application email. Just because there's no one in THAT unit, doesn't mean an outsider can't take over.

[Eclipse]

Besides,

Each time a CC spot opens in our wing, everyone gets the application email. Just because there's no one in THAT unit, doesn't mean an outsider can't take over.

In many cases, especially struggling units, that's the best course of action - new blood, no history or
inappropriate allegiances.

[Private Investigator]

Besides,

Each time a CC spot opens in our wing, everyone gets the application email. Just because there's no one in THAT unit, doesn't mean an outsider can't take over.

In many cases, especially struggling units, that's the best course of action - new blood, no history or
inappropriate allegiances.

I concur.

The CAPR 20-1 2 Jan 2013 makes it a 4 year tour. As a Group Commander for four years, that is a bit much. Squadron Commanders get burnt out after 3 years. I notice that after the third year most CCs will go on auto-pilot.

[Private Investigator]

What is the initial term limit for a squadron commander? And are these national Regs? Or can wing dictate their own rules?

On a side note, the Squadron Commander is appointed by the Group Commander or the Wing Commander in Wings without Groups. The Squadron Commander does a bad job they can be fired. I fired a few when I got too many complaints about them. 

[Patterson]

Where does the ousted Squadron Commander move to?  Serve as a Group or Wing assistant staff officer?  Unfortunately the great majority of Group/Wing/Region staffers don't meet weekly (sometimes monthly or even quarterly!).  You are forcing out a person that has dedicated themselves to the most contact-intensive and active position in the entire organization.  How does a person go from doing something they most likely enjoy and being told "time to go, though we don't know where you should go"??

Some might say that the recently cashiered commander can just pick up a new duty at the squadron.  Others will say "just move up" or "just move on". Unless there is a real plan in place (in writing) that spells out where successful squadron commanders should go once they are drummed out of command, the notion of term limits and replacements are insulting to the majority of commanders that are/have been pushed out to meet the regulation.

I am also getting really tired of being told/ reminded about the timeframe involving commander burnout.  Those are opinions.  Just because a commander was burned out at the four year mark and his squadron exploded does not equal the organizational norm. 

Perhaps we should first look at term limits being placed on Group/ Wing and Region staff positions. If a person has only served on the staff at wing for the past twenty years and has not stepped once into a local squadron, that is far worse than a squadron commander with five years at one unit.

[Eclipse]

Where does the ousted Squadron Commander move to?

Not relevent to the actual question.

That is a separate personnel / personal issue specific to the individual, however the fact that anyone would view the situation
as anything but the normal course of business for any organization means there's too much ego in the equation. And this isn't being "drummed out of command".  That's the problem, people take it too personally and view change as some reflection on their performance.

Yes - higher HQ, different HQ, larger-scope activities, a different staff job, etc., etc. The last guy's job isn't the new guy's problem.
The last guy should have worked that out for himself, which gets to your point about transition.  By the 3rd year there should be multiple candidates and backups for all major jobs.  People die, get sick, move, etc.  Far too many units come to a screeching halt because "John got a new job."

In most wings there are 35-50 some CC jobs, and dozens if not hundreds qualified.

Done properly, the group and wing staff jobs should be turning over and changing when the CC's do.  Not all of them, but
many, for the same reasons.  New guy, new ideas.

I left my Squadron Command early and voluntarily to take a Group Command which I left kicking and screaming.  I would have
never given up that job had I not been required to, but my successors have done excellent if not better jobs, and they deserved
their chance as well, as do their successors, etc., etc., etc.

[AirAux]

As I said, booted out without even a thank you.  We are a volunteer organization and upper menagement needs to remember that.  Eclipse, as you noted the squadron was failing, at least by someone's standards.  Small composite squadron started by the commander 11 years ago.  Probably much more typical than a squadron of 50 or so.  Size varied from 15 to 40, a one time high.  A failed squadron?  Ask the senior member that just finished his first year of flight training and was assigned to McGuire AFB for DC-10 fueler training.  He joined because he wanted to fly for the Air Force.  Ask the other senior member that is halfway through his first year of flight training in Texas,  He joined as a cadet 8 years ago because he wanted to fly for the Air Force.  Ask the second year USAFA cadet that joined as a cadet 6 years ago because he wanted to go to the academy.  Ask the 7-8 active duty members that all joined as cadets because they wanted to join the military some day.  Ask the parents of the 2-3 cadets who had been in trouble with the law and this commander gave them another chance when another squadron woldn't accept them (and they turned out nicely).  Ask the commanders that called this commander between midnight and three in the morning to take some of his sqyadron members and work ELT's.  I could go on, but, obviously CAP has redefined the concept of success..

[Eclipse]

As I said, booted out without even a thank you.

Said who?  If you start form that position, which is NOT CORRECT, then the rest of your assertions hold zero weight.

You can throw all the caveats, asterisks, "I know betters" and "CAP done wrongs because I gave my alls" that you want and
it won't change anything.

The only way to maintain a culture of new ideas, avoid stagnation, and encourage proper mentor-ship is to have term limits.

Just because "John" was a great commander, doesn't mean "Jane, Greg, and Herschel" won't be as well, maybe better, maybe not,
but they deserve their chance instead of sitting on the sidelines because "John" is the "bestest CC ever" and won't even consider
getting out of the way.

You accept the job knowing there are four years, that fuels initiative and drive.  For those where the "changed the rules", in most cases
the clck started with the new reg, either way, you know the clock is ticking, get it done, and then act like an adult and make room for the next guy.

[arajca]

I think (yea, it's a bad habit), CAP is trying move away from the personality driven units to sustainable units. How many of the units with the eternal CC would withstand the CC's departure, for whatever reason?

[lordmonar]

obviously CAP has redefined the concept of success..

Not CAP.....just Eclipse.

I will say again my position.  As a good rule of thumb terms limits make sense for all the reasons Eclipse has stated.  I think that it is a mistake to MANDATE term limits.....as it has been stated before.....if the sitting commander is the best fit for the job.....why screw with it?

Replacement commanders IMHO is NOT the job of the sitting commander...but the job of the next higher echelon...working with the current commander in developing a successor.

In a perfect world....the deputy commander or vice commander would be that successor.....but we know for a fact...that that model is not followed in CAP.

[Eclipse]

I think (yea, it's a bad habit), CAP is trying move away from the personality driven units to sustainable units. How many of the units with the eternal CC would withstand the CC's departure, for whatever reason?

This.

[Walkman]

When you look at it from a career standpoint, very few really good leaders stay at the same echelon for long. Most of the dynamic business leaders are on a career path upwards, and tend to promote to higher levels of responsibility on a regular basis. Happens in the RM as well. It's a natural progression that those that lead really well more forward. Plus, how can we develop the new generation of leaders if they don't have the chance to get out there and do it? And a true leader is always mentoring, enabling those they lead to accept higher level of responsibility. This natural flow of things really can't happen in a unit where the leader stays put.

I'd also like to add that IMO, one of the traits of great leadership is the drive forward. I'm not talking about a selfish need for more power, but that kind of grand vision that is bigger than a single unit.

As far as term limits go, I've been in 6 years now, so I haven't seen that many CCs come and go yet. Looking at it that way, I've been in just a little longer than a full term. I'm not experienced enough to say if the 4 year span it just right or not. But looking at it from an outside, pure "leadership principles" perspective, I think a mechanism that enables CCs to move up and new ones to get a chance os a good thing.

[JeffDG]

Why do we bother with commanders anyway?

We don't trust Wing Commanders to replace squadron commanders, apparently they just don't have the requisite judgement to determine if a squadron/cc is still up to the job or has stagnated.

Plenty of folks insist on regulating everything, and in that environment, the role of a commander is really meaningless.  Commanders should be in place to exercise judgement and discretion, yet nobody seems to trust anyone to actually do that, so their judgement and discretion are narrowed and circumscribed to such a degree that the biggest decision that will be available is whether to serve Coke or Pepsi products at the Squadron picnic (after, of course, everyone from the National Commander on down has approved the Risk Management plan for said picnic).

[Eclipse]

CAP has made its own bed in that regard with poor / inconsistent / nonexistent training, a bunch of circular, self-conflicting and
horribly out of date and out of touch regulations, and no culture of mentorship or support of higher HQ.  The common
practice of selecting commanders based on "respiration and gravitational attraction in proper proportions" is a big part of that as well.

The rhetoric is that the unit is the "Heart of CAP", but generally the only contact units get from higher HQ is requests to
backfill data so the next echelon can check its boxes and push the form up.

With that said, at it's core, running a unit administratively is pretty simple and yet we have people who can't even make the minimums
in terms of reporting and other requirements, and so goes the circle of life.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Dunno. I've seen two units with 4 commanders each in the past 10+ years. Seems that in a small, understaffed unit the CC burns out quick. Seems that in large, active units, CCs have a lot of work leading to burnout.

[Eclipse]

The other thing to consider is that from the responses of a few here, people are treating and taking this far too personal.

We need to start treating CAP, especially command and staff positions, more like a professional business relationship and less like
a garden club meeting.  Knock off all the drama and hurt feelings because something you want to do isn't available, or isn't available
on your personal timetable or within your personal budget, or because your time is up and the next guy needs a chance.

[AirAux]

The problem you are forgetting is that this is a volunteer organization.  It is not the military or a corporation wherein we are paid for our efforts.  To not even thank a commander for his work as you replace him is an insult to all that he has done.  And how dare you to tell someone not to take it personal when they have given 35 years to CAP..  You know when people feel unappreciated they will take their volunteer time elsewhere and then what??  Maverick, what was the name of that animal rescue shelter?  I think I'm going to be needing that.

[Walkman]

To not even thank a commander for his work as you replace him is an insult to all that he has done.  And how dare you to tell someone not to take it personal when they have given 35 years to CAP.. 

I don't think anyone is in support of that. Kicking someone to the curb unceremoniously isn't the same as term limits. I'd be ticked of something like that happened to someone I respected.

[Майор Хаткевич]

The problem you are forgetting is that this is a volunteer organization.  It is not the military or a corporation wherein we are paid for our efforts.  To not even thank a commander for his work as you replace him is an insult to all that he has done.  And how dare you to tell someone not to take it personal when they have given 35 years to CAP..  You know when people feel unappreciated they will take their volunteer time elsewhere and then what??  Maverick, what was the name of that animal rescue shelter?  I think I'm going to be needing that.

How do you leap from end of term to "not even a thank you"? What does that even mean?

[Eclipse]

The problem you are forgetting is that this is a volunteer organization.  It is not the military or a corporation wherein we are paid for our efforts.  To not even thank a commander for his work as you replace him is an insult to all that he has done. And how dare you to tell someone not to take it personal when they have given 35 years to CAP..  You know when people feel unappreciated they will take their volunteer time elsewhere and then what??  Maverick, what was the name of that animal rescue shelter?  I think I'm going to be needing that.

You are apparently confusing a personal, specific situation in which someone was slighted and has a right to feel angry, with the idea of term limits as a policy
of refreshing the culture of the organization.  They aren't connected, even a little.

At all.

A commander standing down who has served successfully deserves decorations, appreciation, and if amenable, a voice in his successor.  When I assumed command of a squadron, the commander was much-tenured and beloved.  He received a number of decorations, including an MSA, plaques, several parties, and his change of command was attended by
a very well-known local news person who spoke eloquently regarding his service and experience.  He remained a presence with the unit for a number of years before moving to
wing staff.

If you or someone you know didn't get appreciated, take it up with those who did the deed, and don't confuse one person's negative experience with the organization as a whole.

I also agree that people vote with their feet, and in many cases, that is the best course of action for all involved.

[AirAux]

The national commander was contacted and didn't even have the courtesy to respond.

[Майор Хаткевич]

The national commander was contacted and didn't even have the courtesy to respond.

Might have overshot?

[jimmydeanno]

The national commander was contacted and didn't even have the courtesy to respond.

Why don't you just come out and say what is on your mind, instead of dancing around the issue.  It sounds like you have a personal grudge based on, most likely, being replaced as a squadron commander without "so much as a thank you."

If it makes you feel better, I contacted the President and he didn't even come to my change of command.  I even said we'd have punch.

[PHall]

The national commander was contacted and didn't even have the courtesy to respond.

But I guarantee you that your Region and Wing Commanders know about your message to the National Commander.

[Private Investigator]

Where does the ousted Squadron Commander move to?  Serve as a Group or Wing assistant staff officer?  Unfortunately the great majority of Group/Wing/Region staffers don't meet weekly (sometimes monthly or even quarterly!).  You are forcing out a person that has dedicated themselves to the most contact-intensive and active position in the entire organization.  How does a person go from doing something they most likely enjoy and being told "time to go, though we don't know where you should go"??

Some might say that the recently cashiered commander can just pick up a new duty at the squadron.  Others will say "just move up" or "just move on". Unless there is a real plan in place (in writing) that spells out where successful squadron commanders should go once they are drummed out of command, the notion of term limits and replacements are insulting to the majority of commanders that are/have been pushed out to meet the regulation.

I am also getting really tired of being told/ reminded about the timeframe involving commander burnout.  Those are opinions.  Just because a commander was burned out at the four year mark and his squadron exploded does not equal the organizational norm. 

Perhaps we should first look at term limits being placed on Group/ Wing and Region staff positions. If a person has only served on the staff at wing for the past twenty years and has not stepped once into a local squadron, that is far worse than a squadron commander with five years at one unit.

CAP Command is different from Military Command. One of the finest Senior Squadrons I know have maybe ten former Squadron Commanders in its membership. For some reason people think the Squadron Commander has to stay in place or move up to Group or Wing and that being a Squadron Commander makes somebody the perfect CAP officer. It does not. It all goes back to the 'rule of five'.   

[Private Investigator]

As I said, booted out without even a thank you.  We are a volunteer organization and upper menagement needs to remember that.  Eclipse, as you noted the squadron was failing, at least by someone's standards.  Small composite squadron started by the commander 11 years ago.  Probably much more typical than a squadron of 50 or so.  Size varied from 15 to 40, a one time high.  A failed squadron?  Ask the senior member that just finished his first year of flight training and was assigned to McGuire AFB for DC-10 fueler training.  He joined because he wanted to fly for the Air Force.  Ask the other senior member that is halfway through his first year of flight training in Texas,  He joined as a cadet 8 years ago because he wanted to fly for the Air Force.  Ask the second year USAFA cadet that joined as a cadet 6 years ago because he wanted to go to the academy.  Ask the 7-8 active duty members that all joined as cadets because they wanted to join the military some day.  Ask the parents of the 2-3 cadets who had been in trouble with the law and this commander gave them another chance when another squadron woldn't accept them (and they turned out nicely).  Ask the commanders that called this commander between midnight and three in the morning to take some of his sqyadron members and work ELT's.  I could go on, but, obviously CAP has redefined the concept of success..

So you never worked in "Quality Control" have you? 

[Private Investigator]

We don't trust Wing Commanders to replace squadron commanders, apparently they just don't have the requisite judgement to determine if a squadron/cc is still up to the job or has stagnated.

From a reality check how many here would fire somebody from doing a bad job? I go to McDonalds and the coke machine is giving watery coke and the guy fixes it and I get a drink. A hole in the wall place, the kid tells me I am to picky, I tell him I want my $1 back.

It is all about Quality Control. How many complaints should a Squadron Commander have before he is dismissed? Having four Spaatz Cadets over the course of their 35 year career make them 'bullet proof'? 

[Private Investigator]

Dunno. I've seen two units with 4 commanders each in the past 10+ years. Seems that in a small, understaffed unit the CC burns out quick. Seems that in large, active units, CCs have a lot of work leading to burnout.

BTW, the average term for a Wing/Region Commander is 23 months. What does that tell you?   

[Private Investigator]

The national commander was contacted and didn't even have the courtesy to respond.

Dude, one thousand, six hundred plus Squadrons and he did not respond to you. WHOA !!! Stop everything. At Petticoat Junction Composite Squadron, we have the General on speed dial. 

[Private Investigator]

The national commander was contacted and didn't even have the courtesy to respond.

Why don't you just come out and say what is on your mind, instead of dancing around the issue.  It sounds like you have a personal grudge based on, most likely, being replaced as a squadron commander without "so much as a thank you."

If it makes you feel better, I contacted the President and he didn't even come to my change of command.  I even said we'd have punch.

RODLM.O

The punch, that is funny on both coasts and Hawaii too   :clap:

[a2capt]

The punch, that is funny on both coasts and Hawaii too   :clap:

Do not taunt the Flying Pineapple. 

[NCRblues]

BTW, the average term for a Wing/Region Commander is 23 months. What does that tell you?   

Cite please.

[a2capt]

I've heard statistics like that during various general sessions at conferences. That the average term was about half of the 4 year period.

[Private Investigator]

Exactly. I heard that at RSC and various sessions at conferences too. I remember a time my Wing had four Wing Commanders in four years.

[Patterson]

It seems that from my varied view most Wings have no policy for transitions.  That includes command selections and staff appointment policies/ procedures at all levels in the wing.  Where I am, if you are not "part of the club", the possibility of commanding anything above the Squadron level is very low.

I have recently watched a very successful Squadron Commander "transitioned" to group at the four year mark, replaced by a person who seemed to be the ideal officer that would continue the Squadron successes.  After 2 months of literally doing nothing at the group level, the former squadron commander decided to leave the organization.  She missed the weekly interactions, the personal contact and the fun that being in a squadron provided.  At the six month mark the squadron has lost 16 total members, is non-compliant in multiple areas and wing just fired the new commander.

So, for every person that says "term limits are good, they work great locally", there is another person that can counter that opinion!

[FlyTiger77]

I am trying to get a formal transition program implemented in my group:

T-4 months: announce an impending vacancy with application requirements (Goals, Resume of CAP Service Career) and change of command date
T-3 months: empanel a board to review the applications and make a recommendation
T-2 months: receive the board's recommendation
T-6 weeks: request wing commander's concurrence and announce incoming commander

This gives the new commander time to transition with the outgoing commander (the old transitinon of the incoming and outgoing commanders exchanging high-5s at the office door never worked too well) and let's everyone know what is going on.

Of the 3 changes of command I have presided over, we have been able to do it once and it worked pretty well.

[Eclipse]

It seems that from my varied view most Wings have no policy for transitions.  That includes command selections and staff appointment policies/ procedures at all levels in the wing.  Where I am, if you are not "part of the club", the possibility of commanding anything above the Squadron level is very low.

I have recently watched a very successful Squadron Commander "transitioned" to group at the four year mark, replaced by a person who seemed to be the ideal officer that would continue the Squadron successes.  After 2 months of literally doing nothing at the group level, the former squadron commander decided to leave the organization.  She missed the weekly interactions, the personal contact and the fun that being in a squadron provided.  At the six month mark the squadron has lost 16 total members, is non-compliant in multiple areas and wing just fired the new commander.

So, for every person that says "term limits are good, they work great locally", there is another person that can counter that opinion!

The same goes for the inverse.

Who told the former commander to quit attending meetings?  Holding a staff position at a higher HQ doesn't equal "no squadron meetings or other the fun activities."

[lordmonar]

Why you did when you said he/she can't be a commander anymore.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Why you did when you said he/she can't be a commander anymore.

Group commanders can't come to meetings? I should let mine know.

[Eclipse]

Why you did when you said he/she can't be a commander anymore.

Not even a little bit.

If anything, she should be more active and engaged with other units on a regular basis doing her new staff job,
and/or simply going to the same unit meeting every week, participating as a member, and mentoring when the opportunity
presents itself.  That would also allow her time to get all that PD done that some people say is impossible
when you're a CC, concentrate on ES ratings, participate in larger-scale activities with all the free time, etc., etc.

Or just sit home and be mad you can't be the playground king anymore. 

If you want to take your ball and go home, so be it, but don't put that on the program. By definition, senior members
are adults.  Adults who are there to serve a greater good as part of something larger then themselves.
This isn't the local Horticultural Society and your ego is supposed to be checked at the door.

And while we're here, I'd like to address the inappropriate feelings of "ownership" engendered when people go
"above and beyond" especially without being asked.

Obviously we need people who feel personal responsibility and "own" their commitments, but that's not the same as
investing inappropriate time, money, or efforts into situations like CAP staff appointments or activities.

We see it all the time in the statements here and elsewhere "I spent eleventy-twelveeen dollars on sending all those cadets to
encampment, bought the unit 4 L-pers, spent thousands on fuel driving to activities, and worked 60 hours a week on paperwork because
there was no one else to do it."   Not only is the fail clear in that sentence, but if the only reason you're doing these things is to
perpetuate your own existence (which sadly happens all too frequently), then you missed the point of the uniform and
are defeating your own purpose and that of the organization.

And further to that point, anyone with several decades of membership, let alone staff appointment to a single job, should know
how CAP works and have the capability to read the landscape when things change, meaning they know what's coming and should
not read it as a personal affront just because things evolved.  And if they can't do that, then they were wrong for the job to start.

[lordmonar]

Why you did when you said he/she can't be a commander anymore.

Group commanders can't come to meetings? I should let mine know.

Actually No they shouldn't......IN A PERFECT WORLD.
a) Conflict of interest.
b) Chain of Command
c) Undue Command Influence
d) Back Seat Driver Syndrome

Of course the Group Commander is free to attend meeting/visit the unit AS THE GROUP COMMANDER.  He should not be there as just another squadron member....because he is not.

Now....I know that it happens and I don't have a problem with it.   Just as I don't have a major problem with term limits.   But a sitting commander who is told to step down should be moved out of the squadron for a time.....it is what happens in the real world (including the military)....See Band of Brothers....when Dick Winters moved up to Battalion...he had trouble of letting go of Easy Company.....that can be a problem in a small unit where the old commander can't resist the temptation to "Just help out the new commander"....which is counter to the whole idea of term limits in the first place!

So....if you tell me my time is done.....I'm walking away from the squadron....at least for a year.....just to make that separation.  If Wing/Group is not supporting my needs for activity.....the I may just walk from CAP too.

[FlyTiger77]

...my time is done.....I'm walking away from the squadron....at least for a year.....just to make that separation.

I agree wholeheartedly!

[Eclipse]

^ I agree 100% with everything said above, and this is how I approached my transitions and how I encouraged others to do
it as well.  But I'm an adult, and viewed the moves as the natural order of the organization, I didn't view it as being "run out of town".

I wanted to give the new people their time to succeed or fail on their own.  Others in the same position were not as mature and it causes issues.

The main point is that if you view term limits as a personal affront, then you're probably cooked from the start anyway.  I'll admit that we've done a disservice to
many units by letting this continue as long as it did - units with CC's for 20-30+ years who now find themselves at the end of that road.  By definition
these are going to be older members who likely haven't dealt with change in CAP overall very well (still USPS things into wing, email is an "activity", wing banker
will take my money, WIWAC, etc., etc.), have a lot of ego wrapped up in the job, and are at an age where they won't be much inclined for "new challenges".

That doesn't mean we don't make good decisions that involve them, or that the organization builds a "somebody else's problem field" around the unit to avoid the
uncomfortable conversation.

Interestingly, no one seems to have issues with Group, Wing, Region, or National limits, only the unit?  Why, because that affects them personally.

[Майор Хаткевич]

But I'm an adult, and viewed the moves as the natural order of the organization, I didn't view it as being "run out of town".

Unit meeting location, one week after Eclipse went to Group. 

[Eclipse]

NICE!

[AirAux]

Let me go back top my original post; "And then it's out the door whether there is a satisfactory replacement or not, with threats to close the squadron, and not even a thank you to the exiting commander..  Another bright idea from those above that don't even know the program or how it works.."

In retrospect, I didn't take the commander change personally.  I took the fact that no one offered thanks for a job well done rather personal.  We are in a volunteer field and we preach passing out praise as much as possible to keep morale up and people motivated.  Unfortunately we were a small squadron and did not have a ready replacement at hand.  This came about rather quickly and I thought after reading the Reg's we could get another year from command to locate or transistion a good candidate for command.  I didn't think the rush, abruptness, or the rudeness was at all necessary just to follow a new regulation.  I do know that change in command is necessary, but there should be a method to it and in this situation it was all madness.  I have been in many positions in CAP since I began.  Of all of them, I enjoy working with Squadron level best.  I will continue to work with and support the squadron and try not to step on the new commanders toes.   

In some areas you will find a small squadron that does not have anyone that wants to take over the responsibility of leadership.  There is an additional time element alond with numerous other requirements.  In a large squadron, you may have members chomping at the bit to become commanders. 

Not all situations are the same. 

As far as a "failing squadron", let's get real.  I would dare say that at least 50% of all CAP squadrons are failing if you look at the current expectations of CAP.   How many squadrons have a perfect flying program?  or Areospace program?  or Cadet program?  And I am talking about everything done by the book, all members up to date on their training and every one moving through the program and ranks as National wants?  As a Corps, we have done an outstanding job over the years.  For a volunteer outfit we are exceptional.  Compared to a corporation where people are paid to do what we do, we probably would come up lacking.  National is now attempting to require units and members to be as accountable as paid personnel would be.   I know very few that have taken on CAP as an occupation.  We do it because we enjoy it.  We enjoy it because we think we are part of something bigger and that we are doing something good.  This becomes a problem when one tries to require more and more out of people with less and less motivation.   

I am concerned that if the way I was treated is the current attitude of National that we will soon lose a lot of good people.  I hate to see this happen to CAP.  I felt hurt by what hppened to me, but I am prior military and have been in CAP for a lonmg time and I am over it, but I am concerned and I feel that I have earned the right to be concerned by my years of contribution to CAP. 

If some of the wiseguys on the Board want to continue to take pot shots at me, have at it.  I know who I am and what I have contributed.  You don't..

[Eclipse]

Pot shots?  Where?

[AirAux]

Such as: "A unit with no replacement CC after 4 years is, by design, failing."

In effect calling me a failure as a commander.  Very cheap pot shot at that.. 

Until you walk a mile in one's shoes, ...

[Eclipse]

Such as: "A unit with no replacement CC after 4 years is, by design, failing."

In effect calling me a failure as a commander.  Very cheap pot shot at that.. 

Until you walk a mile in one's shoes, ...

I stand by that statement, however you are taking macro statements and applying them personally.

If the bell tolls for thee, so be it, but no one was called you out personally or even knows enough about your situation to do so.  Frankly, I had no idea
you were referring about yourself.  I thought you were talking about a situation you knew of.

I also agree that probably 50+% of units aren't meeting their mandates, though I'd say it's more like 25-35% are "failing" in the sense
of having too few real members or being 1-man bands with no transition plan.

Saying that doesn't change anything, otherwise it never gets fixed, and then soon enough it's 60%, then 75%, and then you
have plenty of free time.

If you were treated poorly, that not cricket, but you can't honestly say it caught you off guard, especially if you're active here.
My region has had them in place for more then a decade, unevenly enforced, likewise other wings, don't know about other regions.
It's been discussed here for years and was slowly adopted until it became a reg.  The clock was ticking, it was just a matter of when.

[lordmonar]

Mandates?

I'd like to see those mandates.

[Storm Chaser]

I have recently watched a very successful Squadron Commander "transitioned" to group at the four year mark, replaced by a person who seemed to be the ideal officer that would continue the Squadron successes.  After 2 months of literally doing nothing at the group level, the former squadron commander decided to leave the organization.  She missed the weekly interactions, the personal contact and the fun that being in a squadron provided.  At the six month mark the squadron has lost 16 total members, is non-compliant in multiple areas and wing just fired the new commander.

So, for every person that says "term limits are good, they work great locally", there is another person that can counter that opinion!

Is a squadron really successful when its success is mostly dependent on one person, the commander? My opinion, based on years of experience with different organizations, is 'no'. What Eclipse and others are saying, and I agree, is that a truly successful unit is developing leaders to take over the many functions in that unit. That's not just applicable to the commander, but to all staff officers as well.

In my current unit, for example, we had a very experienced, qualified and talented Emergency Services Officer before I joined. When he left the unit to become the Group Operations Officer, there was no succession plan in place and the unit struggled for months to get its ES program back up and running. I took over as ES Officer about six month later and now, after a year on the job, I have people in place that can take over the position with minimum impact to the unit. I've made every effort so that all we've accomplished doesn't end when it's time for me to step aside. I've done the same thing with other positions (Cadet Programs, Safety, etc.).

No one, not even in a volunteer organization, should be so essential that when they leave or move up, the organization is adversely affected by their departure. Potential replacements should always be trained and a succession plan should be in place. A successful unit must have more than one good leader.

[lordmonar]

Yes.  Successful is defined as fulfilling its assigned missions.

Yes, we as leaders should be working to train our replacements......but it not really our mission to do so.

It is Groups/Wings job to select and train our commanders....not our sitting commanders.

That is why us former commander's get all bent when people say "it is a failure not to have a replacement".

Yes we need to have a plan and a system to make sure there is a succession......which is one of the reasons why this "4 years and out" rule is so stupid as applied.

As a good rule of thumb...sure....as part of an overall system where potential replacements are identified and groomed......by GROUP/WING....then yes it is a good thing.....but as a "You got 4 years to learn your job, have a successful unit AND train your replacement" is not really a good idea.  Not when applied to our organization and our limitations.

[Storm Chaser]

Yes.  Successful is defined as fulfilling its assigned missions.

Just out of curiosity, how do you define a unit who no longer can fulfill "its assigned missions" because of one individual that left the unit?

[lordmonar]

Yes.  Successful is defined as fulfilling its assigned missions.

Just out of curiosity, how do you define a unit who no longer can fulfill "its assigned missions" because of one individual that left the unit?

THAT unit is a failure.....but it's not my job as a squadron commander to select and train my replacement.

Sorry it is just not.  If I am replaced by Group/Wing.....then it is Group/Wing's failure not mine...not the units.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Yes.  Successful is defined as fulfilling its assigned missions.

Just out of curiosity, how do you define a unit who no longer can fulfill "its assigned missions" because of one individual that left the unit?

THAT unit is a failure.....but it's not my job as a squadron commander to select and train my replacement.

Sorry it is just not.  If I am replaced by Group/Wing.....then it is Group/Wing's failure not mine...not the units.

Who trained you?

[Eclipse]

Mandates?

I'd like to see those mandates.

They are pretty self-explanatory.

Execute the missions, insure continuity.  Everything else is a nuance of that.

[Eclipse]

It is Groups/Wings job to select and train our commanders....not our sitting commanders.

That is why us former commander's get all bent when people say "it is a failure not to have a replacement".

Strongly non-concur.

It is 100% the unit commander's responsibility to actively recruit and train personnel to fulfill the missions and insure
continuity of the unit and the organization as a whole.  Groups, Wings, Regions, and NHQ should not and are not
recruiting doorways and people should not be starting at that level.  It all starts and lives at the unit.

Train your replacement, per se?  Arguable, and that's the expectation of most business situations, however
if a commander is properly executing his part - recruiting and training, then there will be a cadre of qualified members
to choose from and who are actively interested in moving forward themselves.

A good commander puts actual ideas and plans into place that he wants to see live and grow beyond his tenure,
the only way to do that is to train and mentor a group of people as potential replacements.

Any organization, group, or activity which depends on a single person to be successful or even exist is a walking failure
that doesn't know its dead, because when that one person leaves or dies the organization dies, and then in that case
telling stories about all the "great things the old CC did" are irrelevant since no one is in the room to hear them.

Any unit that doesn't have a couple of members chomping at the bit to get their shot at the podium is doing something
wrong.  They aren't recruiting enough, they aren't recruiting the right people, or the CC has held things so close to the vest through
micro management and/or constant complaining about "group, wing, national, admiinistrivia, etc." that being a CC sounds like a burden
instead of a challenge, and no one is interested.

[lordmonar]

Well....I'll have to disagree with your disagreement.

It is the Group/Wing Commander who appoints the squadron commander.....not the old squadron commander.

Ergo it is his responsibility to get said commander trained.

Sorry it is as simple as that.   I can pick my replacement, and train him, and get him all set up to take over if I ever fall over dead........but I don't have the authority to do that......so it CANNOT be my responsibility.

Now......if Group/Wing are doing their job.....they are visiting my unit, the will know my people (to a point) they would be working with me and my PDO in grooming a pool of potential candidates and as the 4 year mark approaches they could pick one and recruit (i.e. talk the sucker into taking the job:) ).  But it is not my job to do so.....not directly.

I am not saying that this mentoring, grooming, training should not be going on.....and I am not say that I as the sitting squadron commander cannot be doing said training.......but the ultimate responsibility for "getting it done" is with the next higher commander because it is his/her call on who that person is.

So.....failure of a squadron after change of command, lies with Wing/Group and the new commander not the old commander for "not training his replacement".

My whole problem with this new 4 year rule.....is that we got groups/wings doing their job by "following the reg" but not doing their job by recruiting and training the new commander.

[Storm Chaser]

@ lordmonar

You're getting it all wrong. While it's not the unit commander's responsibility to designate their successor, they very well can work with the group or wing commander, as appropriate, to find and train the replacement. A commander that just says "that's not my job" in detriment to the squadron is not a very good commander or leader, for that matter. As commander, you have no control over who will replace you, but you can offer advice to the group or wing commander and offer to appoint their designee as your deputy commander, although not required, to facilitate the transition.

Regardless of the succession plan in place, if any, a good squadron commander ensures that all critical functions are covered effectively so that in his/her absence, the squadron can operate and accomplish its mission successfully. If good staff leadership is in place within the squadron, it makes the transition with a new commander much more easier. And having a good staff in place >IS< the responsibility of the outgoing squadron commander, not the group or wing commander.

[dwb]

You two are saying the same thing. Go back and read Pat's post where he talks about mentoring potential successors.

And he is exactly right - the Wing Commander is the ultimate decider. It's his/her signature on the CAPF 27.

[Walkman]

All this talk about "training the replacement" has me thinking. I can see the validity of higher echelons being involved, but where I see their main role in that is providing opportunities for regularly scheduled well produced PD courses (UCC, TLC, SLS, etc). The current CC should be motivating their people to be attending these as much as possible. Group/Wing also does have a responsibility to know the people in the unit.

Where I see the CC's role in "training the replacement" is leading by example. Every CC should be making goals, having a vision and a plan to get there. Every ESO, PDO, and PAO should be doing the same. So a CC does this well and then encourages and mentors their staff to do the same in their own AO is in essence "training the replacement" That kind of leadership skill scales.

In my mind, both the current CC and the higher echelon CCs share the responsibility to ensure the when the term is up, someone is ready to take over and succeed. Each has a different role in it, though.

[Eclipse]

In my mind, both the current CC and the higher echelon CCs share the responsibility to ensure the when the term is up, someone is ready to take over and succeed. Each has a different role in it, though.

+1

[Private Investigator]

I am trying to get a formal transition program implemented in my group:

T-4 months: announce an impending vacancy with application requirements (Goals, Resume of CAP Service Career) and change of command date
T-3 months: empanel a board to review the applications and make a recommendation
T-2 months: receive the board's recommendation
T-6 weeks: request wing commander's concurrence and announce incoming commander

This gives the new commander time to transition with the outgoing commander (the old transitinon of the incoming and outgoing commanders exchanging high-5s at the office door never worked too well) and let's everyone know what is going on.

Of the 3 changes of command I have presided over, we have been able to do it once and it worked pretty well.

I did something similar when I was a Group Commander. But I would announce at 6 months the up coming vacancy. Also I asked if the outgoing Commander wanted the Change of Command at a Squadron Awards Banquet or just on a meeting night. Some Squadrons have annual banquets, summer picnics or a holiday party.

I kept a spread sheet so I know when each Commander assumed duties. Some were well prepared for the transition and you will be surprised that others will come up with multiple reasons why the should be extended or postpone the Change of Command. I also do not like the way the new CAPR 20-1 is worded. I told the Squadron Commanders after they completed their probation period they are on a year to year basis as the PA reappoints them every 1 January.