New Corporate Uniform

[Cobra1597]

Got a bunch of stuff here, let me do my best to break it down for you.

I am wondering if there's a problem with anyone else besides me who can't afford to keep changing uniforms.  I don't have the money to do this.  Most of my squadron members get part of their uniform items from the DRMO.

The answer for this is to not get anything new for the moment. In all of these recent changes, not a single uniform combination has been retired, IIRC. They just keep making new ones. That means that the old ones, like the white aviator shirt, are still regulation, and you can still wear them.

Part way through when I was a cadet, they came out with the new style service coat, but I did not go out and get one. The cadets were, and still are, being allowed to wear the old style, so I didn't cough up the money for a new uniform. In fact, I only got the new style service coat right before I went senior member, because at that point I needed a new coat anyways, and as I senior member, I could no longer wear the old style.

Same solution here. If money is a problem, don't get the new stuff until they tell you that you can't wear the old stuff.

If we choose to get rid of the AF-style blues uniform (which I heard rumored for a while now-thus the purpose for the change) what are we supposed to do?  I understand that only the shirt will change for the most part (which I already have) but are we going to wear our military decorations on it in the future as well?

I believe a lot of those decorations (at least the ribbons), you can wear on the white aviator shirt. As for retiring the AF-style blues uniform, I doubt they will do that. They may modify what we wear, but I doubt they will get rid of it flat out.

I pay so much money on dues and attending CAP activities they should be issuing us Senior Members uniform vouchers like the cadets!

12 year old kids don't usually have jobs. Senior members usually do. We want to provide an environment where cadets of all incomes and backgrounds can have access to youth leadership, AE, and drug demand reduction, and the rest of the cadet program. It's not the same deal with senior members.

In addition, there are already more senior members than cadets in CAP (IIRC), and often not enough money for the uniform vouchers for the brand new cadets. If they run out of money for the cadets, how much do you think it will cost for senior members?

I hope I have helped a little.

[arajca]

If the mixing of military insignia and civilian clothing is an issue to the military, why haven't they gone after security guards, police officers, ACA, or the plethora of non-military organizations and companies that use them? How about the soldier who works part time as a security guard? CAP does have a history of using military insignia on our uniforms - look at the NCO grades.

If you pull the "Well, they don't look like military uniforms", it won't cut it for the ACA and other similar orgaizations. I have yet to see anyone who would confuse the CAP service dress with a military uniform.

The only change I see coming down is the change from US cutouts to CAP. Which should have been done at the beginning.

I think there is a slight disconnect here. CAP has USAF uniforms, like the camo BDUs, and the service dress that you mentioned. These uniforms have to be, and are, approved by the Air Force. The problem here is the corporate, or CAP Distinctive uniforms. These are uniforms that are not based on the USAF uniforms, like our service dress is. These uniforms do not have to be approved by the Air Force.

I mentioned the CAP service dress, which is a CAP distintive uniform, not the AF service dress. Since it is not a military uniform, why would someone get more trouble than someone who is working as a part time securtiy sergeant or lt? Or what about the National Guardsman who is also a police sergeant? There are many police agencies that use miltary grade insignia.

At the NB, I saw many members wearing the corporate blues. Even looking from the opposite end of the hall, the white shirt stands out significantly as different from the AF blue shirt.

If someone's AF blue shirt is so faded that it appears white, the shirt is obviously not in good repair and shoud be replaced.

[Cobra1597]

OK, I got confused, because there is no CAP Distinctive called "Service Dress". There is an AF uniform called Service Dress, and a distinctive Corporate Service Coat for the Corporate Uniform. I am guessing now that you are talking about the latter.

[Smitty (The Other One)]

Smitty - you quoted and made reference to the wrong major, I believe it's Major_Chuck you were thinking of.

Okay sir, thanks for clearing that up.  Whoever said it, it's great and I'm using it!  Giving birth to kittens sideways... now that's a creative attention-getter! :clap:

As for prior references to buying new uniforms, from what I can see, they haven't gotten rid of any existing uniforms (yet), so the polo shirt with grey slacks, and the aviator shirt with grey slacks are still valid uniforms. I certainly hope so, because I'm not allowed to wear the new combination(s).

Thank goodness... I'm one of those people who believes that there's nothing wrong with the existing corporate uniforms and that they exist so the new "corporate uniform with service dress coat" does not have to.  When you think about it, the grey and white/grey and white with blazer/polo shirt uniform combinations fulfill the purpose of distinctive, alternative uniforms for members who cannot wear AF uniforms for whatever reason. 

Why spend more $$$ on a uniform that is not needed?  Especially when one uniform already exists for the same purpose, and fulfills that purpose.  My brain is unable to understand this kind of logic. 

[Psicorp]

Well, it seems as though someone's been listening.   I totally agree with the CAP "cutouts" versus the U.S. insignia, but I rather liked the grade insignia on the flight cap.   Ah well, I've always been more partial to the service cap anyway. *grin*  It still makes us look like CAPAirlines.     I recieved the below in an email from the Wing CC this evening.



"MEMORANDUM FOR ALL UNIT COMMANDERS
FROM: CAP/CC
SUBJECT: Civil Air Patrol Corporate Service Coat
1. The recent National Board meeting in Reno was a tremendous success. I was quite pleased to see so many members wearing the new Corporate uniform. This uniform allows our members to present a professional image and to be easily identified as members of Civil Air Patrol. Many members had suggestions on how to improve this uniform and after careful consideration I have decided to implement several of these changes. Effective immediately, the U.S. insignia placed on the lapels of the Corporate Service coat will be replaced by the highly polished C.A.P. device. This device will also be added to the epaulet of the black windbreaker, worn centered between the grade
insignia and the end of the epaulet. Additionally, the flight cap will no longer be worn with the grade insignia on the right side of the cap and the flight cap device will return to its original placement centered on left side of the cap 1 ½ inches from the front edge. The National Executive Committee will meet in November to finalize these and any other changes deemed necessary."

[mikeylikey]

Well, it seems as though someone's been listening.   I totally agree with the CAP "cutouts" versus the U.S. insignia, but I rather liked the grade insignia on the flight cap.   Ah well, I've always been more partial to the service cap anyway. *grin*  It still makes us look like CAPAirlines.     I received the below in an email from the Wing CC this evening.



"MEMORANDUM FOR ALL UNIT COMMANDERS
FROM: CAP/CC
SUBJECT: Civil Air Patrol Corporate Service Coat
1. The recent National Board meeting in Reno was a tremendous success. I was quite pleased to see so many members wearing the new Corporate uniform. This uniform allows our members to present a professional image and to be easily identified as members of Civil Air Patrol. Many members had suggestions on how to improve this uniform and after careful consideration I have decided to implement several of these changes. Effective immediately, the U.S. insignia placed on the lapels of the Corporate Service coat will be replaced by the highly polished C.A.P. device. This device will also be added to the epaulet of the black windbreaker, worn centered between the grade
insignia and the end of the epaulet. Additionally, the flight cap will no longer be worn with the grade insignia on the right side of the cap and the flight cap device will return to its original placement centered on left side of the cap 1 ½ inches from the front edge. The National Executive Committee will meet in November to finalize these and any other changes deemed necessary."

WHAT!  E-NUFF!!  Who made these suggestions?  What is the problem with leaving well enough alone.  The Air Force had no problem with the new TPU and the metal rank, and US Insignia.  This is one more step to becoming completely CORPORATE.  Look in the mirror and practice saying "I am a Corporate TOOL, I was once part of the Air Force Auxiliary, now I perform aerial photography missions for the highest bidder, and will shake hands with any political person as long as they give the CORPORATION money". 
  Seriously though......who cares about uniforms when we just learned that we have a "million dollar windfall" for missions and mission training.  Lets reorganize NHQ, cut X number of programs and jobs and then see we actually don't use all of the money we were given.  Call your Wing Commanders and DEMAND to be put in an Aircraft!  Do it now, while we have the money available, but do it quick, as Tony has only given us 2 weeks to use it all up! 

Wow.....CAP Crap can make a person a little upset sometimes!

[SAR-EMT1]

Have any additions/subtractions/stupid changes been made to the corporate uniform since Sept?
  I also agree with Mikeylikey that the higher ups are becoming too concerned with "CORPORATE" and not concerned enough with USAF-Aux. and activities that matter.
Now Im not trying to play AF and in a way I am: one previous post said "stick with a corporate uniform, if you want to wear blues, join the ANG".  Well, I was AFROTC in college and was deemed "noncommisionable"after several years and later tried to join the guard and was rejected (a result of childhood asthma)
I will  grant I joined CAP as a cadet so ROTC hadnt even happened.  HOWEVER, I take PRIDE in wearing blues. (with CAP gray epulets)
For the record, Ive never tried to pass myself off as anything Im not.

[DNall]

12 year old kids don't usually have jobs. Senior members usually do. We want to provide an environment where cadets of all incomes and backgrounds can have access to youth leadership, AE, and drug demand reduction, and the rest of the cadet program. It's not the same deal with senior members.

In addition, there are already more senior members than cadets in CAP (IIRC), and often not enough money for the uniform vouchers for the brand new cadets. If they run out of money for the cadets, how much do you think it will cost for senior members?

Actually there has never been more adults than cadets. Quite the opposite actually. Cadets outnumebr adult ssignificantly. Then if you go to the active participation numbers versus the BS number on the MML, then you're talking about a 2-3 to 1 advantage of cadets to seniors, which is how it always has been if you're interested.

I actually think it'd be great to provide a wider range of adults the opportunity to contribute to homeland defense, SaR, disaster relief... oh & those cadets don't get crap but for the adults that deliver it. It costs me a couple grand a year to be in CAP, sometimes a lot more. YMMV. That's not exactly being open to the quality people form diverse socioeconomic backgrounds. Now how you gonna pay for uniform vouchers & deployed per diem?.. well, I'd start w/ you don't get teh voucher till you been in a couple years then it's a $25 certificate every 3-5 years, and the per diem can be moderate, enough to remotely approach what the average person sacrifices to be there. That does nothing to explain how you pay for it, but it's where we'd liek to be. I'd even go for a couple bucks out of yearly dues to an acct to help finance such endeavors, but you still need more & there ain't enough to go around.

[RiverAux]

After all the "just a pilot" or "just the testing officer because my kid's a cadet" kind of member really doesn't need it. (And regardless of their rank, they really acting as officers)

Dnall, I am ashamed of you for making such a mistake!

2005 annual report:
Seniors: 33,618
Cadets: 23,270 

Only 4 wings have more cadets than seniors: DC, CT, NM, PR.  Even your own Wing has about 300 more seniors than cadets. 

[DNall]

That's incredibly suprising to me, and not the historical situation I'm used to. I can tell you for my wing, there's no chance in remotest parts of frozen hell that there's actually more adults active in the program than cadets.

Way to call me though, good work!

[RiverAux]

As far as I know it has been that way for a long time. 

[Dragoon]

That's incredibly suprising to me, and not the historical situation I'm used to. I can tell you for my wing, there's no chance in remotest parts of frozen hell that there's actually more adults active in the program than cadets.

Way to call me though, good work!

The key word is "active"

Since CAP doesn't have a mechanism for seperating "coming to meetings" members from "just paying dues" members, the national stats don't have a lot of validity.

I'd agree that there are a heck of a lot more active cadets.  Primarily because "inactive" cadets don't have money to pay dues for no good reason....

[DrJbdm]

 I think we would all be VERY surprised at the actual (real) numbers of active members if there was a way to realistically track it. We are not anywhere close to the numbers that National puts out.

[DNall]

Okay now we've drifted way far off "New Corp Uniform"... Anyway, would you guys agree on a recommendation to NHQ to add input of mtg attendance to eServices (quick check boxes & submit 30sec operation)? A standard for "active vs inactive" can be set after the fact & we can then determine who fits in what category... from that we can then tell legit unit sizes & judge their performance on what they're doing w/ 4 people rather than the 50 on the books, take a fresh look at where we're putting planes, trains radios, & automobiles. Etc, etc... just a mgmt tool. What do yall think?

[MIKE]

Not in this thread please... Take it to another one.