NCO development: Is there a specific program?

Started by Hawk200, August 02, 2020, 12:15:46 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Shuman 14

Perhaps it is again time to have a discussion about doing away with permanent Officer and/or NCO rank and make everyone a Flight Officer/Warrant Officer with grade insignia based solely on the Professional Development/Education level completed...

Level 0 = Senior Member Without Grade

Level 1 = Flight/Warrant Officer

Level 2 = Chief Flight/Warrant Officer 2

Level 3 = Chief Flight/Warrant Officer 3

Level 4 = Chief Flight/Warrant Officer 4

Level 5 = Master Flight/Warrant Officer

No prior Cadet or prior Military advanced promotions. Do your education, do your time, get promoted.

If you choose to accept a Leadership position, you temporarily wear Officer Grade while in the position...

Squadron = Captain

Group = Lieutenant Colonel

Wing = Colonel

Region = Colonel

When your tenure is over, you revert to wearing your earned Flight/Warrant Officer Grade.

Maybe less chest thumping will result and more work will get done, maybe.
Joseph J. Clune
Lieutenant Colonel, Military Police

USMCR: 1990 - 1992                           USAR: 1993 - 1998, 2000 - 2003, 2005 - Present     CAP: 2013 - 2014, 2021 - Present
INARNG: 1992 - 1993, 1998 - 2000      Active Army: 2003 - 2005                                       USCGAux: 2004 - Present

Eclipse


"That Others May Zoom"

Capt Thompson

Quote from: shuman14 on August 04, 2020, 10:05:17 PMPerhaps it is again time to have a discussion about doing away with permanent Officer and/or NCO rank and make everyone a Flight Officer/Warrant Officer with grade insignia based solely on the Professional Development/Education level completed...
You're talking about revamping the entire program, and causing 30,000 members to have to purchase all new rank insignia, some of which would need to be created, all so that we can have a different honorary rank than we already have. Just stop please.

Quote from: shuman14 on August 04, 2020, 10:05:17 PMNo prior Cadet or prior Military advanced promotions. Do your education, do your time, get promoted.
Except that we have current Cadet Officers who are better educated on the program than many L4 and L5 Seniors. Taking away this promotion would ensure most wouldn't cross over to the Senior program, which would be a huge loss for CAP. I'll take a former Earhart or Spaatz Cadet over a brand new SMWOG fresh off of the street, or who used to be a Patron, any day of the week. We need to encourage their higher level of training, not ask them to start over.
Capt Matt Thompson
Deputy Commander for Cadets, Historian, Public Affairs Officer

Mitchell - 31 OCT 98 (#44670) Earhart - 1 OCT 00 (#11401)

Shuman 14

Captain Thompson,

Yes, I am talking about revamping the entire program. There clearly there is a problem with rank based on the hundreds of discussions that have been held on CAPTalk over the years. It has happened before, blue shoulder slides and pin on rank, add a maroon band to the epaulet, then maroon shoulder slides, then the current grey slides.

Blue corporate uniforms... for a minute.

BDUs to ABUs... soon OCPs... its coming.

You're argument is superfluous at best.

With the new education plan, there is no starting over, prior Cadets and Military simply have modules of the Education program completed based on their previous experience. We're talking about rank.

Currently any Prior Military, up to O-5, can walk in the door, complete Level 1 and request a special promotion to their previously rank and it's almost never denied. They then can be a CAP Lieutenant Colonel and never do another piece of the Education program... and still be a Lieutenant Colonel. How does that help?

If we are Flight/Warrant Officers, rank really doesn't matter.

Also, by using Flight/Warrant Officer grades we never have to worry about being confused for USAF Officers except for the selected few in leadership positions.
Joseph J. Clune
Lieutenant Colonel, Military Police

USMCR: 1990 - 1992                           USAR: 1993 - 1998, 2000 - 2003, 2005 - Present     CAP: 2013 - 2014, 2021 - Present
INARNG: 1992 - 1993, 1998 - 2000      Active Army: 2003 - 2005                                       USCGAux: 2004 - Present

Capt Thompson

I wasn't aware there was a problem with our membership being confused for actual USAF officers. Sure that may happen as a one off from time to time, but I assure you it's not a huge issue.

Notice I defended prior Cadets, but not prior military. You're correct, a Spaatz Cadet will make a valuable Captain as soon as they transfer to the Senior Program. A former LTC in the Army won't necessarily be a valuable addition, although they may. The Spaatz Cadet has already earned their grade in CAP, where the LTC may not have any CAP experience beyond L1.

As for Warrant Officer grades, which are something the AF phased out decades ago, moving a Captain to an FO position isn't really solving a problem we currently have, it's looking for a problem to match a perceived solution.

This thread wasn't about Officer grades, which aren't an issue, it was about NCO grades, which nobody seems to know what to do with. We have NCO's, we don't really know why other than the fact that former military NCO's want to have stripes instead of bars due to years of being told that bars are evil. If you have suggestions for the NCO corps, please share, but there is no need to rehash the Warrant Officer argument, again.
Capt Matt Thompson
Deputy Commander for Cadets, Historian, Public Affairs Officer

Mitchell - 31 OCT 98 (#44670) Earhart - 1 OCT 00 (#11401)

etodd

Ranks - Titles - Uniforms

Always debates.

Five years and just renewed to start my sixth.  Only due to being in a Squadron/Wing that is job/mission focused instead of the above. Glad to be here in my little world, as a simple worker bee, doing my jobs.  :)
"Don't try to explain it, just bow your head
Breathe in, breathe out, move on ..."

Eclipse


"That Others May Zoom"

Shuman 14

Quote from: Capt Thompson on August 05, 2020, 01:31:48 AMIf you have suggestions for the NCO corps, please share, 

There is no need or purpose for an NCO Corps in CAP.
Joseph J. Clune
Lieutenant Colonel, Military Police

USMCR: 1990 - 1992                           USAR: 1993 - 1998, 2000 - 2003, 2005 - Present     CAP: 2013 - 2014, 2021 - Present
INARNG: 1992 - 1993, 1998 - 2000      Active Army: 2003 - 2005                                       USCGAux: 2004 - Present

Shuman 14

Joseph J. Clune
Lieutenant Colonel, Military Police

USMCR: 1990 - 1992                           USAR: 1993 - 1998, 2000 - 2003, 2005 - Present     CAP: 2013 - 2014, 2021 - Present
INARNG: 1992 - 1993, 1998 - 2000      Active Army: 2003 - 2005                                       USCGAux: 2004 - Present

Shuman 14

Quote from: etodd on August 05, 2020, 02:37:25 AMRanks - Titles - Uniforms

Always debates.

Five years and just renewed to start my sixth.  Only due to being in a Squadron/Wing that is job/mission focused instead of the above. Glad to be here in my little world, as a simple worker bee, doing my jobs.  :)

Which is why I will be a SMOG for my entire CAP Career.  ;-)
Joseph J. Clune
Lieutenant Colonel, Military Police

USMCR: 1990 - 1992                           USAR: 1993 - 1998, 2000 - 2003, 2005 - Present     CAP: 2013 - 2014, 2021 - Present
INARNG: 1992 - 1993, 1998 - 2000      Active Army: 2003 - 2005                                       USCGAux: 2004 - Present

etodd

Wasn't meaning it in a condescending way. Merely showing how very different Squadrons/Wings can be. I visited mine nearly 10 years ago, and after two meetings, knew it wasn't for me.  Was asked to visit 5 years ago, and it was day/night difference, and have been very active ever since.

Its something that can't be accounted for in the recruitment process. You either mesh with what you see, or you try another Squadron, or like me, wait a few years until the focus has changed.

Its just 'my' story. Luck of the draw when you fist visit a Squadron.

"Don't try to explain it, just bow your head
Breathe in, breathe out, move on ..."

TheSkyHornet

Quote from: Capt Thompson on August 05, 2020, 01:31:48 AMa Spaatz Cadet will make a valuable Captain as soon as they transfer to the Senior Program. A former LTC in the Army won't necessarily be a valuable addition, although they may. The Spaatz Cadet has already earned their grade in CAP, where the LTC may not have any CAP experience beyond L1.

Most cadet officers I've come across and/or worked with can barely manage a project let alone train others beyond the textbook lessons on leadership principles.

Most senior member captains I've come across and/or worked with can barely manage a project let alone do anything beyond a simple task that has to be micromanaged by their superior, or even their superior's superior. Junior grade senior members tend to perform more at my expectation of an E-3 than they do an O-3.

And I'm not knocking them. I think we need to do a better job at mentoring our cadets and teaching them as well as our seniors. In that regard, there's no difference between what cadets should be capable of doing versus senior members. We're just employing that training on different terms because of the lack of life experience and maturity.

As for the NCO Corps, what specifically does a CAP E-5 know versus a CAP O-1?

kcebnaes

Quote from: TheSkyHornet on August 05, 2020, 05:36:38 PMMost senior member captains I've come across and/or worked with can barely manage a project let alone do anything beyond a simple task that has to be micromanaged by their superior, or even their superior's superior. Junior grade senior members tend to perform more at my expectation of an E-3 than they do an O-3.

 

So what I'm hearing is that we should bring ALL members in at E-1, like our parent service, and then members can work their way up like cadets. ;)
Sean Beck, Maj, CAP
Great Lakes Region sUAS Officer
Various Other Things™

TheSkyHornet

Quote from: kcebnaes on August 05, 2020, 05:45:28 PM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on August 05, 2020, 05:36:38 PMMost senior member captains I've come across and/or worked with can barely manage a project let alone do anything beyond a simple task that has to be micromanaged by their superior, or even their superior's superior. Junior grade senior members tend to perform more at my expectation of an E-3 than they do an O-3.

 

So what I'm hearing is that we should bring ALL members in at E-1, like our parent service, and then members can work their way up like cadets. ;)

The Air Force doesn't do that...

Officer Candidates enter as E-5s while in training. ROTC is an entirely different process altogether, but much more comparable to the Cadet Program.

Enlisted and Officer tracks are exceptionally different training curricula. This is why an E-6 can go through as an Officer Candidate and commissions as an O-1 at the junior-most officer grade.

The Cadet Program's ROTC-like training method takes people through the junior grade and advances them. The difficult I have in that is there is no standardized timeline to accomplish that progression in CAP, which results in 50 cadets progressing at 50 different rates. Collegiate ROTC is essentially all on the same page, and insignia worn is commensurate with one's role (despite some differences between schools).

In the OCS/OTS route, you're going to enter in and go through a 12-week (plus or minus a few) training program where you may play the role of various ranks/duties before commissioning as an O-1. Everyone goes through at the same progression (except anyone who is rolled into a later class due to performance or medical issues).

And unlike our senior members, we progress at our own pace, versus being on a military-like periodic timeline consistent with a board (as well as "slot" assignments available for a particular grade). We essentially match the cadets in CAP as far as our progression goes.

kcebnaes

You're absolutely correct; they have a TON of different ways to join. I was only kidding, though! It'd be too much of a PITA to figure out how something like would actually work, let alone getting that kind of system to actually work with for us.

Sean Beck, Maj, CAP
Great Lakes Region sUAS Officer
Various Other Things™

Eclipse

#35
This is all moot until staff and command appointments are based on something other then "presence".

To develop talent, the "talent" has to be motivated, either by mandate or by interest,
and there has to be ramifications for failure, with remediation also based on motivation
by mandate or interest.

Hard to do in the volunteer environment of an organization focused on quantity over quality
in regards to its "members".

Someone who thinks they are doing CAP a favor by just showing up, knowing full well no
one else will take his job, and that the doors may close if he fails to check his box,
isn't going to be forced into doing much he's not already intending on doing.

Further to this, the very idea that an organization like CAP would allow people to be
appointed as staff officers (of record) or worse Commanders, literally before their ID
cards are dry, is ridiculous, yet for "reasons", this practice has persisted for
decades, despite all indications it is the worst possible way to operate.

"That Others May Zoom"

Hawk200

Quote from: shuman14 on August 04, 2020, 10:05:17 PMPerhaps it is again time to have a discussion about doing away with permanent Officer and/or NCO rank and make everyone a Flight Officer/Warrant Officer with grade insignia based solely on the Professional Development/Education level completed...

This was not the point of this thread.

I'm looking at the program as is now, primarily to increase my own awareness of its content. If I go back into the PD (or ET) track, I want do my best to make certain that folks wearing stripes are progressing as they need to.

Does anyone have info as to more specific requirements on the NCO progression? That's what I'm looking to know.

Capt Thompson

Quote from: Hawk200 on August 06, 2020, 01:51:11 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on August 04, 2020, 10:05:17 PMPerhaps it is again time to have a discussion about doing away with permanent Officer and/or NCO rank and make everyone a Flight Officer/Warrant Officer with grade insignia based solely on the Professional Development/Education level completed...

This was not the point of this thread.

I'm looking at the program as is now, primarily to increase my own awareness of its content. If I go back into the PD (or ET) track, I want do my best to make certain that folks wearing stripes are progressing as they need to.

Does anyone have info as to more specific requirements on the NCO progression? That's what I'm looking to know.

As far as PD is concerned, I thought NCO's follow the same PD as Officers as outlined in 40-1.

Level I = SSgt
Level II = TSgt
Level III = MSgt
Level IV = SMSgt
Level V - CMSgt
Capt Matt Thompson
Deputy Commander for Cadets, Historian, Public Affairs Officer

Mitchell - 31 OCT 98 (#44670) Earhart - 1 OCT 00 (#11401)

Hawk200

Quote from: Capt Thompson on August 06, 2020, 02:14:33 PMAs far as PD is concerned, I thought NCO's follow the same PD as Officers as outlined in 40-1.

Level I = SSgt
Level II = TSgt
Level III = MSgt
Level IV = SMSgt
Level V - CMSgt

I'll read through it a little more studiously in time. Just want to make sure that if I do PD again, I either know it, or know where to find it.

TheSkyHornet

Refer to ICL 19-08 to CAPR 35-5:
https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/R355_with_ICL_1908_and_ICL_2004_inc_F9ADEB5A35E90.pdf

There is an officer-NCO grade conversion table.

Once your grade is converted from officer to NCO, you'll need to follow the standardized progression path for all senior members.

Section 6.3 shows the progression table for NCOs, to include time in grade and professional development levels required for advancement. NCOs also have a manning requirement for advancement, meaning that you must have served in a key position for a tenured time in order to promote to the next higher grade.

Short version:
You still need to complete the PD Levels to advance. As an NCO, you'll have different TIG requirements and additional duties at echelon to be eligible to promote.