Enhanced Cadet Protection Policy for '14 - ROUND 2

[Eclipse]

Update Draft:   http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/file.cfm/media/blogs/documents/CAPR_5210_Round_2_coordination_1865CE9A135F4.pdf

Includes comments in the sidebar.

Looks like most of the "concerns" were addressed in one form or another "Addressed" doesn't always mean "agreed with".

Relaxed some of the more specific restrictions on electronic communications, accounts for cadet flight training, calls for CPP refreshers.

Updated Whitepaper: http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/file.cfm/media/blogs/documents/Reply_to_CPP_Comments_BAAB4BBA14D17.pdf

My "favorite" comment - "We rarely have more than one . . . senior at a cadet activity. This will kill our squadron."
Hint: If you can't get more the one senior member to a unit meeting on a regular basis, your unit is already dead.

[Elioron]

They've definitely worked to incorporate a lot of concerns.  Most of the serious concerns, I think, had less to do with disagreement with the intent of the reg as with unintended consequences it could cause.  I can see a couple of things that will require minor revisions in some procedures (shower management at encampment, for instance), but nothing debilitating.

My biggest concern with the first draft was that it was incredibly intrusive into the personal lives of members.  It made being a parent and a member excessively difficult and made professional relationships impossible.  The second draft helped, but this one hits on pretty much most of them.

[Eclipse]

http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/CAP_Vector__JanuaryMarch_2014_029373D619EB6.pdf

Cadet Protection Policy: A redesigned CPP and its CAPR 52-10 is in final coordination. The proposed
policy emphasizes two-deep leadership and a new focus on preventing actions that could lead to greater
risk for our cadets. Plans call for the new regulation to be published 3 or 4 months prior to its effective date,
with new training materials becoming available at that time so that members can get acclimated to the new
standards. For drafts and background papers, please see www.capmembers.com/provinggrounds.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Now if they could fix the CPPT module and have links to case studies within...

[Brad]

http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/CAP_Vector__JanuaryMarch_2014_029373D619EB6.pdf

Cadet Protection Policy: A redesigned CPP and its CAPR 52-10 is in final coordination. The proposed
policy emphasizes two-deep leadership and a new focus on preventing actions that could lead to greater
risk for our cadets. Plans call for the new regulation to be published 3 or 4 months prior to its effective date,
with new training materials becoming available at that time so that members can get acclimated to the new
standards. For drafts and background papers, please see www.capmembers.com/provinggrounds.

I guess they're chalking it up to "plans change" and explaining it away as a guideline instead of a hard and fast deadline. Otherwise it will become the next victim of the 5-year ICL after CAPM 39-1 finally gets released.

That or they'll start counting from the final approved date, instead of the draft publish date.

[NIN]

I guess they're chalking it up to "plans change" and explaining it away as a guideline instead of a hard and fast deadline. Otherwise it will become the next victim of the 5-year ICL after CAPM 39-1 finally gets released.

That or they'll start counting from the final approved date, instead of the draft publish date.

The 52-10 will be published on a specific date (ie. 1 January) and will likely include guidance that says "The provisions of this regulation go into effect on 1 July 2014. Until 1 July 2014, the CAPR 52-10 dated [whatever date the current one is] will be used as operative guidance."

Or they'll publish it as "CAPR 52-10 (New) - Effective Date 1 July 2014"

Nothing says you can't specify that a regulation goes into effect on a date AFTER it is published.

[Brad]

I guess they're chalking it up to "plans change" and explaining it away as a guideline instead of a hard and fast deadline. Otherwise it will become the next victim of the 5-year ICL after CAPM 39-1 finally gets released.

That or they'll start counting from the final approved date, instead of the draft publish date.

The 52-10 will be published on a specific date (ie. 1 January) and will likely include guidance that says "The provisions of this regulation go into effect on 1 July 2014. Until 1 July 2014, the CAPR 52-10 dated [whatever date the current one is] will be used as operative guidance."

Or they'll publish it as "CAPR 52-10 (New) - Effective Date 1 July 2014"

Nothing says you can't specify that a regulation goes into effect on a date AFTER it is published.

Right, I get that point perfectly well. What I was commenting on is that Eclipse is implying that we were (somewhat) told 3-4 months, and here it is now the 3-4 month mark and the regulation has yet to be made effective, or even published with a 3-4 month future effective date.

[Eclipse]

I wasn't implying anything - that's a direct quote from the most recent Vector as linked above it, which was published today.

[NIN]

Right, I get that point perfectly well. What I was commenting on is that Eclipse is implying that we were (somewhat) told 3-4 months, and here it is now the 3-4 month mark and the regulation has yet to be made effective, or even published with a 3-4 month future effective date.

You know, sometimes in CAP, things happen at the speed of HQ, not the speed of the field.

And sometimes the speed of HQ is incomprehensible to us mere mortals.

Thats why they call it "echelons above reality."

[Spaceman3750]

One thing worth pointing out. We've now gone from a 2-page fairly simple policy (don't be dumb) to 17 pages that will take a fair amount of time to truly digest and understand. Of course, it actually deserves that attention, but the average member isn't going to do that.

Clif notes or bullet points would be nice.

EDIT: Actually, on second reading, it's not too bad. Pretty straightforward and will hopefully squish some of the "local policies" or "CPP rumors".

[Brad]

One thing worth pointing out. We've now gone from a 2-page fairly simple policy (don't be dumb) to 17 pages that will take a fair amount of time to truly digest and understand. Of course, it actually deserves that attention, but the average member isn't going to do that.

Clif notes or bullet points would be nice.

EDIT: Actually, on second reading, it's not too bad. Pretty straightforward and will hopefully squish some of the "local policies" or "CPP rumors".

What I noticed as a good thing in the new CPP is that it addresses the difference between hazing and the higher "level of intensity" present at Encampment and the like. Yes admittedly it does get overdone at times by the handful of cadet NCOs who have watched too much Full Metal Jacket, but at the same time it will hopefully dampen down the "My Flight Sergeant spoke to me in a Command Voice, I feel hazed!"

[NIN]

One thing worth pointing out. We've now gone from a 2-page fairly simple policy (don't be dumb) to 17 pages that will take a fair amount of time to truly digest and understand. Of course, it actually deserves that attention, but the average member isn't going to do that.

Clif notes or bullet points would be nice.

EDIT: Actually, on second reading, it's not too bad. Pretty straightforward and will hopefully squish some of the "local policies" or "CPP rumors".

What I noticed as a good thing in the new CPP is that it addresses the difference between hazing and the higher "level of intensity" present at Encampment and the like. Yes admittedly it does get overdone at times by the handful of cadet NCOs who have watched too much Full Metal Jacket, but at the same time it will hopefully dampen down the "My Flight Sergeant spoke to me in a Command Voice, I feel hazed!"

Part of the reason for the delay is to give folks time to accomplish the refresher training materials that address the changes.

at least with some training added, we can (somewhat) reduce the 65,000 interpretations of the 52-10...

[Eclipse]

Refresher what now?

Oh, you mean that thing the olde dude was mumbling about the other night while I was talking to the other seniors about
how we're going to "whip these soft cadets into shape"?

[NIN]

Refresher what now?

Oh, you mean that thing the olde dude was mumbling about the other night while I was talking to the other seniors about
how we're going to "whip these soft cadets into shape"?

Well, partly.

mostly on the "this is what it was, this is what the requirements are now.  Do not step on anything, that is an order!"

[Eclipse]

...that is an order!"

A what now?

I'm sorry, Lt Col Durkins was helping me sew the wing patch on my blazer.

[NIN]

...that is an order!"

A what now?

I'm sorry, Lt Col Durkins was helping me sew the wing patch on my blazer.

I was channeling 1SG 'Slasher' Williams.  Won't happen again.

Cant' wait to see your blazer. should look awesome.

[Eclipse]

I know I'm being a PITA - I pretty much agree with everything that's in the new regs and policies, I
just don't know how you get this into people's heads, especially the ones who don't actually
agree with the ideas to start with.

[NIN]

I know I'm being a PITA - I pretty much agree with everything that's in the new regs and policies, I
just don't know how you get this into people's heads, especially the ones who don't actually
agree with the ideas to start with.

They become walking boundary violations, and either get with the program, or find themselves on the outside looking in.

Problem solved, problem staying solved.

[Майор Хаткевич]

We have a culture of "knock it off" to an extent. Wouldn't think twice to tell a SM that if I felt it was needed in terms of CPP.

[Eclipse]

^ Both presuppose:

A: Command awareness.

B: Command interest in an uncomfortable conversation.

Which if we already had in proper quantity and proportion would probably negate the need for most of CPPT to begin with.