How tough is tough?

[TEAM SURGE]

I thought the discussion on the 2b was pretty insightful.

I my university courses, they taught that we should definitely make our expectations clear to every class of what is expected of them. We were also told to make 'positive' rules and not 'negative' rules consisting of a bunch of "don'ts". See, what happens is if you tell a kid not to push a red shiny button, he's darn well gonna push the button.

I'm basically saying I agree that Day 1 of a cadet's training in CAP should include a stern list of expectations of discipline and leadership. Fact is, promotions are nothing more than evaluations on meeting said expectations: not just run-of-the-mill testing and drone answers.

Somewhere in there I also read something that made me wonder: we can be physically and mentally challenging cadets: physically through fitness and mentally through academics. I would say it is how you come across laying out expectations for these things that matters.

Absolutely if you enforce your rules they will stick. Out of the arguement you have all I got out of it was no pushups, 2b's(which I don't know?). I am just saying Be strict. Don;t let something slide. If you let it slide they will never get it corrected.

[DC]

2b's(which I don't know?).

2b is a shorthand reference to CAPF 2B, Membership Termination. To be 2Bed is to be kicked out of CAP.

While it does not necessarily mean leaving the organization on bad terms (there are several possible reasons listed on the form, including joinng the military, etc), it is usually thought of in that context, because most people leaving by choice just let their membership expire...

[arajca]

I thought the discussion on the 2b was pretty insightful.

I my university courses, they taught that we should definitely make our expectations clear to every class of what is expected of them. We were also told to make 'positive' rules and not 'negative' rules consisting of a bunch of "don'ts". See, what happens is if you tell a kid not to push a red shiny button, he's darn well gonna push the button.

I'm basically saying I agree that Day 1 of a cadet's training in CAP should include a stern list of expectations of discipline and leadership. Fact is, promotions are nothing more than evaluations on meeting said expectations: not just run-of-the-mill testing and drone answers.

Somewhere in there I also read something that made me wonder: we can be physically and mentally challenging cadets: physically through fitness and mentally through academics. I would say it is how you come across laying out expectations for these things that matters.

Absolutely if you enforce your rules they will stick. Out of the arguement you have all I got out of it was no pushups, 2b's(which I don't know?). I am just saying Be strict. Don;t let something slide. If you let it slide they will never get it corrected.

Something that wasn't explicitly stated but works quite well - make any punishment fit the offense. For example, if a cadet won't salute properly after being trained and corrected several times, have them give a report on the history and significance of the salute to the unit. I have seen this done several times and I have seen a noticible improvement each time (different cadets). If they will not comlpete the assignment, hold their promotions until they do - failure to obey a direct order.

[Ford73Diesel]

I do not believe push-ups are an appropriate punishment. Yelling and creating a stressful (to a small degree) environment should only be reserved for encampment. In my military experience, boot camp squares away someone, and from that point on they know how to act, (for the most part, there are exceptions) and any school or operational setting ofter that is more relaxed, becuase if things were like boot camp all the time, no one would remain in the military.

I also think that "punishment" in the form of withholding promotions or something like that would work much better to instill discipline.

[Ford73Diesel]

However for minor offenses in CAP there is no easy way to "punish" someone.

Some units have had limited success with a points system where so many points would result in a 2b or withholding of promotion. I like the idea of writing an essay as someone mentioned earlier.
.

[stratoflyer]

Yeah, the essay idea was cool. Could be hand written after a regular meeting with senior members and cadet staff supervising and instructing? Sound like detention?

[arajca]

I've seen it done as homework. Why punish the seniors and cadet staff?

[stratoflyer]

They'd be having a staff meeting somewhere nearby keeping an eye?

[DC]

Why does it have to be supervised? You could just tell Cadet Snuffy that you want an essay that is x words long on subject y by next week, or else.

It is usually fairly easy to tell if it is plagarized or not, and asking a cadet to stay late after a meeting can be difficult. I have had parents get after me because the meeting broke 10 minutes late, how will you tell a parent that their kid has to stay another hour to write an essay. (on that subject, how will you find a SM that wants to sit there and babysit him?)

I'd say have them do it on their own, maybe with a phone call in the middle of the week to check on their progress/remind them.

[ol'fido]

I still believe that in most cases that cadets that are properly trained and lead will not cause problems that can't be cured with a simple "Alright, people, let's put it in check" or the patented, number 3 "death stare". Cadets behaving badly is usually youthful rambunctiousness or lack of training and not from any real desire to cause trouble. Good leadership will usually solve this. Yelling to discipline should be used rarely if at all. If you try to be Mr. Hardcore all the time, the cadets will become dulled to it and all you will get out of yelling is a sore throat. In fact, some of the most effective butt chewings I've got in my life were by someone speaking at barely more than a whisper.

However, if you feel like you need a system here's one for you. The key to it is progressive discipline. That means that there is a graduated response to most minor transgressions. The more the offense occurs; the greater the disciplinary measure taken. For instance, you can give each cadet a couple of 3x5 cards: a warning card and a demerit card. The first step in progressive discipline is the verbal warning or "don't do that!". The next step would be the written warning. Let's say that cadet Smith didn't have his rank insignia on correctly for the second time. You tell him to fix it and write on his warning card: insignia improperly worn, the date and your name.  On down the road you see Smith with his boots not shined. You look at his warning card and see that Maj Jones warned him the month before about his boots. So, you write him a demerit on his demerit cards.

After 6 demerits, the cadet gets a sit down formal counseling session. Formal counseling can also be done if a cadet gets more than three demerits within a certain time period like two meetings(?). Once, the cadet has 12 demerits he gets a formal counseling and a term of adminstrative hold for say one month. That means that no paper work such as promotions or recognition can be filled out on that cadet for the term of the hold. This is an activity restriction as well. The next time the cadet gets 12 demerits it goes to two months hold, then three, then six. If the cadet has had a total of one year of administraitive holds, then I would have a review board and then if all were in agreement, 2b the cadet. This is a variation of what we do where I work.  You given the cadet every opportunity to steer the right course and you've also created a paper chain of documented disciplinary problems.

[cap235629]

(on that subject, how will you find a SM that wants to sit there and babysit him?)

You mean 2 senior members 

[DC]

(on that subject, how will you find a SM that wants to sit there and babysit him?)

You mean 2 senior members 

Not exactly.

Ensure that at least two "approved" senior members are present at all overnight cadet activities. Encourage at least two senior members to be present at all cadet activities (with the exception of chaplain counseling or cadet orientation flights). This policy is for the protection of the senior members as well as the cadets.

Emphasis mine. Two SMs must be present at overnight activities (its a seperate discussion, but note that it does not specify the gender of those SMs), it is encouraged that there be two SMs at other activities, but not required.

[stratoflyer]

I really liked olefido's suggestion. I think that works great. It reminds me though of a little game I used to play...

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

(on that subject, how will you find a SM that wants to sit there and babysit him?)

You mean 2 senior members 

Not exactly.

Ensure that at least two "approved" senior members are present at all overnight cadet activities. Encourage at least two senior members to be present at all cadet activities (with the exception of chaplain counseling or cadet orientation flights). This policy is for the protection of the senior members as well as the cadets.

Emphasis mine. Two SMs must be present at overnight activities (its a seperate discussion, but note that it does not specify the gender of those SMs), it is encouraged that there be two SMs at other activities, but not required.

But CPPT requires that you do not have 1 cadet and 1 senior alone. So either his/her battle buddy goes along or you need a 2nd SM

[jimmydeanno]

But CPPT requires that you do not have 1 cadet and 1 senior alone. So either his/her battle buddy goes along or you need a 2nd SM

CAPR 52-10 does not state that anywhere in it.  However, good judgement and common sense would dictate situations where the appearance of inpropriety would strongly suggest you have someone else available.

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

I stand corrected.

From CAPP 50-3

Generally, this means that a minimum of two senior members will be present when appropriate and feasible.

This does give some leeway. 
Especially in a discipline situation I would not put myself alone with a cadet. I've done quite a few Level I trainings and have always said avoid a cadet said / you said situation, by having min groups of 3.

[notaNCO forever]

 Even if your another cadet I would recommend you avoid being alone with another cadet that your "disciplining".

[DC]

I stand corrected.

From CAPP 50-3

Generally, this means that a minimum of two senior members will be present when appropriate and feasible.

This does give some leeway. 
Especially in a discipline situation I would not put myself alone with a cadet. I've done quite a few Level I trainings and have always said avoid a cadet said / you said situation, by having min groups of 3.

You shouldn't. It isn't mandated by the regulation, but it is just common sense that you should not be alone with a cadet at any time. That is the thing with regulations, a lot of times you have to apply common sense when interpreting and implementing them.

[stratoflyer]

Common sense is the least common of all senses.

Protect yourself. Do not put yourself in a questionable position. These days, every one is lawsuit happy.

That is why I started this thread, to see how poeple approached discipline and strictness differently.

[Ned]

Common sense is the least common of all senses.

Protect yourself. Do not put yourself in a questionable position. These days, every one is lawsuit happy.

Although I am no longer a CAP legal officer, I'd like to point out that there is no significant legal exposure to simply being alone with a cadet at a CAP activity.  I've never seen or heard of such a lawsuit, and I'm pretty sure I would have after nearly 40 years in CP at every level from local to National and as a CAP legal officer.

Mostly because no ethical lawyer could file such a silly lawsuit.

Moreover, there simply isn't a problem of cadets falsely claiming molest during a squadron meeting or similar activity.  That's not an accident, but rather a result of experienced CP officers appying our very reasonable CPP as well as their own common sense and experience.  We have a system designed to hold members accountable for their actions, including both harming cadets as well as making false claims.  It seems to be working pretty well.



It bears repeating -- our cadets deserve to be challenged, mentored, led, and trained.

Safeguard them and apply generous amounts of common sense and you will be fine.



Too many seniors treat our cadets like they were some sort of IED; waiting to explode and engulf some innocent senior in endless and costly litigation.


That's a serious disservice to our cadets and an indication that the senior might be more comfortable working primarily in ES or AE.




Ned Lee
Former Legal Officer
(and current National Cadet Advisor)