Main Menu

"Minority" majority

Started by RiverAux, March 12, 2010, 03:59:51 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

lordmonar

1) They are free (for the blues) and have a ready surpluss supply for the BDU (or ABUs when we switch  ;D).

2) The USAF has not problems with overweight kids in USAF uniforms (so long as they can't be mistake for "real" USAF persons).......so this is not issue.

As for organsational identity/unity.....there is a very clear distiction between a Cadet and a Senior member....with no negetive connations to be explained to outside customers.  "why is he in BDUs and you are wearing Blue?"  "He's a cadet and I'm an Senior Member."


PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

Eclipse

#21
I'd have no issue whatsoever for our cadets to be in one uniform (all of them), and our seniors in another (all of them).

That's not uncommon at all in organizations such as ours, and would make things a whole lot easier and "uniform".

Something that just struck me that I'd forgotten and no one else had mentioned - outerwear.  Those wearing USAF combos
are required to wear outerwear that displays their grade - those in the aviator whites don't even have the option.

Do anything outside in the Spring or Fall where people have actual weather and you might as well be the pizza guy for anyone
would know your affiliation.  So forget about ribbons, how about just basic "I'm with the band..."

"That Others May Zoom"

OldSalt

This thread is more to the point and appreciated and photos say more than anyone of us can.  :clap:

The bottom line is really not one of how many uniform combinations we have, but that we are uniform - uniformity across all spectrums of what makes CAP, CAP.

CAP's history and Air Force military tradition are to be respected and (hopefully) admired. Whether we standarize on the AF-Style uniforms, or some other styles, uniformity and cohesion demand that we adopt one uniform for all members equally.

Rather than each stakeholder in CAP (Members and AF reps) trying to bully their own positions through endless committees, the chain of command needs to take hold of this issue and make some command decisions that put the overall health and well being of our organization at the forefront. Both the AF reps and the CAP members need to say to themselves before every issue is decided, "How does this improve CAP and CAP's ability to perform our 3 distinct missions?"

No more delegating down the chain - let the Board of Governors make some command decisions and say, "[darn] the torpedoes - full speed ahead!"  >:D   

AirDX

Quote from: Eclipse on March 12, 2010, 04:54:24 AM
But consider these photos:

You see no difference or issue here, especially in a paramilitary organization and considering the person in the blazer below is the highest ranking officer in the organization?


Who's the paramilitary commander in this photo?  Is that lady the cadet's mother or his commander? Hard to tell
from here.
Well, who's holding the rank in THIS picture:

Is it the dude in that red hat? That's pretty cool.  How about the sharp-looking SFC holding the wreath?  Surely it can't be the dude dressed like the butler on the left!

Point is... it's not the uniform that makes a leader.

Quotewe reduce many of our members to a "civilian status",

We ARE civilians.  Some of this discussion loses sight of that.
Believe in fate, but lean forward where fate can see you.

Майор Хаткевич

We are a para-military organization in nature, structure, and dress.

The picture with the president is really a non-comparable example, nor addresses the issue.

Most people know who the president is. Most don't know who the commander of CAP is.

Looking at the picture of the National CC I'd think she may be a congresswoman at best, certainly NOT the commander of the whole organization. Besides, the picture of her in the CSU clearly shows that she has a good number of awards as a SM, which can further be inferred to show her position compared to say, the 20 year old (I think he was actually 21 when he got the award) cadet with 20+ ribbons, or the SM Colonel with only 8.

PhoenixRisen

Quote from: USAFaux2004 on March 14, 2010, 01:07:40 AM
We are a para-military organization in nature, structure, and dress.

The picture with the president is really a non-comparable example, nor addresses the issue.

Most people know who the president is. Most don't know who the commander of CAP is.

Looking at the picture of the National CC I'd think she may be a congresswoman at best, certainly NOT the commander of the whole organization. Besides, the picture of her in the CSU clearly shows that she has a good number of awards as a SM, which can further be inferred to show her position compared to say, the 20 year old (I think he was actually 21 when he got the award) cadet with 20+ ribbons, or the SM Colonel with only 8.

Also, regardless of whether or not people recognize their leaders, I'd also like to point out on that matter that these two situations / people are further uncomparable in that the President may be the leader of this country's military, be he is a civilian.  He has no designated uniform.  Our national commander, however, is a Major General (and in this case, a uniformed member) of the CAP.  We do have uniforms.

arajca

Quote from: PhoenixCadet on March 14, 2010, 01:33:02 AM
Also, regardless of whether or not people recognize their leaders, I'd also like to point out on that matter that these two situations / people are further uncomparable in that the President may be the leader of this country's military, be he is a civilian.  He has no designated uniform.  Our national commander, however, is a Major General (and in this case, a uniformed member) of the CAP.  We do have uniforms.
Two points:
1. All CAP members are civilians. Those who are military personnel do not get that status from CAP.
2. The POTUS is the Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces, but he is NOT a member of the Armed Forces.

PhoenixRisen

Quote from: arajca on March 14, 2010, 01:57:06 AM
Quote from: PhoenixCadet on March 14, 2010, 01:33:02 AM
Also, regardless of whether or not people recognize their leaders, I'd also like to point out on that matter that these two situations / people are further uncomparable in that the President may be the leader of this country's military, be he is a civilian.  He has no designated uniform.  Our national commander, however, is a Major General (and in this case, a uniformed member) of the CAP.  We do have uniforms.
Two points:
1. All CAP members are civilians. Those who are military personnel do not get that status from CAP.
2. The POTUS is the Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces, but he is NOT a member of the Armed Forces.

Regarding your first point:  I'm in full agreement.  That was not my point.  I was simply echoing USAFaux2004's point that we are a uniformed, paramilitary organization.  As "dysfunctional" as it may be (including how our "rank" structure is), and regardless of how the two separate entities interact (CAP and the military), it's still there, so I threw out my opinion on the matter.  I am not debating whether or not we are "civilians" or "military".  We are the former, not the latter.

Your second point is exactly what I was getting at.  The difference between the President not being uniformed and our National Commander not being uniformed are two separate animals.  The POTUS is a civilian, leading a uniformed military.  He nas no uniform, period.

We (CAP) are a "uniformed" organization, and our National Commander is a rank-holding member of the organization (unlike certain CAP higher ups who aren't uniformed, period, like the Executive Director).  Given that we are an Air Force oriented organization, with the authorization to wear military-style uniforms, I think it is only appropriate that our National Commander go a bit farther than a blazer combo.

Then again, I'm one of those who think our ties to the Air Force play a big part in why I'm involved in CAP.  I enjoy the military aspect of the program.  If I wanted to volunteer in a group that didn't wear military uniforms or follow military protocol, I would not have joined CAP.

JROB

Hate to throw gas on the flames but if you notice in the above picture with the President the Tomb Guard SFC and the "dude in that red hat" are both in the Army and are wearing different uniforms for the same occasion.
Maj. Jason Robinson
Squadron Commander, Desoto Composite Squadron
SER-MS-096

"If you are in trouble anywhere in the world, an airplane can fly over and drop flowers, but a helicopter can land and save your life"-Igor Sikorsky

cap235629

Quote from: JROB on March 14, 2010, 04:20:12 AM
Hate to throw gas on the flames but if you notice in the above picture with the President the Tomb Guard SFC and the "dude in that red hat" are both in the Army and are wearing different uniforms for the same occasion.

The "dude in the red hat" is an Amy Band Member wearing a distinctive heraldic Army Band Uniform.  It has a specific purpose.  ONLY members of the Army band can wear it.  No different than an MP wearing his duty gear.
Bill Hobbs, Major, CAP
Arkansas Certified Emergency Manager
Tabhair 'om póg, is Éireannach mé

npfd505

I am a member of CAP who does not meet the weight requirements to wear the AF style uniform.  I understand the rules and regulations and honor our organization's choice to respect the USAF uniform worm by our men/women who have/are/will be defending our great nation.  As such I wear the CAP grey uniform and Blue BDU's.

I am very active in cadet programs.  I feel that we need to set the example in uniform wear for the cadets.  We should also set the physical fitness example too, yet I will concede that some folks cannot due to medical/physical conditions.  I personally do not like the grey uniform and proudly wore the "Pineda" uniform.  I felt it gave me a chance to wear a uniform similar to the cadets (wear of a cover, sharp appearance, & required use of military customs/courtesies).  I had to "act" the part just like they did.  (I will happily concede that the use of metal insignia, blue name plate and epaulets were in poor taste).  The grey uniform does look professional, but lacks standardization (any grey pants that meet the 39-1 will do).  The "Pineda" suit was more of a uniform.  I feel I have lost that "military" like option I enjoyed when working around cadets.  Will I quit CAP? Ummmm, NO!  That's stupid.  I did not join this organization to wear a uniform.  I enjoy the cadets, participating in ES and the friendship.  CAP is more than a uniform and rank!  I feel sorry for those folks who use CAP as a crutch for something that lacks in their lives and takes it too seriously (For another topic).

I honestly do feel singled out and in some cases discriminated upon (some CAP programs require the wear of AF style uniform or some staff jobs are withheld from those who "chose" not to wear the AF-Style uniform).  I believe the "singled out" feeling comes from all the attention people give to the issue and is almost internal.  People in Southern California are EXTREMELY image conscious.  We also, by the very nature of wearing an "alternate" uniform, look different when you are in a sea of cadets and seniors wearing the AF blues.  95% of participants at cadet activities wear the blue uniform in CAWG.  That also adds to the feelings I have.  And finally, there is a feeling I am less of a person because I cannot lose the weight despite all my efforts (my desire to lose weight goes FAR beyond the wear of any uniform...My children, health, and wife are the top reasons). 

I hope this gives some insight to those who often state "I don't understand why you feel that way"
Paul Saba, Capt, CAP
Emergency Services Officer
Inland Empire Group 3

npfd505

Dear Lordmonar,

I think you have an excellent point.  I would agree with the concept of cadets in one uniform and adults (seniors) in another.
Paul Saba, Capt, CAP
Emergency Services Officer
Inland Empire Group 3

Ned

Quote from: npfd505 on March 14, 2010, 06:41:31 AM(some CAP programs require the wear of AF style uniform or some staff jobs are withheld from those who "chose" not to wear the AF-Style uniform).

Really?  Except for the dozen or so chaplains that minister to the RM, I can't think of any other activities or programs that "require" the AF style uniform.  What am I forgetting?

And which staff jobs are witheld from members who wear corporates?  Heck, our national commander wears corporates.  More local to you, the former CAWG commander Virginia Nelson also wore cororates exclusively.

OldSalt

#33
This has probably been stated a bunch of times, but I think that the bottom line is really the overall CAP Identity that is the problem. We are like a person with a split personality, on the one hand we are the Air Force Auxiliary - a fine all volunteer civilian addition to the AF team. As such, identifying with our parent organization by wearing the AF-Style uniforms during AFAMS seems very appropriate in this case and is very accepted by the overall membership, including our AF assigned stakeholders.

However, we also have the non-profit humanitarian service organization personality with missions that mirror other civil service entities like law enforcement, fire / rescue, paramedics, and other emergency services.

It's the acceptance of the latter personality that we are struggling with. Should we wear AF-Style uniforms for all of our missions, or should we only wear AF-Style when in AF Aux mode, and another suitable civil service uniform when in other than AF Aux mode?

In either mode, being uniform is key so that we are distinctly recognizeable to our customers, our parent organization, and the general public. Other paramilitary civil service entities all wear distinct uniforms and no one complains about their choice of attire. No one says to the Sheriff or local Police Chief that they shouldn't use military-style metal rank for themselves or their officers. No one tells the Fire Chief the same thing - for that matter, no one tells the Commander of the Salvation Army they shouldn't wear military-style metal rank or uniforms either, and you don't see members of the same police or fire forces all running around wearing different-but-equal uniforms either.

It seems to me, regardless of the negative connotations of the "TPU" and the original proposer - the adopted CSU was very well suited to this civil service role.

If we can all accept these uniforms and rank styles for other paramilitary agencies, why is it so difficult here in CAP to do the same thing? Why must it be AF-Style or nothing in some people's minds? On another note, why not lobby for Cadet Programs to be put under the AF Aux umbrella and mandate that active participation in Cadet programs requires AF-Style uniform compliance if wearing AF-Style is a key element of that program?

Let's sort out our identity then decide on uniforms that fit that identity across the board.

vmstan

Even the RM has taken on a "non-profit humanitarian service organization personality" in some of their recent missions. Take Haiti for example. Yet they still wear the same uniforms when doing those missions. Obviously when you're RM you're ALWAYS RM, and we have the Aux On/Off problem... but regardless of where the assigned mission came from (AF vs local) I think it's fair to always associate us as a member of the AF team... just as people would always associate the ANG with the AF, even when they're not off blowing up bunkers in Afghanistan. As such it seems reasonable for us to always be able to wear AF-style uniforms, if we can meet their requirements.
MICHAEL M STANCLIFT, 1st Lt, CAP
Public Affairs Officer, NCR-KS-055, Heartland Squadron

Quote"I wish to compliment NHQ on this extremely well and clearly written regulation.
This publication once and for all should establish the uniform pattern to be followed
throughout Civil Air Patrol."

1949 Uniform and Insignia Committee comment on CAP Reg 35-4

MooneyMeyer

Here's an idea.  Have one corporate uniform, the grey slacks / blue polo combo.

If those that do not meet weight and grooming requirements would like to show off their ribbons and rank insignia there is an easy, clear cut solution to that issue. And, perhaps CAP could offer members some help.

CAP could offer members a razor, access to hair clippers, and a good general diet and exercise plan. 

Problem solved.

Sean Meyer
1st Lieutenant, CAP
Fort Worth, Texas

davedove

Quote from: MooneyMeyer on March 16, 2010, 04:30:14 AM
Here's an idea.  Have one corporate uniform, the grey slacks / blue polo combo.

If those that do not meet weight and grooming requirements would like to show off their ribbons and rank insignia there is an easy, clear cut solution to that issue. And, perhaps CAP could offer members some help.

CAP could offer members a razor, access to hair clippers, and a good general diet and exercise plan. 

Problem solved.

It's this attitude that just doesn't get it.  CAP has decided that all are considered full members, EVEN THOSE WHO DON"T MEET THE H/W OR GROOMING STANDARDS.  It isn't about whether a person can shave or lose weight, because CAP says you don't have to do that to be a member.

However, even though these members are told they are full members, they are then told "Sorry, but you don't have a dress uniform where you can wear your accomplishments like the other members."
David W. Dove, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander for Seniors
Personnel/PD/Asst. Testing Officer
Ground Team Leader
Frederick Composite Squadron
MER-MD-003

RLM10_2_06

I still don't understand the removal of the CSU in the first place. Yes, maybe the Air Force had a few problems wih finer details (metal rank, etc.), and everything about the process of its adoption was crap, but why not simply fine-tune the uniform and keep it? I know a double-breasted coat isn't cheap, and it's a fine formal uniform; a double-breasted coat doesn't stand out too terribly much among a bunch of single-breasted coats of the same color, from what I've seen, but still provides a noticeable difference to those who use their eyes (I'd say the same gos for the white shirt versus light blue, but that's stretching it a bit). Solves all this "heritage" and "equal treatment" crap.
-Senior Member, CAP
Former C/PVT, AROTC
Former C/Lt Col, AFJROTC
Former C/2LT, AJROTC

Eclipse

Review the other related threads, though you really won't find anything definitive.  Most of the justifications look like conjecture or retroactive continuity.


"That Others May Zoom"

The CyBorg is destroyed

Quote from: RLM10_2_06 on March 16, 2010, 02:01:05 PM
I still don't understand the removal of the CSU in the first place...why not simply fine-tune the uniform and keep it?

In a word: politics.

Without being privy to the officialese behind all this, there are a few opinions (and that's all they are) I've thought of.

P****a.  It was his idea, and a good one, though very badly implemented.  To the CAP leadership, the CSU represents P****a and they (understandably) don't want anything that he did hanging over their/our heads.

Misinformation.  The AF today, especially young Airmen, know so little about us that they (wrongly) believe that any sort of attempt at a distinctive uniform that is anything but grey/white/polos is some sort of end run around their policies.  To me the whole "Coast Guard Admiral/foreign General/we don't know what they are" argument is a red herring at best, especially given the vagueness of the AF policies on CAP uniforms ("low light/at a distance/mistaken for the Armed Forces") and that they do not own every shade of blue in the book.  Some Airmen at various levels saw what they thought were "fat and fuzzies" wearing their uniform wrongly, grumbled about it and eventually got the ear of CAP-USAF.  Even an E-2 fresh out of tech school can have an effect with such complaints, especially if s/he has the "right" ears listening to them (first shirts, wing kings, etc).

CAP's own blundering for at least the past 20 years.  We have had "corporate leadership" that has tried to have it both ways: wanting to be (loosely) associated with the AF, but downplaying that connection (meaning: "we're a non-profit volunteer group, the AF can't tell us what to do!") and up-playing (OK, that's not a word) the "corporate" side to the point where our relationship with the AF has become very, very needlessly adversarial at times.

Add to that the fact that we did wear hard rank and blue epaulettes with "CAP" embroidered on them but lost them in the early '90s due to bad behaviour on our part (depending on who you ask).  I believe that another post addressed the AF offering to give us back blue CAP epaulettes and hard rank, but since it wasn't on "our" terms, the "corporate leadership" basically flew the AF the bird.

There is a small-but-vocal chunk of our membership who would like to see us ditch any sort of Air Force trappings altogether and just become an ES/SAR/DR organisation with airplanes.  No ranks, no "bling," no uniforms (other than the grey/white/polos/blazer); just fly ES/SAR/DR.  Cadets?  Let them join JROTC.  AE?  If it doesn't relate to a CAP airplane, it's not needed.

These are just my own summations based on things I have personally witnessed, read about and been told since I joined CAP in 1993.

I agree fully with you about retaining the CSU with General Courter's interim modifications.  I've worn it, and it looks good, much better than the atrocious (in my opinion) grey pants.  But I don't really see it happening.  I think CAP has been so snakebitten by this CSU episode that those at the top are really not inclined to press the issue, nor have a "CAP-distinctive" uniform that has any shade of blue in it.  Status quo.

YM (and opinion) MV.
Exiled from GLR-MI-011