"Corporate Uniform" Gone!!

[PACAPSM]

Well, here's my 2 cents...

I bought the Corporate Uniform coat a few years back, had it tailored, the whole nine.  I'm a little cheesed-off if the PowerPoint in Response #617 was from the Nov. 2009 NEC meeting and is to be taken as gospel.  However, I've resigned myself that the corporate coat can still be salvaged with a little modification, if the USAF would allow.  For example:

-Owners of the corporate coat can have the epaulets removed, the silver braid removed, CAP cutouts removed, silver brush name tag removed, ribbons and badges removed, and then wear the magnetic CAP "pocket-thingie" nametag that is presently approved for the blazer in the left breast pocket.  No hard rank, no military "look-a-like" parts to the AF-style, and people could still salvage their CSU coats.  Keep the CAP buttons already on the coat--too much of a PITA to replace, and they have the CAP corporate symbol anyways.  It could still be worn with the white and grays combo already approved--who cares if it may look a little out of place--we'd have to wear the blue blazer with white and grays anyways.  This would also allow adaptations to the CSU coats presently in Vanguards stock, and give a "uniform" blazer coat from stock we already have.

-Maybe a gray garrison cap when this "new" coat configuration is worn (no silver braid on cap--just a gray garrison cap, like an "enlisted"-style cap).  CAP garrison cap insignia worn as presently authorized on USAF garrison cap.  No service cap analog.  [This gray garrison cap could also be used with the CAP navy blue flight suit too, if chosen and authorized].

If the CSU coat in its present configuration has to go, don't throw it out completely (especially because poor people like me dropped a lot of coin on it)--just change it's configuration.  The membership wins out (OK, a little bit to have the tailor remove the braid and epaulets, but its a small price to pay for a coat that couldn't be used otherwise), Vanguard wins out, and CAP and Big Blue win out by not having to cheese-off the membership too badly.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water--just change the bath water!

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

From everything I have read and/or heard on the issue, the only thing that is clear is ... NOTHING about the decision to end the CSU is clear.

I haven't either, sir.  But at this point I'm operating as if the last time I wear mine will be 31 Dec 2010.

But you know what?  I, too, think the CSU was a sharp-looking uniform.  Could it have been handled better?  Yes.  While I like the hard rank, I also don't have any issue with wearing gray epaulet sleeves on the CSU coat.  And we never should have infringed on AF rank slides ... why was it so difficult to just put the gray slides on the aviator shirt for the CSU, as we do for the gray slacks?

Colonel, I've been saying much the same.

When I first saw this uniform with the blue slides and hard rank, I thought "uh oh, someone's going to throw one over this."  I am surprised it lasted as long as it did.  I thought that when the uniform's originator went out, so would the uniform.

As I've posted before, I would advocate a modified version of this uniform (blending it with the grey/white):

Ditch the blue nameplate, replace it with the standard grey/white
Ditch the AF blue epaulets and hard rank; replace with standard CAP grey
Ditch all Army black outergarments; keep A2 leather and blue flight jacket
Ditch the AF blue trousers
Remove the sleeve striping
Adopt a standard grey trouser model, preferably one that looks like it belongs with a uniform
Adopt a dark-blue (not AF blue or Army black) pullover (need not be V-neck) sweater with standard CAP rank slides
Keep the brushed-silver nameplate that says "Civil Air Patrol"

I am not skilled with Photoshop so maybe someone who is can do a graphic of the blue CSU service coat with the grey/white.  It would look different but I don't think it would look horrible.

Maybe that way we can at least keep the CSU service coat...maybe not.

Just a suggestion.

[arajca]

Reply to PACAPSM:
So, you'd be happy with a bunch of folks with shreds of fabric on the top of the shoulder seam, off-color stripes on the sleeve, with holes along each edge, and still forbidding members from wearing their awards in a dress environment?

Before you start on tailoring, I can tell you exactly what most of the members will do, if they bother to keep wearing the coat. Unbutton epaulet, take scissors and cut off epaulet as clost to the seam as possible (maybe) while avoiding cutting the coat. They aren't going to take the coat to a uniform shop, tailor, or seamstress. They aren't going to carefully open the seam to remove the epaulet. When you ask them about, you'll get a response silimar to "Well, you wanted the epaulet off and it's off."

[PACAPSM]

ajarca, it was just an idea thrown out there to use the CSU coat for SOMETHING.  I absolutely don't want to see the CSU go AT ALL!  I absolutely DON'T want to give up the privilege to wear my awards and badges, or to see others lose that privilege!  Please don't make assumptions about what I want or don't want.  Much to your surprise (maybe), I've been at this "CAP game" for a little while now.  The tone of your post appears that you might be assuming that you're talking to a child, or a complete idiot, who may not have already considered the concerns you brought up.  You don't like the idea--OK.  Duly noted.  Take you're venom, scolding and condescending elsewhere.  This an open forum where everyone can post they're ideas openly.  Those who don't like the ideas have posted (for the most part) they're likes/dislikes constructively.

Notice I said "take to a tailor...".  A good tailor can hide a lot of the sins you're talking about.  If other SMs want to do the work themselves and possibly look a mess, that's on them.  But I, for one, am NOT going to drop that much coin on this coat only to have it sit in my closet.  I'll use it for SOMETHING, CAP or not.

After reading more of the posts on possible combos in other threads, I agree-maybe the CSU could be used in its present configuration with the whites and grays "as is".  Should not get any complaints from the AF (uses CAP cutouts already with the hard rank,  or if they said gray slides with gray name tag on coat, fine by me).

[FW]

The multimedia presentation (which I had not analyzed in full until now) by Major General Courter (if they are genuine, Major General Courter is usually more "professional" in the generation of her multimedia) I would consider an official source, however, I must point out the most disturbing elements of this whole matter. Assuming this is real and not some clever chicanery)

March-Aug 2006, the uniform was approved by various actions of the NB and NEC including several changes after the "horse was out of the gate," i.e. the 1 line nameplate replaced with the 2 line.  Jackets went into production.  That is the first instance of "wasted member funds."  The "US" lapel pins were replaced by CAP ones, (second waste of money) By November 2006 (three years ago) its protocols/customs/procedure was codified.

However, as early as August 2006 

"HQ USAF/A3/5 General Officer wrote to BoG
• Concerned that the blue/white uniform "does not meet the "does not meet the
letter and intent" of policy guidance

• Concerned that it "is not significantly different from the U.S. Armed Forces uniforms to
avoid confusion"

• Directed that all future corporate uniforms to be vetted through USAF, too.
(to ensure distinctiveness)

And here is where I am made even more irate... Despite this being known, more and more developments to the uniform were added up to as late as September 2009 (two months before the "surprised" nixing of it all.

Why was this allowed to happen?  Were talking three years here!!!  I submit that there is the "appearance" that policies of the NB and NEC "misrepresented" the situation to the general membership and maybe even Vanguard and lead to a flagrant significant waste of member resources. In my eye that sort of goes against the Core Value of Excellence.  But that is, of course, opinion and speculation of the same sort I have been pointing out and will only entertain that as nothing more than blarney.

I am very very put out by this... I am throwing my support to all uniform proposals being put through a "member expense" caveat and research period and that all future proposals of the NB or NEC include research to determine the effects of these changes to members.  Maybe making this extra step will prevent sudden uniform changes, additions and amendments to CAP Uniform Policy and avoid such debacles in the future.

This is sick...I may be physically ill!!!  I hope much is learned from this and that a mitigation action be placed into effect to commence immediately.

Sparky, don't hurl yet.  I've heard rumblings from above and anything is still possible in this crazy world of ours.

BTW; here is the entire letter from the A3/5, Gen Chandler, dated 14 Aug 2006:

"Dear General Kehoe,
       
         We have recently become aware of the new CAP distinctive uniform.  While we applaud the CAP/CC's attempt to increase the professionalism and esprit de corps of his organization, we do not believe the uniform meets the letter and intent of AFI 10-2701.  Specifically, the uniform is not significantly different from  U.S. Armed Forces uniforms to avoid confusion.

         While it is well within the authority of the USAF to mandate that CAP members sease wearing the distinctive uniform, we are aware of the potential perceptions from a decison on our part.  Instead, we prefer to resolve the issue in the spirit of cooperation between the USAF and CAP senior leadership beginning with the Board of Governors. We request that you call a meeting of the Board of Governors to address this issue as soon as possible with the goal of directing the CAP National Commander to workd with the USAF to develop modifications to the new CAP corporate uniform or an entire new uniform acceptable to both the CAP and the USAF.  To preclude this type of situation in the future, please submit all future CAP corporate uniform changes to HQ USAF/A3/5 for approval.  Our staffs stand ready to provide assistance.  Please contact SAF/GCM if you have any questions about Air Force authorities in this matter.  For all other inputs, please contact AF/A3SHA.

Carol H. Chandler, Lt Gen, USAF                                        Robert J. Goodwin
DCS Air, Space & Information                                            Deputy Assitant Secretary of the Air Force
Operations, Plans & Programs                                           (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) "

The letter seems to be circulating around now so, I think it is appropriate to reproduce it for your reading pleasure at this time.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

That ("became aware") would seem to tell me that the Air Force was not consulted in any way, shape or form on the CSU...so I suppose it's natural that they would feel their toes were stepped on by appropriating several of their uniform items.  It doesn't sound to me like General Chandler or Secretary Goodwin were trying to lower the boom.

However, I still say that the "low light," etc. provisions of AFI 10-2701 have a wide range of interpretation.

To an E-1 fresh out of Lackland, running across a CAP officer may scare the snot out of him/her that said Airman didn't render proper C&C, when said Airman is not obligated to.  I think the issue there is that new Airmen are not educated about their service's Auxiliary.  I've met Marines who know more about CAP than some Airmen.

Conversely, several years ago I was on my way home from a unit meeting wearing the short-sleeve AF style uniform.  I made a quick (15 min.) stop on the way at a supermarket and a customer there thought I was a store security guard.

Almost any uniform, including the current grey/white, can conceivably be misinterpreted under AFI 10-2701 by those who don't know what they're looking at.  This is a bit of a stretch but a John Q. Public who doesn't know what CAP is may think s/he is looking at a new Navy whites order of dress.

I am wondering how open to cooperation the AF still is on this issue...like maybe accepting a modified combination grey/whites with modified CSU service coat like I've suggested elsewhere.

[Gunner C]

Isn't it possible, just possible, that someone high enough in the AF food chain came to the CAP/CC and said "I hate that uniform and it hacks me off, get rid of it"? 

Edit: Wrote it and then thought better of it.

There is a perception that no one is operating in the open.  It seems the AF is sending letters to CAP and it seems CAP is doing things underhandedly. 

I find it hard to believe that CAP-USAF didn't forward the proposal for the CSU up their food chain.  If they did, I'll bet it died on someone's desk.  If so, not our fault initially.  If not, then the former CAP-USAF/CC needs to be brought back and have his dog-tags bent.

[NCRblues]

So, with this letter it is asked for a meeting of the BOG. According to the slides from Cap/cc, they didn't feel like it warranted a bog meeting. IMHO, let me say that again IMHO, we just got into a shoving match (again) with the Air force and lost....(again)

[davidsinn]

So, with this letter it is asked for a meeting of the BOG. According to the slides from Cap/cc, they didn't feel like it warranted a bog meeting. IMHO, let me say that again IMHO, we just got into a shoving match (again) with the Air force and lost....(again)

That letter is 3 years old. The status quo was fine until just now? What changed?

[FW]

^Always a possibility however, in Gen Kehoe's response, it looks like the uniform was changed to meet Air Force concerns hence, no further discussion was deemed warrented.  It is important to note; the BoG is constituted by law.  The Sec AF is responsible for appointing  4 members to it.  The chairman, at the time, was a SECAF appointee.  I wouldn't call the dialog  "us vs. them".

[PA Guy]

So, with this letter it is asked for a meeting of the BOG. According to the slides from Cap/cc, they didn't feel like it warranted a bog meeting. IMHO, let me say that again IMHO, we just got into a shoving match (again) with the Air force and lost....(again)

That letter is 3 years old. The status quo was fine until just now? What changed?

Maybe someone on the AF side decided they had been blown off for 3 yrs and decided to fix the prob. with a sledge hammer approach or this could all be over a non uniform issue.  Remember, the berry board episode wasn't percipitated by a uniform issue but a personnel problem.

[FW]

^And that personnel problem was caused by a disagreement between the CSAF and SECAF.
Note:  Gen Harwell did NOT self promote.  The promotion request was approved by the SECAF/MIR but, the CSAF said, "NO".    End result:  2nd star for Harwell; maroon epaulets for all of us.

[Earhart1971]

"the uniform is not significantly different from  U.S. Armed Forces uniforms to avoid confusion."

I want to know the history of the above Air Force catch phrase.

This is so LOOSE any new Air Force General can come up with this Objection on any CAP Uniform.

We can be playing this Uniform Confusion Game running in circles for years to come.

Let's wake up and smell this coffee!

I wonder if any CAP National Leader has really caught on to this?

[High Speed Low Drag]

Don't forget that Gen. Chandler is now the USAF Vice-Chief of Staff.  This whole uniform thing is beginning to make sense.

And why CAP HQ has been so quiet on it.  It appears that someone at HQ dropped the ball and ignored the AF. 

Picture this:  A 4-star General who happens to be VCSAF (as of AUG 2009) sees or hears about the CSU and how CAP hasn't done squat since the gentle note that he sent.  One of his aides calls the CAP-USAF/CC and says "Hold for Gen Chandler,"  the CAP-USAF/CC promptly drops his coffee, and is then asked by the general about the status of the CSU.  The general then expresses his displeasure about the whole thing, hangs up the phone, and deals with issues more along his level, such as the day-to-day running of the entire USAF.
CAP-USAF/CC more or less nicely tells CAP/CC and Ex. Director that at the next board meeting, CSU needs to disappear. Or else.
NEC drops uniform from use.  NHQ has egg on thier face for not dealing with the issue in '06 and try to hush up the whole thing and slide blame somewhere else "Oh, the big mean AF is picking on us again."  Meanwhile, the VCSAF thinks of CAP as a bunch of idiots.

*** This has been an exercise of pure speculation. *****

But it points out again about how CAP is run.  There is no clear-cut person in charge - we are run by three different groups and some paid staffers.  The paid folks do good jobs and the groups mean well, but we do not have a single person or small group that is the ultimate authority for CAP. 

It also does not preclude the other threads from coming up with a truly CAP-distinctive uniform.

[PA Guy]

"the uniform is not significantly different from  U.S. Armed Forces uniforms to avoid confusion."

I want to know the history of the above Air Force catch phrase.

This is so LOOSE any new Air Force General can come up with this Objection on any CAP Uniform.

We can be playing this Uniform Confusion Game running in circles for years to come.

Let's wake up and smell this coffee!

I wonder if any CAP National Leader has really caught on to this?

Yes, they have.  Please take a look at either slide 11 or 12 of the CAP/CC briefing slides.  It talks about how the corp. uniform doesn't exist to provide a MILITARY appearing uniform.  The handwriting is on the wall.  All the modifications in the world won't bring back the CSU. Corp. uniforms are not meant to have a MILITARY appearance which is apparently the way the AF wants it.

[High Speed Low Drag]

^^^^^^^  Where does it say, other than the alleged briefing slides, that there cannot be a military-style uniform?  You key word was "apparantly."  And, if those slides are legit, then should we roll over and play dead?

If we come up with a totally distinctive uniform, then I think the AF would not have a problem with it.  The key being totally distinctive.  It's not that they think CAP should not be in any military-style uniform, otheriwse we wouldn't have the AF-style.  It's all about "The AF Image" - they dont want us fat/fuzzies wearing anything close to an AF style b/c they are so caught up on image.

[Angus]

Can someone send me a copy of the slides so I can see what they say?

[arajca]

screw it.

[FARRIER]

FW has been able to back his statements. At this point I'm willing to wait and see what does transpire here in the short term, as he suggest.

[Hawk200]

And, if those slides are legit, then should we roll over and play dead?

A case of salute and execute. A paramilitary organization is not a democracy. We do what we're told, or we use the door.