Re: Tac Officers

[Briski]

10-12 man flts, which is a waste of my time - I command 90 in the guard.

Oh yeah, because the opportunity to have a greater, more direct impact on the growth and development of 10-12 cadets and their flight staff since you won't be distracted by 78-80 others is such a menial task. Pails in comparison to commanding 90.

[DNall]

10-12 man flts, which is a waste of my time - I command 90 in the guard.

Oh yeah, because the opportunity to have a greater, more direct impact on the growth and development of 10-12 cadets and their flight staff since you won't be distracted by 78-80 others is such a menial task. Pails in comparison to commanding 90.

Distracted?!? Go easy there, Captain, talking about my soldiers that way. You take take a company commander & assign them to a squad leader position & see how bored they are.

I'm not a junior NCO that's only capable of leading small groups. I know all 90 of my soldiers, and I take care of every one of them. I know about their personal lives, their education, their civilian jobs, their finances, and of course their military development. I'm not their friend & I don't lead by fear, but if I stand up under fire and say follow me, I don't have to look back. My people aren't a distraction, they are the mission.

I joined CAP 14 years ago as a cadet programs officer, and I've impacted hundreds and hundreds of cadets in that time. I've sent I think it's 16 or 17 to service academies, dozens thru ROTC, and many times that to enlisted or civilian success. This'll be my 5th encampment, 6 or 8 CTEPs, couple NCASEs, national activities... pretty much everything out there. All that's nice, but the reason I'm in CAP are the bad kids I've turned around. I've taken kids from juvenile probation for gangs & drugs, from at-risk referrals, you name it, and changed their lives. I hate all the BS that is CAP. The only thing that keeps me here is knowing the impact I have on where those young people end up.

I'm happy to be on TAC staff, but 12-15 cadets, a flt sgt & CC... That's not much of a challenge. It's also not very rewarding to have such a small impact for my time & effort. I don't like lowering my standards, I don't like being bored, I don't like babysitting, and I don't like being taxed for the frustration.

However, I look forward to the encampment. From what I've seen on the command level, it should be a good one. I haven't been able to make one in a while, and I won't be able to make another for a few more years, so I'm happy to fit this one in.

[jb512]

[sarcasm]Sounds like the command staff should be forever in your debt that you've so graciously decided to take one for the team...[/sarcasm]

[mikeylikey]

I'm not a junior NCO that's only capable of leading small groups. I know all 90 of my soldiers, and I take care of every one of them. I know about their personal lives, their education, their civilian jobs, their finances, and of course their military development. I'm not their friend & I don't lead by fear, but if I stand up under fire and say follow me, I don't have to look back. My people aren't a distraction, they are the mission.

Aren't you an Officer?  Junior NCO?? 

[DNall]

[sarcasm]Sounds like the command staff should be forever in your debt that you've so graciously decided to take one for the team...[/sarcasm]

Hey whatever, CAP is all about taking one for the team, over & over again.

I really do like being a cadet programs officer & working events like encampment. I agree with why we're keeping the flights small, and I'm in the position I asked for because that's where I want to be.

That said... If you continue to improve yourself as an officer, and get better and better at one level, eventually you're not going to get the same fulfillment as you did when it was more challenging. Now, I've been doing this for a long long time, and I don't feel fulfilled in an entry level position. I've done just about everything, and I've kind of topped out at this point as a CP officer. The next level is less interaction with cadets, less direct impact, and lots more politics... in other words, much less rewarding. So yeah, I'm just a little frustrated that CAP doesn't have more to offer me at this point in my career.

I do appreciate greatly all that CAP has done for me. It really has shaped and changed my life. It's been very frustrating at times, but also very fulfilling. It's also taught me a whole lot about being an officer, which has in turn made given me the tools to be successful in the real military. I'd like to be able to repay the organization for that, and that's why I stay semi-active & take assignments like this. That doesn't mean I like it, and it doesn't mean that's the best use of the skills this org has helped me attain.

[Briski]

I don't like lowering my standards,

I'm not trackin' on this one... why do you have to lower your standards?

Also,

I really do like being a cadet programs officer & working events like encampment. I agree with why we're keeping the flights small, and I'm in the position I asked for because that's where I want to be.

Why did you ask for the job if your skills and experience would be better used elsewhere?

I'm not trying to pick a fight, just trying to better understand your situation.

[jb512]

I don't like lowering my standards,

I'm not trackin' on this one... why do you have to lower your standards?

Also,

I really do like being a cadet programs officer & working events like encampment. I agree with why we're keeping the flights small, and I'm in the position I asked for because that's where I want to be.

Why did you ask for the job if your skills and experience would be better used elsewhere?

I'm not trying to pick a fight, just trying to better understand your situation.

I didn't quite understand it either.  All due respect, but it did sound a bit condescending.

[lordmonar]

If your flights are so small....do they really need a SM TAC officer for each one?

Your flight commanders and flight sergeants are on staff right?

I would cut the number of TAC's to the match the number of squadrons you are running and use the rest as additional instructors.

I agree with DNall.  Being in charge of just 12 basic cadets would be boring.  Give me 48 thank you.

[jb512]

If your flights are so small....do they really need a SM TAC officer for each one?

Yes

Your flight commanders and flight sergeants are on staff right?

Yes

I would cut the number of TAC's to the match the number of squadrons you are running and use the rest as additional instructors.

No

I agree with DNall.  Being in charge of just 12 basic cadets would be boring.  Give me 48 thank you.

TACs aren't in charge of cadets.  Flight Commanders and their Flight Sergeants are in charge.  We merely look out for safety issues.  If you're a former cadet or military then there is a bit of information you can offer if asked...

[lordmonar]

Even worse....so you need a Baby Sitter for 12 cadets and 2 staff members.

[Eclipse]

Even worse....so you need a Baby Sitter for 12 cadets and 2 staff members.

If you believe a TAC is a babysitter, you're missing the point...

[jb512]

Yeah, there's not much babysitting involved if you've seen most of these cadet officers...

[lordmonar]

Even worse....so you need a Baby Sitter for 12 cadets and 2 staff members.

If you believe a TAC is a babysitter, you're missing the point...

Read Jaybird's post...and tell me that is not babysitting.

[Eclipse]

Even worse....so you need a Baby Sitter for 12 cadets and 2 staff members.

If you believe a TAC is a babysitter, you're missing the point...

Read Jaybird's post...and tell me that is not babysitting.

I have, its not. 

[mikeylikey]

TACs aren't in charge of cadets.  Flight Commanders and their Flight Sergeants are in charge. 

Really?

Because if a Cadet gets hurt, or there is a hazing issue, or any other issue, the TAC is responsible.  Adults are always responsible for the children under their care.

Last time I looked there might be a Cadet Chain of Command, but the Officers are most assuredly in charge.

[Eclipse]

TAC officers are a safety valve, however they are not in the cadet's chain of command.

[jb512]

TACs aren't in charge of cadets.  Flight Commanders and their Flight Sergeants are in charge. 

Really?

Because if a Cadet gets hurt, or there is a hazing issue, or any other issue, the TAC is responsible.  Adults are always responsible for the children under their care.

Last time I looked there might be a Cadet Chain of Command, but the Officers are most assuredly in charge.

Nope.  TACs are not supposed to be in charge of the flights, that is the job of the cadet staff.  A TAC is not responsible for injury or hazing (unless apparently preventable by the TAC).

There's a TAC handbook here that has everything listed:

http://www.texascadet.org/resources/archives/encampment/200506_summer05/tacbook.pdf

[lordmonar]

You are mentor, safety officer, chaperone, and parent all in one and all at once.

Chaperone, safety officer, parent.  Three out of the four things are babysitter jobs.

10-12 cadets do not need three staff members directly assigned to them to keep them safe.

Not saying there should not be any adult supervision....but it should be at the "squadron" level not the flight level.  Otherwise you are just wasting your resources.

[DNall]

Chaperone, safety officer, parent.  Three out of the four things are babysitter jobs.

I am not in this program to babysit. Cadet programs officers do not exist to babysit. I'm an officer. My job is to apply leadership in its many forms to ensure my subordinate leaders meet expected standards in completing the assigned tasks.

Beyond teh scope of encampment, I think this might make for an interesting read:
http://level2.cap.gov/documents/P052_015.pdf

[ZigZag911]

I think for a senior officer such as DNall it is not unreasonable to take a 'been there done that' attitude to serving as a TAC officer for an encampment flight.
There comes a point in one's CAP career when the individual needs to make decisions based on personal taste as well as the mission requirements.

I've dealt with this as an IC. There are members that don't want to participate in a mission in any role other than aircrew. Generally we have limited aircraft, people who need the flights for training, qualification, or renewal, and a limited number of sorties due to weather and other factors.

The training (SET) folks fly to validate the trainees' performance.

The vast group of observers and scanners who fall into the midst of the pack are generally told that if they want to train or serve in another area (mission management or GT), they should come to the SAREX...and, if the opportunity arises, we will get some of them an air sortie, but no guarantees.

If not, we encourage them not to attend until they are in need of renewal.

The point is, as a general rule, volunteers should not have to perform tasks that don't interest them.

However, neither should they attend the activity and just hang around criticizing.

On the matter of TACs' responsibility -- true, CAP does not consider them in the cadets' chain of command -- however, if something goes really wrong (such as a hazing incident) and the adult on scene fails to take all possible action to prevent or mitigate the situation, if it turns into legal action, you'd better believe that adult is going to be held liable to some degree.

As a final observation, I find it extremely odd that an officer of DNall's experience and longevity can not be put to some better use than as a flight level TAC officer.