C/SrA Flight Sergeant?

[vesryn]

Do you think that C/SrA is too low of a rank to be a flight sergeant? My squadron is quite small, and the highest ranking cadet not already in staff is a C/SrA. Should we consider the C/SrA (who has already gone to basic encampment), or wait 8 weeks without a Flight Sergeant?

[MIKE]

I would prefer an NCO (ideally C/TSgt-C/MSgt).  You say that the C/SrA is the senior cadet not already on "staff" of a small squadron.  If you have NCOs and SNCOs in higher level positions.  I would bump them down to  the grade appropriate position before appointing an airman.  Guide or element leader would be a more appropriate role for a C/SrA.

[HGjunkie]

If a C/SrA can drill a flight well, I see no issue with it. Ideally an NCO should do it, but the assumption is they will be an NCO soon anyways.

[Storm Chaser]

I agree with the second post. Last year we were hurting for cadet officers and NCOs, but still had a pretty descent size squadron. We appointed a very sharp C/SrA to the position of Leadership Officer; what a mistake. The cadet was a great cadet and above his pears, but way over his head for this level of responsibility. Cadets should ideally be appointed to positions commensurable with their grade and experience.

That being said, sometimes you don't have much of a choice (other than leaving the position vacant; something that's not always appropriate or possible). When I was a cadet, we had a very large squadron that was hurting for officers and senior NCOs. We had senior NCOs in officer positions and airmen in NCO positions. Our First Sergeant was a C/A1C (something I probably wouldn't do on this day and age). Surprisingly, however, he did pretty good as far as I can remember. He was an older cadet and in high school, which probably helped. But that was an exception, rather than the rule.

Ideally, I would appoint an NCO to Flight Sergeant unless you absolutely have none available and you can't leave the position vacant. And even then, I would ensure that this SrA is performing at the NCO level. Just because he's a great C/SrA doesn't mean that he would make a great Flight Sergeant. That should be taken into account before making a decision.

[Tim Day]

The Cadet Staff Handbook, CAPP 52-15, is a particularly good resource for a situation like this. I would sit down with your staff and discuss the examples found in that reference, then design an appropriate staff for the size and make-up of your squadron. This works well.

[jimmydeanno]

The Cadet Staff Handbook, CAPP 52-15, is a particularly good resource for a situation like this. I would sit down with your staff and discuss the examples found in that reference, then design an appropriate staff for the size and make-up of your squadron. This works well.

Lately, I feel like that's an appropriate response for every question asked..."What does the Cadet Staff Handbook say?" 

It used to be way more interesting when there wasn't good published guidance on all this stuff. 

...Ahhh the good 'ol days...

[lordmonar]

How many cadets in the "flight"?

Got an 8 person flight....sure why not have a C/Sra Flight Sergeant.   It is not like he is really going to be doing be doing the work of a flight sergeant.

[jimmydeanno]

How many cadets in the "flight"?

Got an 8 person flight....sure why not have a C/Sra Flight Sergeant.   It is not like he is really going to be doing be doing the work of a flight sergeant.

Then why not have an element leader for 8 weeks.  If they aren't going to be doing the job, they don't need to be one.  Job titles imply things.  Holding positions goes on resumes.  If you aren't one, but someone gives you the title, it only sets you up for failure later on.

[Tim Day]

How many cadets in the "flight"?

Got an 8 person flight....sure why not have a C/Sra Flight Sergeant.   It is not like he is really going to be doing be doing the work of a flight sergeant.

Then why not have an element leader for 8 weeks.  If they aren't going to be doing the job, they don't need to be one.  Job titles imply things.  Holding positions goes on resumes.  If you aren't one, but someone gives you the title, it only sets you up for failure later on.

Not to mention the entire purpose of the cadet leadership structure is to provide a practical experience that's aligned with their leadership curriculum. A C/SrA is learning to be an element leader and should be provided with that level of leadership responsibility so he can practice what he's studying. That shouldn't be limited to job titles, either. We should be adjusting the our performance expectations to align with the cadet leader's grade.

[Eclipse]

That being said, sometimes you don't have much of a choice (other than leaving the position vacant; something that's not always appropriate or possible). When I was a cadet, we had a very large squadron that was hurting for officers and senior NCOs. We had senior NCOs in officer positions and airmen in NCO positions.

That's >always< an option, and usually appropriate.

As discussed in numerous other threads, cadet staff positions are just as much about the training of the cadet in question as performing the actual staff function.
While failure can be one of life's best lessons, setting someone up for failure, isn't cricket, especially an adolescent.  You're also robbing that cadet
of the one-pass-only learning experiences which are the whole point of their membership (Which is why the "I was serving my peers instead of progressing myself is nonsense.")

You're also setting up all the other cadets under the ill-appointed cadet to fail as well, because you are robbing them of appropriately prepared leadership as well,
which means you potentially set up your squadron for a string of "advance early, fail, quit, next in line, please..."  I've seen that more then once at both squadrons and large activities.

Rare is the person, adolescent or adult, absent proper training, who can lead people in an unfamiliar environment they know nothing about, especially when they are in "learn mode"
themselves.   Adults may well bring outside experience to the table, along with more mental flexibility and willingness to ask for help.  Cadets are rarely going to fall into that category, especially
under C/NCO themselves.

The preferred option should always be to go without, or have adult leadership perform the functions rather then bump someone early. 

[vesryn]

How many cadets in the "flight"?

Got an 8 person flight....sure why not have a C/Sra Flight Sergeant.   It is not like he is really going to be doing be doing the work of a flight sergeant.

We usually have about four cadets in the flight. Yeah, we're a pretty small squadron. One Chief (cadet commander), one Staff Sergeant (First Sergeant), Two Senior Airmen, Two Airmen, one Airman First Class, and two Basics. Not all of them come to all of the meetings, which are every friday from 1800-2000 hours. This cadet has also just come back from encampment, and I can tell that he has really learned a lot.

[arajca]

With only one flight, you have no need for a first sergeant. That cadet should be your flight sergeant. First sergeants are C/MSgt - C/CMSgt, not C/SSgt.

Your CMSgt should be your flight commander at most, not cadet commander. Nothing against your cadet, but what leadership position would they be aspiring to after they served as cadet commander?

I suggest the following structure:
C/CMSgt - Flt CC
C/SSgt - Flt Sgt
C/SrA - Element leaders
Each element gets 1 - C/A1C and 1 basic. First element gets the C/Amn

Simple and generally follows the recommendations of the Cadet Staff Handbook.

I would task each element leader with knowing where their cadets are each meeting - sick, doing homework, family activity, present, etc. If they are not at a meeting and not excused, the element leader should be contacting them before the next meeting to see why they missed the meeting.

[MIKE]

Make the C/CMSgt the Flight Sergeant until he gets C/2d Lt.  Make the C/SSgt the Guide. 

[Tim Day]

With only one flight, you have no need for a first sergeant. That cadet should be your flight sergeant. First sergeants are C/MSgt - C/CMSgt, not C/SSgt.

Your CMSgt should be your flight commander at most, not cadet commander. Nothing against your cadet, but what leadership position would they be aspiring to after they served as cadet commander?

I suggest the following structure:
C/CMSgt - Flt CC
C/SSgt - Flt Sgt
C/SrA - Element leaders
Each element gets 1 - C/A1C and 1 basic. First element gets the C/Amn

Simple and generally follows the recommendations of the Cadet Staff Handbook.

I would task each element leader with knowing where their cadets are each meeting - sick, doing homework, family activity, present, etc. If they are not at a meeting and not excused, the element leader should be contacting them before the next meeting to see why they missed the meeting.

You could also make the C/CMSgt the First Sergeant - which would be more appropriate to the grade of C/CMSgt. That would align even more closely with the Cadet Staff Handbook, although either way is probably ok. This works in larger squadrons as well. 

[vesryn]

With only one flight, you have no need for a first sergeant. That cadet should be your flight sergeant. First sergeants are C/MSgt - C/CMSgt, not C/SSgt.

Your CMSgt should be your flight commander at most, not cadet commander. Nothing against your cadet, but what leadership position would they be aspiring to after they served as cadet commander?

I suggest the following structure:
C/CMSgt - Flt CC
C/SSgt - Flt Sgt
C/SrA - Element leaders
Each element gets 1 - C/A1C and 1 basic. First element gets the C/Amn

Simple and generally follows the recommendations of the Cadet Staff Handbook.

I would task each element leader with knowing where their cadets are each meeting - sick, doing homework, family activity, present, etc. If they are not at a meeting and not excused, the element leader should be contacting them before the next meeting to see why they missed the meeting.

You could also make the C/CMSgt the First Sergeant - which would be more appropriate to the grade of C/CMSgt. That would align even more closely with the Cadet Staff Handbook, although either way is probably ok. This works in larger squadrons as well.

If we did this, who would be the flight sergeant and who would be the flight commander?

[Tim Day]

If we did this, who would be the flight sergeant and who would be the flight commander?

Your C/SSgt would be your flight sergeant and you wouldn't have a flight commander (until you had a C/2d Lt). Your senior member staff would assume command functions and you'd have your cadet NCOs performing the duties assigned to cadet NCO positions per the Cadet Staff Handbook.

[vesryn]

If we did this, who would be the flight sergeant and who would be the flight commander?

Your C/SSgt would be your flight sergeant and you wouldn't have a flight commander (until you had a C/2d LT).

And when the C/CMSgt promotes to C/2d LT and becomes the flight commander, who would become the First Sergeant?

[Tim Day]

If we did this, who would be the flight sergeant and who would be the flight commander?

Your C/SSgt would be your flight sergeant and you wouldn't have a flight commander (until you had a C/2d LT).

And when the C/CMSgt promotes to C/2d LT and becomes the flight commander, who would become the First Sergeant?

No one, until you have a cadet NCO of the appropriate grade to assume that role. Remember, the staff positions aren't mandatory - they are part of the training syllabus. If you don't have a cadet commander or a first sergeant, nothing bad is going to happen to you.

[Eclipse]

+1

[vesryn]

If we did this, who would be the flight sergeant and who would be the flight commander?

Your C/SSgt would be your flight sergeant and you wouldn't have a flight commander (until you had a C/2d LT).

And when the C/CMSgt promotes to C/2d LT and becomes the flight commander, who would become the First Sergeant?

No one, until you have a cadet NCO of the appropriate grade to assume that role. Remember, the staff positions aren't mandatory - they are part of the training syllabus. If you don't have a cadet commander or a first sergeant, nothing bad is going to happen to you.

Good point. Thank you.

[vesryn]

Can a moderator close this discussion? Thanks! I got my answer.

[SarDragon]

Nah, we don't routinely close threads. It will sit here, idle, until someone resurrects it. It could be a day, a week, a year, or even longer. We have threads that have been revived after a five year lapse in posts. No big thang.

[arajca]

Nah, we don't routinely close threads. It will sit here, idle, until someone resurrects it. It could be a day, a week, a year, or even longer. We have threads that have been revived after a five year lapse in posts. No big thang.

Or it will sit here, being added to as members drag the discussion into all sorts of interesting side notes until it devolves into a uniform thread.

[Eclipse]

Nah, we don't routinely close threads. It will sit here, idle, until someone resurrects it. It could be a day, a week, a year, or even longer. We have threads that have been revived after a five year lapse in posts. No big thang.

Or it will sit here, being added to as members drag the discussion into all sorts of interesting side notes until it devolves into a uniform thread.

May I mambo dogface to the banana patch?

[Storm Chaser]

That being said, sometimes you don't have much of a choice (other than leaving the position vacant; something that's not always appropriate or possible). When I was a cadet, we had a very large squadron that was hurting for officers and senior NCOs. We had senior NCOs in officer positions and airmen in NCO positions.

That's >always< an option, and usually appropriate.

In theory, I agree with you. But it's always (or should be) determined by the circumstances. Sometimes you >need< to fill a position because  someone has to do the job. Titles can vary and that's acceptable (i.e. Flight Sergeant instead of Flight Commander if the cadet in charge is an NCO and not an officer). Positions can also be left vacant (we currently don't have a First Sergeant in our squadron). But when you need a job to be done, you appoint someone competent to do it, even if they don't have the ideal grade. It happens on the senior side all the time, as it does in the cadet side.

Personally, I would try to wait until the cadet reach the appropriate grade, but sometimes exemptions are in order.

[Eclipse]

It happens on the senior side all the time, as it does in the cadet side.

Really a different discussion.

On the cadet side, the need to do a job should never trump the cadet's learning experience, nor prematurely  push them into something they have not been
trained for.  There are no jobs in the cadet structure that a senior can't do better on a temporary basis until the cadets are ready.

[Storm Chaser]

On the cadet side, the need to do a job should never trump the cadet's learning experience, nor prematurely  push them into something they have not been trained for.

Again, I don't disagree. But grade alone cannot determine a cadet experience, training, maturity or ability to do a job.

There are no jobs in the cadet structure that a senior can't do better on a temporary basis until the cadets are ready.

That's true in some cases, but not all (how many senior members know how to march... I do, but not many). But again, it all depends on the circumstances, as I said before. You're making an assumption that you have enough senior members to perform these tasks; that's not always the case. I have been in enough squadrons to have experienced that.

[Eclipse]

That's true in some cases, but not all (how many senior members know how to march... I do, but not many). But again, it all depends on the circumstances, as I said before. You're making an assumption that you have enough senior members to perform these tasks; that's not always the case. I have been in enough squadrons to have experienced that.

OK - but that's more indicative of the problem, and you should not penalize the cadets because the seniors aren't up to snuff.

You should not have seniors in leadership positions who cannot at least adequately lead and execute the entirety of the program in absence of
ready cadets.

And yes, I realize that the "warm body" mentality of a lot of a commanders leads to situations where the commander and staff don't even know what the cadets
are doing, or are supposed to be doing.  That doesn't make it right, and again, we're penalizing a cadet(s) by expecting them to step up unprepared, or do a senior's job.
And this being allowed to continue is a command failing all the way up the chain.

So if for no other reason then to be a voice in the crowd, we need to keep hammering how wrong it is to have NCOs in officer roles, and be turning Mosquitoes into cadet commanders.

[Майор Хаткевич]

+100000000000 based on harsh experience.

[Tim Day]

On the cadet side, the need to do a job should never trump the cadet's learning experience, nor prematurely  push them into something they have not been trained for.

Again, I don't disagree. But grade alone cannot determine a cadet experience, training, maturity or ability to do a job.

There are no jobs in the cadet structure that a senior can't do better on a temporary basis until the cadets are ready.

That's true in some cases, but not all (how many senior members know how to march... I do, but not many). But again, it all depends on the circumstances, as I said before. You're making an assumption that you have enough senior members to perform these tasks; that's not always the case. I have been in enough squadrons to have experienced that.

I don't think anyone is making that assumption. Instead we are stating that none of those positions actually need to be filled, ever, except as part of the cadets' training program. The cadet organizational structure is there to provide tailored challenges commensurate with cadet grade.

If I don't have enough senior members to handle 8 cadets than I probably don't have enough senior members to have a cadet program.

[jimmydeanno]

That's true in some cases, but not all (how many senior members know how to march... I do, but not many). But again, it all depends on the circumstances, as I said before. You're making an assumption that you have enough senior members to perform these tasks; that's not always the case. I have been in enough squadrons to have experienced that.

If you are in a unit that is using a senior member to march the cadets around or teach drill, then the likelihood of having a cadet who can drill or instruct drill better is slim to none.  If you have some sort of AFJROTC cadet or something that knows how to drill already, drill can be instructed to an element by an element leader.  Either way, the senior member is going to do just as well if not better than the 5 C/AB that have never drilled before either.  So, no point in making them cadet commanders. 

I have about a decade of cadet programs management on the senior side now, and not once have I found that appointing cadets prematurely was a good thing.  I've saved a number of units from closing and done a lot of drill instruction while cadets moved up the ranks.  The pre-existing conditions were C/NCOs as cadet commanders, C/A1C as a deputy commander, etc.  None of them did well, cadets left.  When I took over, the cadet program got a reset, cadets were put in appropriate positions and told if the wanted to be a "X" then get themselves to a point where they could be one.  Sure enough, they get truckin.  I didn't have C/CMSgts hanging out at the Armstrong, they got their Mitchells and Earharts so that they could be Cadet Commanders and run high-level wing cadet activities.

Time and time again, its the same story, and the squadrons that fail all think that they can make C/A1C Timmy a cadet commander and everything will be fine.

1) Cadets don't progress when they can do everything as a C/SSgt.
2) There is nothing to aspire to when you've been a Cadet Commander by the time you hit C/Tsgt.
3) The leadership lessons are not appropriate.

Really that is the argument in a nutshell.  We aren't talking about the obscure circumstance where the 20 year old C/A1C did an awesome job as a cadet commander because he already had his Masters' Degree in non-profit organizational management, we are talking about the other 99.9% of the time.

It may work short term, but in the long run, the squadron fails.  I've seen it over and over and over again.

[lordmonar]

How many cadets in the "flight"?

Got an 8 person flight....sure why not have a C/Sra Flight Sergeant.   It is not like he is really going to be doing be doing the work of a flight sergeant.

Then why not have an element leader for 8 weeks.  If they aren't going to be doing the job, they don't need to be one.  Job titles imply things.  Holding positions goes on resumes.  If you aren't one, but someone gives you the title, it only sets you up for failure later on.

Wrong Dog....wrong Tree.