Uniforms and Rank/Grade

[Eclipse]

Do we present ourselves well?  I think not.

And that's the problem.  And why it defies easy resolution.

Until someone can articulate how our current uniform constellation measurably affects our ability to get our job done, what we are talking about are aesthetics:  what one member or another thinks "looks better / more professional" or whether we are "presenting ourselves well."

Aesthetics are admittedly important, but we will never, ever have an agreement about what looks better or more professional.  Aggravating this is the cost to our volunteers of any change.

But if someone can show us how having our current uniform set measurably affects the mission, than we can and should discuss it and change them.

But until then, we will fill tens of thousands of posts with endless (sincere and passionately held) personal opinion about how things look.

You absolutely cannot say the uniform is just aesthetics, because that then negates the USAF's stance and ours as well.

If its just aesthetics then we should adopt a CAP-specific uniform and move on.

[Ned]

Bob,

I could have sworn we were just talking about your mischaracterization of my posts.  I never said uniforms are just aesthetics.  I said they are important  tools to help us accomplish our missions.

I do say that the majority of the posts here are differences of opinions about what looks better or more professional.  Or that we have "too many" uniforms.  And absent any evidence that our uniform suite measurably compromises our ability to accomplish the missions assigned to us by the US Congress, then we are indeed arguing about aesthetics by definition.

I say again that aesthetics are indeed important, but also repeat that we will never ever have a consensus on aesthetics, so we are doomed to discuss this for all eternity without any hope of achieving consensus on what looks better / more professional and / or whether we have too many uniforms in someone's personal opinion, or whether members are adequately honored by the clothes they choose to wear.

[Eclipse]

I never said uniforms are just aesthetics.

Until someone can articulate how our current uniform constellation measurably affects our ability to get our job done, what we are talking about are aesthetics:  what one member or another thinks "looks better / more professional" or whether we are "presenting ourselves well."

For the record, on a number of occasions, I have provided several mission-related reasons our current uniform mess is an issue when you have asserted that
our ability to accomplish the mission must mean its irrelevant.

[lordmonar]

CAP needs a UNIFORM not a menu.

Bob.  We need the right tool for the right job.
Let Commanders pick which tool is the best one for the job.

[Eclipse]

CAP needs a UNIFORM not a menu.

Bob.  We need the right tool for the right job.
Let Commanders pick which tool is the best one for the job.

Since when are commanders picking uniforms?  Or have any say in what the average member wears?

Further to that, do USAF CCs, or any military service, LEAs, FD, or even your local CERT "pick" their uniform?
No, they all wear the same thing, perhaps within a duty-specific lane, and there are no separated groups.

If you're good enough to join, you're good enough to wear what everyone else wears.

[lordmonar]

Just because we're able to accomplish the mission(s) doesn't mean they are not negatively affected.

Please show where the mission has be affected.

We hear all the time, albeit anecdotally, that we show up looking like a hodge-podge.  Further to that, we have nearly zero internal enforcement of existing regs, and the regs we have are a mess - so not only don't we have a uniform, what we do have is confusing, at best, for new members.

You knew very well that I was using the comparisons to demonstrate the point of who else is in military uniforms, but thank yo for helping with my earlier point which is, essentially, the USAF restricts our wear of their uniform simple "because they can", and though I ma won't to spread urban legends about this stuff, there is likely some "genetic memory" about past foibles that doesn't help the equation, including conspicuous ignoring of the regs by a number of national staffers in recent memory.

Detriment to the mission?  How about seniors charged with charged with training and being knowledgeable about a uniform they can't wear.  Loss of credibility.

And that affected the mission how?  Because I can follow this up with "man they thought we were a bunch of yahoos....by our funky uniforms....but at the end of the day they were impressed by how we did our job."

How about the hundreds of photos with a senior in a formation or presenting awards dressed like a real estate salesman while surrounded by subordinate staff in their plumage?

which mission affected and how?

How about fully 1/2 the membership who do an equal, if not higher share of the heavy lifting who simply aren't allowed to be honored and recognized as the other half of the organization?  You really think at the end of the day that doesn't quietly chip away at morale and spirit?  Seriously?  Now the adults in that group press on and get it done, but the uniform situation goes on the pile with all the rest of the ills of CAP, and unlike a lot of things, it pops up at every activity and event, because its visible and called out everywhere.

I have no idea what the heck you are talking about here.  But again...which mission is affected and how?

How about new members wandering into a meeting an seeing that literal hodge podge with no discernible ryhme or reason to what people are wearing, and a general lax attitude.

Again....which mission and how affected?

The uniform is not the top problem in CAP, but it's high on the list, if, for no other reason, then it shouldn't even be a discussion point, ever, except perhaps at the national level for occasion, mission-related changes.  The uniform should be "set it and forget it", but in its zeal to please everyone, CAP, as is a regular occurrence, basically defeats the very purpose they aspired to.

I don't think the uniform is top problem......not even top 10 problem. 

We have no uniformity, no organizational identity, to literal and philosophical camps in clothing, and no one working on the root of the problem. Affinity is a factor to deal with, but mission needs, uniformity, and identity should be higher on the list.

Sure we got uniforminity.   I say Service Dress......we got two uniforms to pick from.  I say Service....we got two uniforms to pick from.  I say "field/Duty" uniforms and you got four (two for air and two for ground) to pick from.  I say casual and you got one to pick from.

When we are all wearing the same uniform then we will be uniform.  90% of the problems you point out are simply commander's not caring about what uniform you wear...because it doesn't matter......so long as you wear them right.  If YOU as a commander want everyone in Polo's......you say "everyone wear polo's tomorrow".  You want everyone in the mission base in BDU/flight suits....you say so.  And you send the ones out of uniform home.   That's called leadership....which I say is CAP #2 problem.

CAP needs a UNIFORM not a menu.

And here we are all back to the base line of a lot of your arguments.   I want it this way......and I don't want back talk about "The regs says it's authorized".

Bob.....we have a menu because Mess Dress makes a piss poor Ground Team uniform.
We got USAF style and Corporate Style because we got the USAF not wanting the fat and fuzzies wearing the USAF uniform and a lot of us want to keep our USAF uniforms.

So......You want to cut bait or fish.......which do we do.....ditch the USAF style uniforms  or ditch the fat and fuzzies?

Choose.

[Eclipse]

If you can't see the detriment to the mission of having two classes of members in two different uniforms, nothing I am going to
say is going to change that.  I'm a little shocked you and Ned can't.  I provided the details in this thread and others, and you're just ignoring them.

For the record, we have one service dress.  There is no corporate equivalent.

We got USAF style and Corporate Style because we got the USAF not wanting the fat and fuzzies wearing the USAF uniform and a lot of us want to keep our USAF uniforms.

Making my point about two classes.  Who, exactly, is "us"?

So......You want to cut bait or fish.......which do we do.....ditch the USAF style uniforms  or ditch the fat and fuzzies?

That's easy.  Which is a "need" and which is a "nice"?  CAP seems unable to accept the answer to that question,
because it can't afford the loss, so it continues to pretend there is no issue and hopes it will just go away.

[lordmonar]

CAP needs a UNIFORM not a menu.

Bob.  We need the right tool for the right job.
Let Commanders pick which tool is the best one for the job.

Since when are commanders picking uniforms?  Or have any say in what the average member wears?

Further to that, do USAF CCs, or any military service, LEAs, FD, or even your local CERT "pick" their uniform?
No, they all wear the same thing, perhaps within a duty-specific lane, and there are no separated groups.

If you're good enough to join, you're good enough to wear what everyone else wears.

Every Tuesday at my squadron we have a uniform of the day.  He tells us what we are going to wear. 

I don't know what you are talking about allowing the local CERT to pick their uniforms.....I have no idea where you were going with that.  But to answer your question.....have you seen the Thunder Bird Uniforms?   NOT in any AFI that I ever read....so yes the USAF does let its special teams to "pick" their own uniforms.....I also point out that PJ's, SF, JTACs, WJ, DI and a whole lot of other people have their own special uniforms (Red Horse  for instance)......plus if you want to go way back.....gate guards had their own special bling, Transient Alert Crew chiefs, Flying Crew chiefs, Communications Technicians,....all has some special uniform that others could not....as for local LE and FD.....oh you bet their special teams have their own special bling and "uniform" rules.

Yes.....you should wear "what everyone else" wears.....so when are you going to take off your oak leaves and your ribbons?

[lordmonar]

If you can't see the detriment to the mission of having two classes of members in two different uniforms, nothing I am going to
say is going to change that.  I'm a little shocked you and Ned can't.  I provided the details in this thread and others, and you're just ignoring them.

For the record, we have one service dress.  There is no corporate equivalent.

We got USAF style and Corporate Style because we got the USAF not wanting the fat and fuzzies wearing the USAF uniform and a lot of us want to keep our USAF uniforms.

Making my point about two classes.  Who, exactly, is "us"?

So......You want to cut bait or fish.......which do we do.....ditch the USAF style uniforms  or ditch the fat and fuzzies?

That's easy.  Which is a "need" and which is a "nice"?  CAP seems unable to accept the answer to that question,
because it can't afford the loss, so it continues to pretend there is no issue and hopes it will just go away.

Eclipse.....I agree with you....we need one uniform.....But....as you have been challenged.....where is the determent to the mission?
You claim that this is one of CAP's top problems....yet can't cite one instance where it has caused a mission loss or degradation.

You are the one asserting that it is a major problem...that needs to be solved.........and I don't see it that way.

As for answering my question you still have not done so.   Which is it.....loose the USAF style uniforms or kick out all the Fat and Fuzzies?

[Eclipse]

^ So you're going to make your argument about uniforms by grabbing for anyplace you can that has a special
variant?  How is that relevent to >THIS< conversation or CAP.

I'd have no issue if NHQ tomorrow decided we would no longer wear grade or decs, as long as the whole
cadre goes at the same level.

[Eclipse]

>Anything< which is a detriment to morale, initiative, or cohesion, not to mention appearance, especially in an all-volunteer
organization is a detriment to the mission.

I'm not going to retype the above answers because you don't accept them or understand them, beyond, CP training is effected,
our standing in the military community, and recruiting, to name three areas, are significantly affected, which is in turn a detriment to
the entire organization.  Just because you can stand up and say "we have a field uniform you can wear, so mission accomplished" doesn't mean there aren't ripple effects and unseen detriments all over.

No to mention the underlying thread of having our act together.

As for answering my question you still have not done so.   Which is it.....loose the USAF style uniforms or kick out all the Fat and Fuzzies?

Without the more then 1/2 the membership who are restricted from USAF style uniforms, CAP would fold tomorrow.
Seems an easy answer to me. 

Which is more important to you?  USAF affinity or the morale and experience of more then 1/2 the affected membership?

[Eclipse]

Here's the other reason I, and others, have such heartburn about the issue.

Many of the commanders and staff who should be the champions on this issue with the USAF, whether it's changing the wear standards or moving to a CAP-specific uniform, based on photographic evidence, are ignoring the weight and/or grooming standards themselves,
and because of this, are "unaffected", or "immune" to the issue.

I've said it 100 times, if CAP would just start across-the-board enforcement of its uniform wear regs, with actual ramifications for
violators, we'd see a much different "face", and a lot of the things which seem "unequal" would change quickly, because all of a sudden
we'd see members with influence affected.

[lordmonar]

Say it.....say you want us to drop the USAF uniform and go to an all volunteer, corporate organization.

Please....I beg you to say it.....because if we drop the USAF uniforms that is exactly what we are going to get.....and 98% of all the rest of your arguments on all your other threads immediately fall to pieces.

[Eclipse]

Say it.....say you want us to drop the USAF uniform and go to an all volunteer, corporate organization.

Please....I beg you to say it.....because if we drop the USAF uniforms that is exactly what we are going to get.....and 98% of all the rest of your arguments on all your other threads immediately fall to pieces.

?  I can't say it because it isn't true.  I DO NOT WANT TO LOSE THE USAF STYLE UNIFORMS.  I do not want to lose the affinity and status as a military auxilary,
nor do I have any disdain for decs or badges.

I want one uniform for all members.  Those are not mutually exclusive propositions.

[SunDog]

We can look pretty ragged now, for sure. A bunch of us went to a local AFB for a chamber ride a few years ago. Ghastly, I mean hideous, and I'm pretty easy about this stuff.  I didn't KNOW we had that many uniform combinations, or that we could muck them up so ingeniuosly. It was embarrasing. . .

My Unit always looks sharp. The problem is some units do not have the moral courage to tell their buddy Bubba to shape up because you are making Petticoat Junction Squadron look like sad sacks. You are a "Captain", what did you say?   

Good point- sorry for the delayed response, overlooked your post, but wasn't ducking you - I didn't say squat, to anyone. For the ones that were clearly, obviously beyond the pale, I should have.

And our mob did look like motley. Ket's say a "great variety of imaginative combinations".

Lot of sneakers, etc

[Eclipse]

Sneakers?  OK now you're just making this up.

[SunDog]

For CAP uniforms, I'd prefer to get it right, but I follow the herd - someone mentioned earlier we shouldn't wear baseball caps w/rank with the polo combo - heck, everyone in my Wing does that!  Not gonna worry about it until Wing makes a case. . .sure would like a tactical/cargo khaki pants combo, though.

Thanks for being part of the problem!

Shoot, I just got that hat, to replace a disreputable looking sweat-stained article. If my Wing doesn't have some dispensation or locally authority for the hats, you may be right. For all I know, it the caps may have been approved by someone with the authority to do so. . . or not.

But, in this case, we are uniform, it looks OK, is practical, and we don't look like a rag-tag collection of miscreants. On the negative side, we might be breaking a uniform reg.

Not as externally embarrasing as our showing at the AF Base in bizzare mufti, though. If we're technically off the reservation with the ball caps, but consistent with it wing-wide, I don't feel like I'm shirking too much by going along.

[SunDog]

Sneakers?  OK now you're just making this up.

Nah, I swear, sneakers. Not black coaches shoes, either, but Nike or Adidas-like, running shoes. I didn't (and don't) know the legal combos, but the variation was enourmous. Maybe 25 guys? Maybe 15 variations? Heck, even forgetting the jeans, sneaks, etc., we looked like a circus.

[Eclipse]

^ You have no idea of the apoplexy you are inducing in many of the readers right now.

[68w20]

Sneakers?  OK now you're just making this up.

Nah, I swear, sneakers. Not black coaches shoes, either, but Nike or Adidas-like, running shoes. I didn't (and don't) know the legal combos, but the variation was enourmous. Maybe 25 guys? Maybe 15 variations? Heck, even forgetting the jeans, sneaks, etc., we looked like a circus.

Please...Just take 15 minutes and skim this...http://tinyurl.com/q3culcg