A Commission?

[ZigZag911]

Volunteer officer in a volunteer organization....I realize that wasn't a choice, but I think it makes necessary distinctions....not least of which is that we are only the "some time" Auxiliary to USAF.

Secondly, never having served in RM (tm) I would not presume to compare myself with anyone who has served in RM (tm) in any capacity.

Bottom line, we're citizens seeking to help our country....the officer grade is largely internal, to identify those in positions of responsibility, and to motivate members.

[Falshrmjgr]

Volunteer officer in a volunteer organization....I realize that wasn't a choice, but I think it makes necessary distinctions....not least of which is that we are only the "some time" Auxiliary to USAF.

So we only need to be professional "some time?"   

Furthermore, I disagree.  Our rank has AS MUCH to do with how we present ourselves to the outside world than how identify ourselves and motivate.

I actually resent the idea that CAP rank is just "pretend."  At first blush, it sounds like humility.  But after hearing it over and over again, it sounds like a child saying "I'm just a kid" when they didn't act responsibly.

IMHO, as volunteers we are given a bit of slack for our failures, but that in no way absolves us of the responsibility of living up to the STANDARDS of an officer.

You, me, and everyone of us has a responsibility to every soldier, sailor, Marine or airman who has ever worn a uniform to fulfill the FULL obligation of those fancy doodads we stick on our collars.  Anything less is a craven act.

[Hawk200]

I actually resent the idea that CAP rank is just "pretend."  At first blush, it sounds like humility.  But after hearing it over and over again, it sounds like a child saying "I'm just a kid" when they didn't act responsibly.

Never really thought about it that way, but it makes sense to me.

[DrJbdm]

I fully agree, we absolutely have a duty to live up to the standard of that rank. If you feel you can't or would rather not live up to that duty and that standard then wear the golf shirt so you are not wearing a rank and you are not in a military looking uniform. to do any less is an insult to the tradition of the military service and the men and women who wear the uniform of our United States Military.


 

[ddelaney103]

So what exactly is the "standard of the rank?"  What do we expect of a MP who is a Major that we don't from a MP who is a SMWOG?

Usually, we expect more from an officer because they have more responsibility.  This isn't the case in CAP because they may not have any responsibility or authority.

If I'm sitting in an airport lobby and I see an Airman, Soldier, Sailor or Marine who is below me in grade getting out of line, I have a duty to try to settle him or her down.  If I don't, I can be held responsible for their actions.  If I go over there in uniform or show my ID, that person knows they have to listen to me or they can get into trouble.

In CAP, I can go over and talk to someone but they won't get into trouble for not listening to some random CAP Major - only those in his chain of command even if they don't "outrank" him.  I have no authority from my grade: therefore, I have no responsibility based on my grade.

So can someone explain to me the "standard" of grade that has neither authority nor responsibility?  As members of CAP and trained specialist we have professional standards of performance and conduct, but none of it changes based on grade.

[Short Field]

we absolutely have a duty to live up to the standard of that rank.

What standard of the rank?  Our rank only applies within the Civil Air Patrol and is based on standards of the Civil Air Patrol.  It is not the standards of the US Military.  The RM gives us the courtesy due the rank - but it is just a courtesy.   I am proud to serve in the Civil Air Patrol - but I don't pretend it is something it is not.  

Oh, for a reality check, next time you are in the BX, move to the front of the line in the check-out that says "military in uniform has priority".

[BillB]

One of the problems of grade is the various methods of promoting that has occured and developed over the history of CAP. At one time a Wing Commander could promote and even appoint any NCO through LtCol grade on a new member upon joining. During another period to atain O-5 required completion of:
ECI 7C
SOS
Industrial College of the Armed Forces (now National Defense University)
ACSC
AWC
In other words the promotion roughly equaled USAF requirements.
Since then the training requirements have been lowered with ICAF and AWC dropped. CAP PD is supposed to fill the training void, but with few exceptions, leadership is not included in the training to any degree.  Responsibility and authority in a volunteer organization can't function as one is based on the other and a member can ignore an order if the person giving it doesn't have the authority. The only answer is the 2B and chances are that could be appealed.

[Falshrmjgr]

So what exactly is the "standard of the rank?"  What do we expect of a MP who is a Major that we don't from a MP who is a SMWOG?

Usually, we expect more from an officer because they have more responsibility.  This isn't the case in CAP because they may not have any responsibility or authority.

If I'm sitting in an airport lobby and I see an Airman, Soldier, Sailor or Marine who is below me in grade getting out of line, I have a duty to try to settle him or her down.  If I don't, I can be held responsible for their actions.  If I go over there in uniform or show my ID, that person knows they have to listen to me or they can get into trouble.

In CAP, I can go over and talk to someone but they won't get into trouble for not listening to some random CAP Major - only those in his chain of command

even if they don't "outrank" him.  I have no authority from my grade: therefore, I have no responsibility based on my grade.

So can someone explain to me the "standard" of grade that has neither authority nor responsibility?  As members of CAP and trained specialist we have professional standards of performance and conduct, but none of it changes based on grade.

Officership is much more than the legal ability to give a lawful order, or the legal condition of being subject to the UCMJ.  Officership, includes a high moral character, strong leadership, moral and physical courage, sense of duty, and personal example.

As far as the airport example, going over and trying to give an order is stupid.  Conversely, doing nothing is a dereliction.  In that situation, I would simply go over and tell them to stop whatever behavior it is, politely.  If asked if that's an order, I would say "no legally I can't give you and order."  Why is it so hard to separate doing the right thing for the right reasons from some barracks lawyer opinion of what CAP grade means?

What standards am I talking about then?

Being at the appropriate place at the appropriate time in the appropriate uniform.
Being accountable for your actions and those subordinate to you
Taking appropriate action in the absence of orders.
Leading by example.
Disregarding personal discomfort when it detracts from mission accomplishment.

The list goes on and on.

This is not an indictment of CAP at all, but rather an attempt to point out that being an officer is much more than the piece of paper signed by the President.  It is an approach to the job, it is a frame of mind, it is a personal commitment.  Frankly, most of the CAP members I know are highly dedicated individuals who embody most of the things that I have pointed out.

The point is simply this: I have read here and on other threads those bemoaning this, that, and this other about CAP rank, and its meaning.  ANd I disagree with those who hold it meaningless outside of CAP.

The bottom line is this:  As a former military officer, when seeing a person wearing a uniform of the United States, and wearing the rank of an officer two things come to mind. Firstly, I have an expectation of that persons professionalism and dedication.  Secondly, I recognize him as a member of the officer fraternity.  A comrade in arms.

So please, understand what I am saying.  I don't really care about the "LEGAL" status of the CAP Officer, what I care about is the fact that he is a fellow officer and that he ascribes to same level of professional conduct.

And as far as the BX example goes, please.  The only time I could/would condone that is a mission aircrew getting ready to fly a real world sortie.  But completely aside from that, why is that people seem to focus on the "perquisites" so much, and so little upon the obligation?

[JohnKachenmeister]

Well said, Paratrooper.

An officer sees to the mission and takes care of his troops before seeing to his own comfort.

The reason that uniformed troops get head-of-the-line privileges at the BX is so they can get back to work and carry out their missions.  It has never occured to me to use that privilege when I was in uniform but not needed back at a duty station.

Regardless of what uniform I'm wearing.

[riffraff]

High moral character, strong leadership, moral and physical courage, sense of duty, and personal example?? These aren't officer qualities. They're basic standards of conduct. Most people I know ascribe these qualities to their everyday lives. It's called being a responsible adult.

[Short Field]

We are talking about CAP's Core Values - which are taken from the USAF's Core Values.

Extracted from Bobbie Tourville's article, "Making Core Values Make Sense".

Core values establishes a common set of expectations of conduct for all members. The meaning and power of the values CAP has chosen: INTEGRITY, VOLUNTEER SERVICE, EXCELLENCE, and RESPECT are easily inferred by all who read them. These words effectively replace dozens of pages of directives, and simply articulate what's right and what's wrong, and form a tool by which conduct is measured. They are the embodiment of how CAP members are expected to treat each other and the people they come in contact with -- of man's expectations of fellow man.

[JohnKachenmeister]

High moral character, strong leadership, moral and physical courage, sense of duty, and personal example?? These aren't officer qualities. They're basic standards of conduct. Most people I know ascribe these qualities to their everyday lives. It's called being a responsible adult.

RiffRaff:

I'd have to disagree with you.  Most people lack a strong sense of duty, and far too many people in America lack physical courage.  Even more lack moral courage.  Most of American society believes that any misconduct that is not legally provable is allowed.

That's why a society based on "I will not lie, cheat, or steal, nor tolerate among us those who do" is such a foreign concept to so many.

[BillB]

"I will not lie, cheat, or steal, nor tolerate among us those who do" came from the military academies. It was adopted by many CAP cadet squadrons as an oath and during the 1950's Florida Wing Encampments was required to be learned by all cadets.
To a great degree this is still followed by cadets, but sadly not by many senior members with authority, or even IGs. Now the politics of CAP takes presidence. Regardless of grade. And to many this is the problem of the grade syatem of CAP.

[Walkman]

I'm working hard to make my upcoming 2nd Lt. grade mean something other than sitting around for 6 months. I'm working on both Scanner and GTM training, fulfilled half of my PA Tech rating (aside from TIS), been to every meeting and event, and have recruited several new members. Stil have 3 months to go. My goal is to be Scanner qualified and have everything for Tech but TIS finished before I get my bars.

Regardless of what others say, CAP grade is very important to me. I wasn't able to serve in the RM, which was something I dreamed about since a child. I don't think a week went by in my adult life that I didn't wish things could have been different and I could have been in the service. When I found CAP, it was a dream come true.

Going back to the original question in the thread: if there was any chance of me being able to qualify for a true commision I'd do it in a heartbeat.

[O-Rex]

High moral character, strong leadership, moral and physical courage, sense of duty, and personal example?? These aren't officer qualities. They're basic standards of conduct. Most people I know ascribe these qualities to their everyday lives. It's called being a responsible adult.

Riffraff: If most people you know are that way, then I need to move to your neighborhood!

Maybe I'm a "glass half-empty" kind of guy, but IMO, nowadays reponsible adults top Pandas and Bengal Tigers on the endangered species list.

[Dragoon]

So what exactly is the "standard of the rank?"  What do we expect of a MP who is a Major that we don't from a MP who is a SMWOG?

Usually, we expect more from an officer because they have more responsibility.  This isn't the case in CAP because they may not have any responsibility or authority.

If I'm sitting in an airport lobby and I see an Airman, Soldier, Sailor or Marine who is below me in grade getting out of line, I have a duty to try to settle him or her down.  If I don't, I can be held responsible for their actions.  If I go over there in uniform or show my ID, that person knows they have to listen to me or they can get into trouble.

In CAP, I can go over and talk to someone but they won't get into trouble for not listening to some random CAP Major - only those in his chain of command

even if they don't "outrank" him.  I have no authority from my grade: therefore, I have no responsibility based on my grade.

So can someone explain to me the "standard" of grade that has neither authority nor responsibility?  As members of CAP and trained specialist we have professional standards of performance and conduct, but none of it changes based on grade.

Officership is much more than the legal ability to give a lawful order, or the legal condition of being subject to the UCMJ.  Officership, includes a high moral character, strong leadership, moral and physical courage, sense of duty, and personal example.

As far as the airport example, going over and trying to give an order is stupid.  Conversely, doing nothing is a dereliction.  In that situation, I would simply go over and tell them to stop whatever behavior it is, politely.  If asked if that's an order, I would say "no legally I can't give you and order."  Why is it so hard to separate doing the right thing for the right reasons from some barracks lawyer opinion of what CAP grade means?

What standards am I talking about then?

Being at the appropriate place at the appropriate time in the appropriate uniform.
Being accountable for your actions and those subordinate to you
Taking appropriate action in the absence of orders.
Leading by example.
Disregarding personal discomfort when it detracts from mission accomplishment.

The list goes on and on.

This is not an indictment of CAP at all, but rather an attempt to point out that being an officer is much more than the piece of paper signed by the President.  It is an approach to the job, it is a frame of mind, it is a personal commitment.  Frankly, most of the CAP members I know are highly dedicated individuals who embody most of the things that I have pointed out.

The point is simply this: I have read here and on other threads those bemoaning this, that, and this other about CAP rank, and its meaning.  ANd I disagree with those who hold it meaningless outside of CAP.

The bottom line is this:  As a former military officer, when seeing a person wearing a uniform of the United States, and wearing the rank of an officer two things come to mind. Firstly, I have an expectation of that persons professionalism and dedication.  Secondly, I recognize him as a member of the officer fraternity.  A comrade in arms.

So please, understand what I am saying.  I don't really care about the "LEGAL" status of the CAP Officer, what I care about is the fact that he is a fellow officer and that he ascribes to same level of professional conduct.

And as far as the BX example goes, please.  The only time I could/would condone that is a mission aircrew getting ready to fly a real world sortie.  But completely aside from that, why is that people seem to focus on the "perquisites" so much, and so little upon the obligation?

It sounds like you are talking about generic "officer stuff."  Qualities we'd expect of EVERY officer member - from a 2d Lt to a Lt Col.  But that's not the same as "standard of rank."

That implies different standards for different ranks.  And frankly, we don't have those.  Because there is no required difference in conduct, authority or responsiblity between CAP officer grades.

I think that's the point of contention  here.

[Hawk200]

That implies different standards for different ranks.  And frankly, we don't have those.  Because there is no required difference in conduct, authority or responsiblity between CAP officer grades.

I don't think it's a case of differences between the grades, but that we have people that ignore the higher grade anyway. In my unit, there are a few that outrank the commander. If they give me a sensible order that doesn't conflict with the commanders directions, I'm going to follow it. I do that from time in the military that taught me obey those orders.

When you have people that have never learned that lesson, that's where the problems begin. Or with people that have decided that only commanders have authority. The other ranking personnel do have authority as far as I'm concerned, but the commanders priorities take precedence.

It's not really a case of whether or not they have vested authority, it's mostly whether or not you choose to obey. When you know better, choosing to ignore orders is your own integrity violation. Just because there may not be repercussions, doesn't make it right.

[Falshrmjgr]

It sounds like you are talking about generic "officer stuff."  Qualities we'd expect of EVERY officer member - from a 2d Lt to a Lt Col.  But that's not the same as "standard of rank."

That implies different standards for different ranks.  And frankly, we don't have those.  Because there is no required difference in conduct, authority or responsibility between CAP officer grades.

I think that's the point of contention  here.

Fundamentally, there is nothing really different about the standards of an O-1 versus an O-10.  The difference lies in the maturity, experience, knowledge, and scope of responsibilities.  That affects the expectations.

The standard I meant was the standard of an OFFICER, versus Other Ranks (to borrow the British usage.)

[riffraff]

It sounds like you are talking about generic "officer stuff."  Qualities we'd expect of EVERY officer member - from a 2d Lt to a Lt Col.  But that's not the same as "standard of rank."

That implies different standards for different ranks.  And frankly, we don't have those.  Because there is no required difference in conduct, authority or responsiblity between CAP officer grades.

I think that's the point of contention  here.

Exactly correct. The qualities that are being described have to do with morals and ethics, not rank.

Back to rank for a second:
How many would be willing to give up their present rank and be reclassed as WOs?

All SMs would be WO ranks -- WO1 thru CW5. Former military officers would be appointed to WO-grades commensurate with their O-grades/WO-grades, as applicable. Basically take our current rank/ special appointment structure and replace the O-grades with WO grades.

Only CC/CVC would be commissioned ranks (starting at Captain for Sqn CC) and those ranks would only apply while in those positions. Vacate the position and they revert to their previous WO rank. Maybe 2LT and 1LT for staff types and/or former CCs stay in the lower commissioned ranks.

The USAF is unlikely to have an issue with CAP WO grades, especially since USAF doesn't have any -- thereby solving their "CAP officers trying to pass themselves as USAF officers" problem. CAP commissioned officers will be readily identifiable as command types and SMs as WOs ensure the Sqn CC will always be the senior ranking officer -- i.e. no internal or external ambiguity as to who's in charge.

In the US military system, WOs (except for WO1) are commissioned officers so everyone still gets to be an officer. To get the salute crowd all riled up, WOs don't salute each other -- at least not in the Army.

And just to add to the misery index, dump all the USAF uniforms and make the blue-bag, BBDU, and TPU the only CAP uniforms. No height/weight requirements. Common sense grooming requirements.

There's something for everyone (to complain about):
- poser-deterring military-style rank system
- clear promotion paths (WO) that won't conflict with command positions
- latitude for initial appointments based upon prior military service or skills
- clear-cut command structure -- i.e. only command positions are commissioned ranks
- poser-deterring military style uniforms instantly identifiable as CAP

[ZigZag911]

Volunteer officer in a volunteer organization....I realize that wasn't a choice, but I think it makes necessary distinctions....not least of which is that we are only the "some time" Auxiliary to USAF.

So we only need to be professional "some time?"   

Furthermore, I disagree.  Our rank has AS MUCH to do with how we present ourselves to the outside world than how identify ourselves and motivate.

I actually resent the idea that CAP rank is just "pretend."  At first blush, it sounds like humility.  But after hearing it over and over again, it sounds like a child saying "I'm just a kid" when they didn't act responsibly.

IMHO, as volunteers we are given a bit of slack for our failures, but that in no way absolves us of the responsibility of living up to the STANDARDS of an officer.

You, me, and everyone of us has a responsibility to every soldier, sailor, Marine or airman who has ever worn a uniform to fulfill the FULL obligation of those fancy doodads we stick on our collars.  Anything less is a craven act.

That is not what I said.....in case you hadn't noticed, the entire US military is 'all volunteer'...volunteer is not a dirty word! Nor is it an excuse for lack of professionalism, inattention to detail, or slipshod performance of duty.

While I agree wholeheartedly that we should train and serve in as professional a manner as possible, I still feel it is important to bear firmly in mind that we are quite distinct from professional soldiers...supporting the USAF (and by extension all the services, and our nation) is important.....but it strikes me that it is equally important that we not encourage the 'wannabe' mentality, anymore than the 'Rambo' or 'GOB' viewpoints....each, in different ways, can be very damaging to CAP and its missions.

We are, in fact, volunteer officers in a voluntary organization. Legally we are not always an 'instrumentality of the United States' -- but that does not make us any less patriotic citizens seeking to help neighbor, community and nation in time of need.