NCO Program Launched

[Luis R. Ramos]

You have forgotten one part of CAP senior membership. Before being promoted, senior members spend six months with no grade. Can you accept making it more difficult for these members to attain grade, and these senior members be called "enlisted senior members?" The CAP NCOs would be between these and the officer grades!

Flyer

[Eclipse]

Before being promoted, senior members spend six months with no grade.

Not all of them.  Lot's and lots of CFI Captains get promoted the day after level I clears.

[MSG Mac]

Can all of us wait for the actual reg to be published before whining about it?

[Flying Pig]

Id rather not wait 2-3 years before we whine about it.  Sorta looses its luster

[Eclipse]

Can all of us wait for the actual reg to be published before whining about it?

Reg?  You mean the NCO-ICL?

[JoeTomasone]

Can all of us wait for the actual reg to be published before whining about it?

I'm just thankful that the change to the embroidered chevrons didn't ignite another thread-crushing uniform debate.   

[Elioron]

My guess is there will be no non-NCO enlisted members....
Lvl I=SSGT
Lvl II=TSGT
Lvl III=MSGT
Lvl IV=SMSGT
Lvl V=CMSGT

The problem with this is that everything over Level II is getting into organizational management - not really the purview of NCOs.

The idea of promoting someone to an officer grade to fill a job then dropping them back to NCO just doesn't make any sense to me.  Anything that reduces the pool of officers at this point also seems counterproductive since most units don't have enough to go around as it is.

[Private Investigator]

Has there been a recruiting push into military bases and the response cards said "Only if I can be an NCO?"

Has there been a member exit survey that indicated "I would have stayed if I could have been an NCO / been promoted as an NCO?"

Is there evidence that NCOs can somehow train cadets "more better" if they wear stripes instead of steel?

#1, unless you were a NCO, you have no ideal. It is like the Beirut barracks bombing, 10/23/1983, 30 years ago. Incomprehensible indeed.

#2, but we have CAP officers who have left because they got hurt feelings; re: promotions, awards, etc.

#3, former military NCOs regardless of their CAP grade train Cadets better than most parents.

JMHO YMMV   

[sarmed1]

The problem with this is that everything over Level II is getting into organizational management - not really the purview of NCOs.

The idea of promoting someone to an officer grade to fill a job then dropping them back to NCO just doesn't make any sense to me.  Anything that reduces the pool of officers at this point also seems counterproductive since most units don't have enough to go around as it is.

I agree that the level of trainnig doesnt match with the role of the NCO at that point; but it is more where I think they would go with it rather than what would be appropriate.  Personally I would buy off on Staff and Tech within Level I, Master at LeveL II, and Senior at Level III.  Chiefs would be based on appointment to group level only and more as a staff position rather than a proffesional development level.

Reducing the officer pool doesnt matter, manpower is manpower, short of command billets, I dont think it matters what "rank" you are to do the job.  Personnel NCO or Personnel Officer, the job gets done the same.

I thought about would you drop people back or leave them at an officer grade if they gave up a position with a grade expectation.  I dont have a good answer to that one.  I can se the plus and minus to each theory.   Maybe something like wing commanders, must serve in the position for at least a year and be reccomended byt he commander to make grade permanant, that way you prevent people from taking a position for 3 months just to get an officer promotion out of it.....

If you are going to build even a semblence of an enlisted/NCO corps for NCO's to be the backbone of.... there has to be some balance to keep people at the NCO level yet not otherwise restricting peoples personal/proffesional growth within the organizaiton.  Equally blancing the need to maintain an officer corps, without leaving jobs unfilled while you are waiting to find someone to "commision" to fill a job......

My optimistic side says this could be a great thing for the organization: re-alligning NCO's and officer roles and jobs to be more similar to the military and even other organizations (ie not appearing to be a group of officer wanna-be's, too many chiefs not enough indians and otherwise confusing peoples perception of the structure of the organization... ie why are there a whole punch of Lt's and Captains filling sand bags or why is that 1LT in charge of that LTC??)

My pesimistic side says the "corps of NCO's" is going to be that same group of poeple that it is now, their jobs wont change and CAP wont use them any differently, they can just now get to Chief like they always wanted when the were AD.....

mk

[Private Investigator]

Id rather not wait 2-3 years before we whine about it.  Sorta looses its luster

Correctamundo. 2 years from now we'll be distracted by the ABUs.

They had a fast track for the Command Speciality Track, they should do the same for the CAP NCOs.   

[Private Investigator]

Reducing the officer pool doesnt matter, manpower is manpower, short of command billets, I dont think it matters what "rank" you are to do the job.  Personnel NCO or Personnel Officer, the job gets done the same.

My pesimistic side says the "corps of NCO's" is going to be that same group of poeple that it is now, their jobs wont change and CAP wont use them any differently, they can just now get to Chief like they always wanted when the were AD.....

Two great points here. If I am Comm guy and all I want to do is comm. Why can't I be a SSgt with the goal of being a Master Sergeant one day?   :clap:

[Elioron]

The problem with this is that everything over Level II is getting into organizational management - not really the purview of NCOs.

The idea of promoting someone to an officer grade to fill a job then dropping them back to NCO just doesn't make any sense to me.  Anything that reduces the pool of officers at this point also seems counterproductive since most units don't have enough to go around as it is.

I agree that the level of trainnig doesnt match with the role of the NCO at that point; but it is more where I think they would go with it rather than what would be appropriate.  Personally I would buy off on Staff and Tech within Level I, Master at LeveL II, and Senior at Level III.  Chiefs would be based on appointment to group level only and more as a staff position rather than a proffesional development level.

Reducing the officer pool doesnt matter, manpower is manpower, short of command billets, I dont think it matters what "rank" you are to do the job.  Personnel NCO or Personnel Officer, the job gets done the same.

I thought about would you drop people back or leave them at an officer grade if they gave up a position with a grade expectation.  I dont have a good answer to that one.  I can se the plus and minus to each theory.   Maybe something like wing commanders, must serve in the position for at least a year and be reccomended byt he commander to make grade permanant, that way you prevent people from taking a position for 3 months just to get an officer promotion out of it.....

If you are going to build even a semblence of an enlisted/NCO corps for NCO's to be the backbone of.... there has to be some balance to keep people at the NCO level yet not otherwise restricting peoples personal/proffesional growth within the organizaiton.  Equally blancing the need to maintain an officer corps, without leaving jobs unfilled while you are waiting to find someone to "commision" to fill a job......

My optimistic side says this could be a great thing for the organization: re-alligning NCO's and officer roles and jobs to be more similar to the military and even other organizations (ie not appearing to be a group of officer wanna-be's, too many chiefs not enough indians and otherwise confusing peoples perception of the structure of the organization... ie why are there a whole punch of Lt's and Captains filling sand bags or why is that 1LT in charge of that LTC??)

My pesimistic side says the "corps of NCO's" is going to be that same group of poeple that it is now, their jobs wont change and CAP wont use them any differently, they can just now get to Chief like they always wanted when the were AD.....

mk

Well said.

To give a little background on my concern about reducing the officer pool, staff positions are only part of it and, as you said, they could be filled with NCOs.  I know of at least three squadrons that were in a situation where they couldn't find a commander.  They ended up with the choice of choosing somebody or cease to exist.  One was a fairly large squadron and a former commander stepped up (again) until they could find someone else.  While we have officers that are willing to teach or fly, they don't have the desire or time for command.  If they disallow people without a 4-year degree to be officers, it eliminates people that may be willing to fill those positions.

Your description is more dynamic and reactive, which is good.  I think you're right that it will create a lot of confusion as people get used to it.  I also think that unless people are forced to be NCOs, it will be mostly the same people that are there now, but I have hope that they will be utilized better and provide a program to give them some kind of fulfillment that doesn't exist as it is.

[sarmed1]

Other things that rattle around in my currious mind:  would you change some of the PME requirements for promotion/Level award:

ALS coorespondence vs SLS? to get to TSGT?  I would also argue the CAP instructor course be a requirement early on
NCOA vs OBC for Level II... (I would include SLS here)
SNCO for promotion to SMSGT... (I would include CLC here)

Then if you want to "commision" do you come onbaord as an O1 or as and O-whatever based on the Level you are at?

mk

[Panache]

I don't agree with limiting CAP officers to college grads.  We have to remember we are a volunteer organization, not a professional military.  People come and go at their pleasure.

Speaking for myself, I have extensive professional supervisor and management experience in the private sector.  I have never earned a college degree for various reasons.  Should I be barred from a command position simply because I don't have a piece of sheepskin proclaiming I spent an ungodly amount of money and four years of my life learning about ancient ritual drum circles of the middle-Mongolian tribes or something?

It goes back to the old joke:  what does a person say after graduating with their Liberal Arts degree?  "Would you like fries with that?"

Along the same times, not everybody should be an officer.  Like many have pointed out, if somebody wants to join up just to run SAR or GM's or focus on one aspect of CAP, and that's what they're happy doing, than why "force" them into promotion in what is normally seen as a command rank by everybody else.

But the question is: do we really have the numbers for a true "enlisted / NCO corps"? 

Maybe organizing it as such:

Single-aspect members (i.e. just wants to run SAR): Enlisted ranks (Start at "normal" enlisted, can progress to the NCO chain.)
Staff officers: Warrant Officer ranks.  (WO1-CWO5)
Command-position officers: Second Lieutenant and above.

Command position ranks are temporary and strictly position-based.  If you resign your command position, you revert back to your normal Warrant Officer grade.  There is no shame in this.

[Elioron]

It's been suggested we segregate our membership based on having a 4-year degree.  I'm aware that's the way it's done in the military, but I think it could have a lot of unintended consequences.

I, for example, have no such degree.  If I had joined as a SSgt, I wouldn't have four of the tech ratings I hold now.  Why?  Because I would feel it wasn't my place, and that I should concentrate on technical skills like IT, Communications, and ES.  PD, AE, and CP are things I didn't have experience in and would leave it to those with degrees in those areas or, in the case of CP, are experienced former AD NCOs.  I wouldn't have had the opportunity for the Command track.

Even looking at the decorations I've been given, the highest award wouldn't exist if I were an NCO as they are both for taking charge of special projects and making them happen.  Projects I felt a responsibility to see through as the Deputy Commander for Seniors - a post I would be ineligible for.

It's not about the badges or ribbon, it's about what I did to get them - things that would not have happened if I were a SSgt because I would have felt doing so would be overstepping my bounds.  I'm not everyone, but I'm sure there are others like me out there.

Just food for thought.

[Flying Pig]

If I ever attend a wing conference again I want to make sure Im an officer. I will not tolerate eating with enlisted types.  Perhaps we could have two banquets. Officers can have our banquet first while the unwashed enlisted serve us.  Then we can retire to the library and smoke cigars, listen to classicsl music and discuss world affairs while the enlisted have their banquet, chocked full of debautchery, alcohol and heavy metal music.  Silly enlisted. 
Hmmmm.... well, maybe that enlisted track wouldnt be too bad?

[SarDragon]

Other things that rattle around in my currious mind:  would you change some of the PME requirements for promotion/Level award:

ALS coorespondence vs SLS? to get to TSGT?  I would also argue the CAP instructor course be a requirement early on
NCOA vs OBC for Level II... (I would include SLS here)
SNCO for promotion to SMSGT... (I would include CLC here)

Then if you want to "commission" do you come onboard as an O1 or as and O-whatever based on the Level you are at?

mk

I disagree. Simply sending someone through a course such as exists now, does not an instructor make. I spent a whole month learning that stuff as a Navy E-6, and it was the hardest course I took in the Navy. It was even harder than the 6 months of electronics school. It also had the highest fail rate of any courses I took.

[JC004]

My guess is there will be no non-NCO enlisted members....
Lvl I=SSGT
Lvl II=TSGT
Lvl III=MSGT
Lvl IV=SMSGT
Lvl V=CMSGT

The problem with this is that everything over Level II is getting into organizational management - not really the purview of NCOs.
...

Good point.

[wuzafuzz]

This is all getting a bit silly.  CAP could dispose of Senior Member grade tomorrow and most of us would keep volunteering our hearts out.  The same people who truly contribute now would keep on truckin' and most of my Senior Members wouldn't notice the difference since they usually wear polo shirts anyway. SM, NCO, or officer makes almost no difference to me.

In fact, most other volunteer groups do just fine without rank or grade. Most have a few position based titles and a lot of people who are just glad to help. Red Cross, ARES, and SAR teams are a few examples.

I'm not completely knocking SM CAP grade; I've done PD and served in some challenging roles (currently commanding a 140-ish member squadron and wing communications director).  As a result they let me wear gold oak leaves on some of my CAP uniforms.  Change my title and take away the oak leaves and I'll keep doing exactly what I did before.

[Panache]

If I ever attend a wing conference again I want to make sure Im an officer. I will not tolerate eating with enlisted types.  Perhaps we could have two banquets. Officers can have our banquet first while the unwashed enlisted serve us.  Then we can retire to the library and smoke cigars, listen to classicsl music and discuss world affairs while the enlisted have their banquet, chocked full of debautchery, alcohol and heavy metal music.  Silly enlisted. 
Hmmmm.... well, maybe that enlisted track wouldnt be too bad?

"I say, old chap, let us continue to discuss proper form usage and paperwork distribution while we savor a fine brandy while those CAP NCO's have their "fun".  Pip pip.  Cheerio."