NCO Duty Positions and Responsibilities

[lordmonar]

I have a young man in my squadron who is an ex-cadet and in the Army National Guard. He rejoined the squadron as a Senior Member just this month. I spoke with him about what he wants to do to contribute to the squadron and his immediate rejoinder was that he wants to be an NCO and NOT AN OFFICER. That was quite vehement and set me back a bit. I opened the regs and showed him what it say there and he is quite happy to serve six months as a SMWOG and then sew on Staff Sergeant stripes.

I was wondering in what way I could use him, and I think that probably the best way is to have him lead the squadron's drill and ceremonies area as he is current on them (yeah, I know I wrote above that he is ARMY, not Air Force!!!). Definitely more current than our other Seniors who were last in uniform 13 or more years ago.

If he likes that idea, I guess I would put him in the Cadet Programs Specialty Track and have him teach the cadets. By the way, our squadron is going through changes right now with a huge cadre leaving as they age out, join the military, or college, and there is a large gap before the newer cadets are ready to take over (The most senior of the junior cadets is a C/Staff Sergeant).

If he wants to wear stripes to do this rather than a butter bar, I have no problem with that.

Use him like you would any other CAP member.   He just wears stripes.

[lordmonar]

I am currently pondering going from silver bottle caps to enlisted. Our Wing just posted an opening for CMSgt and as a retired E-8 I meet the requirements for consideration.

please do.    Message me if you want to talk turkey.   

[lordmonar]

I would like once again to make some statements and clarifications about the NCO program.

First there has always been CAP NCOs.....this is not anything new.   We just never had a lot of them as there was no way to promote or progress....and who wants to say a SSgt for his entire CAP career.

Second, the idea that there should NCO jobs and Officer jobs is a great one.   And we are going to get there eventually.   We have to put all the other pieces into place first. 

Baby Steps.

The idea that there is no NEED for CAP NCOs is true.  I admit it.   CAP will not end if we don't have NCOs.   But maybe CAP can be better if we do have NCOs.   And that is what is guiding the committee.   We think that if CAP has a strong NCO corps with a promotion system, a PD system and a support system we can leverage that to make CAP better.

The idea that this is a colossal waste of time....is an interesting one....and maybe a true one.   Hence the reason that it is currently a voluntary one.   No one is being forced to be an NCO.   No one is being told that they must spend their time on the committee or working on any of the project tasking coming out of the committee.  So it is their time to waste.    We are trying hard to make sure that any changes we make to CAP do not add any additional burdens on the squadrons or higher command elements. 

While specific changes to officer requirements, promotions or assignments is NOT a direct tasking, goal or charter of the NCO committee....the White Paper signed by the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force does state that one of the goals of the CAP NCO program is to position CAP to be able to make improvements to the officer corps.

Yes the NCO program is only being implemented in steps and stages.  Yes there have been some false starts and rush to publish issues.   But some of that is by design.   We need to have NCOs to build the NCO PD program.   We have NCOs in CAP but they don't want to wear stripes because there was not way to promote.  So we built a way to promote.  Now we got a lot of former NCOs in CAP who would like to change over...but they don't want to trade Lt Col oak leaves for SSgt stripes....so we are working on a system to remove that barrier.  We need our own PD system.  So we are working on that now.  Once we got those things into place and we build a large enough cadre of NCOs we can then work on how to open up the NCO corps for non-prior military service members.

Once that is in place CAP would then be positioned to make changes to the officer corps and duty positions and truly make Officer Jobs and NCO jobs.

Most of the concerns voiced here on CAPTALK and other forums are making it to the NCO committee and to CAP leadership.     We think we understand them and we are working to address them as necessary.

Remember from the get go this was envisioned as a long term transition program.

If we tried to build a fully functional NCO program with all the bells and whistles onto CAP it would fail miserably.   So we are deliberately taking small incremental steps.   To insure our changes are as painless as possible and to insure that if any of our changes fail, that failure does not do any real damage to CAP.

Okay....thanks for letting me rant.   

[Storm Chaser]

I get that, as of right now, NCOs can do any job available to officers except commander and (possibly) deputy commander. I get that some members may choose to join CAP as NCOs or even revert to previous NCO grades. I get that now they can be promoted, something they couldn't do before. What I don't get is these NCO positions. We have NCO positions at each echelon, some needed for promotion, but no official position description yet. That's not an implementation "in steps and stages", but a half implementation.

That said, it's done and there no sense in dwelling over it. Now we're just waiting for the revision to CAPR 20-1. Unfortunately, the position descriptions in the draft you provided seem too vague. Every job in CAP should have a purpose and I don't get that from those positions. I think they need work and, if there's still time, I recommend they go back to the drawing board and come up with something better, more functional, and practical.

[Alaric]

I have no dog in the hunt other than to say, what does it matter?  As long as grade, position and responsibility have no relationship, grade is meaningless.  We have 1st Lts as squadron commanders with Majors on their staff; all grade really shows (presuming duty performance only) is time in CAP, and PD progression.  If having NCOs makes people happy, then lets have NCOs.  As long as we can perform the mission, I don't care what insignia people wear.

[MSG Mac]

The NCO Corps is badly in  need of a formal training program and definitive roles. My Wing has just an opening for the Wing CMSgt and I am strongly considering applying. But there are so many unanswered questions about the lack of structure and rewrites of CAPR 20-1 and 35-5 to include NCO positions that I am hesitant. 

[winterg]

1. Keep our PD program and specialty track programs the same as now.
2. Change grades awarded in PD program from officer to Enlisted (SSgt - CMSgt)
3. Officer grades reserved for Squadron/Group/Wing/Region Commanders.
4. Go back to arguing about uniforms.

[Storm Chaser]

I have no dog in the hunt other than to say, what does it matter?  As long as grade, position and responsibility have no relationship, grade is meaningless. 

Except that we currently have specific NCO positions in eServices, some required for promotion IAW CAPR 35-5, but not duty description for these positions. Don't you think having meaningful duty position descriptions for these positions matters?

We have 1st Lts as squadron commanders with Majors on their staff; all grade really shows (presuming duty performance only) is time in CAP, and PD progression.  If having NCOs makes people happy, then lets have NCOs.  As long as we can perform the mission, I don't care what insignia people wear.

And I wasn't arguing that.

[TheSkyHornet]

I have no dog in the hunt other than to say, what does it matter?  As long as grade, position and responsibility have no relationship, grade is meaningless. 

Except that we currently have specific NCO positions in eServices, some required for promotion IAW CAPR 35-5, but not duty description for these positions. Don't you think having meaningful duty position descriptions for these positions matters?

We have 1st Lts as squadron commanders with Majors on their staff; all grade really shows (presuming duty performance only) is time in CAP, and PD progression.  If having NCOs makes people happy, then lets have NCOs.  As long as we can perform the mission, I don't care what insignia people wear.

And I wasn't arguing that.

I believe the gentleman's original post was regarding the NCO duties and responsibilities, not what to call them.

Every single duty position, every job, should have a job description associated with it, written somewhere. This is not only so a person knows the extent of their own job, so that other people know the extent of that job.

Does the Operations NCO have the exact same role as the Operations Officer?

[Storm Chaser]

Exactly. In eServices, an NCO can be assigned to the positions of Squadron NCO, Group NCO, etc., but there's no official duty description for those positions. That's why I started this thread.

Lordmonar provided copy of a draft proposal for CAPR 20-1, which covers those positions, albeit with slightly different duty titles. While I appreciate having something to start with, I think those duty descriptions are too vague. If I'm to assign an NCO to these NCO-only positions, I would like to have a better description of their specific duties and responsibilities. Otherwise, it doesn't make much sense to make the assignment.

[FW]

As there is,yet, no specific duties and responsibilities for CAP NCOs, I think it unwise to assign them an NCO-only position.  Better to treat them as any other member until things are actually written down.  Of course, there is nothing stopping a unit from doing things on their own.  That's what we call a possible "benchmark" in an inspection... :angel:

[jeders]

I've previously made my opinion of the whole NCO program known previously, so I've kept silent on this topic until now. I just read through the draft, which is woefully vague as Storm Chaser has pointed out, and I ran across a curious responsibility for Group Superintendent.

Resolve issues between subordinate squadrons, other groups, wing staff, and outside agencies

What exactly does that mean and how are they supposed to do that? Are we expecting our NCOs to be Vinnie the Enforcer? (I'm picturing Pat Harris walking around with a club with bits of pilots wings sticking out of it) These sound more like something that should be the responsibility of the group commander and not an NCO who has no authority over officers. Then again, maybe I'm reading too much into it.

[Storm Chaser]

As there is,yet, no specific duties and responsibilities for CAP NCOs, I think it unwise to assign them an NCO-only position.  Better to treat them as any other member until things are actually written down.  Of course, there is nothing stopping a unit from doing things on their own.  That's what we call a possible "benchmark" in an inspection... :angel:

I agree with you, except that some may not be able to promote to MSgt or higher unless they have one of those NCO positions at the group, wing or region according to CAPR 35-5.

[TheSkyHornet]

I've previously made my opinion of the whole NCO program known previously, so I've kept silent on this topic until now. I just read through the draft, which is woefully vague as Storm Chaser has pointed out, and I ran across a curious responsibility for Group Superintendent.

Resolve issues between subordinate squadrons, other groups, wing staff, and outside agencies

What exactly does that mean and how are they supposed to do that? Are we expecting our NCOs to be Vinnie the Enforcer? (I'm picturing Pat Harris walking around with a club with bits of pilots wings sticking out of it) These sound more like something that should be the responsibility of the group commander and not an NCO who has no authority over officers. Then again, maybe I'm reading too much into it.

That identifies a huge part of people having different opinions about something because it isn't clearly written out. It's not concise and specific. If you were shaking hands and saying "this is what I do," it would suffice. But to clearly outline your processes and procedures, it's not there...IF CAP wanted everyone in that position to act to a standard across all squadrons.

That being said, obviously there is some trial and error when it comes to writing regulations and defining roles. Sometimes it's not always sufficiently written for the purpose you intended. I think one of CAP's weak areas is the timeliness of getting the regs amended and published.

Someone previously said that the use of NCOs is not new to CAP. If that's the case, I'm assuming that this topic has been brought up in the past, not just on CAP Talk. So why wasn't this addressed sooner? It's being addressed now, definitely, but will changes reflect these questions that have been asked and will they be strong enough to be clear, concise, and specific to mitigate these questions in the future?

Right now, I don't see questions of "why is it this way." I see questions of "what is the purpose." It seems that people don't understand the difference between CAP NCOs and CAP Officers clearly. Not only do I see this as something to be addressed in future publications of the regs, but in the training as well for basic officers when they join, and implement it into the training for unit commanders and deputy commanders.

[FW]

Someone previously said that the use of NCOs is not new to CAP. If that's the case, I'm assuming that this topic has been brought up in the past, not just on CAP Talk. So why wasn't this addressed sooner? It's being addressed now, definitely, but will changes reflect these questions that have been asked and will they be strong enough to be clear, concise, and specific to mitigate these questions in the future?

Right now, I don't see questions of "why is it this way." I see questions of "what is the purpose." It seems that people don't understand the difference between CAP NCOs and CAP Officers clearly. Not only do I see this as something to be addressed in future publications of the regs, but in the training as well for basic officers when they join, and implement it into the training for unit commanders and deputy commanders.

This topic has been brought up many times here, and elsewhere.  CAP NCO grade was used for different purposes at different times in our history.  According to  those who seem to know, the questions raised here are being addressed.  We can only hope we will understand the results and move forward.

Now, the "why is it this way" is simple.  Gen Carr made the decision to expand CAP's NCO Corps to be a meaningful part of the organization.  The Air Force agreed.  The process continues...

[Spam]

Agreed, the January document positions seem very general and nonspecific in duties and responsibilities. Good work in progress, though. (Glass half full, guys). I'm working from the first presumption that the intent was to progress from the general to the specific, and not to keep roles and tasks and skills purposefully blurred for some reason.


Suggestion: I'd like to suggest that some lessons could be learned from a parallel roles and missions debate which has existed for years: what jobs do you give a former Cadet Commander to keep them interested and active and progressing, without stepping on current cadets, or overstepping his/her boundaries?  As a recent DCP, I assigned a task to the GA Wing CAC to come up with a position description document. See attached.  It has a real sample of duties to pick from, as a SUGGESTED list. Not every cadet will make a good CAC rep. Not every cadet will be a good ES or AE instructor. Yet, having a list of tasks helps frame the discussion, yes?

(Caveat: only a couple of units that I know of are using the attached template so far. The main benefit was to the CAC cadet officers themselves, in terms of indirect leadership and committee analysis and report writing, but that's beside the point to an NCO discussion).


For the NCO community, defining specific tasks would seem to be a good thing, from which knowledge, skills and training requirements should be drawn to aid Commanders and SNCOs in making personnel assignments. By that I mean, a Wing Superintendent might interview a guy who was an MTI at Lackland or Great Lakes once upon a time, and another guy who was an engine shop lead, and having specific KSAs for NCO positions could help him make a recommendation to the Commander to assign one to be a resource NCO under the DCP for drill and ceremonies, and the other as an LG NCO in charge of maintenance records or purchasing, etc. A shopping list of skill sets vs tasks, so to speak.


I'm neutral on the whole uniform and grade issue. What I care about is making sure that we max out the use of our volunteer members skills (from which satisfaction and retention and excellence grow).


R/S,
Spam

[THRAWN]

Agreed, the January document positions seem very general and nonspecific in duties and responsibilities. Good work in progress, though. (Glass half full, guys). I'm working from the first presumption that the intent was to progress from the general to the specific, and not to keep roles and tasks and skills purposefully blurred for some reason.


Suggestion: I'd like to suggest that some lessons could be learned from a parallel roles and missions debate which has existed for years: what jobs do you give a former Cadet Commander to keep them interested and active and progressing, without stepping on current cadets, or overstepping his/her boundaries?  As a recent DCP, I assigned a task to the GA Wing CAC to come up with a position description document. See attached.  It has a real sample of duties to pick from, as a SUGGESTED list. Not every cadet will make a good CAC rep. Not every cadet will be a good ES or AE instructor. Yet, having a list of tasks helps frame the discussion, yes?

(Caveat: only a couple of units that I know of are using the attached template so far. The main benefit was to the CAC cadet officers themselves, in terms of indirect leadership and committee analysis and report writing, but that's beside the point to an NCO discussion).


For the NCO community, defining specific tasks would seem to be a good thing, from which knowledge, skills and training requirements should be drawn to aid Commanders and SNCOs in making personnel assignments. By that I mean, a Wing Superintendent might interview a guy who was an MTI at Lackland or Great Lakes once upon a time, and another guy who was an engine shop lead, and having specific KSAs for NCO positions could help him make a recommendation to the Commander to assign one to be a resource NCO under the DCP for drill and ceremonies, and the other as an LG NCO in charge of maintenance records or purchasing, etc. A shopping list of skill sets vs tasks, so to speak.


I'm neutral on the whole uniform and grade issue. What I care about is making sure that we max out the use of our volunteer members skills (from which satisfaction and retention and excellence grow).


R/S,
Spam

I liked everything after the squadron patch...

[Spam]

Ha!  Glad you noticed!  I did put a few little personal stamps on their product... staff work is boring enough, we should have fun where we can.

In past meetings I've run, when it got boring, I declared a 15 minute "Looney Tunes Voice" mandate, where all comments must be done in character. you should see Field Grade fighter pilots alternating between Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd when discussing weapons integration and test.

V/R,
Spam

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Sorry to be a former member buttinsky, really.

If I were given the opportunity to rejoin CAP as an enlisted man, I would do so.  I left CAP largely over the bullcrackie and politics and pissing contests of who gets to be promoted beyond Captain, and was ultimately told that I had made too many enemies (nothing new; a slight consequence of having your back to the wall and becoming somewhat unpleasant as a result).

Unfortunately, my ANG service does not allow me to rejoin at my last rank.

OK, thanks.

[lordmonar]

Sorry to be a former member buttinsky, really.

If I were given the opportunity to rejoin CAP as an enlisted man, I would do so.  I left CAP largely over the bullcrackie and politics and pissing contests of who gets to be promoted beyond Captain, and was ultimately told that I had made too many enemies (nothing new; a slight consequence of having your back to the wall and becoming somewhat unpleasant as a result).

Unfortunately, my ANG service does not allow me to rejoin at my last rank.

OK, thanks.

  Yes it does.   It is not in the regs yet but it is active.  Any prior services or active service enlisted E-1 through E-4 (AB-SrA, Pvt to Specialist) are given an initial appointment to SSgt.

So come back to the dark side CyBorg.