Is it a uniform if no one can see it?

[MIKE]

Members can be suspended for "regulatory infractions."  You can counsel and write them up before it comes to that.

[Eclipse]

What would you do with a person who wears a CDU or AFU and does not own a proper coat for weather conditions that are freezing comes to the meeting with a civilian heavy winter coat. When the coat is worn no one could tell that the person is wearing a uniform under the coat. What would you do. I have witness this many times during my career in CAP.

I would do the same thing I do anytime I see an infraction, correct the member in a good-natured, positive way.

If its a long-time member I know personally and who I know "knows better", it might be some public ribbing, but with anyone who is new, or sensitive to being singled out, I do it privately or as a general "reminder" to the whole group.

With cadet infractions I inform their superior and allow the chain to handle it, which is a good experience for everyone.

This issue of "what if its cold", etc., holds no weight.  There is simply no excuse for the easy stuff like outerwear, etc., especially for senior members.

We have simple uniform options that allow for civilian outerwear - if you can't afford or be bothered to get the correct jacket, or its simply too cold for what you have, wear the golf shirt or civvies and be safe.

[SStradley]

What would you do with a person who wears a CDU or AFU and does not own a proper coat for weather conditions that are freezing comes to the meeting with a civilian heavy winter coat. When the coat is worn no one could tell that the person is wearing a uniform under the coat. What would you do. I have witness this many times during my career in CAP.

I think the answer depends on what he does once he is in the room.  Does he only wear it from the car to the get inside and then take it off and stow it away, or does he continue to wear it once he is inside.  Attitude is also a factor. If it is truly freezing then the Members safety trumps the uniform regs.

Understand I am a Florida Boy.  We might have one night a year where it is cold enough that a member needs a winter coat.  Therefore, I would not require anyone to purchase a M-65 or other winter gear just to be in uniform for 1 of 52 meetings (and once inside they can remove the offending garmet.)

For last weeks meeting it was real cold, (at least 60 degrees) out.  I confess that I wore a plaid wool jacket over my TPU in the truck.  However, I left it in the truck, and dashed through the cold to get inside in my TPU. 

[JCW0312]

For last weeks meeting it was real cold, (at least 60 degrees) out.

Wow! How'd you survive?

[mikeylikey]

For last weeks meeting it was real cold, (at least 60 degrees) out.

Wow! How'd you survive?

OMG.  If it were 60 here I would throw on shorts and a T-shirt.  This past week it fell below 11 with a wind chill of -4.  I would love to have fall weather all year. 

Heck, not until it drops below 40 do people in my parts even wear a jacket.  For anything above 40 is nice in the winter.

[JCW0312]

For last weeks meeting it was real cold, (at least 60 degrees) out.

Wow! How'd you survive?

OMG.  If it were 60 here I would throw on shorts and a T-shirt.  This past week it fell below 11 with a wind chill of -4.  I would love to have fall weather all year. 

Heck, not until it drops below 40 do people in my parts even wear a jacket.  For anything above 40 is nice in the winter.

I spent four hours directing traffic in sub-freezing temps the other morning thanks to a drunk who swears the light pole and fire hydrant ran out in front of him. With the winds kicking I would have given anything for 60 degree weather!

[SStradley]

For last weeks meeting it was real cold, (at least 60 degrees) out.

Wow! How'd you survive?

Well it was tuff, but somebody has to do it. 

I have once been in Nebraska for a day and it was -1.  Everytime we get a cold snap the kids put out cups of water to try to "make ice".  Have not had any serious frost here for two or three years.  But once in 86 or 87 we spent the whole day and it never got above 32.

[JCW0312]

^Must be nice. But on the upside of living in Tennessee, I can't think of the last hurricane to make landfall here...

[SStradley]

OK, Back on topic.  Was I out of uniform with the plaid coat?  Of course I was, but did I committ a violioation of the reguliations worthy of being counciled?  I don't think so.  If a member take off his non-regulation coat at the door I think it is best to smile and thank them for comming to the meeting on a night when the weather is so bad.

If the two members who want to eat a $100 burger cover up or change their shirts to go into the restraunte I think that OK under the regulations.  They are not flying a CAP aircraft, and they are not on a mission or anyother CAP activity at that time.

If Kach wants to have a black Harley picture under his BDU so what?  In fact I work with Kach all the time and I never knew ...

[Dragoon]

If the two members who want to eat a $100 burger cover up or change their shirts to go into the restraunte I think that OK under the regulations.  They are not flying a CAP aircraft, and they are not on a mission or anyother CAP activity at that time.

Let's take those same two guys and look at it through the public's eye.  And let's assume they are in CAP distinctive uniforms, so their "cover ups" are legal within regs.


Two guys in UCLA sweatshirts over CAP uniforms in a restaurant - the public can't tell they're in CAP.  For all practical purposes they are not in uniform.

The same two guys in the same outfits at a mission base.  The public can't tell they're in CAP.  For all practical purposes they are not in uniform.

And yet our regs say they are.  Does this make any sense.

What good is a uniform if no one can see it?  Why not just show up at the mission in the UCLA sweatshirt without the CAP uniform under it - what difference would it make?

This just doesn't make sense.  We don't wear uniforms for ourselves.  We wear them for others who look at us.

[ddelaney103]

Concur.  Uniforms are, to use an old school term, "An outward and visible sign of an inward and invisible grace."  If we think they are to be worn, then they should be seen as well.  Otherwise, let's issue lapel pins or orange vests and be done with it.

[Eclipse]

Let's take those same two guys and look at it through the public's eye.  And let's assume they are in CAP distinctive uniforms, so their "cover ups" are legal within regs.

Two guys in UCLA sweatshirts over CAP uniforms in a restaurant - the public can't tell they're in CAP.  For all practical purposes they are not in uniform.

And there is no reason anyone needs to know they are in CAP - we do not do walk-up service.

The same two guys in the same outfits at a mission base.  The public can't tell they're in CAP.  For all practical purposes they are not in uniform.

Mission bases are not open to the public, so again, no issue.  If you want to argue that MIOs, PAOs, LOs, and ALs, need to wear something more "exciting", so be it, no argument from me but the two cases cited are not even a situation where the public needs to know who we are.

[ddelaney103]

Let's take those same two guys and look at it through the public's eye.  And let's assume they are in CAP distinctive uniforms, so their "cover ups" are legal within regs.

Two guys in UCLA sweatshirts over CAP uniforms in a restaurant - the public can't tell they're in CAP.  For all practical purposes they are not in uniform.

And there is no reason anyone needs to know they are in CAP - we do not do walk-up service.

The same two guys in the same outfits at a mission base.  The public can't tell they're in CAP.  For all practical purposes they are not in uniform.

Mission bases are not open to the public, so again, no issue.  If you want to argue that MIOs, PAOs, LOs, and ALs, need to wear something more "exciting", so be it, no argument from me but the two cases cited are not even a situation where the public needs to know who we are.

So is it your opinion that uniforms are unnecessary unless the public is there?  So the overnight shift at mission base could be jammies and bunny slippers as long as no visitors are allowed?

[Eclipse]

So is it your opinion that uniforms are unnecessary unless the public is there?  So the overnight shift at mission base could be jammies and bunny slippers as long as no visitors are allowed?

No, what I am saying is that the examples being raised are not a justification for citing this as a problem.

[Dragoon]

Actually, I believe you intimated uniforms are not important at a mission base except for key personnel.

Which is patently absurd.

All kinds of "visitors" come in to mission bases.  Including the agencies we're working with.  Sometimes family members.  Sometimes spectators hanging around the airport.  All people that CAP care about.

Plus, that approach ignores the value of uniforms to the members of the organization (emphasizing teamwork, esprit de corps, attention to detail).  Uniforms are just for others - they also can have a positive impact on us.  If implemented correctly.

Based on your analysis, USAF shouldn't require uniforms for members on closed bases either.  After all, the public can't see them....  But it seems USAF doesn't agree with your logic.

[Eclipse]

Please make your own arguments and not mine - I said nothing of the kind.

The examples you cite, for the reasons you cite, are not "problems" enough to support changing the regs.

[Dragoon]

Your quote was....

Mission bases are not open to the public, so again, no issue.  If you want to argue that MIOs, PAOs, LOs, and ALs, need to wear something more "exciting", so be it, no argument from me but the two cases cited are not even a situation where the public needs to know who we are.

Seems pretty clear to me.  No public = no issue with not having uniforms.  Which I (and probably a large number of CAPers) find a bit incredulous. 

[Hawk200]

Your quote was....

Mission bases are not open to the public, so again, no issue.  If you want to argue that MIOs, PAOs, LOs, and ALs, need to wear something more "exciting", so be it, no argument from me but the two cases cited are not even a situation where the public needs to know who we are.

Seems pretty clear to me.  No public = no issue with not having uniforms.  Which I (and probably a large number of CAPers) find a bit incredulous. 

I would have to agree. If you're at a mission base, you need to have a reason. For us, the reasons are obvious and the uniform serves as your ID. For those not in CAP, the reasons need to be known.
People not in uniform need to be identified, and kept in a specified area with someone with them. Preferably a chaplain. Who would be identified by his uniform. It probably wouldn't hurt to issue some type of ID to the family.

Either way, there will probably be people present that could impede a mission. Press, for example. Although "the public has a right to know", that doesn't trump the safety and efficiency of the mission. And the familiy that needs to know are the only ones that really need to be kept in the loop.

Everyone present at a base should have something identifying them. Easiest way is a proper uniform.

[Eclipse]

Everyone present at a base should have something identifying them. Easiest way is a proper uniform.

As is required by the regs.

How Dragoon could believe I am advocating not wearing a uniform in a mission base, I don't know.

[ddelaney103]

Everyone present at a base should have something identifying them. Easiest way is a proper uniform.

As is required by the regs.

How Dragoon could believe I am advocating not wearing a uniform in a mission base, I don't know.

You advocated it was OK to cover up the uniform so no one could see it - while I suppose that is a difference, the end result is the same.