Proposed Corporate Uniform Changes

[davedove]

I know folks don't care much for uniform threads, but here are some of what I feel would be common sense changes to the current corporate uniform, as well as reasons for the changes.  They are based on the requirement to have both AF-style and CAP-distinctive uniforms.

1.  Members who wear this uniform do not have to meet the weight or grooming standards required to wear the AF-style uniforms.  This is a corporate uniform and should therefore be open to all members, not just those who meet grooming standards.

2.  Currently, only a CAP aviation badge and one additional CAP badge are authorized on the uniform shirt, to parallel the grey slacks/aviator shirt uniform.  This should be changed to parallel the AF-style service uniform so that a total of four badges or devices can be worn, with a maximum of two devices worn above the ribbons.  This would result in one set of rules for both uniforms, with the only difference being the prohibition against the wearing of military devices and ribbons on the CAP uniform.

3.  Change the grade insignia so that it is the same as for the AF-style service uniform, currently the grey embroidered epaulet slides.  The insignia should be the same to promote uniformity and reduce the number of different insignia.  This would reduce the confusion that can result from differing insignia.  Also, since only one type of insignia is required, CAP may be able to realize economies of scale with Vanguard because of the larger production of one insignia type.  If the insignia is changed for the AF-style uniforms, it would change for this uniform as well.

If these changes were instituted, especially number 1, CAP could then move to reduce the number of uniforms.  The grey/white aviator uniform as well as the blazer combination could both be eliminated as there would already be another CAP uniform to wear in their place.  Of course, a phase out period would be required to ease the burden of cost on the members.

[ddelaney103]

I agree with most of your points.

I might want relaxed standards for grooming, but still some standard.  I don't think most beards would be a problem, but I think "ZZ Top beards" are a problem.

I think we should be allowed to wear military badges and ribbons on corp suits.

The AF allows medals on civilian formalwear:

AFI36-2903 2 AUGUST 2006 Table 4.3
civilian black tie - center the holding bar of the bottom row of medals
immediately above the pocket; do not wear pocket-handkerchief.

The VA encourages the wear of ribbons/medals/badges on civilian attire:

http://www1.va.gov/veteranspride/

There should be no reason we shouldn't wear them.

[mikeylikey]

General practice is that military awards can be worn on anything civilian, as long as it is in good taste.

[ELTHunter]

3.  Change the grade insignia so that it is the same as for the AF-style service uniform, currently the grey embroidered epaulet slides.  The insignia should be the same to promote uniformity and reduce the number of different insignia.  This would reduce the confusion that can result from differing insignia.  Also, since only one type of insignia is required, CAP may be able to realize economies of scale with Vanguard because of the larger production of one insignia type.  If the insignia is changed for the AF-style uniforms, it would change for this uniform as well.

I think the whole idea behind the white shirt/blue pants/blue epaulets was to look more like the Air Force and wear the same looking rank insignia.  While I agree with your suggestions, I think it is a non-starter if the same reasoning still applies that was being used when this uniform combo was inspired.  This then kills the relaxation of the grooming standards for it.

[JC004]

I am for the standardization of badges across the uniforms.

I am also for phasing out the generic aviator shirt and going with the more AF-cut version.

[Sgt. Savage]

Why don't we just go Army Style. I want to wear all of my BLING on my uiniform at the same time.

[TankerT]

1.  Members who wear this uniform do not have to meet the weight or grooming standards required to wear the AF-style uniforms.  This is a corporate uniform and should therefore be open to all members, not just those who meet grooming standards.

One of the purposes of this uniform was to allow personnel that did not meet weight standards to wear a professional, military style uniform for interacting with other agencies, to include the military.  Showing up like Wolf Man Jack to a meeting with the Adjutant General would somewhat defeat the purpose of the new corporate uniforms.

[mikeylikey]

3.  Change the grade insignia so that it is the same as for the AF-style service uniform, currently the grey embroidered epaulet slides.  The insignia should be the same to promote uniformity and reduce the number of different insignia.  This would reduce the confusion that can result from differing insignia.  Also, since only one type of insignia is required, CAP may be able to realize economies of scale with Vanguard because of the larger production of one insignia type.  If the insignia is changed for the AF-style uniforms, it would change for this uniform as well.

Vanguard does not produce the blue AF slides, they purchase them like everyone else and up the price and make you pay more.  DSCP and a few other Gov Contractors make those slides. 

I don't think there is any confusion.  You see a gold embroidered bar on a blue sleeve or you see it on a grey sleeve.  Those are the same insignia.  Lets push to get rid of the GREY ONES, not the BLUE ONES!

[aveighter]

As stated in another discussion (never thought I'd say this) the corp (TPU) uniform isn't a bad looking set of threads.  One can appear very professional in it, or not depending on the amount of excess mass one totes around.  A lot of that was on display at the recent NB meeting.  Not good.

Relax further at your peril, I say.

[RogueLeader]

Lets push to get rid of the GREY ONES, not the BLUE ONES!

Good idea, but we set the color for the corp uniform the AF sets for theirs.  You'd have a better chance of getting the blue to go than the gray

Personal opinion- I like it.

[Hawk200]

I like the ideas. Standardize across the board. It would be a lot easier for a guy in blues to tell a guy in corporates something to the effect of "You'll put this badge here, a half inch above your ribbons, and this one is centered on your pocket."

It shows a lot more solidarity, and allows more team work than "Well on these that would go here, but I don't know on those."

I don't see the grey slides going away anytime soon. Personally, I think cadets should wear them too. But, just my two cents. If we all looked closer to the same across the board, I think we would an easier concept for teamwork.

There's a few other things I would change too by minimizing the contents of our uniform manual, but that's another thread.

[davedove]

1.  Members who wear this uniform do not have to meet the weight or grooming standards required to wear the AF-style uniforms.  This is a corporate uniform and should therefore be open to all members, not just those who meet grooming standards.

One of the purposes of this uniform was to allow personnel that did not meet weight standards to wear a professional, military style uniform for interacting with other agencies, to include the military.  Showing up like Wolf Man Jack to a meeting with the Adjutant General would somewhat defeat the purpose of the new corporate uniforms.

My principle is that if you design a corporate uniform, all members should be authorized to wear it.  Since CAP accepts members that do not meet weight or grooming standards, they should be able to wear any corporate uniform.

To restrict those who do not meet grooming standards from wearing a uniform only divides the membership.

I also get a kick out of how people always seem to imply that someone overweight is more professional looking that someone with a beard, and immediately jump to the "ZZ Top" or "Wolfman Jack" references.  What about the 450 lb. guy who can barely waddle two steps without getting out of breath?  Under the current standards he can wear the corporate uniform.  However, someone who is super fit and can physically outperform anyone else in the squadron can't wear the uniform because he happens to wear a beard.  That just doesn't make sense to me.

[ddelaney103]

I'm beginning to think the TPU was created so the fat people could have someone to look down on.

We've set up our uniforms so we now have more divisions between the members.  In the AF the types of uniforms are based on activity.  In CAP, they are based on weight and grooming.

[TankerT]

I also get a kick out of how people always seem to imply that someone overweight is more professional looking that someone with a beard, and immediately jump to the "ZZ Top" or "Wolfman Jack" references.  What about the 450 lb. guy who can barely waddle two steps without getting out of breath?  Under the current standards he can wear the corporate uniform.  However, someone who is super fit and can physically outperform anyone else in the squadron can't wear the uniform because he happens to wear a beard.  That just doesn't make sense to me.

Two things:

1- The consideration is how the folks we interact with will perceive us.  Facial hair and long hair are not well received by most military members as a professional look.  Grooming standards ARE a personal choice.  To say that a physically fit person can't wear the TPU because he wears a beard is not a correct statement.  To say that a fit person can't wear the TPU because the CHOOSE not to meet the standards is a correct statement.

2- Weight, MAY OR MAY NOT be a choice.  As many medical professionals will point out, there are medications that will cause you to balloon up, and you're pretty much stuck with it.  You can exercise, which you should, but you'll still end up big.  You can argue there is a choice.  But, many of these medications are for serious health conditions that either deal with something that can kill them, or have them stuck in bed all day.

So, for the TPU - if you argue that everyone should be able to wear them...well... guess what... they can.  It's a personal choice to wear that uniform. 

You could argue that weight is a personal choice.  And, for some people it is.  But, for some people, the alternatives make it pretty much a non choice.

/I choose to wear the TPU on occasion.
//I choose to wear the greys on occasion
///I choose to wear the AF style uniform on occasion.
////They are all personal choices.

[Hawk200]

1- The consideration is how the folks we interact with will perceive us.  Facial hair and long hair are not well received by most military members as a professional look.  Grooming standards ARE a personal choice.  To say that a physically fit person can't wear the TPU because he wears a beard is not a correct statement.  To say that a fit person can't wear the TPU because the CHOOSE not to meet the standards is a correct statement.

It is very much a correct statement that a person with a beard can't wear the TPU. Claiming it's not is just inaccurate. It's still discriminatory. And there is a uniformed service that permitted wear of a beard with a uniform for a long time. The person most well known for it was never considered unprofessional, in fact was highly regarded.

2- Weight, MAY OR MAY NOT be a choice.  As many medical professionals will point out, there are medications that will cause you to balloon up, and you're pretty much stuck with it.  You can exercise, which you should, but you'll still end up big.  You can argue there is a choice.  But, many of these medications are for serious health conditions that either deal with something that can kill them, or have them stuck in bed all day.

You could argue that weight is a personal choice.  And, for some people it is.  But, for some people, the alternatives make it pretty much a non choice.

So people that have made a personal choice not to lose weight get the same benefits as those cannot lose weight for legitimate reasons? But the person who made the personal choice to wear a beard or long hair doesn't get the priviledge of wearing corporate service dress? Why?

Beard and long hair being well received by the military is a pointless argument when it comes to a nonmilitary uniform. It doesn't apply. It's an apple and oranges comparison. There are personnel in the military with shaving profiles, wearing beards, that actually present a completely professional appearance. Wearing a beard isn't going to make military personnel completely discount a persons abilities.

And there are the inevitable realities of people with facial scarring, or people that have breakouts or reactions to shaving. There are legitimate reasons why some people can't shave. There are people that frequent this board that have that issue. Why shouldn't they get to dress as fancy as everyone else?

Pineda wanted something to wear his ribbons and badges on, but anyone could look at him and tell he shouldn't have been wearing AF service dress. He created his own thing. Initially, I didn't like the TPU. I don't care for the fact that it mixes military uniform items with nonmilitary items. But it is probably here to stay. If addressed properly, it could result in more uniformity than we have now. But further segregating the membership is poor management, and poor leadership.

As far as uniforms go, there should be two camps. Those who can wear AF uniforms, and those who can't. Right now there are three. And when it comes to corporate uniforms, there shouldn't be any arbitrary division. Besides, the Air Force said they don't care about the corporate uniforms, so there is really no justification to discriminate.

[davedove]

As far as uniforms go, there should be two camps. Those who can wear AF uniforms, and those who can't. Right now there are three. And when it comes to corporate uniforms, there shouldn't be any arbitrary division. Besides, the Air Force said they don't care about the corporate uniforms, so there is really no justification to discriminate.

And that's pretty much my point.  As long as CAP accepts members who do not meet weight and/or grooming standards, they should be able to wear all corporate uniforms.

[Hawk200]

And that's pretty much my point.  As long as CAP accepts members who do not meet weight and/or grooming standards, they should be able to wear all corporate uniforms.

I agree. It wouldn't hurt to minimize the number of uniforms to avoid confusion. TPU is actually uniform in component, whereas the blazer is more in concept. Personally, I think we ought to eliminate the blazer, only have one corporate service dress.

Although, maybe we ought to keep the golf shirt for those that dislike wearing rank insignia.

[Dragoon]

Although, maybe we ought to keep the golf shirt for those that dislike wearing rank insignia.

That's one option.  Another would be to say "CAP a para military organization.  Wear your rank.  If you don't like it, feel free to remain an SM without rank and salute everyone else. Those are your only two options."

[SDF_Specialist]

I'm all for wearing the badges you've earned. The only thing is I think that wearing four badges on the blues is a little excessive. I've seen this once. The person had a ribbon rack of probably 23-24 ribbons, GT badge, and three specialty track badges. My only question was "is that person trying to rival Patton with decorations?" I like the fact that on the corporate uniform, only two badges are authorized. It makes you appreciate the uniform a little more since it isn't cluttered with things that make people's heads swell. As far as the grooming standards go, long hair and full beard = no just no.

[davedove]

I'm all for wearing the badges you've earned. The only thing is I think that wearing four badges on the blues is a little excessive. I've seen this once. The person had a ribbon rack of probably 23-24 ribbons, GT badge, and three specialty track badges. My only question was "is that person trying to rival Patton with decorations?" I like the fact that on the corporate uniform, only two badges are authorized. It makes you appreciate the uniform a little more since it isn't cluttered with things that make people's heads swell.

I could agree with that.  But whatever the number, it should be the same on each uniform.

As far as the grooming standards go, long hair and full beard = no just no.

Again, I'm not arguing about whether you should have those, only that since those members are allowed, they should be allowed to wear any corporate uniform.

[SDF_Specialist]

I'm all for wearing the badges you've earned. The only thing is I think that wearing four badges on the blues is a little excessive. I've seen this once. The person had a ribbon rack of probably 23-24 ribbons, GT badge, and three specialty track badges. My only question was "is that person trying to rival Patton with decorations?" I like the fact that on the corporate uniform, only two badges are authorized. It makes you appreciate the uniform a little more since it isn't cluttered with things that make people's heads swell.

I could agree with that.  But whatever the number, it should be the same on each uniform.

As far as the grooming standards go, long hair and full beard = no just no.

Again, I'm not arguing about whether you should have those, only that since those members are allowed, they should be allowed to wear any corporate uniform.

Yes, it should be the same on each uniform. So why not do this, two specialty badges; one for each pocket. They must be the highest badge earned (i.e. Senior in Comms and Master in PA. Not Master in Comms and a tech in Personnel). The last two I mentioned could be allowed if that's all you have. Like I said, four badges in excessive. Also, two ES badges (i.e. GT, GTL, GBD, MS, MO, Pilot). Minimize the hardware on the uniforms.

[jimmydeanno]

I'd actually propose three... two above and one below the ribbons.  The lone badge on the right side looks awkward and out of place - purely asthetic reasons...

[SDF_Specialist]

I'd actually propose three... two above and one below the ribbons.  The lone badge on the right side looks awkward and out of place - purely asthetic reasons...

True. But to have one above your name plate (not the command badge) is fugly.

[DrDave]

When discussing specialty badge placement, do not forget the changes/allowances for female CAP members -- i.e. allowing one specialty badge ABOVE the name plate on the right (so it doesn't look like a nipple sticking out at breast level BELOW the name plate).

Dr. Dave

[arajca]

Yes, it should be the same on each uniform. So why not do this, two specialty badges; one for each pocket. They must be the highest badge earned (i.e. Senior in Comms and Master in PA. Not Master in Comms and a tech in Personnel). The last two I mentioned could be allowed if that's all you have. Like I said, four badges in excessive. Also, two ES badges (i.e. GT, GTL, GBD, MS, MO, Pilot). Minimize the hardware on the uniforms.

Instead of the only highest, allow for badges that the member is currently working in. For example, my highest badges are senior CP and Admin, but I don't work in CP any more. I work in PD (Tech) and admin.(plus a few others)

[floridacyclist]

Pineda wanted something to wear his ribbons and badges on, but anyone could look at him and tell he shouldn't have been wearing AF service dress.

I've often wondered about that; every time I've met him, he's been in BDUs