CAP Corporate Working Uniform

[THRAWN]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue. You took that oath when you signed up, and this is one of those situations it applies to. In the end, you will be the one missing out, not me, or the event.

If my deputy commander sent a member  home from a weekly meeting for a uniform issue, he wouldn't be my deputy commander any longer.

You're right. He should be the commander.

[Damron]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue. You took that oath when you signed up, and this is one of those situations it applies to. In the end, you will be the one missing out, not me, or the event.

If my deputy commander sent a member  home from a weekly meeting for a uniform issue, he wouldn't be my deputy commander any longer.

Ok, so how do you deal with a member who consistently doesn't get it right, after repeat corrections?

Is that the scenario you presented in your post?

[Chappie]

The above is not mutually exclusive, and the attitude that "some regulations are more 'reggy' then others" is what causes a
great deal of problems in CAP.

What's wrong with just setting the standard and enforcing it?

Nothing of course.  But not every regulation violation deserves the death penalty.  Commanders, when reasonably possible, should employ a form of progressive discipline starting with on-the-spot corrections, verbal counselings, re-trainings, etc. and progressing to sterner measures like reprimands, written counselings, restrictions, demotions, and only after all lesser and suitable methods have been exhausted, the dreaded 2B.

My point here is "sending a member home" for a uniform violation is only one tool in the discipline tool box, and should be among the last used.

Had a situation where one of our students at a CCRSC was a bit over the height/weight standards for the blues...so much so that he had two belts sewn together and his trousers altered for the girth.   Due to the distance of travel...he was not sent home, but received "counseling/training".  He assured us that his squadron commander had "approved" his wear of the altered uniform.   When it was pointed out that the regs were the final word and not the local squadron commander, he was dumbfounded.  No one had taken the time to acquaint him with the reg.   Not sending him home and providing counsel was a good thing...for the rest of his CAP career, he wore the white/gray or blazer combo -- and did so with dignity.   I admired his integrity.

[Damron]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue. You took that oath when you signed up, and this is one of those situations it applies to. In the end, you will be the one missing out, not me, or the event.

If my deputy commander sent a member  home from a weekly meeting for a uniform issue, he wouldn't be my deputy commander any longer.

You're right. He should be the commander.

Tonight, I'm attending a meeting that will be attended by three cadets that had their home burn to the ground this week.  I'll be happy to see them in any attire.  There are any number of good excuses that I'd accept. 

I didn't even need a hypothetical example to make you look like a pedant. 

[Eclipse]

Tonight, I'm attending a meeting that will be attended by three cadets that had their home burn to the ground this week.  I'll be happy to see them in any attire.  There are any number of good excuses that I'd accept. 

I didn't even need a hypothetical example to make you look like a pedant.

Seriously?  You ignore the question and then try and make an excuse with a tangential non-example?

A. With no home they probably have more important things to do then be at a CAP meeting (though the return to normalcy is a valid position).

B. Few CC's would have any issue with that stance, though activities like flying wouldn't care, however that does not
address the actual question you were asked, nor the general discussion.

[Eclipse]

The above is not mutually exclusive, and the attitude that "some regulations are more 'reggy' then others" is what causes a
great deal of problems in CAP.

What's wrong with just setting the standard and enforcing it?

Nothing of course.  But not every regulation violation deserves the death penalty.  Commanders, when reasonably possible, should employ a form of progressive discipline starting with on-the-spot corrections, verbal counselings, re-trainings, etc. and progressing to sterner measures like reprimands, written counselings, restrictions, demotions, and only after all lesser and suitable methods have been exhausted, the dreaded 2B.

My point here is "sending a member home" for a uniform violation is only one tool in the discipline tool box, and should be among the last used.

Had a situation where one of our students at a CCRSC was a bit over the height/weight standards for the blues...so much so that he had two belts sewn together and his trousers altered for the girth.   Due to the distance of travel...he was not sent home, but received "counseling/training".  He assured us that his squadron commander had "approved" his wear of the altered uniform.   When it was pointed out that the regs were the final word and not the local squadron commander, he was dumbfounded.  No one had taken the time to acquaint him with the reg.   Not sending him home and providing counsel was a good thing...for the rest of his CAP career, he wore the white/gray or blazer combo -- and did so with dignity.   I admired his integrity.

He had the option of changing his clothes - if he didn't it might be a different story.  Imagine the damage it does
to CAP's optics with someone like that walking around a military base, or even just in public.  Also "integrity" aside,
at the point you're literally sewing belts together, it would strike the average person that "something isn't right here".

In either case, phone calls by higher HQ to that CC should have been made, if not immediately, then right after the activity.
Maybe start with the Wing CC and let it work it's way down naturally.

[Damron]

Tonight, I'm attending a meeting that will be attended by three cadets that had their home burn to the ground this week.  I'll be happy to see them in any attire.  There are any number of good excuses that I'd accept. 

I didn't even need a hypothetical example to make you look like a pedant.

Seriously?  You ignore the question and then try and make an excuse with a tangential non-example?

A. With no home they probably have more important things to do then be at a CAP meeting (though the return to normalcy is a valid position).

B. Few CC's would have any issue with that stance, though activities like flying wouldn't care, however that does not
address the actual question you were asked, nor the general discussion.

Slow down.

Somebody posted that they would send a member home for being in the wrong uniform.  Absolutely no context was provided other than they were not wearing the UOD.  He didn't say that he would eventually send home somebody that wouldn't respond to repeated  corrective action. 

When I point out that is a bunch of  pedantic crap, somebody wants to have a reasonable conversation.   No, why don't we address the silly crap before we have a conversation about members that refuse to comply with repeated corrective measures.

[Eclipse]

Somebody posted that they would send a member home for being in the wrong uniform.  Absolutely no context was provided other than they were not wearing the UOD.

Fair enough.

What other "context" is needed?

"UOD is "x", you don't have it.  You now have some free time."

The person somehow knew about the activity enough to show up, figured out the when and where of it, may have paid
some money to attend, yet it's OK to ignore "that detail"?

We're talking about adults here, adults who are signing up to either guide and mentor youth, or save life and property.
Neither of those things are well supported by members with either so little attention to detail they don't know the proper dress
for the day, or feel some regulations or directives don't apply to them because "who has time for uniforms when people are dying?!"

Jobs have uniforms, some formal, some informal.  Show up out of the proper lane, you're sent home.
We'd be much better off if people stopped treating CAP like a PTA meeting and treated it more like a job, because that's
what it ultimately is, enjoyable, rewarding, or not.

You're there to serve the country and accomplish a mission, not show everyone you're special and unique.

The uniform is part of that, if only as an outward acknowledgement you are part of something bigger then yourself and absorbed
into the team.  This is why the multiform is such a problem.  CAP can't even look like a team, let alone act like one most days.

[Chappie]

<snip> He had the option of changing his clothes - if he didn't it might be a different story.  Imagine the damage it does
to CAP's optics with someone like that walking around a military base, or even just in public.  Also "integrity" aside,
at the point you're literally sewing belts together, it would strike the average person that "something isn't right here".

In either case, phone calls by higher HQ to that CC should have been made, if not immediately, then right after the activity.
Maybe start with the Wing CC and let it work it's way down naturally. <snip>

Unfortunately, he did not have the option of uniform change.  He only had his blues -- he wore his uniform to class but was quick to change to civvies.  Fortunately the location of the classes, etc. limited the optics.

It did get handled by the Wing Chaplain/Wing CC and the local commander at the conclusion of the activity.   As stated, he was compliant to the uniform regs from that activity on the rest of his CAP career.  Always wore either the g/w or blazer combo.

On another note...lessons were learned by the activity director.   After that event, the CAPM 39-1 was sent to each participant upon registration...with the warning that the h/w would be enforced so have a back-up uniform handy -- or if you have doubts about wearing the blues, wear the corporate instead.  At CCRSC there were daily uniform inspections (announcement was part of the participant's manual) based on the approved UOD for the event.   When I served as the Director of the CCRSC...both the Dean and I would alternate wear of the blues and corporate during the course of the week (I did the same thing when on NSC staff).  Glad to report that though the initial incident occurred in the late 90's, the practice of providing the CAPM 39-1 and a Participant's Manual with all the items covered for the event proved to be an effective way of dealing with the uniform issues that may have been encountered in the years that followed.   There were a couple of issues that did occur but were easily resolved...which is another story

[Damron]

A couple of years ago, media darlings started using the word "optics" in place of "appearance" - let's respect the language.

[Damron]

Somebody posted that they would send a member home for being in the wrong uniform.  Absolutely no context was provided other than they were not wearing the UOD.

Fair enough.

What other "context" is needed?

"UOD is "x", you don't have it.  You now have some free time."

The person somehow knew about the activity enough to show up, figured out the when and where of it, may have paid
some money to attend, yet it's OK to ignore "that detail"?

We're talking about adults here, adults who are signing up to either guide and mentor youth, or save life and property.
Neither of those things are well supported by members with either so little attention to detail they don't know the proper dress
for the day, or feel some regulations or directives don't apply to them because "who has time for uniforms when people are dying?!"

Jobs have uniforms, some formal, some informal.  Show up out of the proper lane, you're sent home.
We'd be much better off if people stopped treating CAP like a PTA meeting and treated it more like a job, because that's
what it ultimately is, enjoyable, rewarding, or not.

You're there to serve the country and accomplish a mission, not show everyone you're special and unique.

The uniform is part of that, if only as an outward acknowledgement you are part of something bigger then yourself and absorbed
into the team.  This is why the multiform is such a problem.  CAP can't even look like a team, let alone act like one most days.

Command is about promoting and enforcing the rules.  Command is also about using good judgement when rules are broken.   Context matters. 

If my finance officer is forced to work late at his job, the one that feeds his family and pays his bills, and doesn't reach the dry-cleaners in time to pick up his blues, I still expect my finance officer at our finance committee meeting. 

Context matters.  Instead of thinking about the infinite good excuses why somebody might have a uniform issue, you want to point out the case where the member doesn't give an eff? 

[Eclipse]

Context matters.  Instead of thinking about the infinite good excuses why somebody might have a uniform issue...

! No longer available

[DakRadz]

Also "integrity" aside,
at the point you're literally sewing belts together, it would strike the average person that "something isn't right here".

Meh. Volunteer fire departments, police and sheriff department volunteers, EMS, Boy Scouts, Coast Guard Aux, etc.

Just a few groups that can, depending on location, be far more familiar to a new member and have no weight standards for anyone at all. Some do, but many do not.

ESPECIALLY as a chaplain, because those same public safety groups don't always make the Ch do PT entrance exams, or meet H/W, if it exists.

And I have seen surprisingly large structural turnout gear. Don't think "the average person" doesn't notice either way, even if they don't have an issue with it.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

[Майор Хаткевич]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else, and I'm the Project Officer, I will send you home. It's not a comfort issue, it's not a financial issue, it's an integrity issue. You took that oath when you signed up, and this is one of those situations it applies to. In the end, you will be the one missing out, not me, or the event.

If my deputy commander sent a member  home from a weekly meeting for a uniform issue, he wouldn't be my deputy commander any longer.

Ok, so how do you deal with a member who consistently doesn't get it right, after repeat corrections?

Is that the scenario you presented in your post?

Given that this was my first dip into the topic...yes?

[etodd]

If the UoD is 'X',  and you show up wearing something else ....

That is disobedience, and yes, should have repercussions.

My post above was that for every event I've seen in the last year, the uniforms for an event, for example,  might be listed as A, B, C or D "in that order", with polo being usually being D.  So members always have had a choice and none left out. The planners of the events wanted it opened up to all, without limitations of attendance due to uniforms.

But sure ... its up to the discretion of the planners, and some Squadrons/Wings are more stringent on these types of things than others. This is a very large country, and there are always regional differences. The event planners I'm sure learn what works with their groups.

[Garibaldi]

To me, the expectation is this:

1. We have a uniform to wear while performing CAP activities/missions. These are fairly specific to whatever it is we are doing. In some cases, we can wear more than one combination to a given activity, but it's up to the project officer or commander to dictate which uniform will be worn where. I mean, I'm not going to set the expectation that we show up to a SAREX in blues, but it may be suitable for some mission base work.

2. Wear of the uniform is mandatory, and it is expected that we wear the UOD to whatever activity. Schools, FTXs, meetings, whatever.

3. Especially where cadets are involved, we need to adhere to the commander's dicta of the UOD.

4. If you are given the dicta that the UOD for Sam Spade's "Divining the POD for the LKP of the Maltese Falcon" as being blues or the CAP equivalent, and you show up in BDUs, expect to be given the stink eye and sent home.

5. Whoever said that we should treat CAP as a work environment is correct. It is a working environment and our uniform is dictated by the activity. Especially if cadets or other agencies are involved.

6. Anyone who has an issue with being told that they are being sent home because they didn't follow the rules needs to find some other place to spend their time. I will accept reasons for not showing up to the meeting in uniform (people often come to meetings right after work and don't always have time to change), but the activities are usually planned well in advance. There is no excuse for not knowing what the UOD is and wearing the incorrect combination.

I would not expect to show up in civvies or blues on a mission. I know what uniforms are required each week at our meetings. I know what we plan to wear on a trip to the USS Yorktown.

Having people flaunt the required UOD is just bad business, and hearing excuses day in and day out really gets tiresome. We have rules, and they need to be followed. If you have an issue with the rules, there's the door. If you can't follow a simple directive regarding uniform wear, I really have my doubts as to your ability or desire to follow other orders.

And on that subject, if you are finding that you have to suck in that gut in order to button your BDUs or blues uniform and you end up looking like a stuffed sausage, maybe it's time you took a look at the CAP equivalent. I made a solemn vow not to wear the AF style uniform until I lose the 50 or so pounds I need to. It's just my opinion, but adult members who constantly flout the laws of physics and gravity by wearing the AF style seventy pounds beyond CAP regs really need to be corralled by their local leadership and counseled on the other options available.

Just my 2 centavos.

[SarDragon]

Wow, did I poke the hornet's nest.

Thanks for the sanity check, Ned. Yes, I did leave out some details, which, on retrospection, probably should have been included. I'll think harder on that next time.

As others pointed out, circumstances do matter, and I do take these into account. The fact remains that an established UoD should be adhered to as closely as possible. There are usually enough options offered that there shouldn't be any difficulty in showing up in a proper uniform.

[Luis R. Ramos]

SAR,

I have known you long enough in these boards. Although reading and "meeting" you in this way is nothing like working in person with someone, I do trust that you would have been just and fair before sending that person home. Even if you did not post the context or circumstances here.

[FW]

Somebody posted that they would send a member home for being in the wrong uniform.  Absolutely no context was provided other than they were not wearing the UOD.

Fair enough.

What other "context" is needed?

"UOD is "x", you don't have it.  You now have some free time."

The person somehow knew about the activity enough to show up, figured out the when and where of it, may have paid
some money to attend, yet it's OK to ignore "that detail"?

We're talking about adults here, adults who are signing up to either guide and mentor youth, or save life and property.
Neither of those things are well supported by members with either so little attention to detail they don't know the proper dress
for the day, or feel some regulations or directives don't apply to them because "who has time for uniforms when people are dying?!"

Jobs have uniforms, some formal, some informal.  Show up out of the proper lane, you're sent home.
We'd be much better off if people stopped treating CAP like a PTA meeting and treated it more like a job, because that's
what it ultimately is, enjoyable, rewarding, or not.

You're there to serve the country and accomplish a mission, not show everyone you're special and unique.

The uniform is part of that, if only as an outward acknowledgement you are part of something bigger then yourself and absorbed
into the team.  This is why the multiform is such a problem.  CAP can't even look like a team, let alone act like one most days.

Command is about promoting and enforcing the rules.  Command is also about using good judgement when rules are broken.   Context matters. 

If my finance officer is forced to work late at his job, the one that feeds his family and pays his bills, and doesn't reach the dry-cleaners in time to pick up his blues, I still expect my finance officer at our finance committee meeting. 

Context matters.  Instead of thinking about the infinite good excuses why somebody might have a uniform issue, you want to point out the case where the member doesn't give an eff?

All true, except we forget commanders really have no "command authority".  If a commander can't motivate a member to wear the UOD, there are more problems than uniform wear.... I was once told; "not having the time to do something just means a lack of interest in doing it".  As a commander, I would insure my unit membership is interested enough to wear the proper uniform when "ordered".  The expectation should be the unit's; not the commander's. 

One of the reason's, IMHO, we have these continued discussions is due to a lack of "Esprit de Corps".  These discussions are just a symptom of a larger problem.  Once you send a member home for improper uniform wear, you've lost the conversation. 

[etodd]

If a commander can't motivate a member to wear the UOD, there are more problems than uniform wear....

Is this a frequent problem in some Squadrons? In the instances I mention, members were given enough options to where I've never seen anyone not in 'some type' of uniform that was on the approved list for the day.