FLWG Unit Citation?

[JoeTomasone]

Well, let's take my particular example.

I am a member of Florida Wing, but was in Iraq for the entire oil spill mission and didn't perform a single task in connection with it.   On that basis, I likely don't deserve a Unit Citation.

On the other hand, what if some of the work I did before I left had an impact on the mission execution?   If I hadn't done x, would y have been possible or much more difficult?   

On a response of this size, I do think that there is a trickle-down effect of members helping each other out.   I know one Squadron Commander who spent 3 months (IIRC) in Tallahassee working the mission - someone had to fill in for him back home.   Should that person not be recognized?   What about the others?   I think it would be a very formidable challenge to fairly quantify individual awards in these circumstances.

[Hawk200]

Personally, I believe that anyone performing direct actions for the missions should be written for decorations. At least an Achievement, if not Commendation. The ones who did something should have recieve something personal for it.

[RiverAux]

However, I think for a unit citation to be valid, a significant percentage of the unit must have been involved.  If the numbers involved are accurate and much less than 10% of the entire wing was involved, then unit citation for the entire wing is certainly not justified.

The U.S. Military does not agree.

What matters is what got accomplished.....not how many people actually did it.

I am fully confident that if some battalion did a great job in Afghanistan that the Army wouldn't award the whole Division a Unit Citation.  They would give it to the unit that did the outstanding work. 

Its all about deciding what unit or units did the great job. 

Wouldn't you agree that if (numbers made up by me for this example), one of Florida's seven groups did 80% of the sorties and accounted for 90% of the personnel that were assigned to a high profile mission that it would be more appropriate to give the unit citation to that group rather than the entire wing? 

What if we look at that group and find that 95% of the flights were actually flown by a single squadron?  Wouldn't it be more appropriate to give the citation to that squadron than to the group? 

Now, there is no exact numerical standard that can ever be applied to these situations so argument is always possible.  Heck, there is probably never a CAP mission where more than 50% of any unit at any level is involved given the nature of our organization.  So, we have to live with the fact that unit awards will be given out to a unit in which a relatively small number of people did the work to earn it.  But, we still have to be reasonable about it.

Unit Citations should go to the absolute lowest level in the organization as possible.  If there was significant participation from a large number of units then you should look at giving the citation to the next level up that encompasses all the other other units. 

[lordmonar]

However, I think for a unit citation to be valid, a significant percentage of the unit must have been involved.  If the numbers involved are accurate and much less than 10% of the entire wing was involved, then unit citation for the entire wing is certainly not justified.

The U.S. Military does not agree.

What matters is what got accomplished.....not how many people actually did it.

I am fully confident that if some battalion did a great job in Afghanistan that the Army wouldn't award the whole Division a Unit Citation.  They would give it to the unit that did the outstanding work.

True.....but the wing did do oustanding work.....so all the squadrons go the award.

Its all about deciding what unit or units did the great job. 

Wouldn't you agree that if (numbers made up by me for this example), one of Florida's seven groups did 80% of the sorties and accounted for 90% of the personnel that were assigned to a high profile mission that it would be more appropriate to give the unit citation to that group rather than the entire wing?

True.....but what about the 20% of the work done by the other six groups?  If they were not there to do their 20% the entire mission would have been a failure.  The idea of the unit award is that everyone has to be doing their job to get the "war fighters" in a status and position to win the "war".

What if we look at that group and find that 95% of the flights were actually flown by a single squadron?  Wouldn't it be more appropriate to give the citation to that squadron than to the group?

Same story.  If you got to fly 100 sorties to get the mission done.......the accomplishment is the mission.  If my unit did the last five sorties then we were partially responsible for accomplishing the mission. 

Now, there is no exact numerical standard that can ever be applied to these situations so argument is always possible.  Heck, there is probably never a CAP mission where more than 50% of any unit at any level is involved given the nature of our organization.  So, we have to live with the fact that unit awards will be given out to a unit in which a relatively small number of people did the work to earn it.  But, we still have to be reasonable about it.

Why do we have to be reasonable about?  It is a bloody unit award.  There are always going to be someone who was on leave or just joined the unit or was out processing during the event...that really did nothing to affect the outcome of the mission.  But by the rules of the game they are just as deserving to wear the ribbon.  So why are we quibbeling about it?   FLWG (among others) did a good job and got a unit citation.  BZ....move on.

Unit Citations should go to the absolute lowest level in the organization as possible.  If there was significant participation from a large number of units then you should look at giving the citation to the next level up that encompasses all the other other units.

No....they should go to the units that particpated in the event.  It should be given at the most appropriate level to ensure that all units that particpated get recognised.  Hording awards like this will only build up animosity amongst the units.  Large unit A is able to field 50% of the needed units for the mission....Small units B, C, D and E picked up the slack....but they don't get an award because they did not have enough presences.  So yes...some one should take the time and do five different forms to get all five awards....or they can do just one for the entire group.....yes that means that Units F, G, H and I may suddenly have an award too.....but that is how the system works....in CAP and in the Military.

[RiverAux]

So, since I am in CAP and CAP did a great job in this mission, why am I not getting a Unit Citation?  By your reasoning it is appropriate since all of CAP was involved at some level.  This is the same silliness that resulted in all members of the Coast Guard and CG Aux getting a Presidential Unit Citation for Katrina. 

So, if we have a major missions in which a few Groups in a Wing did most of the work, but others participated, then it is logical to issue a Unit Citation to the whole Wing.  Now, since SER had a major mission and even though FL wing did most of the work, but a few members of Region staff participated and maybe a few random members from other Wings helped out, then it is justified to give a Unit Award to all of SER.  Now, obviously,  NHQ had some involvement so even though a few groups in one wing in one region did most of the work, then it would be appropriate to give a Unit Award to all of CAP. 

You've got to have a logical cut-off point.  Under your reasoning if my squadron somehow gets a mission that it handles well the whole Wing deserves  a Unit Citation if only a few members from other units participate?  Get real.

Even in the real military they don't look at it that way. 

There are always going to be someone who was on leave or just joined the unit or was out processing during the event..

That is not the issue as I've said several times.  The issue is that the UNIT that did the work should get the UNIT citation. 
Issue it to the squadrons or Groups that truly showed a strong effort at their level and give individual awards to the random people from other squadrons that participated. 

[lordmonar]

So, since I am in CAP and CAP did a great job in this mission, why am I not getting a Unit Citation?  By your reasoning it is appropriate since all of CAP was involved at some level.  This is the same silliness that resulted in all members of the Coast Guard and CG Aux getting a Presidential Unit Citation for Katrina.

All of CAP was not involved.  Like you said....the unit citation should be issued at the lowest level.  But once the appropriate level is determined....then you should just let it go.

So, if we have a major missions in which a few Groups in a Wing did most of the work, but others participated, then it is logical to issue a Unit Citation to the whole Wing.

Sure...that is what a unit citation is for.  When you get a unit citation for a squadron that did XYZ over a two year period.....not everyone in the unit did everything or even anything to accomplish XYZ.  But it is too hard to separate who did what exactly.......hence a unit award.

Now, since SER had a major mission and even though FL wing did most of the work, but a few members of Region staff participated and maybe a few random members from other Wings helped out, then it is justified to give a Unit Award to all of SER.  Now, obviously,  NHQ had some involvement so even though a few groups in one wing in one region did most of the work, then it would be appropriate to give a Unit Award to all of CAP.

Yes...that is a good argument....SER was the point for this mission......it would have totally justifiable, in my opinion, for the entire region to get the unit award.   But it seems that the powers that be, like you, did not think that was right and only issued a unit citation for FLWG.

You've got to have a logical cut-off point.  Under your reasoning if my squadron somehow gets a mission that it handles well the whole Wing deserves  a Unit Citation if only a few members from other units participate?  Get real.

No....I did not say that at all.  I said that if you wing got a mission that your squadron contributed a major portion of the accomplishment of the mission....then Region or National may feel that the entire wing should get an award....even if your squadron did the bulk of the work.  No different from a single individual doing the bulk of the work that results in a unit getting a unit award.

Even in the real military they don't look at it that way.

Never said it did......but you would be supprised what sort of stuff goes on in the military.
Seen several officer award packaged where they got credit for "directing" stuff that I know for a fact that they did not know about until I briefed them on when it was all done.

I got two AFOUAs with V for valor while my entire unit was stationed in JAPAN....but other units in the wing deployed personnel to the war zone.

I got an AFAM for an event that I was on leave for for 90% of the time.  I did help in the prep and planning....but the bulk of the work took place while I was in the states.....but everyone in the shop got an AFAM for it and so did I.

River.....I spent 22 years seeing this sort of thing....it happens all the time.  CAP is NOT doing anything different then the USAF is doing.  It is rewarding UNITS for doing a good job.  It is understood that some subordinate units and individuals will have had different levels of participation....everything from being the HMFIC to "We did what?".  If you personally don't think you deserve the award don't wear it.  But don't steal other people's bling.

There are always going to be someone who was on leave or just joined the unit or was out processing during the event..

That is not the issue as I've said several times.  The issue is that the UNIT that did the work should get the UNIT citation. 
Issue it to the squadrons or Groups that truly showed a strong effort at their level and give individual awards to the random people from other squadrons that participated.

So....define you terms.  Define "truly showed a strong effort" and I am all with you.  Set up a system where the people left out of the blanket award get their just reward and I am all with you.  I don't think you really want to go there.   I have had to deal with several award boards for just that sort of thing.  IFOR/SFOR for Bosnia, ALLIED FORCE for Kosovo, CENTCOM, for Desert storm/Norther and Southern Watch and the current OND/OEF awards boards.

Major waste of time and money for the military.....CAP just does not have that sort of resource.  So some one wrote one up for FLWG national signed off on it.....end of story.

[Ned]

My dear old Mom had a saying:

Just because something Good is happening to someone else does not mean something Bad is happening to you.

She was a very wise woman.

Now go out an play with your friends.

[Robert Hartigan]

^+1 :clap: :clap:

[DBlair]

On a somewhat-related note, does anyone have the list of awards presented at the 2011 FLWG Conference?

There seems to be some discussion of exactly who received what.

[FastAttack]

On a somewhat-related note, does anyone have the list of awards presented at the 2011 FLWG Conference?

There seems to be some discussion of exactly who received what.

good question i was there .. mostly group 7 members took most of the awards including best safety officer, best IC , best group commander

Also they told us for those that participated in Deep water horizon . we are waiting for final auth to wear the disaster relief ribbon with the V on it.
( I think they said 237 members or something like that they will list them on the flwg website. I participated as an MP ).

[Eclipse]

Best Group CC, seriously?  That's an award?

[FastAttack]

Best Group CC, seriously?  That's an award?

yeah first time i ever heard of such an award until this year lol

[DBlair]

On a somewhat-related note, does anyone have the list of awards presented at the 2011 FLWG Conference?

There seems to be some discussion of exactly who received what.

mostly group 7 members took most of the awards including best safety officer, best IC , best group commander

Group 7, seriously?  I'll leave that one without further comment. lol

...do you recall who received CP Officer OTY?

[FastAttack]

On a somewhat-related note, does anyone have the list of awards presented at the 2011 FLWG Conference?

There seems to be some discussion of exactly who received what.

mostly group 7 members took most of the awards including best safety officer, best IC , best group commander

Group 7, seriously?  I'll leave that one without further comment. lol

...do you recall who received CP Officer OTY?

actually they come a long way under their new group commander.. so they deserve most of the awards, but I think honestly that no one passed up the paperwork required for these awards. My UCC didn't even know you had to submit for them ( not his fault either he just assumed commander in December)

CP, Oh it was a group 7 guy as well lol

[starshippe]

. . the dwh participants received permission at last week's georgia wing conference to wear the disaster relief ribbon with the silver v.
. . i had also heard of a special ribbon being designed for dwh, as it was the largest cap mission since ww2.
. . might see u all at the s.e. region conf in june. we can find out then fer sure.

. . fast attack, was that an ssn reference? ssbn629 here.

bill
dwh ic

[Hawk200]

. . i had also heard of a special ribbon being designed for dwh, as it was the largest cap mission since ww2.

I would hope not. We have enough trouble with our current decs as it is. We don't need to be getting into the "campaign" decoration business.

[DC]

. . i had also heard of a special ribbon being designed for dwh, as it was the largest cap mission since ww2.

I would hope not. We have enough trouble with our current decs as it is. We don't need to be getting into the "campaign" decoration business.

This. We have too many freaking awards already, we don't need to invent a new one each time we have a big mission. What's next, retroactive special awards for Katrina, Rita, Wilma, et al., the Fossett search, and every other large/high profile mission I'm not thinking of that we have had in the last decade?

[Spaceman3750]

. . i had also heard of a special ribbon being designed for dwh, as it was the largest cap mission since ww2.

I would hope not. We have enough trouble with our current decs as it is. We don't need to be getting into the "campaign" decoration business.

This. We have too many freaking awards already, we don't need to invent a new one each time we have a big mission. What's next, retroactive special awards for Katrina, Rita, Wilma, et al., the Fossett search, and every other large/high profile mission I'm not thinking of that we have had in the last decade?

A specialty patch might be more appropriate - ILWG has a supplement authorizing a special Katrina contingent patch for those from our wing who went down.

[Eclipse]

Enough with the dots.

The dwh participants received permission at last week's georgia wing conference to wear the disaster relief ribbon with the silver v.

Recipients do not "receive permission" - either an approved 120 exists or it doesn't.  We've had this issue for years where senior officials
hand out decs at conferences with no substantiation, which then causes issues years later for members wearing unusual decorations with nothing on file.

I'd have no issue with a ribbon based on major missions - its not like we have that many, or that it would affect that many members as a whole.  The military does it with major engagements, wars, and relief efforts, why shouldn't we?  Besides, as defined, the DR-V is inappropriate for the Spill mission.

[DBlair]

Conference Award List: http://flwg.us/conferenceawards.aspx

Seems like the Sun 'N Fun airshow yet again proved to be an automatic decoration factory (then again, this is how it is advertised to members), and it looks like DWH was the favorite operation this year... pretty much every decoration noted is related to Sun 'N Fun or DWH.

As for the rest of the awards, they showcase the finest of CAP politics-- exactly what lead so many to roll their eyes and eventually get fed up and leave. Oh well, such is our organization.