I think Region primary staff officers should be full Colonels

[ZigZag911]

OK, here's my take:

1) Nat'l CC could be a 3 star....either retire in grade at end of term, or revert to 1 star to stay active (up till the end of WW2, US military usually only held 3 or 4 stars as 'temporary' grade)

2) Nat'l CV 2 star, see #1 above.....if not elected  NCC, back to 1 star...NCV should have concurrent term w. NCC,,,,frankly, we ought to do like most large national organizations -- vice president (CV equivalent) is generally either presumed successor or, in some cases, automatic heir to top slot by constitution & bylaws of organization

3) Nat'l CS should get 1 star, keep it if at least 1 year satisfactory service in the job

4) Region CC 1 star, same conditions as NCS

5) Region CV, CS, and current DCS slots (plus director of safety and IG)
    should be O-6.

Here's the condition: no promotion to O-6 or higher for anyone who has not already completed Level 4 and served 4 years as CAP Lt Col...this, of course, would limit wing CC appointments....which is the idea! No waivers, no exceptions, period!

Completion of Level 5 within 12 months is a good idea....why is Region/Wing CC Course not granted NSC equivalency??

[John Bryan]

OK, here's my take:

1) Nat'l CC could be a 3 star....either retire in grade at end of term, or revert to 1 star to stay active (up till the end of WW2, US military usually only held 3 or 4 stars as 'temporary' grade)

2) Nat'l CV 2 star, see #1 above.....if not elected  NCC, back to 1 star...NCV should have concurrent term w. NCC,,,,frankly, we ought to do like most large national organizations -- vice president (CV equivalent) is generally either presumed successor or, in some cases, automatic heir to top slot by constitution & bylaws of organization

3) Nat'l CS should get 1 star, keep it if at least 1 year satisfactory service in the job

4) Region CC 1 star, same conditions as NCS

5) Region CV, CS, and current DCS slots (plus director of safety and IG)
    should be O-6.

Here's the condition: no promotion to O-6 or higher for anyone who has not already completed Level 4 and served 4 years as CAP Lt Col...this, of course, would limit wing CC appointments....which is the idea! No waivers, no exceptions, period!

Completion of Level 5 within 12 months is a good idea....why is Region/Wing CC Course not granted NSC equivalency??

Retire in grade could be an issue since almost all National Commanders and their wives are made life members , thus never expire or retire. Plus I think if we were to do this, we should follow the example of the other US military auxiliary.....btw...they are older then us so and as older brother / sister they should set the example 

As for the WWII thing....if you want to look at history the grade of Lt Gen before WWII was a much bigger deal then it is now. Remember we went from George Washington to U.S. Grant with no one holding that grade.

[RiverAux]

Folks, are we actually assuming that Region staff members actually DO anything in the first place that warrants a Col. rank?  Although it is changing a little bit in regards to ES, region staff members don't really do much anyway, nor should they really.  Why do they deserve to be Colonels?

[mikeylikey]

^ They don't!  Being a staff officer has nothing to do with rank or grade, nothing!

In reality some Wing Commanders don't warrant being a Colonel to begin with.

[SAR-EMT1]

Personally I think the situation at hte higher levels is good "as is"
but if I must voice an opinion here it is:

Keep Nat /CC at 2 stars
Keep Nat. /CV at 1 star
Region /CC to 1 star
Region and National Staff to Col.
(lvl V required prior to Region or National job)
Wing /CC stays Col.
(AD USAF Wing /CCs are Cols )
(reqs for Lvl 4 completed prior to Wing job)
Wing Staff: Lt Col
Group /CC: Lt Col
Group Staff: up-to Maj
(requirements for Lvl 2/3 completed prior to getting Group job)
Sq /CC:  Maj
Sq staff: up-to Capt
Flight /CC: Capt
Sq staff: Lvl 2 complete

[ZigZag911]

Granted that in the current situation rank/grade has little to do with duty assignment....but perhaps it should.

There is a very good reason that, by and large, the modern military does not take new officers, promote them to Colonel, and put them in command of a combat brigade! The reason is inexperience.

In an ideal world:

Nat CC = Lt Gen
Nat CV = Maj Gen
Nat CS = Brig Gen
All principal National staff officers (National ______ Officer) should be colonels
Region CC = Brig Gen
Region CC = Col
Region CS, DCSs, IG, SE = Col
Other region staff directors  = Lt Col
Wing CC = Col
Wing CV = Col
Wing CS = Lt Col
Wing Directors = Lt Col
Other wing staff department heads = Maj
Group CC = Lt Col
Group CD = Lt Col
Principal staff officers:
(IG, SE, DOS, DO, AE, PD, CP, LG. DC) = Maj
Other staff dept. heads = Capt
Sqdn CC = Maj
Sqdn CD = Maj
Principal staff officers = Capt
Other staff officers = 1 Lt
Flt CC = Capt
Flt CD = 1 Lt

Brig Gen should be highest permanent grade.

Inactive officers, or officers not presently filling a slot suitable to their rank, should revert to highest grade held for 5 years active service

[Cecil DP]

Personnaly I feel tht completion of Level 5 and an apropriate TIG  (10 years?) should entitle anyone to be a Col.

[mikeylikey]

Wow......like many here point out, this is not the AF.  We do not need to stack our leadership with stars and eagles.

[ZigZag911]

10 years TIG as lt col to be eligible for colonel, with a Wilson?  I could support that, but I think there should be some extra service requirement, fulfillable in various ways (e.g., group or higher staff for a certain number of years, or a similar amount of encampment staff or RSC staff service, or a certain number of years as IC....like that).

O-6 should not go to people who simply passively participate as asst officer in charge of pencil sharpeners!

[ZigZag911]

Wow......like many here point out, this is not the AF.  We do not need to stack our leadership with stars and eagles.

On the other hand, CAP careers of 30 years plus seem to be the norm, rather than the exception.....whereas it is the rare AF officer who serves that long....perhaps after 3, 4 or more decades of paying for the privilege of serving, buying one's own uniforms, taking time from family, career, and personal interests, it's not really a whole lot to ask for....I mean, you're one of the first to say that CAP rank is meaningless, Mikey, so what's the difference to you if it makes dedicated CAP officers feel fulfilled if they can pin on eagles after all those years, not because they politicked to become a corporate officer, but because they worked for years in a squadron, group or wing?!?

[EShep]

I don't agree. The DCS staff officers carry the authority and rank of the Region CC, who is a full Colonel. Any staff officers subordinate to the various DCS staff officers, carry the authority of that particular staff officer. (The same applies at Wing level) Thus forms the normal chain of command.

What happens to region staff officers who leave their positions? Do they revert back to previous grade earned?

One of the problems I've noticed in my nearly 48 year CAP career, is too much emphasis on more rank. If you think you need to be a Colonel in order to do your job, you aren't capable of doing your job. Spend more time learning to lead and motivate, and less time giving orders.

I've lost track of the number of members I've encountered who can't wait for their next promotion; or who think they are due for promotion. You're never due for promotion. You're not being paid. You become eligible for consideration for promotion, not due. That's how it's worded in the regulation.

[mikeylikey]

Wow......like many here point out, this is not the AF.  We do not need to stack our leadership with stars and eagles.

On the other hand, CAP careers of 30 years plus seem to be the norm, rather than the exception.....whereas it is the rare AF officer who serves that long....perhaps after 3, 4 or more decades of paying for the privilege of serving, buying one's own uniforms, taking time from family, career, and personal interests, it's not really a whole lot to ask for....I mean, you're one of the first to say that CAP rank is meaningless, Mikey, so what's the difference to you if it makes dedicated CAP officers feel fulfilled if they can pin on eagles after all those years, not because they politicked to become a corporate officer, but because they worked for years in a squadron, group or wing?!?

BECAUSE it is not the dedicated CAP officer who spent 30 or 40 years serving CAP leading this organization!  Reference our previous National Commander.  How many years did he have?  10??  6???  Get the point.  Your point is not valid.  If it were, our leadership would be in the age bracket of 50-70.  If they allowed the average Joe Blow member to make Colonel without having to be a Corporate Officer, I would be all for your idea.  But that currently is not how the system works.

[FW]

On the other hand, CAP careers of 30 years plus seem to be the norm, rather than the exception.....whereas it is the rare AF officer who serves that long....perhaps after 3, 4 or more decades of paying for the privilege of serving, buying one's own uniforms, taking time from family, career, and personal interests, it's not really a whole lot to ask for....I mean, you're one of the first to say that CAP rank is meaningless, Mikey, so what's the difference to you if it makes dedicated CAP officers feel fulfilled if they can pin on eagles after all those years, not because they politicked to become a corporate officer, but because they worked for years in a squadron, group or wing?!?

To tell you the truth, I personally would rather just get an honest "thank you"  from time to time.  The "bling" is just something that I'm losing interest in.  However, I never get tired of the great relationships I've forged over the years.  And, the longer I'm involved, the more important the relationships are.   No matter what level I've been involved in, it's the people I'm with that "make my days".  I've got more "stuff" than I need on both my walls and chest.  Another promotion or another ribbon or certificate just doesn't do it for me any more.

Of course, YMMV  

[Major Carrales]

To keep meaning to CAP rank beyond Lt Col, it should be exclusive and held by only those that serve in command of a WING or Region, let the staffs serve as Brevet Colonels until their service is up.  Reward them with a Lt Cololonelship for a given time of service as NATIONAL or REGION staff.

[ZigZag911]

Sparky. how on earth do you reward someone with a grade (lt col) he or she often already has?

Look, if the eagles are too controversial, how about a title (Baron or Count always sounds nice!), or "Vice Deputy Under Grand Pubah"!

In all seriousness, we'd be a heck of a lot better off if O-6 had to be earned first by dint of several years service in a responsible staff/CV/CS post....then limit selection for corporate officer slots to the pool of serving colonels with minimum two or three years time in grade!

[Major Carrales]

Sparky. how on earth do you reward someone with a grade (lt col) he or she often already has?

Look, if the eagles are too controversial, how about a title (Baron or Count always sounds nice!), or "Vice Deputy Under Grand Pubah"!

In all seriousness, we'd be a heck of a lot better off if O-6 had to be earned first by dint of several years service in a responsible staff/CV/CS post....then limit selection for corporate officer slots to the pool of serving colonels with minimum two or three years time in grade!

Ha!  I was purposely trying to see if anyone would catch that and declare it moot.  Just give the Lt Col some badge to wear to denote REGION, NATIONAL or WING staff.  They can remove it when they finish their pull in the administration.  You could even have the REGION or WING actually own and issue the stupid badges so that it would only be worn for that occasion.

[arajca]

Sparky. how on earth do you reward someone with a grade (lt col) he or she often already has?

Look, if the eagles are too controversial, how about a title (Baron or Count always sounds nice!), or "Vice Deputy Under Grand Pubah"!

In all seriousness, we'd be a heck of a lot better off if O-6 had to be earned first by dint of several years service in a responsible staff/CV/CS post....then limit selection for corporate officer slots to the pool of serving colonels with minimum two or three years time in grade!

Ha!  I was purposely trying to see if anyone would catch that and declare it moot.  Just give the Lt Col some badge to wear to denote REGION, NATIONAL or WING staff.  They can remove it when they finish their pull in the administration.  You could even have the REGION or WING actually own and issue the stupid badges so that it would only be worn for that occasion.

While you probably posted this in jest, it's not a bad idea. Much more palatable than auto-grades for wing/region/national staffers. IIRC, the military does something similar...
fixed quote order

[Dragoon]

It's funny that we're concerned about region staff officers getting commensurate rank for their positions...


....when throughout CAP we've got 1st Lts and Captains as primary wing staff.....


....and in squadrons we have 1st Lt's commanding Majors and  Lt Col's!


Rank in CAP means almost nothing, except 0-6 and above, which normally just means "I used to be a high level guy."

Given how hard it is to be a Wing CC, if folks could get their eagles on Region staff, you'd have a LOT fewer folks vying for wing command.  They'd just go to region and get promoted the easy way.


If rank is going to mean anything in CAP, it needs to be reformed top to bottom.

But first, we need to decide what rank should be in CAP

1.  Is it a symbol of responsiblity and authority (as it is in the Real Military)

2.  Is it a symbol of PREVIOUS responsibility and authority (as it is for CAP 0-6 and above)

3.  It is just a symbol of training and longevity (as it is for CAP 0-5 and below).



Personally, I vote for #1.  But even #2 would be a step in the right direction.

[John Bryan]

I think grade is a little over rated......Don't get me wrong , unlike others here I do think it has meaning. But the person not the grade makes a leader. I think I really understood that when I figued out that some above me were poor leaders and some below me were better leaders then me.  There was I time not too long ago when I assumed that the colonels and the generals must be good or great leaders.  Now I am less impressed with the stars and birds and more interested in their character.

We should not ask ourselves what grade should our leaders hold but rather what type of character should they hold. We have people with high grade that understand less about the core values and moral character then most 12 year old cadet airman. This is the true issue facing us.

[Dragoon]

This is very true in CAP because there are really no leadership performance requirements attached to grade.   Since we don't EXPECT more out of an 0-5 than we do out of an 0-2, it's not surprising that we don't always GET more out of the 0-5.