Making the BDU the new CAP corporate field utility uniform?

[0]

Chances are likey that once the Air Force phases out the BDU that we will then get authorizatio to wear the ABU. 
[/quote]

Already been discussed at the National level. From what the Air Force has said, we'll get it.
[/quote]

Well when we do get the ABU's which will be sooner rather than later I'd like to see the BBDU stay in place as the alternative for those of us who either don't meet the weight and grooming standards or those of us that like a little change.

[davedove]

If the ABU is approved for CAP wear, that can certainly be the AF style field uniform.

Now, for the CAP distinctive field uniform, there are different, very practical issues.

If you keep the BBDU as the corporate uniform, you do not have to change the uniform manual.   Those with BDU's will either have to switch to ABU's or the blue uniform.

If the BDU becomes the new corporate uniform, those members who already have BDU's will not have to buy new uniforms.  They will, of course, have to remove their military badges.  Those who currently have the blue uniform will have to get new uniforms.

From what I have observed, there are more members currently in BDU's than the blue field uniform, so it would be easier on our overall membership to switch to BDU's as the corporate field uniform.

As far as availability between the blue or camouflage BDU's, I don't think there will be a significant difference.  You can readily purchase either.

I still don't think camouflage is appropriate for our ES operations, but I wouldn't have any heartache wearing it either.

[0]

Well based on the past I highly doubt the BDU will be the new corporate uniform.  When the military switched from the OD Green to the current BDU's we're wearing now we phased into these as well.  And if you look the OD Green isn't our alternative.  I'm fairly confident that the BBDU will still be the standard Corporate Field Uniform.

[Hawk200]

Sounds like everyone currently wearing BDUs will be required to buy new uniforms pretty soon.  So, if people are going to be buying uniforms anyhow, why not have then buy uniforms that everyone can wear instead of continuing our tradition of uniform segregating based on members' physical characteristics?

I've still got a few good years on my BDU's. And AAFES is far cheaper on uniforms than buying them commercially, so the military utilities are a better bet. They would be more consistantly available.

And a mix of the uniform types hasn't hurt any operations in CAP that I've seen. People seem to be creating a discrimination that isn't there. And I'll say it again, CAP is not the one that sets the standards for wear of the AF uniforms. The Air Force does. There are simply alternates for those that cannot, or will not meet those standards.

Besides, I like the military aspect of CAP, it's one of the reasons I joined. Wearing BBDU's seriously reduces that. I know there are people here that are against the military uniforms, but it's a bad progression. We get rid of the military uniforms, we distance ourselves from the Air Force. And we may as well close up shop.

[0]

Hawk, we're talking about when the BDU ceases to be a military style uniform and we go over to the ABU's.  At that point the BDU's won't be a military uniform.  Just like the OD Green I mentioned earlier is no longer a military uniform.

[RiverAux]

Well based on the past I highly doubt the BDU will be the new corporate uniform.  When the military switched from the OD Green to the current BDU's we're wearing now we phased into these as well.  And if you look the OD Green isn't our alternative.  I'm fairly confident that the BBDU will still be the standard Corporate Field Uniform.

Keep in mind that we didn't have a distinct corporate field uniform when that last switch was made...

[0]

Well based on the past I highly doubt the BDU will be the new corporate uniform.  When the military switched from the OD Green to the current BDU's we're wearing now we phased into these as well.  And if you look the OD Green isn't our alternative.  I'm fairly confident that the BBDU will still be the standard Corporate Field Uniform.

Keep in mind that we didn't have a distinct corporate field uniform when that last switch was made...

I wasn't around at that time.

[Hawk200]

Hawk, we're talking about when the BDU ceases to be a military style uniform and we go over to the ABU's.  At that point the BDU's won't be a military uniform.  Just like the OD Green I mentioned earlier is no longer a military uniform.

Not sure what you're even addressing, so I would appreciate some clarity. I was addressing a post that proposes eliminating the military uniforms from CAP. It is a constant continuing thing that keeps coming up. A proposition that I personally have serious disagreement with.

[0]

Hawk, we're talking about when the BDU ceases to be a military style uniform and we go over to the ABU's.  At that point the BDU's won't be a military uniform.  Just like the OD Green I mentioned earlier is no longer a military uniform.

Not sure what you're even addressing, so I would appreciate some clarity. I was addressing a post that proposes eliminating the military uniforms from CAP. It is a constant continuing thing that keeps coming up. A proposition that I personally have serious disagreement with.

Don't worry about them eliminating military style uniforms.  It always comes up as a discussion but it will never happen. 

[Hawk200]

Don't worry about them eliminating military style uniforms.  It always comes up as a discussion but it will never happen. 

I know, I just wish people would stop suggesting monumentally outlandish concepts.

Not to mention, there are far more people creating an issue of "non-uniformity" when there isn't one. Thousands (possibly hundreds of) of people have been working together in Civil Air Patrol wearing different styles of uniforms and have been doing just fine.

Even in the military, there is no across-the-board uniformity on any given day. In the Army for example,on any given day, you can see medical whites, CVC suits, flightsuits, Class B's, Class A's, ABDU's, A²CU's, BDU's, maybe even a Dress Blue, or possibly an old wool cold weather field uniform(it is still in the reg). Army personnel don't seem to be in an uproar over the variety, why should CAP members be so hung up on it?

I do think there really isn't a place for two completely separate corporate uniforms. What purpose does it serve? And it discriminated against those with facial hair. The Air Force uniforms require a certain reasonable standard to wear, and I would imagine that most intelligent people would understand it. But some don't seem to. They seem hung up on forcing everyone into the same mold.

It used to be that if you met certain requirements, you could wear Air Force uniforms. If you didn't, you had another option that still showed you belonged to the organization. Now, you have to consult a matrix to determine what you're allowed to wear. Am I the only person that thinks this is stupid?

[0]

There's no real matrix to consult it's simple.  If you don't meet the CAP weight standard you wear an alternative uniform.  If you want to be a fuzzy you wear an alternative. 

[davedove]

There's no real matrix to consult it's simple.  If you don't meet the CAP weight standard you wear an alternative uniform.  If you want to be a fuzzy you wear an alternative. 

The new corporate uniform falls outside this simple rule.  To wear it, you can be fat, but not fuzzy.

[0]

True, I forgot that one.  Been so long since I put it on.  I've been rocking the grey and whites or the cap utility. 

[Dragoon]

Not to mention, there are far more people creating an issue of "non-uniformity" when there isn't one. Thousands (possibly hundreds of) of people have been working together in Civil Air Patrol wearing different styles of uniforms and have been doing just fine. 

Ahh the old "if it's not broke, don't fix it" argument. We sure hear that a lot in CAP.

There is, of course, a counterpoint, while we may have been "doing just fine" is it possible that we can do better?

Sure, not all change is good.  But to dismiss change out of hand leads to stagnation and "the way we've always done things" attitude.  Not exactly the spirit of innovation that breeds corporate success.

Even in the military, there is no across-the-board uniformity on any given day. In the Army for example,on any given day, you can see medical whites, CVC suits, flightsuits, Class B's, Class A's, ABDU's, A²CU's, BDU's, maybe even a Dress Blue, or possibly an old wool cold weather field uniform(it is still in the reg). Army personnel don't seem to be in an uproar over the variety, why should CAP members be so hung up on it?

Speaking as a soldier, we are hung up on it!  You won't see all the uniforms you mention above in the same unit on the same day.  If a bunch of guys are in the same unit and doing the same job, they'll be in the same uniform. 

90% of the time, everyone is in ACUs, unless their duty requires specialized clothes (like flight suits or medical whites.  Pretty much the only people still wearing BDUs are recently activated reservist - and they stand out like a sore thumb.

Minor variations (like tie or no tie with Class Bs) are up to the individual.  But it's nowhere near the fashion show on display at a typical CAP squadron meeting or mission base.

I think there is a value to uniformity, as it helps "brand" your organization in the public eye.  I believe it would increase public recognition of CAP which could result in more cooperation, higher recruitement and perhaps even new missions.  If you look like a professional team, people assume you are one.  Many businesses feel the same way. 

You don't have to dress alike to get a good public image - but it sure can help.

[Hawk200]

Not to mention, there are far more people creating an issue of "non-uniformity" when there isn't one. Thousands (possibly hundreds of) of people have been working together in Civil Air Patrol wearing different styles of uniforms and have been doing just fine. 

Ahh the old "if it's not broke, don't fix it" argument. We sure hear that a lot in CAP.

There is, of course, a counterpoint, while we may have been "doing just fine" is it possible that we can do better?

Sure, not all change is good.  But to dismiss change out of hand leads to stagnation and "the way we've always done things" attitude.  Not exactly the spirit of innovation that breeds corporate success.

Show where the "not broke" is impeding or keeping us from our duties. I doubt you can. Any member not being allowed to do their job because they're in a different uniform is not the one at fault. If you're the one doing that to them, you are wrong.

There is little reason to force everyone into the same mold. There is talk about discrimination against people not meeting height/weight to wear the AF uniforms. But when Pineda did it, no one seems to have a problem with it. How about addressing both sides of that issue?

Additionally, eliminating AF uniforms is suicide for our organization. What do you think the Air Force is going to say if you get rid of their uniforms for corporates? They might decide they don't need to support us anymore either. Right now, there is no other program like the CAP cadet program. Take away the AF support, you lose them too. And those cadets don't seem to have a problem with some seniors wearing an alternate.

It would be hard to claim that we have Air Force ties without AF uniforms when you don't dress like them. That would seriously ruin credibility.

And it's not really dismissing change out of hand, it's dismissing flights of fancy. They serve no purpose. Try working on the smaller things that can get changed. That's where professionalism lies.

[Dragoon]

   Any member not being allowed to do their job because they're in a different uniform is not the one at fault. If you're the one doing that to them, you are wrong.

Where the heck did you come to the conclusion that I, or anyone, was not allowing members to do their jobs because of a uniform?  Did someone actually say that somewhere?

But now that you mention it, it is in the regs.  39-1, page 7, note 1.   A commander may enforce uniformity.  Few do, but if they do, they aren't "wrong."

To allow people to wear whatever they want negates the the major value of having uniforms at all - the whole "uniform" part.  (you know, looking like members of the same team).

There is little reason to force everyone into the same mold. There is talk about discrimination against people not meeting height/weight to wear the AF uniforms. But when Pineda did it, no one seems to have a problem with it. How about addressing both sides of that issue?

The mold needs to fit all.  But there can still be a mold.  The Air Force does it.  Most police forces and fire departments do it.  Athletic teams do it.  Many schools do it.  Heck, UPS and McDonalds do it.

Simply put, if you dress alike, you build team cohesion AND build a corporate brand that can pay big dividends in the public affairs/cooperation/getting help from other agencies world.

There are many ways to get to a more uniform appearance. It's a goal worth working towards, if the goal is a better CAP.

[Hawk200]

Where the heck did you come to the conclusion that I, or anyone, was not allowing members to do their jobs because of a uniform?  Did someone actually say that somewhere?

No. It's simple logic, and I'll explain. You asked this:

There is, of course, a counterpoint, while we may have been "doing just fine" is it possible that we can do better?

That leaves me with the impression that if changing to a single uniform would allow us to perform "better", then something seriously wrong is going on now.  What would changing the uniform to a single one accomplish, unless something is wrong now? If nothing is wrong, there is no need for change for the sake of change. If change doesn't improve something, then isn't needed.

But now that you mention it, it is in the regs.  39-1, page 7, note 1.   A commander may enforce uniformity.  Few do, but if they do, they aren't "wrong."

If the commander wants me to wear a golf shirt, he can buy me one. And a pair of pants to go with it, since I have nothing that fits the manual. I have blues from ten years ago that are still compliant with the manual. You would have me ditch them. Not to mention, you would take away the priviledge of wearing military badges and decorations that I have also earned in the last eighteen years.

To allow people to wear whatever they want negates the the major value of having uniforms at all - the whole "uniform" part.  (you know, looking like members of the same team).

I guess you forgot about that uniform manual. If you're not wearing something in accordance with it, you're not uniform. If you wear it the way it's specified, then you are.

The way you're looking at it, is that unless everyone is wearing blues, then there is no uniformity. It's a fallacy. The manual establishes uniformity.

Merriam-Websters definition of uniform:

: dress of a distinctive design or fashion worn by members of a particular group and serving as a means of identification; broadly : distinctive or characteristic clothing

That's the most appropriate definition. Seems to fit what we wearing at present.

The mold needs to fit all.  But there can still be a mold.  The Air Force does it.  Most police forces and fire departments do it.  Athletic teams do it.  Many schools do it.  Heck, UPS and McDonalds do it.

You want to eliminate standards, and talk about a mold? Think about it first. You should see it.

There are many ways to get to a more uniform appearance. It's a goal worth working towards, if the goal is a better CAP.

You keep saying this, but you have yet to quantify the so-called improvements. Lay them out, don't just allude to them. You're not presenting how the improvements will occur. What are they? What time period will have to pass in order for the improvement to be seen? How does it improve our operations with everyone wearing the same thing? Who makes the sacrifices? There will be some. What are the downsides? There will be downsides too.

BTW, for the sake of uniformity, which one would you choose? The way you're arguing there can only be one single uniform to achieve your goal. Which one is it?

[Dragoon]

  We'll split these up one at a time, to keep the theads short.

Where the heck did you come to the conclusion that I, or anyone, was not allowing members to do their jobs because of a uniform?  Did someone actually say that somewhere?

No. It's simple logic, and I'll explain. You asked this:

There is, of course, a counterpoint, while we may have been "doing just fine" is it possible that we can do better?

That leaves me with the impression that if changing to a single uniform would allow us to perform "better", then something seriously wrong is going on now.  What would changing the uniform to a single one accomplish, unless something is wrong now? If nothing is wrong, there is no need for change for the sake of change. If change doesn't improve something, then isn't needed.

Big flaw - room for improvement does not mean things are "seriously wrong."  Nothing's wrong with getting B's in school, but you can still shoot for A's.

[Hawk200]

We'll split these up one at a time, to keep the theads short.

That'll work.

Where the heck did you come to the conclusion that I, or anyone, was not allowing members to do their jobs because of a uniform?  Did someone actually say that somewhere?

No. It's simple logic, and I'll explain. You asked this:

There is, of course, a counterpoint, while we may have been "doing just fine" is it possible that we can do better?

That leaves me with the impression that if changing to a single uniform would allow us to perform "better", then something seriously wrong is going on now.  What would changing the uniform to a single one accomplish, unless something is wrong now? If nothing is wrong, there is no need for change for the sake of change. If change doesn't improve something, then isn't needed.

Big flaw - room for improvement does not mean things are "seriously wrong."  Nothing's wrong with getting B's in school, but you can still shoot for A's.

All right, so how are we getting B's right now, and how will changing the uniform get us those A's? You keep saying that going to a single uniform will improve use. How? In what manner will a single uniform concept make us better? Can you answer that question with a quantified answer?

If you can't, then there isn't a problem. "I just think it will make us better" is not a legitimate answer.

[ddelaney103]

We'll split these up one at a time, to keep the theads short.

That'll work.

Where the heck did you come to the conclusion that I, or anyone, was not allowing members to do their jobs because of a uniform?  Did someone actually say that somewhere?

No. It's simple logic, and I'll explain. You asked this:

There is, of course, a counterpoint, while we may have been "doing just fine" is it possible that we can do better?

That leaves me with the impression that if changing to a single uniform would allow us to perform "better", then something seriously wrong is going on now.  What would changing the uniform to a single one accomplish, unless something is wrong now? If nothing is wrong, there is no need for change for the sake of change. If change doesn't improve something, then isn't needed.

Big flaw - room for improvement does not mean things are "seriously wrong."  Nothing's wrong with getting B's in school, but you can still shoot for A's.

All right, so how are we getting B's right now, and how will changing the uniform get us those A's? You keep saying that going to a single uniform will improve use. How? In what manner will a single uniform concept make us better? Can you answer that question with a quantified answer?

If you can't, then there isn't a problem. "I just think it will make us better" is not a legitimate answer.

I'm sure Dragoon will answer this tomorrow, but for tonight, "I'm your huckleberry."

First, you are entirely too literal with his metaphors - he was trying to point out that there is always room for improvement, not handing out grades to CAP.

Now, it will be very difficult to hang numbers off of things that are intangibles, such as morale and performance.  However, I will try to lay out the assumptions and see where they take us.

In my old sqdn, we were working on ways to improve the team.  One of the ways to improve units is through raising morale and making the unit something they wanted to be part of.  We decided that we wanted to work on "unit branding."  No, this didn't involve hot irons on the BBQ grill, but establishing the sqdn through both images and actions.

One of the first things we did was create a patch, the "turtle with a Lewis Gun."  We used it for lots of things: the web site, off-duty polo shirts, etc.  But it's primary purpose was to ID members of the sqdn in uniform.  The problem was, which uniform?

CAP has a problem being recognized.  Part of this is due to the fact that there are so many uniforms we don't look, well, uniform.  There are different uniforms based on duty, fatness, and fuzziness.  Members also have varied and limited resources, so we want them to save their money for important things, such as ES gear, flying hours, and beer.  So we decided there would be only one required uniform for members of the sqdn, and they even get a choice.

The choices were the BBDU's, the utility jumpsuit, and the CAP blue aramid flightsuit.  We did this for a few reasons:

- We wanted to be a mission oriented sqdn.  While you can get away with business attire or formalwear for dinners and such, you need a working uniform for missions.

- This was a set of uniforms everyone could wear: big or little, fuzzy or smooth.  Any AF uniform wouldn't be for everyone.

- All of these uniforms look similar enough that the people wearing them looked like they were supposed to be together.

- All of the uniforms could have the "turtle and Lewis Gun" patch.  The members knew what sqdn they were from - and soon, so did the rest of the wing.

This worked amazingly well.  We were noted for both our ability to get the job done and the image we cut when we showed up at mission base.  Passive peer pressure got some people "into the blue" even though they wore nothing but golf shirts or civvies up until then.

We still have other uniforms - members wear golf shirts for casual flying, AF dress for dressy affairs and BDU's for the CP types when they work with Cadets.  But we enforce (though it really enforces itself) uniform discipline for meetings and ES events.  More buy in makes people more interested in the mission - after all, you don't want to be left behind when the sqdn van pulls out of the parking lot.

Can this be done in CAP?  Obviously, but it runs against the current custom which tends to go "if it's in 39-1, I can wear it."  The blue work uniforms have the aura of "second class suits," what you wear when you can't wear the real uniform.  The uniforms and the patches don't make them better members directly, but they are good ways to build esprit de corps.  And it is that team spirit that will drag a guy or gal out of bed at "0 dark thirty" and run a mission.

Our uniforms are a tool: not as directly applicable as aircraft or DF gear to our missions but, with a little work, it can be as useful.  CAP, unfortunately, does not take advantage of this possibility by developing a "uniform" uniform policy.

And that's what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown.