First Sergeant Diamonds

[MIKE]

Do we need to post CAPR 52-16 2-4. e. again, with emphasis?  There is no room for interpretation... the position is open to cadet SNCOs ONLY.

[lordmonar]

Do we need to post CAPR 52-16 2-4. e. again, with emphasis?  There is no room for interpretation... the position is open to cadet SNCOs ONLY.

Sorry Mike....but the regulation makes not sense.

You can appoint a C/TSgt to the position of C/Commander...but not to the position of C/First Sergeant?

[IceNine]

^Pretty much

[SarDragon]

Our Cadet commander is AWOL... okay not really but he has been gone due to summer schedule and visitation and such.  The other cadet Officer has been out ES officer up until when ever I can get back into the swing of things.  He is also the only SET we had so he is more often than not teaching something to someone.  So to the 1SG so that the Cadets are handling everything.  I see it as the 1SG responsibilities to ensure training as the Cadet Commander would deal with the running of the Cadet program. 

You know I see your point and I am going to have to ask the DCC how she wants everything to run.  I havent seen her for a while either between both of our schedules.

IMHO, the SET should be evaluating, not teaching. YMMV.

[ßτε]

IMHO, the SET should be evaluating, not teaching. YMMV.

I was thinking that, too.

[DC]

Our Cadet commander is AWOL... okay not really but he has been gone due to summer schedule and visitation and such.  The other cadet Officer has been out ES officer up until when ever I can get back into the swing of things.  He is also the only SET we had so he is more often than not teaching something to someone.  So to the 1SG so that the Cadets are handling everything.  I see it as the 1SG responsibilities to ensure training as the Cadet Commander would deal with the running of the Cadet program. 

You know I see your point and I am going to have to ask the DCC how she wants everything to run.  I havent seen her for a while either between both of our schedules.

IMHO, the SET should be evaluating, not teaching. YMMV.

But logically the SET would more experienced than the others, so to me it is logical that they teach. Ideally you would have enough people certified to have one group teach and one group evaluating, but this is not always the case.

[SJFedor]

Why not just get the C/TSgt to promote? Maybe convince the C/CMSgt to hold off on the Mitchell for a month or two, and train the C/TSgt into the position, then promote them both, and give the new C/MSgt the diamonds.

If, for whatever reason the C/TSgt cannot promote, them make them the Cadet Deputy Commander, and have them do the 1stSgt job.

Wait...you seriously want someone to hold off on progression in the cadet program, just so you can wait till the next person in line is a SNCO?

You should NEVER be encouraging a cadet to not progress in the program. Ever. Regardless of the circumstances.

All else fails, and the 1SG promotes to officer level, they can still function in the role of a 1SG, just minus the title. Call them an adjunctant or whatever you need to.

[Eclipse]

But logically the SET would more experienced than the others, so to me it is logical that they teach.

Except that if the SET is actually teaching things incorrectly, there is no check-and-balance to stop the perpetuation of an incorrect practice.

On the ES side, a lot of wings prohibit the instructor from being the SET as well.

Ideally you would have enough people certified to have one group teach and one group evaluating, but this is not always the case.

Ideally, yes, in real-world CAP, good luck, which makes the latter above generally a practical impossibility.   

[356cadet]

They're also used if the squadron is out of actual 1st Ranks. At least, that's what my squadron does.

[DC]

They're also used if the squadron is out of actual 1st Ranks. At least, that's what my squadron does.

How? Do you put the diamond next to their stripes?

[AvroArrow]

They're also used if the squadron is out of actual 1st Ranks. At least, that's what my squadron does.

How? Do you put the diamond next to their stripes?

According to Vanguard, you wear your grade on the left collar, and the diamond on the right.

[SarDragon]

Suuurrrre. Walk over, my friend, I've got a great deal on a bridge. 

Exactly how authoritative do you think Vanguard is with respect to uniform regs?

[DC]

They're also used if the squadron is out of actual 1st Ranks. At least, that's what my squadron does.

How? Do you put the diamond next to their stripes?

According to Vanguard, you wear your grade on the left collar, and the diamond on the right.

Think about that statement.

When did CAP's third party supplier supercede CAPM 39-1?

[lordmonar]

 

[SarDragon]

Well, well, well.

I decided to look at CAPM 39-1, and the Vanguard product description. It seems that Vanguard hasn't caught up with this ICL:

Cadet Enlisted Grade Insignia. Effective 10 July 2007, cadet enlisted members are now authorized to wear grade insignia on both collars or lapels of the Air Force service coat or light blue shirt. The CAP cutout will no longer be worn. Mandatory wear date for this change is 1 March 2008.

When the cadets were wearing grade insignia only on the right hand side, the Vanguard description was correct. Now the diamond, if authorized, would be worn on both sides. AvroArrow's interpretation was flawed.

And just for the record, nowhere am I advocating the diamond's use, since there are no longer occasions for its wear.

[Eclipse]

And just for the record, nowhere am I advocating the diamond's use, since there are no longer occasions for its wear.

?

If you're the First shirt, you wear the diamond.

What other "occasion" do you need?

[SarDragon]

RTFM, Bob. The discussion is about this item:



Since ONLY C/MSgt and above cadets may wear 1st Shirt insignia, this item has no place on the uniform.

   

[Eclipse]

Um, I don't think the discussion was about an actual diamond, but the wear of the insignia with the diamond.

Wearing just a diamond must predate me in the program.

[DC]

Um, I don't think the discussion was about an actual diamond, but the wear of the insignia with the diamond.

Wearing just a diamond must predate me in the program.

I think the idea is for cadets below the rank of C/MSgt to wear a seperate diamond above thier stripes, where it would be on C/MSgt and above. I have seen one of the diamonds in question, they are very small, and fit quite well in that position. However, the entire argument is moot. 52-16 doesn't leave the issue up for debate. It doesn't make much sense, but that's what it says...

[MIKE]

It makes a lot of sense... You're just used to grade being meaningless doodads which are not tied to position, authority or appropriate levels of responsibility.