Restructure CAP ranks: change "SM without grade" members into "Senior Airmen"

Started by supertigerCH, October 24, 2018, 08:27:46 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

N6RVT

As it stands SMWOG is a 6 month temporary position out of which appointment to officer grade is essentially guaranteed.

I still think the FO grades should not be limited to a 3 year age range.  Let every senior member start out as an FO

If you want a better sounding title for a new member - we already have it.

CAP9907

Quote from: Dwight Dutton on October 25, 2018, 02:27:05 PM


I still think the FO grades should not be limited to a 3 year age range.  Let every senior member start out as an FO

If you want a better sounding title for a new member - we already have it.

I cant disagree with this... it actually makes good sense to me
21 yrs of service

Our Members Code of Conduct can be found here:   http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=13.0

THRAWN

Quote from: Dwight Dutton on October 25, 2018, 02:27:05 PM
As it stands SMWOG is a 6 month temporary position out of which appointment to officer grade is essentially guaranteed.

I still think the FO grades should not be limited to a 3 year age range.  Let every senior member start out as an FO

If you want a better sounding title for a new member - we already have it.

Super idea, and it would have worked well if it hadn't been for those pesky NCOs.

According to 35-3, FO grades outrank NCOs. If a member decides to go the NCO path of rainbows and unicorns, he is essentially getting demoted to do so.
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

PHall

Quote from: Dwight Dutton on October 25, 2018, 02:27:05 PM
As it stands SMWOG is a 6 month temporary position out of which appointment to officer grade is essentially guaranteed.

I still think the FO grades should not be limited to a 3 year age range.  Let every senior member start out as an FO

If you want a better sounding title for a new member - we already have it.

SMWOG is NOT a temporary position. You can join and be a member for 50 years and still be a SMWOG if that is your wish.
Promotions to higher grade are not mandatory. We don't have an "Up or Out" policy in CAP like the "real military" has.

Eclipse

Quote from: PHall on October 25, 2018, 03:54:28 PM
SWWOG is NOT a temporary position. You can join and be a member for 50 years and still be a SMWOG if that is your wish.
Promotions to higher grade are not mandatory. We don't have an "Up or Out" policy in CAP like the "real military" has.

Humorously, you can be a unit commander, or for that matter even a Wing or National CC, as a Senior Member,
but not wearing E-9 stripes.

It's not workable in a volunteer paradigm where the majority of the institutional knowledge lives in
the older members with inconsistent, and sometimes nonexistent development, but an "up or out" policy
would at least allow for people to see a natural end.

I've said this before - spend 10 years in the military or a corporate job and separate and it's a "success",
leave CAP after 10 years and you're a "quitter".

Frankly, for most members, that 25-year mark is probably where the cut off should be for everybody.

"That Others May Zoom"

Luis R. Ramos

PHall, your last post,  :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

I agree there is no need to change Senior Member. I have never, ever met anyone that when told about Senior Member equates that with being old or above 60. And I have been a Senior Member for about 20 years!

Squadron Safety Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer

SarDragon

Again, SMWOG is an invention, a nonentity having NO official basis. You will not find "SMWOG" in any CAP publication. Anywhere.

Sent using Tapatalk

Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

NovemberWhiskey

There are "adult individuals without grade" referred to in CAPM 39-1 for example. Is there some fine distinction between "adult individuals" and "senior members" you're trying to draw out?

SarDragon

Quote from: NovemberWhiskey on October 25, 2018, 05:17:38 PM
There are "adult individuals without grade" referred to in CAPM 39-1 for example. Is there some fine distinction between "adult individuals" and "senior members" you're trying to draw out?
I am trying to point out the uselessness of SMWOG in any discussion.

I did, in fact, come across "adult individuals ...' in my search for SMWOG and its expansion. It appears to be becoming the favored term.

Sent using Tapatalk

Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

Mitchell 1969

Quote from: SarDragon on October 25, 2018, 05:25:11 PM
Quote from: NovemberWhiskey on October 25, 2018, 05:17:38 PM
There are "adult individuals without grade" referred to in CAPM 39-1 for example. Is there some fine distinction between "adult individuals" and "senior members" you're trying to draw out?
I am trying to point out the uselessness of SMWOG in any discussion.

I did, in fact, come across "adult individuals ...' in my search for SMWOG and its expansion. It appears to be becoming the favored term.

Sent using Tapatalk

Except "adult individuals" describes anyone who is an adult, whether in CAP or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.

SarDragon

Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on October 25, 2018, 06:14:40 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on October 25, 2018, 05:25:11 PM
Quote from: NovemberWhiskey on October 25, 2018, 05:17:38 PM
There are "adult individuals without grade" referred to in CAPM 39-1 for example. Is there some fine distinction between "adult individuals" and "senior members" you're trying to draw out?
I am trying to point out the uselessness of SMWOG in any discussion.

I did, in fact, come across "adult individuals ...' in my search for SMWOG and its expansion. It appears to be becoming the favored term.

Sent using Tapatalk

Except "adult individuals" describes anyone who is an adult, whether in CAP or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[emoji23]

Sent using Tapatalk

Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

FW

After reading this very intellectual thread, I've come to the conclusion we must copyright the term "SMOWG", and incorporate this as the initial grade in CAP.  I would have enjoyed being addressed as SMOWG Weiss, back in the day! :o ;D >:D

Live2Learn

Quote from: PHall on October 24, 2018, 08:35:44 PM
What's wrong with just Senior Member?  Senior Airman is an actual grade in the Air Force and we don't want any confusion, right?

+1

Also, it's very clear that many SM don't really put much weight on the "officer" title.  While some of our members are motivated by prospects of LOOKING like a person who is in the military (complete with uniform and 'rank'), other very productive, very supportive, adult members view it differently.

Luis R. Ramos

I think a lot of members at some time misunderstood the phrase "Senior Member without grade" and started using it that way thinking it was the intention of NHQ. Mistakenly. For the first ten years of my CAP service I was reading on CAP manuals references to "senior members without grade" but never ever heard anyone referring to "SMWOG." It was only about five to eight years that I ever found people literally using the phrase.

"It is in CAPM 39-1." So is Captain bars. So when are we going to read this rank is not "Captain" but "Captain Bars?"

"It is in CAPM 39-1." So is Major's rank. So when are we going to read this rank is not "Major" but "Major Rank?"
Squadron Safety Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer

supertigerCH

Quote from: PHall on October 25, 2018, 03:54:28 PM

SMWOG is NOT a temporary position. You can join and be a member for 50 years and still be a SMWOG if that is your wish.
Promotions to higher grade are not mandatory. We don't have an "Up or Out" policy in CAP like the "real military" has.


Yes to this PHall. 

Well said.  I guess this is the issue that lead to my starting this thread! (and suggesting a possible solution... although certainly there might be other ways to address it... that are even better than my idea).

supertigerCH

Quote from: Dwight Dutton on October 25, 2018, 02:27:05 PM

I still think the FO grades should not be limited to a 3 year age range.  Let every senior member start out as an FO

If you want a better sounding title for a new member - we already have it.


I agree very much with what you're saying here.

As a matter of fact, maybe that is an even better solution than the one I originally suggested (which was all members joining CAP as Senior Airman).

As you are pointing out here... an even better answer is right before our eyes... and it would not require creating any new ranks that don't existJust make slight amendment to the Flight Officer ranks that already exist!  Open them up wider than what they are now... & have all new members join as flight officers.

Then, similar to my original suggestion, those members interested in officer track (things like leadership & more professional development) can choose as soon as the time is right, to begin the process for promotion to 2LT.  Those members that are loyal hard workers... but have no interest in leadership positions/advancement... could remain flight officers (with perhaps promotion to Tech Flight Officer and Senior Flight Officer based on years of good service (10 years, 20 years?  or maybe based on something else?).

Cadets who turn 18... could (I assume) continue to become flight officers (with the usual age 21 for pursuing officer track).


This sounds like it could be an even better idea than the one I first posted.  Instead of creating something that is not currently part of CAP, just make slight adjustment to policy... on ranks that we already have (and it takes care of the situation of 2 types of members that I originally talked about -- leader/officer types... and those who just want to serve faithfully without focusing on advancement).

Sounds like an even better possible solution... than the one I first thought of.

Hawk200

Seems like there is a desire to classify the "non rank" of Senior Member Without Grade as some type of rank. Not really seeing any reason to do this.

What I can understand is wanting a better term for the people joining up that haven't yet earned a rank. Something better than "Senior Member Without Grade Smith." (Doesn't really roll off the tongue smoothly now, does it?)

Maybe a term like "Candidate?"

Personally, I wouldn't have an issue with someone new being addressed as "Airman" (and just "Airman," not "Senior Airman") although I suspect that could be confusing. But, it would probably be more fitting than anything else, and at least it would be a functional term of address.

Eclipse

The proper term for new adult members, up to them being promoted is...

"Senior Member".

While the term "Senior Member without grade" does appear in a few places,
it's really "Senior Member (without grade)".

"That Others May Zoom"

SarDragon

Hawk, I direct you to replies 18 and 27, with my explanation of the non-term  SMWOG.

Sent using Tapatalk

Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

Hawk200

Quote from: SarDragon on November 07, 2018, 02:21:21 AM
Hawk, I direct you to replies 18 and 27, with my explanation of the non-term  SMWOG.

Sent using Tapatalk
Saw those. I think the issue is that "Senior Member" seems awkward, and doesn't really describe a placement like "Lieutenant" or "Major" does. It's also a bit of a long winded term.

"Senior Member" can be confusing to outsiders. Most people have heard of lieutenants, captains, majors, or colonels; but "Senior Member" doesn't really say much. I think some folks would like to see a term that has some sense of meaning outside of CAP. What that might be is what is up in the air.