CAP Talk

General Discussion => The Lobby => Topic started by: SARMedTech on April 22, 2008, 04:04:03 AM

Title: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 22, 2008, 04:04:03 AM
Many, including myself, have brought up things that the USCGAux does well that CAP doesnt, and vice versa.  Aside from CAP not being a full time military Auxiliary, I would like to hear a reasonable and calm discussion on what various members think one auxiliary does better than another, what training might be superior in one over the other, etc. Im not at all interested in a bashing session, just a comparison and a way to see how both auxiliaries might learn from each other.  Thanks.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: Major Carrales on April 22, 2008, 04:14:13 AM
Temper this discussion with the Knowledge that CAP and USCGAux have always been "different animals."  Most of their aircraft, for example, are privately owned.

I would suggest dual membership in coastal areas, although even I cannot afford that.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 22, 2008, 04:22:47 AM
Well, I was sort of predicating it on the fact that folks would operate under the knowledge that the CGAux is water based and that CAP is Air/Ground based.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: CadetProgramGuy on April 22, 2008, 04:24:02 AM
CGAux does hold a Land SAR course though.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: Slim on April 22, 2008, 05:02:29 AM
Here are a few things that I enjoyed about my time in the CG Aux, in no particular order.

By far, my best experiences were working with the AD people on operations.  SAR cases were always hit or miss, just depended on whether our facility and crew
had pulled orders and got underway.  Though there were a few times when the facility I crewed on was used as the primary SAR boat while the 41' was out on something else, and we did get a case or two.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: afgeo4 on April 22, 2008, 05:10:25 AM
Quote from: Slim on April 22, 2008, 05:02:29 AM
Here are a few things that I enjoyed about my time in the CG Aux, in no particular order.

  • CG SAR is a lot more proactive, being out on the water and establishing a presence.  It also tended (at least in my AOR) to cut down on a lot of shenanigans, the other boaters knew we were out there
  • The training was top-notch, and in most cases, the same as that used by the AD CG.
  • Not being treated like a leper by the gold-side.  They actually appreciated the fact that we were out there, multiplying the numbers.
  • Yeah, the exchange benefit was nice, but the closest CG exchange was about the size of a gas station, and located inside the Group (now Sector) Detroit building.  And, other than unit caps, sold no uniforms.  They would order them from UDC for you, or ship you out to the big AAFES MCSS at Selfridge ANGB, where we could only buy uniform items anyway.  But, it was nice to pop in and grab a pop or something like that.  I did visit CGEXes at two different Group offices (Grand Haven and Sault), that were similar in size to Detroit's.  CGAS Traverse City actually had a pretty decent sized exchange.

By far, my best experiences were working with the AD people on operations.  SAR cases were always hit or miss, just depended on whether our facility and crew
had pulled orders and got underway.  Though there were a few times when the facility I crewed on was used as the primary SAR boat while the 41' was out on something else, and we did get a case or two.

What are the costs of CG Aux like? I know you have to pay for the uniforms there too, but how much do they cost? How often are there changes? Is there a membership fee?

I know that CAP doesn't require any experience in flying for one to become a member. How is that in CGAux? Would it make sense for someone to join if they don't like boats much?
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: PA Guy on April 22, 2008, 08:26:27 AM
I augment 2-3 days a month in a CG clinic. The gold side has been very accepting. The biggest difference between Aux and CAP is the attitude of the gold side folks. For the most part they appreciate what we do and like Slim said you don't feel like a leper when you walk around the base. When I augment I wear the member shoulder boards and I don't eat in the wardroom or chief's mess of the galley. I also don't go to the O Club unless I've been invited. Remember, there is no rank in the Aux only the symbol of office. If that is important to you the Aux would not be a good fit for you.

The CG Exchange is no big deal. Most of them are fairly small and I only use it for sundries while I'm on base. I have never taken advantage of the MWR facilities. One nice thing is the ability to order uniforms on line from the CG uniform center.

The costs are about the same as CAP. The most you might get from the CG is mileage and per diem for attending a course although I sometimes get mileage and per diem for augmenting. The only dues are local flotilla dues, in my case $25/yr.

If you are looking for a "military" experience the Aux might not be for you.  There is no D&C and customs and courtesy instruction is minimal. Auxies seldom if ever salute each other but are expected to render courtesies to CG officers. The demographic of the Aux tends to be quite a bit older than CAP.

If you live away from the coast you better like Recreational Boating Safety because that is the bread and butter of the inland flotillas. Getting crew qualified takes awhile with a lot of hoops to jump through, much longer than CAP. The background checks take a long time. And if you need the in depth DO background get ready for a full blown check starting with the SF 86 and interviews with your neighbors. The SF 86 also includes a release allowing the govt. to look into any part of your life they choose including financial, medical etc.

As I said I have enjoyed my time with the Aux but CAP and the USCG Aux are two very different animals.

As always, YMMV.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 22, 2008, 09:46:05 AM
Quote from: afgeo4 on April 22, 2008, 05:10:25 AM
Quote from: Slim on April 22, 2008, 05:02:29 AM
Here are a few things that I enjoyed about my time in the CG Aux, in no particular order.

  • CG SAR is a lot more proactive, being out on the water and establishing a presence.  It also tended (at least in my AOR) to cut down on a lot of shenanigans, the other boaters knew we were out there
  • The training was top-notch, and in most cases, the same as that used by the AD CG.
  • Not being treated like a leper by the gold-side.  They actually appreciated the fact that we were out there, multiplying the numbers.
  • Yeah, the exchange benefit was nice, but the closest CG exchange was about the size of a gas station, and located inside the Group (now Sector) Detroit building.  And, other than unit caps, sold no uniforms.  They would order them from UDC for you, or ship you out to the big AAFES MCSS at Selfridge ANGB, where we could only buy uniform items anyway.  But, it was nice to pop in and grab a pop or something like that.  I did visit CGEXes at two different Group offices (Grand Haven and Sault), that were similar in size to Detroit's.  CGAS Traverse City actually had a pretty decent sized exchange.

By far, my best experiences were working with the AD people on operations.  SAR cases were always hit or miss, just depended on whether our facility and crew
had pulled orders and got underway.  Though there were a few times when the facility I crewed on was used as the primary SAR boat while the 41' was out on something else, and we did get a case or two.

What are the costs of CG Aux like? I know you have to pay for the uniforms there too, but how much do they cost? How often are there changes? Is there a membership fee?

I know that CAP doesn't require any experience in flying for one to become a member. How is that in CGAux? Would it make sense for someone to join if they don't like boats much?

You have a point. However, while all Auxies are taught boating basics, I know from my visit to the flotilla nearest me that there are plenty of positions which can be filled "ashore" for those who arent interested in becoming BCM's or whose physical condition does not allow them to endure the rigors of crewing a what can be rather large Auxie facilities (Auxie for boat). Also, there is much more a culture of participating as much or as little as you like or are able. I would say from my limited experience with CAP and from my even more limited experience with the Aux, there are far more options for the elderly to put on the "blazer combo" (the Aux equivalent of the golf shirt uniform) or to wear no uniform at all and still find ways to participate. I saw two men who appeared to be in their mid-70's wearing nothing identifying them as Auxies other than their lapel pins and was told that they are very active in administrative functions within the flotilla. Something else worth nothing is that the older culture of the Aux is changing as flotilla and other staff officers make an increased effort to recruit younger members. The friend who is trying to recruit me, who is also a team member in IMERT, let me know that his flotilla has a great number of new "up and comers" who are EMTs, ham radio operators, college students studying marine ecology, etc. Subsequently, there have been great improvements made to this flotilla's vessel to reflect the new types of missions they are taking on as new, younger and more gung-ho members join the ranks. I also noticed that there is a great sense of pride in the fact that Auxies wear insignia, badges, etc which are virtually identical to their gold side counter parts except for the fact that they may be silver instead of gold and have the tell-tale Auxie "A" on them somewhere. While I am not particularly concerned with blingage, having bling which is much more equivalent to the AD folks is a big moral booster and I think plays no small part in the excellent relations between the gold and silver sides. I wish I could be a two hatter in CAP and the Aux, but there will come a point where I will have to make a decision.

By the way, when I used the word "benefits" in the title of this thread, I was not referring to being able to shop at the BX. I meant rather to indicate the benefits of the overall culture of the organization. I'd like to thank those who have participated so far for keeping it civil and productive. Though I will not be able to be dual-hatted if I make the crossover, I know that there are lots who are and I appreciate their input.

I want to thank all those who have contributed to this thread so far for keeping it civil and on track and I look forward to even greater input as the days go by. Thanks to one and all.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RRLE on April 22, 2008, 09:51:47 AM
QuoteTo an extent I think you are right about the customs and courtesies being a little less formal at the flotilla level, ie during the meeting I attended, I did not see very many boat crew members saluting their commanding officer.

Auxies are not supposed to practice D&C among themselves. The following are quotes from the USCG Auxiliary Manual, aka AuxMan.

QuoteSaluting is not required between Auxiliarists. Saluting is proper courtesy for Auxiliarists when greeting commissioned officers of the Armed Forces (to include National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) uniformed officers, who serve with the Armed Forces).

QuoteThe hand salute is a long-established form of greeting and recognition exchanged between persons in the armed services. Saluting between Auxiliarists is not usually the custom.

One of the quickest ways to get labeled a wannabee in the Aux is to engage in saluting another Auxie or insist on being saluted by other Auxies.

Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 22, 2008, 10:04:15 AM
Quote from: RRLE on April 22, 2008, 09:51:47 AM
QuoteTo an extent I think you are right about the customs and courtesies being a little less formal at the flotilla level, ie during the meeting I attended, I did not see very many boat crew members saluting their commanding officer.

Auxies are not supposed to practice D&C among themselves. The following are quotes from the USCG Auxiliary Manual, aka AuxMan.

QuoteSaluting is not required between Auxiliarists. Saluting is proper courtesy for Auxiliarists when greeting commissioned officers of the Armed Forces (to include National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) uniformed officers, who serve with the Armed Forces).

QuoteThe hand salute is a long-established form of greeting and recognition exchanged between persons in the armed services. Saluting between Auxiliarists is not usually the custom.

One of the quickest ways to get labeled a wannabee in the Aux is to engage in saluting another Auxie or insist on being saluted by other Auxies.



I don't think its correct to say that Auxies are not supposed to exercise D/C with other Auxies. What I saw on my recent flotilla visit were BCMs and even coxswains saluting their flotilla commander and vice commander. Because AUXMAN, which I have recently been studying, says that it is not required between Auxies, does not mean that it is not done out of respect for one's superior FOs/FSOs. I havent met an Auxie yet who would "insist" on being saluted and I certainly don't think it is the mark of a wannabe to salute someone who is superior to yourself within the Aux. It is a sign of respect that, during the course of one meeting, I saw several Auxies participate in. My CAP sqdn has a former AD NCO and to be quite honest, it makes me a little uncomfortable to be saluted by him. In my mind, in a military/para-military auxiliary, it makes much more sense to salute someone with a superior rating that signifies in many cases years of hard work than it does to salute someone with more brass on his collar simply because he has it. While saluting is a sign of respect and though not required among Auxies, I do believe that it is appropriate and the meeting that I attended saw a lot of saluting because it was a promotions and awards ceremony.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RRLE on April 22, 2008, 11:20:17 AM
What you witnessed is very abnormal for the Aux and a violation of the clear rules.

This was previosuly quoted as being in the AuxMan - maybe it needs its own highlight.

QuoteSaluting between Auxiliarists is not usually the custom.

The AuxMan is Commandant Instruction (COMDTINST). If he states that saluting is not customary, then it is not customary - period - end of story - private motives and good intentions do not count. What you witnessed is a flotilla that is in clear violation of the Commandant's instruction by making saluting customary. Flotillas sometimes get a rogue leadership that goes 'off the reservation' when it comes to saluting and other military courtesies - but they get noticed sooner or later and the situation is corrected. One way they often get caught is they take their improper D&C to a wider forum (like a division or district meeting) and the higher-ups fix it.

The CG has always had a policy that the Aux is a civilian organization and it does not want the Aux to attempt by any backdoor means to become a para-military one.

A few years ago, the issue of saluting within the Aux became a hot topic on one of the Aux boards. A cross-over member of CAP tried to institute saluting within the Aux as a matter of national policy. That failed. He also got his flotilla to do what you witnessed - until he took his saluting 'off the reservation' and got called on it. During that debate in the Aux I wrote a research note (several pages long) on "Saluting Within The Aux".  It was posted on the web but was removed. I can repost it to my private web page if you care to read it. It shows that saluting within the Aux has never been the custom and should not be made customary.

And FWIW - Auxies do not practice drill or marching in formation either.

The thread so far has stressed Aux boat crew.

The Aux also has an air program - using private planes as someone mentioned.

The qualification levels are:

Air Observer - very minimal qualifications, earns a ribbon.
Air Crew - most of the non-flying pilot qualifications are required, a medical is required. Earns wings. I held this qualification (as well as coxswain)
Co-pilot - minimum pilot qualification - rarely used and rarely gets missions. Pretty much restricted to logistics flights
First Pilot - medium qualifications.
Aircraft Commander - requires IFR rating.

The pilot ratings are mainly based on 2 factors - license (VFR/IFR) and time as pilot-in-command. Experience as PIC before joining the Aux counts. There has also been a move within the Aux to move away from a 'take anyone who applies for the program' to becoming much more selective in terms of accepting candidate observers, air crew and pilot candidates and aircraft. In some districts it would be hard to join the air program as a pilot if you were not capable of being an aircraft commander, for example.

Above Aircraft Commander are the optional qualifications of Instructor Pilot and Flight Examiner (usually both are held at once).


The air program in the Aux is very district and then air station dependent. The 7th District (Fl, GA, SC, VI, PR) is probably the most active. Some districts have no air program to speak of.

The Aux also has a radio program. However, from what I have read of CAP comms - the CAP program is light-years ahead of the Aux program -  in terms of qualifications, equipment provided and nets. However, Auxies can augment at CG stations as watchstanders - it is a fairly common way for Auxies to augment at CG stations. An Auxie must be able to meet and pass the CG PQS (Personal Qualification Standard) - just as the Coasties do.



Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: mikeylikey on April 22, 2008, 01:01:09 PM
Yikes......the whole "don't salute because it's not customary", just turned me off of the Coast Guard Auxiliary. 

To actually think someone would get reamed out for throwing a salute is just plain ridiculous. 

Wow.....

Your AUX regs says "not customary", it did not say forbidden.  There is a difference.  IF they wanted it forbidden, they would have written forbidden!
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: isuhawkeye on April 22, 2008, 01:11:56 PM
Saluting is simply not a part of their culture
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: afgeo4 on April 22, 2008, 02:11:11 PM
I'm confused. They want to look as military as possible (as close to a/d USCG as can be), but act as civilian as possible? That may be why they don't attract many people. It sends a dual message that says "we're fakers!" even though that's not really the case.

Think of how that looks to a civilian... they don't know you're not the real Coast Guard... or the Navy for that matter when you're  in black/whites. You wear the grade insignia of an Ensign and you're not saluting someone who's wearing the grade insignia of a Commander? I'd have a negative impression.

I think the custom of not saluting is proper for an organization that doesn't wear military uniforms.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: JayT on April 22, 2008, 02:33:18 PM
Quote from: afgeo4 on April 22, 2008, 02:11:11 PM
I'm confused. They want to look as military as possible (as close to a/d USCG as can be), but act as civilian as possible? That may be why they don't attract many people. It sends a dual message that says "we're fakers!" even though that's not really the case.

Think of how that looks to a civilian... they don't know you're not the real Coast Guard... or the Navy for that matter when you're  in black/whites. You wear the grade insignia of an Ensign and you're not saluting someone who's wearing the grade insignia of a Commander? I'd have a negative impression.

I think the custom of not saluting is proper for an organization that doesn't wear military uniforms.

I disagree, even through I do find it odd.

Honestly, how often do you see CAP Senior Members exchanging salutes? Where does it say we're required to salute?

I don't think that would put members of the public off. Does Johnny Q know what an Ensign insignia is? Or a lite or full Commander?

Infact, the opposite could be true. A lot of the pilots and boaters I know are pretty independent types.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: MIKE on April 22, 2008, 02:45:00 PM
No offense to my fellow Auxies, but from what I've seen... a lot couldn't pass for "military" despite the similarities of the uniform.

Someone asked about dues.  My CAP dues are around $55 a year, while my Aux dues are still under $30 a year.  Like with CAP, your dues may vary.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: sandman on April 22, 2008, 05:27:03 PM
Quote from: mikeylikey on April 22, 2008, 01:01:09 PM
Yikes......the whole "don't salute because it's not customary", just turned me off of the Coast Guard Auxiliary. 

To actually think someone would get reamed out for throwing a salute is just plain ridiculous. 

Wow.....

Your AUX regs says "not customary", it did not say forbidden.  There is a difference.  IF they wanted it forbidden, they would have written forbidden!

Just to let you know, we do salute often. Sector San Diego and others encourage it! Many members are former military and continue the custom in CGAUX uniform. You will not receive a bad label for saluting and in fact may increase the patriotism of your unit.

That said, there are some people that will cast an odd look at you. Those people are from some backwater flotilla who have no members with any military service, have irregular contact with division or higher or the gold side, and are comfortable with just being another "yacht club"

I encourage you to reconsider joining! Take time to look at several flotillas near you (if you have that option). You could be just the person they are looking for to initiate that patriotic spark!

/r

LT
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: JoeTomasone on April 22, 2008, 10:41:02 PM
Quote from: JThemann on April 22, 2008, 02:33:18 PM
Honestly, how often do you see CAP Senior Members exchanging salutes? Where does it say we're required to salute?


CAPP 151, Section 2b:

b. Saluting. It is a courtesy exchanged between members of
the Civil Air Patrol when in military-style uniform as both a
greeting and a symbol of mutual respect. As such, it is never
inappropriate to salute another individual. The basic rules
regarding saluting for CAP members are:
(1) You salute when in military-style uniform.
(2) You salute the President of the United States, all
Medal of Honor recipients, and commissioned officers and
warrant officers of the Armed Forces who are senior in rank to
you.
(3) You do not salute when indoors unless you are
formally reporting to an officer senior in rank to you.
(4) You salute when outdoors unless:
(a) You are carrying articles (or a heavy object) in
both hands, which cannot be transferred to the left hand, or
another legitimate reason such as injury, and so forth. In this
case, an oral greeting should be exchanged, such as "Good
Morning, Sir or Ma'am." If you are the lower ranking individual
and the one you are approaching is higher in rank but
whose arms are incapacitated, you will still salute.
(b) You are in a designated "covered" or "no salute"
area, (aircraft marshalling areas and flightlines are "no salute"
areas).
(c) You are a member of a military formation or a
work detail (only the senior member of the formation or detail
salutes).
(d) You are attending a public gathering such as a
sports event.
(5) When on a military installation, you salute officers in
government cars if the car has a flag or metal standard that
identifies the rank of the occupant (usually general officers
and military wing or base commanders).
(6) Military personnel are not required to render a salute
to CAP personnel, but they are not restricted from doing so if
they desire.


Now, b(2) is a little misleading since it states that you salute AD officers superior in rank to you, but not CAP Officers.   However, since the parent paragraph states "It is a courtesy exchanged between members of
the Civil Air Patrol when in military-style uniform as both a greeting and a symbol of mutual respect.", then the omission isn't much of a problem to me.   I sent a question to the KB and they mucked the answer up while not answering the question.

The AD officers I've saluted have seemed pleased to see it done (which hopefully doesn't mean that many CAP members do NOT salute them), and I've even been saluted by AD airmen, which I appreciated (but obviously have no right to expect).   I definitely agree with the sentence that states that it is a sign of respect and therefore never inappropriate, and therefore can't fathom what the CG Aux is thinking by requiring NO saluting.   I have my own personal rule - I originate salutes to Spaatz cadets to show them that I respect and honor their achievement.   It catches them off guard, but when I remind them that as soon as they turn Senior that they'll outrank me anyway, it's not as awkward.

Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 22, 2008, 10:53:02 PM
CG Aux does not have any land SAR training or mission as someone mentioned earlier. 

Advantages to being a CG Aux member vs CAP --
1.  If you are near a CG unit and are interested, you can probably find an opportunity to work directly with the CG in some form or fashion and have a real impact on helping them perform their mission, or at a minimum improve morale by giving some Coastie a shift off while you do their job.
2.  More actual programs in which you can participate whether on water or land.  As noted, they all revolve around boating safety, but there is actually much more that a CG Auxie can do.  Lots of things that you can do as an individual compared to CAP which is pretty much all done as a team.
3.  Because of the wide variety of programs and opportunities for individual work you can really plan out your CG Aux activity pretty well.  A lot of certainity about when you'll be doing stuff. 
4.  Pilots in coastal areas will get way, way, way more free flying time with CG Aux than CAP since they do regular patrols. 
5.  The AF lawyers aren't involved in CG Aux!


Advantages of CAP over CG Aux:
1.  CAP is monumentally more involved in disaster relief missions.
2.  CAP is much more hooked into the local community (for the most part) and you're not tied down to just supporting the AF.
3.  I think the opportunity to work to develop kids into leaders is a net plus for CAP membership.
4.  I think CAP missions are generally more challenging than CG Aux missions.  While CG Aux occassionally does have multi-boat events (even some really big ones), they're not all that complex and are usually geared towards non-emergency situations.

Overall costs are about the same between CAP and CG Aux for most members. 
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: isuhawkeye on April 22, 2008, 11:19:23 PM
really,

Essentially you are correct the coast guard aux does not have an operational ground component, but then there is this

http://www.acc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-060606-010.pdf (http://www.acc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-060606-010.pdf)

Otherwise great assessment


Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: Eclipse on April 22, 2008, 11:40:45 PM
Quote from: JThemann on April 22, 2008, 02:33:18 PM
Honestly, how often do you see CAP Senior Members exchanging salutes? Where does it say we're required to salute?

All the time, on a regular basis, when in uniform, and even when in civvies if you know the person is a commander or high-grade.  I would suggest you review CAPP 151(e).

As to this repeated comment above about CAP's relationship with the USAF, and this notion that there is disdain for us, I would put forth that the vast majority of CAP members never encounter a member of the USAF, or even a member of another MC$, and the majority of the whole "USAF doesn't like us" is urban legend sustained by hearsay and half-truths.

I have never personally met a member of the USAF, or any other service who showed anything but respect and appreciation for our service.  My offices are on a very active military base, and I encounter officers and enlisted personnel on a regular basis.  In all cases I am treated as a peer with real work to do and a real mission.

YMMV, but based mostly on the specific of the situation, not an overall issue.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: FlyingTerp on April 22, 2008, 11:53:29 PM
Quote"USAF doesn't like us" is urban legend sustained by hearsay and half-truths.

Couldn't agree more!  Thanks for posting that!
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 22, 2008, 11:57:06 PM
That is the CG that teaches that school.  Has nothing to do with any CG Aux mission or capability.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RRLE on April 23, 2008, 12:06:27 AM
QuoteEssentially you are correct the coast guard aux does not have an operational ground component, but then there is this...

The Auxiliary isn't mentioned in that announcement, CAP is.  ;D

The Aux SAR course was changed this year to another course AuxSCE (http://coastguardauxiliaryfc61.org/AUXSAR.htm). That course is based on another CG course. From the description the course is all water SAR focused.

Even Aux land mobile radio facilities are water focused since most of the land mobile facilities carry VHF Marine radios and usually nothing else but a cell phone.

QuoteThose people are from some backwater flotilla who have no members with any military service

An interesting and incorrect generalization. In my old flotilla and on public bulletin boards some of the biggest opponents of a 'more military' or paramilitary Auxiliary are prior service Auxies. They have a BTDT and don't want to do it again! attitude. Meanwhile, some of the biggest proponents of a 'more military' Auxiliary are non-service members many of whom could not serve or did not serve when they were the proper age - and hope to make up for that missing aspect by changing the civilian Auxiliary into something it is not and was never meant to be.

Quote1.  CAP is monumentally more involved in disaster relief missions.

And that is a big sticking point with some Auxies. The Aux NACO is on record in the Proceedings of the USNI as stating the Aux is not a first responder agency. If emergency response is your game, then CAP, ARES/RACES, ARC and a host of other organizations would be a better fit then the Aux.

Quotetherefore can't fathom what the CG Aux is thinking by requiring NO saluting

First it isn't the Aux - the 'not customary' rule is in the AuxMan, a Commandant Instruction, and therefore a CG not an Aux imposed rule.

Second, the CG, going back to the Aux's founding in 1939, has always tried to preserve the civilian nature of the Aux. For the first two years of its existence the Aux did not have and was not allowed to wear uniforms or insignia other then a member device.

Although, many Auxies love to talk about the relationship with the CG (see the tenor of the posts here) the CG wants to make sure that the Aux never loses its ties to the recreational boater. And letting the Aux become more paramilitary does just that. To listen to some Auxies talk or read what they write you would think the prime mission of the Aux is to augment the CG. However, if you read what the CG writes about the Aux its prime mission is recreational boating safety (RBS) and the Aux has been falling down on that mission for years as its rushes pell mell to augment with the CG.

And there is some indication that while opportunities do exist to augment with the CG, those opportunities will become increasingly hard to come by and harder to fulfill as the CG tightens the requirements.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: sandman on April 23, 2008, 12:55:57 AM
Quote from: RRLE on April 23, 2008, 12:06:27 AM

QuoteThose people are from some backwater flotilla who have no members with any military service

An interesting and incorrect generalization. In my old flotilla and on public bulletin boards some of the biggest opponents of a 'more military' or paramilitary Auxiliary are prior service Auxies. They have a BTDT and don't want to do it again! attitude. Meanwhile, some of the biggest proponents of a 'more military' Auxiliary are non-service members many of whom could not serve or did not serve when they were the proper age - and hope to make up for that missing aspect by changing the civilian Auxiliary into something it is not and was never meant to be.

I'll agree to your correction to a point in that I have seen evidence to the fact that we are both correct having been a member in other districts.

/r

LT
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 23, 2008, 01:13:59 AM
QuoteAnd there is some indication that while opportunities do exist to augment with the CG, those opportunities will become increasingly hard to come by and harder to fulfill as the CG tightens the requirements.
Nah, you're talking about some of the marine enviornmental protection gigs, very few of which were bringing in Auxies in the first place.  Not a major factor.  Most CG Aux augmentation is done in more "generalist" positions such as radio watch at CG stations and a few other venues. 

We were asked to discuss the benefits of both organizations and no matter how you cut it, the CG has and apparently will continue to have much more use of Auxies than the AF will have for CAP into the future. 

No one ever said it was the primary purpose of the Aux, but it is one area of major difference between CAP and CG Aux.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: JayT on April 23, 2008, 02:36:44 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on April 22, 2008, 11:40:45 PM
Quote from: JThemann on April 22, 2008, 02:33:18 PM
Honestly, how often do you see CAP Senior Members exchanging salutes? Where does it say we're required to salute?

All the time, on a regular basis, when in uniform, and even when in civvies if you know the person is a commander or high-grade.  I would suggest you review CAPP 151(e).

Right.

Are you sure it's CAPP? Or is it a CAPR or CAPM?
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: Gunner C on April 23, 2008, 03:28:28 AM
I've been on exercises with the Auxies.  They've impressed me on the operator side - they were helpful and professional.  On the planning side, they needed some help.  Good folks all around.  In my wing, we had a really good relationship with them.

GC
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 23, 2008, 04:01:27 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on April 22, 2008, 10:53:02 PM
CG Aux does not have any land SAR training or mission as someone mentioned earlier. 

Advantages to being a CG Aux member vs CAP --
1.  If you are near a CG unit and are interested, you can probably find an opportunity to work directly with the CG in some form or fashion and have a real impact on helping them perform their mission, or at a minimum improve morale by giving some Coastie a shift off while you do their job.
2.  More actual programs in which you can participate whether on water or land.  As noted, they all revolve around boating safety, but there is actually much more that a CG Auxie can do.  Lots of things that you can do as an individual compared to CAP which is pretty much all done as a team.
3.  Because of the wide variety of programs and opportunities for individual work you can really plan out your CG Aux activity pretty well.  A lot of certainity about when you'll be doing stuff. 
4.  Pilots in coastal areas will get way, way, way more free flying time with CG Aux than CAP since they do regular patrols. 
5.  The AF lawyers aren't involved in CG Aux!


Advantages of CAP over CG Aux:
1.  CAP is monumentally more involved in disaster relief missions.
2.  CAP is much more hooked into the local community (for the most part) and you're not tied down to just supporting the AF.
3.  I think the opportunity to work to develop kids into leaders is a net plus for CAP membership.
4.  I think CAP missions are generally more challenging than CG Aux missions.  While CG Aux occassionally does have multi-boat events (even some really big ones), they're not all that complex and are usually geared towards non-emergency situations.

Overall costs are about the same between CAP and CG Aux for most members. 

I'm not sure where you get that the USCGAux completes less complex and more non-emergent missions. If I recall, you are an Auxie as well, but I would encourage you to read the accounts of the numerous missions undertaken by Auxie crews each year which lead to the saving of lives. As for multi-element missions which are not complex and are gear toward non-emergencies, I recall a thread on this forum where cadets were directing parking and performing "security"duties at an air show. Also, how many SAR missions performed by CAP are non-emergent ELT hunts?

I disagree with the cost issue. I have spent most of the day talking to a flotilla commander and my annual dues would be $45. In addition, one can join the Aux with nothing much more than a set of the now AD defunct working blues, which are still authorized for Auxies until all stores of them become unfit for service wear. Also, of one is a member of a boat crew, its not necessary to spend enormous amounts of time and money on the perfect 24-pack, 72-pack, untold uniform varieties, etc. USCG approved, and often provided, PFD's are provided to members at no cost to themselves. And, unlike CAP, the Auxie has more choice as to where he can purchase uniform and equipment items. Once an Auxie has completed BCM training, he is ready to begin patrols with the Aux and all he needs is a set of blues, a PFD and a set of deck shoes, athletic shoes or boots depending on what the facility commander determines he/she wants worn on the deck of their vessel.

By comparing the whole cadet issue, you are comparing apples to oranges in terms of the stated missions of the respective organizations. The mission of the USCGAUX is not to prepare young men and women for military service in which they may or may not engage. It is purely and simply to act as a unarmed force multiplier in all respects for the USCG. Commandant Allen estimates that the Aux saves the CG hundred of thousands of man hours and millions of dollars each year.

I'm surprised to hear you state that CAP is much more tied to the community and less reliant on the Air Force than the Aux is on the USCG.  Active Auxies see the ties to the CG as a good thing. Regulations are more clear, since in large part Auxies are governed by the same regulations as gold-siders.  As for a visible presence in the community, well, I question that as well. I had the good fortune to travel to the Northeast Coast recently and found at most marinas, harbors, etc, there was a Auxie presence. They are there to assist the boating community. Also, if you think about it, CAP primarily supports the aviation community. How many people fly planes in the United States and how many people have boats that they use on a regular basis. Its also just a matter of how the two services work that in most cases, CAP ES shows up after the disaster has happened, while because they conduct regular patrols, the Aux is there to save lives, not retrieve bodies, as it were. Furthermore, CAP hunts ELTs and the Aux hunts EPIRBS.

And in terms of being a true force multiplier, there are approximately 39,000 men and women in the CG Gold Side. That number is virtually matched by the Aux. Auxiliarists serve functions from environmental hazard monitoring, to vessel (commercial and private) inspections with gold side boarding crews (unarmed) and a far greater number of HS related activities than CAP, since they fall under the direct jurisdiction of the DHS ( a fact well- known to any Auxie who has tried to become cleared to augment on a cutter or air station.)

The fact is that by being all Aux, all the time, the USCGAUX is able to be much more efficient in many ways because they dont have the constant argument of what missions fall under whose jurisdiction. And as far as disaster relief, check out the number of Auxies who participated in Katrina/Rita relief efforts. This may be one of the reasons that Adm. Allen has authorized a new award for the Auxiliary: The USCG Auxiliary Medal of Valor.

Also, since Gunner C writes that "On the planning side, they [USCGAUX] needs help, I would encourage him  to look at the mandatory requirements for ICS education and at the Aux's IC training program.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 23, 2008, 04:16:23 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on April 23, 2008, 01:13:59 AM
QuoteAnd there is some indication that while opportunities do exist to augment with the CG, those opportunities will become increasingly hard to come by and harder to fulfill as the CG tightens the requirements.
Nah, you're talking about some of the marine enviornmental protection gigs, very few of which were bringing in Auxies in the first place.  Not a major factor.  Most CG Aux augmentation is done in more "generalist" positions such as radio watch at CG stations and a few other venues. 

We were asked to discuss the benefits of both organizations and no matter how you cut it, the CG has and apparently will continue to have much more use of Auxies than the AF will have for CAP into the future. 

No one ever said it was the primary purpose of the Aux, but it is one area of major difference between CAP and CG Aux.

I would disagree also with you statement that amost Aux augmentation is in a generalist role. First of all, standing radio watch on a cutter or in an air station is not all that general. Secondly, if you think that the Aux only augments in a general way, read the qualifications for and responsibilities of those who have completed the USCGAUX Trident Marine Safety Program. When you have Auxies boarding container vessels and inspecting ships manifests, I, personally dont think of that as generalist. Auxies may have no LE powers or participate in missions where weapons are carried (at least they dont participate with the boarding party in those missions, they may participate in other aspects of the job) but they certainly are not being generalists when they board a 120' cargo ship with a team of Coasties to inspect safety and HS compliance matters. If you look at the AuxOps program or the Trident program, both are rigorous and difficult to complete and hardly generalist in nature.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: Gunner C on April 23, 2008, 04:18:02 AM
Quote from: SARMedTech on April 23, 2008, 04:01:27 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on April 22, 2008, 10:53:02 PM


Also, since Gunner C writes that "On the planning side, they [USCGAUX] needs help, I would encourage him  to look at the mandatory requirements for ICS education and at the Aux's IC training program.

I was speaking of combining air and ground SAR forces.  They said they didn't have much experience with that along with coordinating with State Police & Sheriffs Department.  They showed a great deal with their small boat ops and how to coordinate air/marine ops.  

GC
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 23, 2008, 04:25:58 AM
Quote from: Gunner C on April 23, 2008, 04:18:02 AM
Quote from: SARMedTech on April 23, 2008, 04:01:27 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on April 22, 2008, 10:53:02 PM


Also, since Gunner C writes that "On the planning side, they [USCGAUX] needs help, I would encourage him  to look at the mandatory requirements for ICS education and at the Aux's IC training program.

I was speaking of combining air and ground SAR forces.  They said they didn't have much experience with that along with coordinating with State Police & Sheriffs Department.  They showed a great deal with their small boat ops and how to coordinate air/marine ops. 

GC

Thanks for the clarification. I would bet dimes to donuts, however, that my friends who are in an Auxie unit that augment in the Port of Los Angeles have a fair amount of dealing with local entities. Of course, there is no question about the ground capabilities. I have been doing some very interesting reading about how the Aux is working to grow its AuxAir program and some of the amazing successes that they have had in terms of HS type missions with their regular overflights of certain areas.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: Eclipse on April 23, 2008, 04:40:17 AM
Quote from: JThemann on April 23, 2008, 02:36:44 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on April 22, 2008, 11:40:45 PM
Quote from: JThemann on April 22, 2008, 02:33:18 PM
Honestly, how often do you see CAP Senior Members exchanging salutes? Where does it say we're required to salute?

All the time, on a regular basis, when in uniform, and even when in civvies if you know the person is a commander or high-grade.  I would suggest you review CAPP 151(e).

Right.

Are you sure it's CAPP? Or is it a CAPR or CAPM?

Yes, its a pamphlet, heres a link: http://level2.cap.gov/documents/u_082503084356.pdf
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: isuhawkeye on April 23, 2008, 11:40:13 AM
I have often wondered how many "Distressed" SAR events each of the auxiliary's participate in, and which of the two is credited with saving more lives, and the $ spent per life saved
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: capchiro on April 23, 2008, 01:52:08 PM
In the old days, 1976-1980, (and maybe still, but I am displaced from the location) we used to fly sun down patrols in CAP in southeastern Florida.  Many times we would spot vessels in distress (out of fuel, broke down?) waving a towel at us and we would radio in the details.  I am sure that we made a difference in a lot of people's lives. but it was all in a day's work to us and we didn't file any "Find" ribbons or life saving requests.  We did this day in and day out in our group.  I thought everyone did.  Perhaps if we would have kept track we would have had as many if not more "saves" than the auxies??  It just wasn't a big deal.  Also, historically the CAP has worked very directly with the Air Force.  We (and I use that term collectively, naturally) used to tow targets for the Air Force to shoot at.  I think that qualifies as working directly for the Air Force??  I am sorry, but I will not consider the auxies to be our equivalent as far as scope, training, responsibility, etc.  It's just a different group and much more civilian oriented than we are.   JMHO after 30+ years.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 23, 2008, 03:02:46 PM
Quote from: capchiro on April 23, 2008, 01:52:08 PM
In the old days, 1976-1980, (and maybe still, but I am displaced from the location) we used to fly sun down patrols in CAP in southeastern Florida.  Many times we would spot vessels in distress (out of fuel, broke down?) waving a towel at us and we would radio in the details.  I am sure that we made a difference in a lot of people's lives. but it was all in a day's work to us and we didn't file any "Find" ribbons or life saving requests.  We did this day in and day out in our group.  I thought everyone did.  Perhaps if we would have kept track we would have had as many if not more "saves" than the auxies??  It just wasn't a big deal.  Also, historically the CAP has worked very directly with the Air Force.  We (and I use that term collectively, naturally) used to tow targets for the Air Force to shoot at.  I think that qualifies as working directly for the Air Force??  I am sorry, but I will not consider the auxies to be our equivalent as far as scope, training, responsibility, etc.  It's just a different group and much more civilian oriented than we are.   JMHO after 30+ years.

Col-

There is no question that CAP works very hard and closely with the USAF. I have never said otherwise. But we must set our way back machines to the symbolism of the "AuxON/AuxOFF" patches. While just a hunk of cloth meant as a tongue in cheek symbol of CAP's varied duty status, there is no denying that the USCGAUX works more for their parent service than CAP simply because they do not move without operational orders. An Auxie flotilla meandering down a narrow, muddy river is under operational orders to do so. They don't so exercises unless under orders from the gold side.

I'm not sure where all of this "they are much more civilian oriented" business comes from. Is it because they don't have ranks, but rather operational offices. Is it because they have spare bling when compared to CAP? Because their vessels are privately owned?  Well, when those vessels fly the colors of the USCG, they are considered technically and legally to be assets of the USCG.

I have written a lot in this thread about the differences and similarities between CAP and the Aux. But I'm not sure why you are getting do defensive. While they both peform missions to keep America safe, the two organizations are very different in their organization. Not only do they only receive their operational orders from teh CG, their are also governed by the DHS, as is the gold side CG.  This thread has become somewhat about CAPsters feeling like they have to defend CAP. I have a great love and respect for CAP. You don't have to defend it to me. But when you look at who administers the Aux, the fact that all members, regardless of fatness and fuzziness, are allowed to wear their parent service's uniform and that a vast majority of their training is EXACTLY the training that their gold side counterparts receive. Though it may be on a 22' cabin cruiser instead of a 41' fast boat, the Auxies are all taught the same basic seamanship as an incoming Coastie. And when was the last time that a CAP member boarded a cargo jet to check its manifest against its actual cargo. When qualified through the Trident program, Auxies board ships right along side gold siders. Auxies perform at least as many augmentation missions if not more. One of my college roomies is an Auxie and spends most weekends standing radio watch at a CG Station in Florida.

Again, I say, its not a competition. They are two seperate entities with two separate missions. This isnt a spitting match. The two exist for different reasons, are administered by different entities (the Aux being ENTIRELY governmental, all the time). Its just really not that big a deal. I dont believe that I have bashed CAP because of the respect I have for what we do. Im not sure why you feel the necessity to get up in arms when I simply asked for some comparisons in experience between CAP and the Aux. CAP has plenty of members who sign some letters "Semper Vigilans" and some "Semper Paratus."  There is no reason why CAP and the Aux cannot co-exist and even learn to be more interoperational. From the anecdotal evidence I have gained, the lack of interest in that regard comes from CAP and its officers and not the Aux.

As far as training goes...why dont you join the Aux, complete your Boat Crew quals, then complete your Coxswain quals and tests, then qualify for your AuxOps designations and then undergo the intense training required for the Trident MSP. Its all very rigorous and the scope of how they train and what they do is huge. And just as you reported distressed vessels during your sundown flights, who do you think stepped (or floated, as it were) in to handle those rescue ops. I even know of the history of Auxies being involved in the Mariel boat lift.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: afgeo4 on April 23, 2008, 03:27:30 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on April 22, 2008, 11:40:45 PM
Quote from: JThemann on April 22, 2008, 02:33:18 PM
Honestly, how often do you see CAP Senior Members exchanging salutes? Where does it say we're required to salute?

All the time, on a regular basis, when in uniform, and even when in civvies if you know the person is a commander or high-grade.  I would suggest you review CAPP 151(e).

As to this repeated comment above about CAP's relationship with the USAF, and this notion that there is disdain for us, I would put forth that the vast majority of CAP members never encounter a member of the USAF, or even a member of another MC$, and the majority of the whole "USAF doesn't like us" is urban legend sustained by hearsay and half-truths.

I have never personally met a member of the USAF, or any other service who showed anything but respect and appreciation for our service.  My offices are on a very active military base, and I encounter officers and enlisted personnel on a regular basis.  In all cases I am treated as a peer with real work to do and a real mission.

YMMV, but based mostly on the specific of the situation, not an overall issue.
I completely agree. When I was in the USAFR, I was stationed at McGuire AFB, NJ, a VERY busy base with 3 Flying Wings and 3 different airlift aircraft, and the Air Mobility Warfare School. Also co-located with Ft. Dix and Lakehurst NAES and near Picatinny Arsenal and Ft. Monmouth, so there was no shortage of military personnel on base at all. McGuire was also the home of HQ/NJWG and HQ/NER of CAP at the time and they had their own building, which was conveniently placed half way between the flightline and the BX, so I've seen it many times. At the time, I didn't know who CAP were or what they did, but I had seen their members and cadets eat at Falcon Hall (dining facility) and they acted extremely professional. I had no bad feelings for them AT ALL. Why would I? These people get up early to iron their uniforms, put them on and do work for my organization (maybe even work I'd have to do myself if they weren't there) and they do it for free while I get paid for it? I always felt proud that kids were interested in the Air Force enough... felt like this was the next generation of Airmen growing up.

I don't know of anyone at McGuire who felt otherwise and doubt anyone else in the USAF does either. Well... maybe xcept for some budget hungry Generals.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 23, 2008, 08:53:01 PM
QuoteI'm not sure where you get that the USCGAux completes less complex and more non-emergent missions.
They are less complex because the operational "missions" generally consist of a single resource (a boat and crew).  Every now and again this boatcrew might be paired up with an aviation resource during a mission, but that is usually as complex as the emergency missions get.  Compare to CAP where our standard missing airplane search mission or mid-size SAREX usually has 5-15 aircrews, several ground teams, a mission base staff with a total personnel roster of 50-100. 

I did allow for large-scale Aux missions but I am correct in that almost all of those are non-emergency based missions such as providing "security" during waterborne fireworks shows, regattas, etc.  The Aux will sometimes be a part of even larger scale missions, but the Aux almost never runs them. 

QuoteBy comparing the whole cadet issue, you are comparing apples to oranges in terms of the stated missions of the respective organizations. The mission of the USCGAUX is not to prepare young men and women for military service in which they may or may not engage.
Well, duh.  Thats what I said.  Remember the point of this thread is comparing the two organizations and I accurately did that. 

QuoteI'm surprised to hear you state that CAP is much more tied to the community and less reliant on the Air Force than the Aux is on the USCG.
Easy to answer -- the majority of CAP Wings receive direct funding from the state and many squadrons receive direct funding from local sources.  CG Aux gets no state funding.  Also, there are quite a few hoops to jump through for the CG Aux to provide any sorts of support to local agencies.  Heck, you have to obtain specific permission from the CG to even talk to another government agency. 

QuoteAlso, since Gunner C writes that "On the planning side, they [USCGAUX] needs help, I would encourage him  to look at the mandatory requirements for ICS education and at the Aux's IC training program.
Although the CG Aux is slightly ahead of CAP in requiring ICS  100/200/700/800, CAP has decades more experience in operating in a multi-agency, large scale mission environment.  As noted above, the CG Aux just doesn't do the same sorts of missions and all the ICS stuff is mostly theory.  With CAP, it is a lot of new terms for what we've already been doing with a few twists thrown in. 

QuoteI would disagree also with you statement that amost Aux augmentation is in a generalist role.
I am very familiar with CG Aux augmentation programs.  The specific marine safety jobs that were referenced are not widely available. By "generalist" I meant that CG Auxies have the opportunity to do almost any job in the CG and that if you look hard enough, you will probably find an Auxie doing almost everything.  They may not do all things in all places, but some things everywhere. 

QuoteI have been doing some very interesting reading about how the Aux is working to grow its AuxAir program and some of the amazing successes that they have had in terms of HS type missions with their regular overflights of certain areas.
In some areas they have put severe limitations on new people coming into Aux Air due to cost concerns.  This is a shrinking program, not a growing one. 

QuoteI have often wondered how many "Distressed" SAR events each of the auxiliary's participate in, and which of the two is credited with saving more lives, and the $ spent per life saved
Last year CG Aux saved almost twice as many people as CAP in distress situations.  Non-emergency assists were in the thousands.  No real way to compare costs since most CG Aux costs are carried in regular budgets of local CG units. 
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RRLE on April 23, 2008, 10:40:18 PM
Quotethe USCGAUX is able to be much more efficient in many ways because they dont have the constant argument of what missions fall under whose jurisdiction.

Instead the Aux has constant arguements over whether or not a mission or activity is 'military or direct law enforcement' - both of which the Aux is barred from.  That arguement then almost always leads to a discussion of the illegal blue lighters.

QuoteBut when you look at who administers the Aux, the fact that all members, regardless of fatness and fuzziness, are allowed to wear their parent service's uniform

Like many things in CAP and the Aux there is the regulations and then there is reality. And this issue is a sore point in the Aux but not as much as it appears in CAP. In fact, both organizations appear to have the same official policy regarding the gravity challenged and wearing the parent service (or reasonable facsimile thereto) uniform.

Aux official policy, as stated in the AuxMan 1.A.4.c. Weight Standards is:

QuoteAuxiliarists who wear the Auxiliary Uniform shall ensure that it fits properly and presents a trim, military appearance. The uniform should be tailored if an Auxiliarist loses or gains weight. Any Auxiliarist who has difficulty maintaining a properly fitted uniform, shall wear the Auxiliary Blue Blazer outfit as appropriate.

I think the above is pretty close to CAP policy. However, it is rarely, if ever enforced. And the reason it cannnot be enforced is a statement made by the CG Chief Director of Auxiliary (ChDirAux) at a National Conference (NACON) a few years ago. In addressing the national leadership he stated: "Discipline starts at the top." So whenever the National or lower leadership goes on some kick about proper uniform wear - the Bilge Mice quote the ChDirAux and then start posting pix on public forums of the National and District leadership who are having serious gravity challenges and do not meet the first requirement for wearing the uniform as stated in the AuxMan. That is usually enough to shut down the heirarchy for months (in one case the entire 2 year tour of a NACO (National Commodore).

FWIW - the general grooming standard is:

1.A.4.b. Grooming

QuoteAuxiliarists who desire to wear their hair, jewelry, or maintain a general appearance different from that described in Chapter 10 shall wear the Auxiliary Blue Blazer outfit instead of the Auxiliary Uniform. Waivers for any deviations from the grooming and appearance standards described in Chapter 10 must be submitted through the chain to the appropriate Director.

Here are the Chapter 10 standards:

10.C.3.n. Hair/Facial Hair

QuoteThe goal is for men's hair to be neat and clean, not touch the collar, and be away from the ears. Beards, sideburns, or mustaches if worn, shall be well groomed and neatly trimmed at all times in order not to present a ragged appearance. No portion of a mustache will extend below the lipline of the upper lip. Handlebar mustaches or other eccentric styles are not appropriate while in uniform. Full and partial beards, van dykes, and goatees are authorized. In uniform, patches and spotty clumps of facial hair are not considered beards and are not authorized. The bulk of the beard (distance that the mass of facial hair protrudes from the skin on the face) shall not exceed 1 inch. The length of individual hair shall be limited to 1½ inches. The wearing of beards and mustaches shall not interfere with the operation of oxygen masks, gas masks, or other safety/survival gear. As such, the wearing of beards and moustaches may be prohibited for those participating in certain operational missions as deemed necessary by the Director or a Coast Guard Commanding officer supervising that mission. For uniformity during public appearances as a distinctive element of the Auxiliary, personnel assigned to a Ceremonial Honor Guard shall be clean-shaven. Women's hair should not be below the collar or extend below the eyebrows when the hat is removed.

Look in almost any issue of the Aux National magazine, The Navigator or any district publication and you will find flagrant violations of the above. Why is it tolerated? See 'discipline starts at the top' above? Why are the pix published? Probably because some of the most active Auxies are also the least concerned with 'proper' uniform wear and/or grooming standards. And without them there are not pix, no stories and no Aux.

There was a time when the Aux fought over proper uniform wear on public bulletin boards, much as CAP does today. I think the difference is that most Auxies know that enforcing those rules is a waste of time and just ticks off some very active Auxies - so many adopted a 'live and let live' approach to the issue.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 23, 2008, 11:55:21 PM
The issue is that you can't really enforce a non-specific standard even if you wanted to.  A "trim, military appearance" can be in the eye of the beholder where as specific weight requirements are something that can be enforced if you want to make a point of it. 
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RRLE on April 24, 2008, 12:31:07 AM
QuoteA "trim, military appearance" can be in the eye of the beholder where as specific weight requirements are something that can be enforced if you want to make a point of it.

You are forgetting the line in the AuxMan that (paraphrased) states that if the AuxMan is slilent on an issue then the CG manuals rule. And the CG manuals define 'trim, military appearance' in the very specific language you seem to require. In fact, the CG is supposed to enforce the age-dependent height/weight standards on Auxie Augies - so far in most places they haven't. Nor does the CG enforce the grooming standards on the Auxie Augies at most stations.  However, unkept and unmilitary a lot of Auxie Augies are - they are still more valuable to the CG then to send them packing.

Even if we stuck with "trim, military appearance" you could have some border line cases - but the gravity challenged beer bellies that are prevalent in Auxie pubs certainly are over the line and out of any gray area. But someone has to do those missions, so the real rule is 'look the other way'.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: calguy on April 24, 2008, 01:49:29 AM
In Southern California, (San Diego, Long Beach, Orange County) CAP handles almost all E.P.I.R.B.s for the Coast Guard.  I bet our guys locate 100 or so a year down here.  I know they even put CAP members  on their boats and helicopters to search for EPIRBs out to sea that they were unable to locate.  They also share and use our repeater network when their primary repeaters have gone down.  I have even heard stories of CAP turning off ELTs and EPIRBs on their aircraft and boats.
Seems like CAP gets more bang for the buck!
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: mikeylikey on April 24, 2008, 01:54:34 AM
Why does the CG AUX even wear anything remotly similar to rank insignia?  Since they don't do the whole military thing......whats the purpose??
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 24, 2008, 02:03:09 AM
The only time Auxies have to meet a specific physical fitness standard is if it is attached to a CG job that an Auxie wants to do and that has nothing at all to do with height/weight requirements.  The vast majority of augmentation positions have no such requirement.

QuoteWhy does the CG AUX even wear anything remotly similar to rank insignia?  Since they don't do the whole military thing......whats the purpose??
Just because CAP salutes and uses military rank titles doesn't make CAP essentially any different than the CG Aux in terms of "who is more military".  Auxies wear uniforms because the Commandant of the CG wants them to. 
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 24, 2008, 02:32:34 AM
Incidentally, if you take a look at the CG's weight/physical fitness standards manual it very clearly states in multiple locations that it applies to
QuoteThis Manual clarifies weight and physical fitness policy for all Coast Guard military
personnel, officer and enlisted, active and reserve, and Public Health Service (PHS) officers detailed to the Coast Guard.

As stated before, Auxies may have to meet a physical fitness standard to do a particular job for the CG (and that requirement will be found in the PQS for that job) but there are absolutely no occassions that I'm aware of that require that they meet a weight requirement. 
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 24, 2008, 03:29:58 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on April 23, 2008, 11:55:21 PM
The issue is that you can't really enforce a non-specific standard even if you wanted to.  A "trim, military appearance" can be in the eye of the beholder where as specific weight requirements are something that can be enforced if you want to make a point of it. 

You took the words right out of my mouth.  There is a difference between looking presentable no matter how you weigh and not being allowed to wear a uniform if you are over a specific numerical weight. To me (and I have had some experience with Auxies over the last few years) this says that "ok, you may be overweight, but you can still carry out the mission we are assigning to you and therefore we think that you are worthy of wearing our uniform."  The CAP policies as they exist, IMHO, are just plain discriminatory. Due to an auto accident in 2004, I have had varying activity levels/abilities since then and subsequently have alternately lost and gained weight. It was made clear to me that I should maintain a set of AF-style uniforms and a set of corporates. As a result, I have a set of woodlands and a set of blues but have chosen just to stick with the corporate "blues" equivalent.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RRLE on April 24, 2008, 03:36:55 AM
QuoteWhy does the CG AUX even wear anything remotly similar to rank insignia?  Since they don't do the whole military thing......whats the purpose??

Good question to which there is no good answer.

To compound the insignia/title issue - the Aux for the most part does not use military titles. The ones they use that are similar to military titles do not correspond, for the most part to the insignia. The Aux did change some titles that will bring its office titles more in-line with Real Rank but there are still plenty of misfits. For example:

The top dogs in the Aux are Commodores not Admirals. And they are the only ones permitted to be addressed in writing or verbally with a title before their names (Commodore or COMO). Many of the 'more military' faction in the Aux affect using titles for Flotilla Commander (either Commander Jones or Flotilla Commander Jones) or Division Captian (Captain Smith or Division Captain Smith). Both are clearly wrong by the AuxMan. They are either addressed by their civilian titles Mr/Ms/Mrs/Miss Jones or by first name. It is improper to address anyone below the rank of Commodore with an Aux title before their name. But like saluting improperly, it is done in some places.

Other insignia/title mismatches:

Ensign looking insignia/Flotilla Staff Officer
LT jg looking insignia/Vice Flotilla Commander
LT looking insignia/Flotilla Commander

There have been proposals that run the gamut from dumping the insignia all together thru changing the insignia to something non-military.  There have been an equal number of proposals to change the officer titles. However, the last time a proposal was able to make it to the Commandant (about a decade ago) he didn't do anything. His rationale was that any change would probably anger as many members as it satisfied and the best course of action was to do nothing.




Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 24, 2008, 03:46:13 AM
Quote from: RRLE on April 24, 2008, 03:36:55 AM
QuoteWhy does the CG AUX even wear anything remotly similar to rank insignia?  Since they don't do the whole military thing......whats the purpose??

Good question to which there is no good answer.

To compound the insignia/title issue - the Aux for the most part does not use military titles. The ones they use that are similar to military titles do not correspond, for the most part to the insignia. The Aux did change some titles that will bring its office titles more in-line with Real Rank but there are still plenty of misfits. For example:

The top dogs in the Aux are Commodores not Admirals. And they are the only ones permitted to be addressed in writing or verbally with a title before their names (Commodore or COMO). Many of the 'more military' faction in the Aux affect using titles for Flotilla Commander (either Commander Jones or Flotilla Commander Jones) or Division Captian (Captain Smith or Division Captain Smith). Both are clearly wrong by the AuxMan. They are either addressed by their civilian titles Mr/Ms/Mrs/Miss Jones or by first name. It is improper to address anyone below the rank of Commodore with an Aux title before their name. But like saluting improperly, it is done in some places.

Other insignia/title mismatches:

Ensign looking insignia/Flotilla Staff Officer
LT jg looking insignia/Vice Flotilla Commander
LT looking insignia/Flotilla Commander

There have been proposals that run the gamut from dumping the insignia all together thru changing the insignia to something non-military.  There have been an equal number of proposals to change the officer titles. However, the last time a proposal was able to make it to the Commandant (about a decade ago) he didn't do anything. His rationale was that any change would probably anger as many members as it satisfied and the best course of action was to do nothing.


Well, at least the leadership decided it would be wisest not to do something which would anger and perhaps alienate its membership. Also, while saluting is not "customary" it is not forbidden, therefor it is likewise not a violation of any Aux regulation.

One thing that I like about what I have learned so far about the Aux is that it is far less concerned with matters of rank, bling, titles, etc and is more operationally concerned. Ive searched many official and unofficial Aux forums and find far more discussions about operational matters than I have about uniforms and rank. I have also been told by the members of my "local" flotilla that there is a movement afoot to eliminate anything rank related whatsoever and simply use the Aux insignia (the "shielded A."
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: Slim on April 24, 2008, 06:06:35 AM
So many posts, so little time.

On Saluting
Never did it in my AOR (D9C) unless we were boarding/leaving a cutter, or were outside during Colors.  We didn't salute each other at all, never used rank or titles, etc.  In fact, one of the first meetings I went to when I was joining, I'm walking in from the parking lot and spot a guy in winter dress blue with chickens on his collar.  I snuck inside, told everyone of an impending visitor from on high (remember, I had a CAP mindset where chickens=wing king, or someone really important).  They said "Oh good, Billy's here.  Haven't seen him in a while."  Billy was one of the rear commodores from the district and was from our flotilla.  Note:  another difference.  In the CG Aux, you're almost always assigned to a flotilla, regardless of how high your elected office is.  No transfers to division, region or district.

I did once run into the CO of CG STA St Clair Shores one night, after returning from a maritime security patrol (tall ships on the Detroit River).  My thought was "This guy's an active duty LT, he's new to the station, and I haven't met him yet."  When in doubt, whip it out.  LT Williams looked at me kinda shocked, and said "Don't scare me like that again."  We got a good chuckle out of it, and LT Williams rocked.

Augmenting
It's a tough choice now, looking back, to decide if boat crew or augmenting was what brought me into the CG Aux.  What planted the seed, and got me looking into it was a show I saw on Discovery channel called "Dangerous Seas: Inside the US Coast Guard."  I liked what I saw, and saw a lot of similarities with CAP, so I hopped on the net, did some research, and found the Aux. 

I thoroughly enjoyed my time augmenting, and eventually qualified as a watchstander at two different boat stations, Port Huron and St Clair Shores (busiest boat station in the CG).  I also did some general admin-type work in the OPCEN at Air Station Detroit, and was considering going for an in-port slot on the USCGC Bramble.  Wish I could have done more on her, but two things happened shortly after I started:  security checks (my credit got pretty hosed up during my marriage), and they announced that the ole girl was being decommissioned.

So, yeah, I'm among the legions who left because of that SF-86.  Though it was also having to choose between that and CAP due to time constraints, and CAP won.

But the guys were always great.  They respected the fact that I was there taking the load off of them, working for free, and sometimes doing the jobs they hated (like hosing down the boats 2-3 times a day when they'd get covered by fishflies, or mowing the lawn).  I never set out to take advantage, but someone always seemed to pay for a meal in the galley or messdeck for me, or chip in on something for me.  I always seemed to find a new station ballcap or t-shirt with my name on it.  Little things like that went a long way to show me that I was appreciated.

Weight Standards
It was never a big deal.  As long as your uniforms fit right, they didn't care.  I've been out of it for 5 years now, so that might have changed. 

The one coxswain I always crewed for was a great guy.  Retired firefighter, could drive a boat into a tempest, would take his boat out to the station for picnics/morale days so the guys and their families could go skiing or tubing.  He knew the AOR better than a lot of people did.  Newly assigned AD folks would take a ride with us to learn the trouble spots of the area.  However, he weighed well over 300 pounds (the reason he was retired was due to complicatons of Lyme disease).  He had to custom order uniforms from Lighthouse, and spend a small fortune on them.  But nobody ever cared about that, because they knew that he knew his stuff, and could do the job.

I'm no small guy either, and I never had a problem with improperly fitting uniforms, and never had a gold sider look down his nose at me.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 24, 2008, 07:00:47 AM
Well-said and written. In my short (so far) investigation of the Aux, I have found that the gold siders genuinely seem to have a respect and even fondness for Auxies. And you are definitely right that Coasties don't mind learning from Auxies when the situations calls for it.

As for the uniform business, the FC of the flotilla I am thinking of joining is a VERY big boy who also has his ODUs and Tropicals custom tailored. However, other than being worried that I may at some point end up pumping his chest while on an Op, he seems to me to be an amazing teacher, commander and Auxie in general. That was what prompted my comment earlier that in many ways the Aux seems more concerned with operational ability than with trying to ensure that every single Auxie looks like a 28-year-old rescue swimmer straight out of "A" school.

Thanks for the thoughtful post.

PS- does anyone know of a good Auxie forum. I have found a few that seem pretty "unofficial" that leave much to be desired.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RRLE on April 24, 2008, 12:23:23 PM
QuotePS- does anyone know of a good Auxie forum. I have found a few that seem pretty "unofficial" that leave much to be desired.

The last official Auxie forum, the Member Forum, was shut down about 7 years ago. The Grandees were not fond of the Bilge Mice pointing out their foibles, mistakes, errors and general ineptitude in public.

The longest lasting of the unofficial forums is the Auxie forum on military.com (http://forums.military.com/1/OpenTopic?q=Y&a=frm&s=78919038&f=7501922942). That is also probably the largest in terms of readers, lurkers and posters.

A relatively new Auxie board showed up on uscg.org (http://www.uscg.org/?uscg-forum=*http://www.uscg.org/forum/profile.aspx?f=2&m=443&p=497). Although that site has some of the trappings and style of official USCG sites, I don't know if it really is. That '.org' url is a bit suspicious.

There is an Auxie forum on VAJoe (http://www.vajoe.com/board/viewforum.php?id=41) but it gets little activity

Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 24, 2008, 03:37:26 PM
Folks who bemoan the un-military aspects of the CG Aux might want to consider that this is the way the CG wants things to be and despite all that stuff the Aux wears a uniform much closer to the CGs than CAP is to the AF despite the supposedly more "military' aspects of CAP. 

Perhaps CAP has headed down the wrong road in this regard....
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: JoeTomasone on April 24, 2008, 10:11:15 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on April 24, 2008, 03:37:26 PM
Folks who bemoan the un-military aspects of the CG Aux might want to consider that this is the way the CG wants things to be and despite all that stuff the Aux wears a uniform much closer to the CGs than CAP is to the AF despite the supposedly more "military' aspects of CAP. 

Perhaps CAP has headed down the wrong road in this regard....


There's a difference -- the cadet program.   CAP is supposed to be, in part, serving as a basic orientation to military life for those who are (or could become) military-minded.   As I see it, the more we permit both Cadets and Seniors to get away with non-adherence to uniform and customs and courtesies regulations and traditions, the more we fail in this regard.   I've been involved in volunteer organizations for a long time, and I can sum up my experience in this way: 

Those organizations that artificially or intentionally relax their standards tend to find that the best personnel leave or aren't attracted in the first place since the organization is substandard.   Those who maintain and enforce high standards scare away those who are possibly not the best candidates, but retain a core of dedicated and experienced individuals with a high esprit de corps.    I'd rather be in command of a smaller number of outstanding people than a bloated corps of those who range from outstanding to decidedly not.


I've said it before and I'll say it again - if you want a CAP with no military standards, where you don't have to render customs and courtesies and wear your uniform properly, than the Boy Scouts are more than willing to have you.   And I'm not saying this to demean the Scouts; it just may be that they are more your cup of tea.   

I see the CG Aux as something of a CAP for boating enthusiasts as opposed to pilots or SAR folks.   Certainly that's why my father joined up - he's been a boater since long before I was born.

Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 24, 2008, 10:55:22 PM
QuoteI see the CG Aux as something of a CAP for boating enthusiasts as opposed to pilots or SAR folks.   Certainly that's why my father joined up - he's been a boater since long before I was born.
I don't think that is accurate at all.    Keep in mind that the vast majority of CAP senior members are not pilots and do not participate in aircrew programs.  The same goes in the CG Aux -- very few own boats and participate in actually on-the-water boating programs. 
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: JoeTomasone on April 24, 2008, 11:10:55 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on April 24, 2008, 10:55:22 PM
QuoteI see the CG Aux as something of a CAP for boating enthusiasts as opposed to pilots or SAR folks.   Certainly that's why my father joined up - he's been a boater since long before I was born.
I don't think that is accurate at all.    Keep in mind that the vast majority of CAP senior members are not pilots and do not participate in aircrew programs.  The same goes in the CG Aux -- very few own boats and participate in actually on-the-water boating programs. 


Granted, but my point was more that aviation minded people would be better candidates for CAP and boating enthusiasts would possibly fit better in the CG Aux - not that all CAP members are pilots and all CG Aux members are boaters.

I'm not a pilot and I'm in CAP..   I disprove the premise myself.

Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RRLE on April 25, 2008, 03:05:48 AM
One aspect of CAP life that has the Aux beat 4 ways to Sunday is your openness regarding conducting meetings. There are and were Auxiess who used CAP as an example of how the Aux should run.

Specifically I am writing about the publication of agendas and action items before meetings and the publication of the minutes and reports after the meetings.

The Aux thru the late 1960s/early 1970s also operated in that fashion. Meeting agendas, especially proposals before the National board were published in the National magazine before the big annual meetings. That way if a lowly Bilge Mouse had an opinion on an issue he could address the 'chain' ahead of time. After the meeting the minutes and substantive extracts of reports were published in the national magazine.

Since the early 1970s no agendas have been published and no minutes of the National Board or ExComm of the Aux have been published. Auxies only find out about a policy recommendation after it has been approved by either the National Board (internal matters) or the Commandant (external matters).

The Bilge Mice have borrowed the expression "Mushroom Mangement" to describe that aspect of Aux leadership. For those that don't know, Mushroom Management is "keep them in the dark, feed them feces and expect them to produce".

OTOH, CAP has a very good reputation for operating in the open.

The funny thing is that I would expect it the other way. CAP being a private corporation could keep its records to itself. The Aux which is a volunteer public agency should be expected to operate fully in the open.

One bright light - I noticed that the CG Auxiliary Association Inc (the non-profit corp that helps fund the Aux) published its board meeting minutes in its ePublication. That is the first time in years that has occured. Maybe it is the start of a slow change to public accountability for the Aux.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 25, 2008, 12:11:07 PM
I wouldn't disagree with you that these things should be more widely publisized, but the fact is that CG Aux national-level meetings have much less impact on the members than CAP meetings do since any significant change in the CG Aux has to be approved by the CG.  The CAP NB, NEC, BoG however can be the final authority on a whole lot of matters. 
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 26, 2008, 01:34:58 PM
From the CG Aux 9WR newsletter....this is about as close to a "land" program as the Aux gets
QuoteMarine Safety Unit (MSU) Chicago is seeking Auxiliary members to assist with vehicle and bicycle patrols of the commercial waterfront in the Greater Chicago area. Special training is not required, although specific harbor safety training is expected to be offered within the next year. For both vehicle and bicycle patrols, Auxiliary members will be serving alongside active-duty Coast Guard personnel as an assistant. MSU already tasks their petty officers with making government-vehicle patrols on evenings and weekends. With the addition of Auxiliary volunteers, they can put two vehicles on the road at the same time to double the patrol area and provide a visible, immediate increase in their presence on the waterfront. The same will apply to bicycle patrols when the weather turns warmer. Since the minimum bicycle patrol is two members, the addition of Auxiliary volunteers will enable MSU to send out two patrols at once.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RRLE on April 27, 2008, 12:40:25 AM
You can forget about the Aux doing bike patrols. There is no written PQS for it and as soon as some Gold Sider realizes that the Aux will not be allowed to do them. It should only take the Aux and the CG about a decade to write the PQS for bike riding - that is less time then it took to re-write the PQS for diving (about 23 years) or paddlecraft (now banned, except by special district rules and you aren't covered by the liablity policy).
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 27, 2008, 02:11:32 AM
Quote from: RRLE on April 27, 2008, 12:40:25 AM
You can forget about the Aux doing bike patrols. There is no written PQS for it and as soon as some Gold Sider realizes that the Aux will not be allowed to do them. It should only take the Aux and the CG about a decade to write the PQS for bike riding - that is less time then it took to re-write the PQS for diving (about 23 years) or paddlecraft (now banned, except by special district rules and you aren't covered by the liablity policy).

First off, the CGAUX is in the process of re-creating a PQS for paddlecraft operator which should be operational this year if it isnt already. Secondly, there is already a PQS for dock and marina walkers, so I doubt that putting them on a bicycle should be much more difficult. If you have further interest in this qualification, you can see the 2005-2007 Training Strategies memo here: www.auxtdept.org/AuxTrainingStrategy.pdf (http://[url=http://www.auxtdept.org/AuxTrainingStrategy.pdf)

It also sounds like they are getting ready to eliminate the AUXOPS qual while beefing up the Trident Program. Its a shame because while there are not many AUXOPS in the flotillas in my area, there are far fewer Trident device wearers. It just takes too long, and requires to great an expense and potential amount of travel to the Auxie. You will also see that this memo puts forth that the Aux is planning (and in many cases has already implemented) eliminating Aux specific courses and having Auxies train using the same training materials, facilities and delivery systems as gold siders, ie...they are giving them the same training as Active Duty Coasties.  Now there is something CAP could learn from.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 27, 2008, 02:51:58 AM
Uh, they're revamping most of the AUXOP programs, so what makes you think they're going to eliminate the qualification?  If anything they are strengthening it. 
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 27, 2008, 04:41:46 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on April 27, 2008, 02:51:58 AM
Uh, they're revamping most of the AUXOP programs, so what makes you think they're going to eliminate the qualification?  If anything they are strengthening it. 

Well, if you read that Training Change Summary for which I posted the link, I read it to say that they would be awarding the AUXOPS device for only as long as current stores of it remained available and I thought I read in that same part of the Summary that they are re-considering its usefulness. Personally, other than the Coxswain program, I think AuxOps is the most valuable training in the Aux. I think one of the best things that could happen would be to merge the qualifications for AuxOps and Trident. I think the "M" or Marine Safety (Trident) programs are invaluable, but after speaking with the local flotilla commanders and reading some pretty in depth materials about the Trident trainings and quals, it can be pretty prohibitive in terms of the time, money and likely required travel of the average Auxie and I also think that Trident is probably not a program which appeals to older Auxies, because some of its requirements can, it would seem, be a little physically taxing and, even though I dont fall into the older Auxiliarist category, I would have to travel about three hours to go through the Trident programs container and commercial fishing vessel inspections qual requirements. Apparently, I misunderstood what I read about the AuxOPS, but as I say I think calling it AuxOPS and merging it with Trident and classifying it under the "M" school programs and then eliminating Trident as a free-standing qual would be more beneficial and it would be scene as a measure which could have the potential to qualify a great number of Auxies for augmentation duties, since that is what both AuxOps and Trident are intended to do.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SAR-EMT1 on April 27, 2008, 06:54:51 AM
Ok, here are my own personal thoughts, being as I am a dual hatter...


First off I want to say that I love the fact that CAP has rank and is set up to salute etc and I HATE that CAP isnt closer to the Air Force. (At least in my area)

I love that the CG Aux is tied into the AD side and that we can augment. I HATE that it is civilian minded. I want to see rank and saluting and whatnot.
(Then again I am totally military minded and would give my right arm for an AD commission) In a way i am a wannabe in every sense of the word.


I joined the CG Auxiliary expecting a paramilitary experience where I could augment and be treated as an >unpaid< Officer , I was sorely disappointed. However the fact is I am able to contribute and am doing so.

Moving on...

As far as the CG Aux goes...
I am a Division Staff Officer - think Group Staff-  and I wear the mark of an O-2 with that annoying "A"  centered on the shoulderboard
In my duties Ive met about everyone in my Division (IL South of I-74)
I am 23 years old. The majority tend to be at least 60 and up , as far as saluting or uniforms are concerned they couldnt care less, having both the time of age and a yacht club mentality.
Most in my Division are also overweight and many insist on mixing civilian clothing with Blues and it looks horrid. Everyone goes by first names, however they are quick to address any AD member by his full rank and title. (When an Aux, augments or even visits a CG station the "Office Identifier" (Rank) comes off our uniform entirely. Instead we wear a generic "Aux" lapel device (An anchor with a big "A" in the middle)


The CG program to allow EMTs and Medics to augment has been cancelled. I personally have no interest whatsoever in recreational boating. But as some said it is the bread and butter of any flotilla. Ive toughened up and am proceding. I currently put in roughly 5 hours a week in the RBS / MDV program. I am waiting for an opening to attend CG Comm training so that I might augment as a radio watchstander.

The problem with that is that the "local" CG station is over an hour and a half away (The flotilla is 15 minutes) and the current AD staff is not at all interested in what the Auxiliary can do. They have no need for augmentation. Also the Aux Air program in my area is being phased out entirely as there is not a recognized need for it.

The Auxiliary can attend training at several CG stations. These courses are called "C Schools" and basically work like condensed tech training for certain positions. To add to that Auxiliarists can COMPETE for openings in CG "A schools"
- full length tech training in any "non law enforcement" AD MOS/AFSC. While there everything is provided free of charge. However, this is usually limited to the retired and individually wealthy as you do NOT get a pay check during the course.
- Weeks long-
We also have access to the CG/Navy version of AFIADL and the full range of PME.

In the CGAux it is mandatory to recite the Pledge in uniform with your hand over your heart. This is something that has allways irked me.

The Aux do provide a very valuable service. In fact there are currently more Auxilliarists then AD/Res USCG Personnel. Yes they can use all benefits on a CG base (and some Navy bases) yes they can augment and without their help with recreational boaters i feel the CG and DHS would be in trouble and hurting for manhours/power.
The CG decides what we do and what we wear. Everything we do is "aux on, with orders in hand. In fact every one of our manuals/regs/pamphlets was written by an AD Officer.  We are utilized so much that Several Auxiliarists sit on the personal staff of the AD USCG Commandant. Every AD/Res Officer either has some Auxiliarists on the staff or has an asigned Aux Liasion.

All in all it is a good program. To my mind we function/are utilized as a civilian CG National Guard, although that isnt quite accurate.
---
I dont mean to sound harsh or insubordinate about either organization.  It is just that for someone who wasnt given an AD commission, I personally will always wish that both it and CAP were something they arent.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 27, 2008, 07:23:09 AM
SAR-EMT1-

My experience over the last few weeks has been different than what you are describing with the AUX.

I am sad to hear that they have eliminated the medical augmentation quals for EMTs/Medics. I know that it took an MOU from the Gold Side mission commander and was specific to that individual mission and no good after that, though I had heard that some who had the civilian/maritime rating of CGMPIC (Coast Guard Medical Person in Charge) had a little more latitude.

The flotilla I have been visiting has its meetings in a city administrative building. Now that the weather is warmer and the days longer, that flotilla has been charged, on the nights of their meetings, with bringing down the Colors outside the building since their meetings fall around the time for doing that. I have never seen anything but sharp salutes as the flag comes down and I know that the National Ensign saluted afloat, but like you, I mourn the lack of saluting those who are, if not higher in rank, at least higher in office, which I think would be a good mix of civilian and military C and C. It wouldn't require the changing of 'offices' to ranks or grades, but would definitely add the military snap that both you and I look for. Of course, Gold Side officers are saluted and it is a flotilla custom in this flotilla that the FC and VFC are saluted by the flotilla crew.

You are also correct that there is a wide variety of gold side opinions about the necessity and practicality (and possible safety and security) of silver side Auxies on augmentation duty. I know one fellow in the flotilla I hope to join augments as a watchstander at Cal Harbor quite often, and I have been told that this is more common in Coastal AORs than in rivers and inland waterways. I also have a friend who augments as a watchstander from his home, listening for distress beacons and mayday traffic.

One thing I can say is that I must admit to liking the salutes and military ranks and customs, I was told that these are few and far between in the Aux, so I was prepared for it. That being said, I don't think it would deter me. Also, you will find that the Coast Guard as a whole is a little more...informal...for lack of a better word. AD Coasties are known to use each others first names commonly so some of that is just the tradition of the parent service.  I think you may see some of this change as Admiral Allen takes a look at things and sees that it is beneficial to both gold and silver sides to bring the Aux more in line in terms of training, quals, classes,etc with the AD folks.  I think its great that Auxies can compete for A school slots. Does this mean you will be headed to AST school for the next rescue swimmer class?  ;)
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SAR-EMT1 on April 27, 2008, 07:52:34 AM
No, there was a Memo from ADM Allen awhile back forbidding the training/jobs that an auxiliarist can hold. Rescue Swimmer was one of them.
Reason being: Auxiliarists are not allowed to serve as crew on AD/Reserve Aircraft

However to a lesser extent there is a reg that does specifically forbid any auxiliarist from serving as a swimmer (even on an aux facility)

There were two college guys who joined same time as me only to quit a month later due to the above coming out.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: SARMedTech on April 27, 2008, 08:04:02 AM
Affirmative.  I have been told that any Auxie going into the water after a PIW is going to get raked when the whole incident is over. That's what boat hooks are for. Now that life rings are no longer mandatory that is.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 27, 2008, 12:56:41 PM
QuoteIn the CGAux it is mandatory to recite the Pledge in uniform with your hand over your heart. This is something that has allways irked me.
Its a naval tradition....

You will find that the interest the AD has in having Auxies augment can vary widely.  I know that in my area where regular crew augmentation has never happened to my knowledge, they were very open to it when approached on behalf of a member who wanted to do it. 
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: 2ltAlexD on April 25, 2009, 04:26:24 PM
I am an in processing member, but like the CG Aux some what better so far. I like the fact that we are openly welcomed on military instalations and can purchase from the Coast Guard online exchange. I also like that when we say we are in the CG Aux, people are like wow, but for CAP, when I say I'm in CAP, they are like, "Oh, isn't that a high school thing?" or "Oh, like boy scouts." Plus, CAP members are treated like crap when it comes to getting on most bases and we can not purchase from the online exchanges and only from the in store ones for uniform items or in government quarters. I also like that the regs for the CG Aux state that "When injured or become ill on an official CG Aux mition, auxiliarists will be treated to the same medical care as any other Coast Guard member." As for the CAP side, we are "Like any other civilian Medical care for emergencies on a space available basis and the military comes first." Oh, so they'll just let us suffer just because we're in CAP. It just seems that people especially active duty respect the CG Aux alot more.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: Spike on April 25, 2009, 04:41:56 PM
^ Wow.  There are AF regulations out there that go into more detail about medical care, and Federal benefits afforded to CAP members.

Consequently, CAP is in a "punishable" phase right now.  Older Army/AF Pubs allowed CAP members more on base privileges, but leadership screwed those benefits up for CAP.

I still tell people I am in the "Air Force Auxiliary", when they ask what CAP is.

Trust me, if it was between you or an AD Coast Guard member who presented with the same injuries, you would be taken second into the medical facility also. 

Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: JayT on April 25, 2009, 04:56:11 PM
Quote from: 2ltAlexD on April 25, 2009, 04:26:24 PM
I am an in processing member, but like the CG Aux some what better so far. I like the fact that we are openly welcomed on military instalations and can purchase from the Coast Guard online exchange. I also like that when we say we are in the CG Aux, people are like wow, but for CAP, when I say I'm in CAP, they are like, "Oh, isn't that a high school thing?" or "Oh, like boy scouts." Plus, CAP members are treated like crap when it comes to getting on most bases and we can not purchase from the online exchanges and only from the in store ones for uniform items or in government quarters. I also like that the regs for the CG Aux state that "When injured or become ill on an official CG Aux mition, auxiliarists will be treated to the same medical care as any other Coast Guard member." As for the CAP side, we are "Like any other civilian Medical care for emergencies on a space available basis and the military comes first." Oh, so they'll just let us suffer just because we're in CAP. It just seems that people especially active duty respect the CG Aux alot more.

You seem to have a lot of issues with CAP.

1. Do you really believe, that in the one in a thousand chance a CAP member is hurt on a base large enough to have a hospital, they would 'suffer?' Do you have any experience in the medical field at all? If a CAP member was having a heart attack, do you think a military nurse would ignore him to help a military member with a hurt ankle? That's immature, unrealisitic, and absurd.

2. Again, as I've said before, the relationship between CAP and the Air Force is different then the CG/CGAux relationship because it needs to be.

How old are you, by the way?
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: Spike on April 25, 2009, 05:26:29 PM
^  :clap:

Agreed. 
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: caplegalnc on April 25, 2009, 06:35:10 PM
Quote from: 2ltAlexD on April 25, 2009, 04:26:24 PM
I am an in processing member, but like the CG Aux some what better so far. I like the fact that we are openly welcomed on military instalations and can purchase from the Coast Guard online exchange. I also like that when we say we are in the CG Aux, people are like wow, but for CAP, when I say I'm in CAP, they are like, "Oh, isn't that a high school thing?" or "Oh, like boy scouts." Plus, CAP members are treated like crap when it comes to getting on most bases and we can not purchase from the online exchanges and only from the in store ones for uniform items or in government quarters. I also like that the regs for the CG Aux state that "When injured or become ill on an official CG Aux mition, auxiliarists will be treated to the same medical care as any other Coast Guard member." As for the CAP side, we are "Like any other civilian Medical care for emergencies on a space available basis and the military comes first." Oh, so they'll just let us suffer just because we're in CAP. It just seems that people especially active duty respect the CG Aux alot more.

I f you want to be in CAP and have unlimited shopping priviledges on military installations then simply walk into a recruiting station, pass a few tests, and give up 3, 4, 6 or even 8 years of your life.  CAP may have a relationship with the Air Force but AAFES (Army Air Force Exchange Service) is oriented towards servicemembers.  If you want to shop, QVC is on 24/7.  If you want to serve, suck it up and drive on. 
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: 2ltAlexD on April 25, 2009, 06:39:51 PM
You know, I wish I could, but I am totally visually impaired. I'd give my whole life to serve and am the daughter of a National Guard soldier. That is why I serve in the auxiliaries and try to give back. The auxiliaries are the closest me and many others will ever have to military service. I'd stand in front of an IED if it made life easier for the troops. If people ask if I am in the military when they see my CAP id, I say no, I am in the auxiliary.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: JayT on April 25, 2009, 07:22:25 PM
Quote from: 2ltAlexD on April 25, 2009, 06:39:51 PM
You know, I wish I could, but I am totally visually impaired. I'd give my whole life to serve and am the daughter of a National Guard soldier. That is why I serve in the auxiliaries and try to give back. The auxiliaries are the closest me and many others will ever have to military service. I'd stand in front of an IED if it made life easier for the troops. If people ask if I am in the military when they see my CAP id, I say no, I am in the auxiliary.

You still haven't answered any questions posted in this thread, or others.

Sorry about your vision.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: Spike on April 25, 2009, 08:14:35 PM
Quote from: caplegalnc on April 25, 2009, 06:35:10 PM
I f you want to be in CAP and have unlimited shopping privileges on military installations then simply walk into a recruiting station, pass a few tests, and give up 3, 4, 6 or even 8 years of your life. 

That is not very nice!  There are many that if given the chance, would give up everything in their lives and serve in the military.  I would also like to point out that there are CAP members who do more for their country, and communities than SOME Active Duty folks ever will.  In fact there are some that give their lives in performing their CAP duties.  Military service is voluntary just like CAP, but you get paid in the Service, in CAP your reward is the satisfaction you feel at the end of the day.

I hate how quick people throw out the "just go enlist" answer when someone brings up the question about benefits.  Those that do, should be ashamed of themselves.

I also would like to point out that CAP at one time was afforded the same MWR benefits as the military Services.  Do some researching before posting on something you have no idea about.

I am a strong believer that CAP members should be offered exchange privileges.  In the end it only makes AAFES more profitable, and contributes a greater amount of money to military MWR programs.

Speaking as a person who has exchange and commissary benefits, the savings between shopping AAFES/ DECA Commissaries is not what it used to be.  You can usually find better deals if you shop around.   
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: 2ltAlexD on April 25, 2009, 08:23:57 PM
Quote from: Spike on April 25, 2009, 08:14:35 PM
Quote from: caplegalnc on April 25, 2009, 06:35:10 PM
I f you want to be in CAP and have unlimited shopping privileges on military installations then simply walk into a recruiting station, pass a few tests, and give up 3, 4, 6 or even 8 years of your life. 

That is not very nice!  There are many that if given the chance, would give up everything in their lives and serve in the military.  I would also like to point out that there are CAP members who do more for their country, and communities than SOME Active Duty folks ever will.  In fact there are some that give their lives in performing their CAP duties.  Military service is voluntary just like CAP, but you get paid in the Service, in CAP your reward is the satisfaction you feel at the end of the day.

I hate how quick people throw out the "just go enlist" answer when someone brings up the question about benefits.  Those that do, should be ashamed of themselves.

I also would like to point out that CAP at one time was afforded the same MWR benefits as the military Services.  Do some researching before posting on something you have no idea about.

I am a strong believer that CAP members should be offered exchange privileges.  In the end it only makes AAFES more profitable, and contributes a greater amount of money to military MWR programs.

Speaking as a person who has exchange and commissary benefits, the savings between shopping AAFES/ DECA Commissaries is not what it used to be.  You can usually find better deals if you shop around.  
Thanks so much for your service. That is really neat that we once had mwr access. What changed that? My squadron commander authorizes us to purchase anything accept for state sales tax items without being in quarters as long as its not a big screen tv or something like that. I read that some bases will let CAP members participate in MWR as individuals but it is up to the instalation commander.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: PA Guy on April 25, 2009, 08:34:42 PM
Quote from: Spike on April 25, 2009, 08:14:35 PM
I also would like to point out that CAP at one time was afforded the same MWR benefits as the military Services.  Do some researching before posting on something you have no idea about.

This is not meant as a flame or confrontation please.  I have been a member of CAP for 35+ yrs and I don't remember the above ever being a benefit.  Was it before my time?
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: PA Guy on April 25, 2009, 08:48:13 PM
Quote from: 2ltAlexD on April 25, 2009, 08:23:57 PMMy squadron commander authorizes us to purchase anything accept for state sales tax items without being in quarters as long as its not a big screen tv or something like that.

I suggest that you read CAPR 147-1 particularly para. 1-b. It clearly states the requirements for CAP members to purchase non uniform items in an AAFES facility. A CAP sqdn commander does not have the authority to circumvent this regulation. It is situations like this that often result in further restrictions on access and privileges for CAP members. And people wonder why we are sometimes treated poorly when we openly flaunt the regs that provide us with access and privileges.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: 2ltAlexD on April 25, 2009, 08:52:41 PM
Quote from: PA Guy on April 25, 2009, 08:48:13 PM
Quote from: 2ltAlexD on April 25, 2009, 08:23:57 PMMy squadron commander authorizes us to purchase anything accept for state sales tax items without being in quarters as long as its not a big screen tv or something like that.

I suggest that you read CAPR 147-1 particularly para. 1-b. It clearly states the requirements for CAP members to purchase non uniform items in an AAFES facility. A CAP sqdn commander does not have the authority to circumvent this regulation. It is situations like this that often result in further restrictions on access and privileges for CAP members. And people wonder why we are sometimes treated poorly when we openly flaunt the regs that provide us with access and privileges.
I appologize, I should specify that that only includes food items on the way to a squadron event or if we are in need of something specific.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: PA Guy on April 25, 2009, 09:02:11 PM
^^
Food courts, snack bars or fast food places are not covered by CAPR 147-1. They are open to anyone, civ or mil, that happens to be on base.

However, if you go inside the AAFES store and make a purchase of a non uniform item you must meet the requirements of CAPR 147-1
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: Spike on April 25, 2009, 09:09:32 PM
Quote from: PA Guy on April 25, 2009, 08:34:42 PM
This is not meant as a flame or confrontation please.  I have been a member of CAP for 35+ yrs and I don't remember the above ever being a benefit.  Was it before my time?

Yes....before you joined.  Circa 1951.  Most MWR/AAFES benefits were changed in 1961.  I was lucky enough to view my Wing's "archives" and some old CAP regs.  Most CAP regulations (believe it or not) were written by the Army first, and later the USAF after 1947.  I am pressuring my Wing Commander to let me begin scanning old regs and posting on the internet. 

Quote from: PA Guy on April 25, 2009, 09:02:11 PM
^^
Food courts, snack bars or fast food places are not covered by CAPR 147-1. They are open to anyone, civ or mil, that happens to be on base.

However, if you go inside the AAFES store and make a purchase of a non uniform item you must meet the requirements of CAPR 147-1

The Base/Post/station Commander can circumvent such regulations, and allow Civil employees, contractors and civilians (like CAP members) exchange benefits (except for Alcohol and Cigarettes).  I have been privileged enough to be in CAP Squadrons were the Base or Post Commander liked the unit, and let members use such facilities. 

Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: 2ltAlexD on April 25, 2009, 09:16:37 PM
I have also been extremely at my local home base. I was displaced by the flood of this year and had emergency needs. I knew the store employees on base, and she allowed me to purchase food items and items I needed. This food was not at all from the commissary though, it was just in the small exchange limited stuff. Floods are awful and due to an event that was part of the flood, I had to find another home and was in desperate need of low cost food. I would never take advantage of it though. I also have to fly to squadron events since I do not have support of my local squadron since they can or refuse to accomidate my needs as a differently abled member.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: Cherokeepilot on April 26, 2009, 05:57:24 AM
The basic difference between the auxiliaries is fairly simple.

The United States Coast Guard Auxiliary is a uniform service.
The Civil Air Patrol / USAF Auxiliary is not a uniform service.

73s
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 26, 2009, 01:11:10 PM
Huh?
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: 2ltAlexD on April 26, 2009, 01:31:47 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2009, 01:11:10 PM
Huh?
In other words, he is saying the CG Aux is an actual component of the Coast Guard unlike CAP being a component of the AF accept on AF mitions.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RiverAux on April 26, 2009, 01:40:43 PM
Quote from: 2ltAlexD on April 26, 2009, 01:31:47 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2009, 01:11:10 PM
Huh?
In other words, he is saying the CG Aux is an actual component of the Coast Guard unlike CAP being a component of the AF accept on AF mitions.
That really doesn't have anything to do with it.  CAP now isn't significantly different than it was before that change was made not even 10 years ago.  Even before then CAP was much, much, much more independent and separate from the AF than CG Aux ever has been.   
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: RRLE on April 26, 2009, 07:22:43 PM
QuoteEven before then CAP was much, much, much more independent and separate from the AF than CG Aux ever has been.

And that is easy to explain. The USCG Auxiliary is a totally dependent on the USCG. The Commandant of the USCG determines who can be a member of the USCG Auxiliary and what the rules & reg of the organization are. CAP is both the USAF Auxiliary and an federally chartered non-profit corporation. According to 36 USC 40301 CAP, the corporation, has perpetual existence regardless of what the USAF does. According to 36 USC 40303, CAP not the USAF determines who may be a member of CAP. And the list goes on and on.                                           
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: O-Rex on April 27, 2009, 12:50:09 PM
I mentioned this in a previous post, but there are elements of the Coast Guard that are actually descended from volunteer organizations, i.e., the lighthouse service and rescue boat crews, not to mention that fact that it is a very small organization and it's post 9/11 mission has stretched it to its limits.  So it stands to reason that the CG's relationship with, and utilization of it's Auxiliary differs from that of USAF with CAP.

Different organization, different culture, slightly different mission.  Comparing the CGAUX to CAP is like comparing their respective patron services.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: DG on April 27, 2009, 10:00:32 PM
Quote from: JoeTomasone on April 24, 2008, 10:11:15 PM
Those organizations that artificially or intentionally relax their standards tend to find that the best personnel leave or aren't attracted in the first place since the organization is substandard.

In CAP, our best pilots prefer relaxed uniforms, when not flying.  And those who mandate or otherwise obsess over uniforms instead of comfort, are not pilots.
Title: Re: USCGAux Benefits compared to CAP Benefits
Post by: PaulR on April 30, 2009, 12:25:47 AM
Quote from: SARMedTech on April 24, 2008, 07:00:47 AM
Well-said and written. In my short (so far) investigation of the Aux, I have found that the gold siders genuinely seem to have a respect and even fondness for Auxies.

Darned skippy!  They CG Aux personnel are awesome! 

I have a story for you...   Our base's automatic security gate died last winter.   This gate is manned during business hours by the Active Duty OOD and JOOD, and set to automatic mode during the night time hours(card entry).  As most know, last year was the coldest in a very long time.  Last November the automatic gate motor broke.  Well, the Aux guys volunteered to augment the live security watch at the gate, allowing our Active Duty watchstanders more of a break between shifts as well as time to focus on their regular duties.  It took two months for the gate to be fixed.  The Aux guys(six of them) pulled a few hundred hours of watch between them.  The gate was finally fixed in mid January

The true charactor of these men in women can be seen in their smiles as they carried out the mundane and unglamorous gate watch, night after night, in the sub-zero wind and weather.  You will get a 100 volunteers for the headline grabbing action adventures(SARS), but when these people volunteer for duties as described above with the same level of enthusiasm as a search and rescue case, you will se what teamwork is all about.  This is but a mere example of the huge impact they make for us on the Gold side, every day. 

I was so touched by their selfless contribution of time and display of team work that I ended up writting these men and women up for a decoration, which they now proudly wear on their ribbon bars today.   I can tell you that the CG Aux men and women are held in the highest regard everywhere I have been. 

As far as uniforms and customs and courtasies are concerned... Their appearance while in uniform has rivaled any AD person I have seen.  Perhaps I am just lucky enough to have been around Auxies that had pride in their uniforms.  They are relaxed when it comes to customs and courtasies among themselves, yet the are very proper when working with the Gold side.  I have never met a more professional group of people.  A very mission oriented group, who's focus is on the task at hand, not looking at one another's collar insignia.