Unit Commanders

[stixco1]

What is the benefit to CAP for the 4 yr term limit? If the Commander is doing a good job, has no desire to move up the chain, no one else in unit is jumping to take over?

[jeders]

Asked and answered, search is your friend.

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=16786.0

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=16709.0

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=15025.0 (This one predates the national term limit rule, but still has the same information/opinions/hilarity.)

[JeffDG]

Another solution in search of a problem.

If a commander is ineffective, he can be relieved without any need for a term limit.

If a commander is effective, then the regulation simply forces the Wing Commander to put someone else who may not really want the job in there.

What it does do is guarantee that a mediocre commander will serve for 4 years, because there's no good reason to punt them before their term is up.

[Eclipse]

Growth and opportunity for more, reduces stagnation for all.

[jeders]

What it does do is guarantee that a mediocre commander will serve for 4 years, because there's no good reason to punt them before their term is up.

As opposed to a mediocre commander serving for 24 years.

[JeffDG]

What it does do is guarantee that a mediocre commander will serve for 4 years, because there's no good reason to punt them before their term is up.

As opposed to a mediocre commander serving for 24 years.

Nope, before the Wing Commander could just say "Hey, Doug, you're doing just fine, but let's get some fresh blood in there."

Now, with a defined term, the Wing/CC pretty much needs a reason to replace.

[Eclipse]

What it does do is guarantee that a mediocre commander will serve for 4 years, because there's no good reason to punt them before their term is up.

Poppycock.

4 years is the limit, not the mandate.  BTDT.

Having a term limit puts positive time pressure on the good managers, forcing them to
build their contingency and transition plans from day-1, and insures a poor CC can't hang out
indefinitely, even if the next echelon has no backbone for uncomfortable conversations.

And the transition is >supposed to< force the recruiting and mentoring issue, but we've seen that
is inconsistent at best.

I've seen way more poor "lifer" CCs who no one wants to be mean to run marginal units into the ground
then "awesome" CCs being run out against their will.

Now, with a defined term, the Wing/CC pretty much needs a reason to replace.

CC's are still "at will" of the Wing CC - no more reason then "I want change" is required.

[JeffDG]

CC's are still "at will" of the Wing CC - no more reason then "I want change" is required.

Yet you had poor "lifer" commanders.

The term limit does absolutely nothing that could not be done before. 

It just takes those folks who are doing a good job and tosses them out for no reason other than the date on a calendar.

If you have a Wing/CC who can't be bothered to have an "uncomfortable conversation", that's where you problem is.

[Eclipse]

If you really view it as being "tossed out", you must not be familiar with business management practices or military
transition in the modern age.

It is difficult not to stagnate in any leadership roll for more then 3-4 years, especially CAP.

And to your point about poor wing CCs, not to mention Group CCs, sadly far too many are not inclined to
make people sad, thus, when you abdicate your responsibility, someone else steps in and does it for you,
usually in the form of regulations.

We need more current managers and leaders and far less den mothers and GOB flying club types.

[JeffDG]

If you really view it as being "tossed out", you must not be familiar with business management practices or military
transition in the modern age.

It is difficult not to stagnate in any leadership roll for more then 3-4 years, especially CAP.

And to your point about poor wing CCs, not to mention Group CCs, sadly far too many are not inclined to
make people sad, thus, when you abdicate your responsibility, someone else steps in and does it for you,
usually in the form of regulations.

We need more current managers and leaders and far less den mothers and GOB flying club types.

So...

My wing can't get it's stuff together, so we'll make everyone else suffer for our Wing/CC not wanting to have uncomfortable conversations.

[Flying Pig]

I was very relived to step aside when the term was up.  Since I left, there have been two other great commanders since.  Maybe harder in some places than others.  If there was a position where this really became an issue, I have no doubt waivers could be obtained. 

[Eclipse]

My wing can't get it's stuff together, so we'll make everyone else suffer for our Wing/CC not wanting to have uncomfortable conversations.

No one is "suffering", and it certainly wasn't just your wing, or even a couple, this was an
across the board problem in every wing.

Before the change, there were CC's who had been in command in excess of 25 years.
My wing had a couple of those, and far too many sitting for in excess of a decade.

Rare is the person in that age group, from that era who would still be "current" in the way CAP needs them
to be, nor no in grained in their personal ruts. 

Sorry, that's just the reality of the situation.

And regardless, even if they were the new "Curry" or "Spaatz", does that mean no one else gets the chance to
be a CC?  And when they get hit by a bus, or simply up and quit because of "all those changes NHQ is forcing on us?
Then you're really stuffed.

Further, as Flying Pig points out, they don't call it "relief" from command for nothing. Al lot of long term CCs
are only still there because they feel "no one else will (or can) do it", which means they are trying to make up
for the failings of those above them (or their own in ability to train their successor.

Any CC who views a term limit in a negative light, is the example of the problem the term limits addressed.

[stixco1]

So a CC serves for 4 yrs., by all accounts does a good job. Group Commander sends out an e-mail to all SM's in the group for anyone interested in the job. No response. Current CC gets extension. This goes on for 3 yrs until it can no longer happen per regs. Still no one interested. What happens then.

[jeders]

So a CC serves for 4 yrs., by all accounts does a good job. Group Commander sends out an e-mail to all SM's in the group for anyone interested in the job. No response. Current CC gets extension. This goes on for 3 yrs until it can no longer happen per regs. Still no one interested. What happens then.

In the extraordinary event that this person is the only one able to do the job, then he can get another 4 year term, and another after that, and another after that, and another after that. There is no limit to the number of terms (absent a region or wing supplement) that a commander can serve.

[Eclipse]

Correct, however from my experience "no one interested' has not been viewed as an "extraordinary" reason.

A CC might get a small extension, but not a new term and his new job one is finding his replacement (or the Group CC's
job, etc).

For a commander to succeed themselves, both Wing and Region have to agree there is no other choice.
I have yet to see a valid reason for anything but a short extension.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

What is the benefit to CAP for the 4 yr term limit? If the Commander is doing a good job, has no desire to move up the chain, no one else in unit is jumping to take over?

This happened to my first unit (long before the term limits were imposed).  I was quite possibly going to be in line for CC...until I met the lady who is now my wife and moved to a different locale.  My CC and I had basically built the unit back up over the prior couple of years from near-Flight status to a viable Composite squadron.  He was tired of the job and I don't blame him.

When he stepped down I heard rumours that the unit sputtered on for awhile, was reconstituted as a Flight and finally got back on its feet a couple of years later.

The problem I have with a CC being on for indefinite periods are that a CC can end up burnt-out, as happened with my former CC, who also happened to be a good friend.

Also, a CC can begin to think a unit is his/her "turf"...in which case a cleaning-out is necessary...which is why I support the term limitations.

[Private Investigator]

... Still no one interested. What happens then.

I call "nonsense" on that. <Expletive device in play.> Tom, Dick & Harry the local GOBs say, "Tom is commander forever". They get new members and they "indoc" them that Tom is the guy and they never will be a commander because Tom is the commander. I have seen it happen and that is a reality check.   

[lordmonar]

Term limits simply replace leadership with bureaucracy.

[MSG Mac]

CAP's Term Limits are longer than the military's. The intent is to have experienced personnel move up and pass their expertise on to a wider audience and allow up and coming officers to lead at the Squadrobs and Groups.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

CAP's Term Limits are longer than the military's. The intent is to have experienced personnel move up and pass their expertise on to a wider audience and allow up and coming officers to lead at the Squadrobs and Groups.

Which is pretty much how the CGAUX operates (most of the time).  Virtually all commanders at all levels are elected, until you really go up the chain, when the CG gets involved.

[Flying Pig]

CAP's Term Limits are longer than the military's. The intent is to have experienced personnel move up and pass their expertise on to a wider audience and allow up and coming officers to lead at the Squadrobs and Groups.

Unfortunately CAP doesn't work like that.  People in CAP don't move around like military commanders who move up, and then get paid moves to other bases.  People join CAP and stay in one place.  In CAP there is no incentive to climb the ladder other than for that members personal interest.  Just look at how many people DONT apply to be a Wing or Group CC.  I don't know that its ever been a REAL issue, although I know with my old squadron I was told personally that if I didn't take over the Sq, it was just going to be disbanded.  And I have seen instances where someone took the spot with a groan, when the current CC was more than willing to stay on.   I think the current system seems to work fine, and If I recall there are provisions for extensions if no other commander can be found?  I think it was 3yrs with a 1yr extension.  Really, if you cant find a replacement in 4yrs, then something is wrong anyway.  Unless all of your membership walks out at the 3.5yr mark.

[Storm Chaser]

The problem I have with a CC being on for indefinite periods are that a CC can end up burnt-out, as happened with my former CC, who also happened to be a good friend.

Also, a CC can begin to think a unit is his/her "turf"...in which case a cleaning-out is necessary...which is why I support the term limitations.

You're 100% correct. Those are some of the reasons why term limits were put in place.

Really, if you cant find a replacement in 4yrs, then something is wrong anyway.  Unless all of your membership walks out at the 3.5yr mark.

Exactly.

[LSThiker]

Really, if you cant find a replacement in 4yrs, then something is wrong anyway.  Unless all of your membership walks out at the 3.5yr mark.

In which case, then something is wrong anyway.

[JC004]

Units that struggle because the leadership is lacking tend to lack good candidates for command, because they've left by the time a change rolls around.  These units get stuck in a cycle, especially if there is a lack of major support from above to break the cycle.

[lordmonar]

especially if there is a lack of major support from above to break the cycle.

And that ladies and gentlemen is the key to all the problems term limits are supposed to solve.

Stagnate leadership....group/wing should make a fix.
No opportunity for growth for lower officers.....group/wing should make the fix.

Now don't get me wrong....3-4 years in the hot seat is just about right for most people.   But I don't see the need to move an effective commander simply because his/her time is up.

[Eclipse]

Term limits simply replace leadership with bureaucracy.

The vacuum of the former is generally filled with the latter.

Something CAP seems unable, or unwilling to accept, thus the increasing administrative and regulatory burden.

CAP isn't growing leaders, or even good managers, so the things that most companies and services would
assume as a matter of fact, aren't even on the radar, and thus have to be added to inspections and the regs.

[DoubleSecret]

And that ladies and gentlemen is the key to all the problems term limits are supposed to solve.

Stagnate leadership....group/wing should make a fix.
No opportunity for growth for lower officers.....group/wing should make the fix.

Some groups/wings cause that leadership stagnation, and deter applications by how they do day-to-day business.  They might grow the pool of aspiring CCs simply by being easier to work with.  I've known a number of dedicated, unit-level officers who don't apply because their higher HQ makes things unduly onerous.  The unit level stuff can be a headache all on its own, but having to cater to some HHQ person's sense of self-importance is a migraine.

[w7sar]

To quote:
"Some groups/wings cause that leadership stagnation, and deter applications by how they do day-to-day business.  They might grow the pool of aspiring CCs simply by being easier to work with.  I've known a number of dedicated, unit-level officers who don't apply because their higher HQ makes things unduly onerous.  The unit level stuff can be a headache all on its own, but having to cater to some HHQ person's sense of self-importance is a migraine."

ABSOLUTELY!

Unfortunately a lot of folks in "higher" headquarters have not been in a squadron for decades and have no clue to how much is required of today's squadron commanders/members. 

A deal killer is someone "above" who just sits, issues directives or requests or creates forms and loads the usual few in a squadron that try to follow the rules ... until the squadron folk just give up.  And add in parents who are there to support their kids ... and the huge burden from above just burns them out so when their kid loses interest, the parents quit too.  And then there are the higher headquarters folk who believe there is a problem (perhaps with a singular event) who decide to add roadblocks shotgun style in the form of "review mechanisms" to improve something that probably didn't need improving.  It's a power thing ... "I will make you jump through hoops to show you how important I am."  (Where the opposite is true ... "I will help you achieve greatness by helping remove barriers to your progress or at least take the time to help you understand why you are being asked to do something."

The SINGLE most important question a supervising staff/commander should ask is "What is the impact of this new idea/requirement/form/supplement on the SQUADRON member? And is this additional "thing" really needed?" 

If it adds to a member's burden and the member has no understanding of "WHY", chances are that it will tip the balance toward inactivity ... Things like requiring reports that no one (who requires them) actually reads or holding up some action for an ad hoc committee review (sometimes not even defined in a supplement/regulation).

LEADING (vs. managing) volunteers is an interesting animal.  Occupy enough of their time with meaningless demands, and a volunteer will take their time and talents elsewhere.

But .. just my opinion. 

[Eclipse]

the usual few in a squadron that try to follow the rules ... until the squadron folk just give up.  And add in parents who are there to support their kids ... and the huge burden from above just burns them out so when their kid loses interest, the parents quit too.  And then there are the higher headquarters folk who believe there is a problem (perhaps with a singular event) who decide to add roadblocks shotgun style in the form of "review mechanisms" to improve something that probably didn't need improving.  It's a power thing ... "I will make you jump through hoops to show you how important I am."  (Where the opposite is true ... "I will help you achieve greatness by helping remove barriers to your progress or at least take the time to help you understand why you are being asked to do something."

The bold is the root of the problem, not when higher HQ starts directing people to do their jobs.

If your unit is run by "a few", or you have members in uniform who won't do much more then sit and watch their cadets,
you're not doing it correctly.  Neither is sustainable, nor fits the proper model.

I love how when CC's fail in the mandates they accepted voluntarily, it becomes everyone else's "fault" that they aren't / can't
do their jobs and what is both expected of them and which they agreed to do.

Don't like it?  LEAVE.

"But there's no one else to do my job."

You're just made your own point...

[lordmonar]

No mission ready unit was inspection ready....no inspection ready unit was mission ready.

This is an old military joke.....but it applies to CAP more so then the military.

[Eclipse]

Yeah.

More BS.  CAP needs to try "mission ready" on for size for a while before it
can make those kinds of jokes.

If I ever see it I'll take a pic.

[lordmonar]

Yeah.

More BS.  CAP needs to try "mission ready" on for size for a while before it
can make those kinds of jokes.

If I ever see it I'll take a pic.

Come by my squadron...you will see it every Tuesday.

[JeffDG]

Yeah.

More BS.  CAP needs to try "mission ready" on for size for a while before it
can make those kinds of jokes.

If I ever see it I'll take a pic.

Come by my squadron...you will see it every Tuesday.

yeah, he thinks the failures of his wing, like wing commanders unable to break bad news to people, apply to everyone else.

[Eclipse]

Yeah.

More BS.  CAP needs to try "mission ready" on for size for a while before it
can make those kinds of jokes.

If I ever see it I'll take a pic.

Come by my squadron...you will see it every Tuesday.

Yeah, well if anything Area 51 Composite is the exception that proves the
rule.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Yeah, well if anything Area 51 Composite is the exception that proves the
rule.

SIR-I must warn you, from one officer to another, that the existence of PCR-NV-666 has never been acknowledged officially, unofficially, through rumour or hearsay by the Pacific Coast Region CAP, National Headquarters CAP, CAP-USAF, USAF-CAP, any General officer, any Cabinet secretary, Steven Spielberg, Sir Ridley Scott or Uncle Tom Cobley.

[rustyjeeper]

Yeah, well if anything Area 51 Composite is the exception that proves the
rule.

SIR-I must warn you, from one officer to another, that the existence of PCR-NV-666 has never been acknowledged officially, unofficially, through rumour or hearsay by the Pacific Coast Region CAP, National Headquarters CAP, CAP-USAF, USAF-CAP, any General officer, any Cabinet secretary, Steven Spielberg, Sir Ridley Scott or Uncle Tom Cobley.

Kudo's on the OPSEC warning! :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

[Private Investigator]

No mission ready unit was inspection ready....no inspection ready unit was mission ready.

This is an old military joke.....but it applies to CAP more so then the military.

From my experience as an IG in CAP. That is very true but more Units are not mission ready or inspection ready. Some Units do both poorly or not at all. 

[PHall]

Yeah, well if anything Area 51 Composite is the exception that proves the
rule.

SIR-I must warn you, from one officer to another, that the existence of PCR-NV-666 has never been acknowledged officially, unofficially, through rumour or hearsay by the Pacific Coast Region CAP, National Headquarters CAP, CAP-USAF, USAF-CAP, any General officer, any Cabinet secretary, Steven Spielberg, Sir Ridley Scott or Uncle Tom Cobley.

Okay, for the LAST FRICKIN' TIME.......    There is no Pacific Coast Region.  It's Pacific Region, period...    PCR is used because Puerto Rico wing uses PR.

Comprende?

[MSG Mac]

Yeah, well if anything Area 51 Composite is the exception that proves the
rule.

SIR-I must warn you, from one officer to another, that the existence of PCR-NV-666 has never been acknowledged officially, unofficially, through rumour or hearsay by the Pacific Coast Region CAP, National Headquarters CAP, CAP-USAF, USAF-CAP, any General officer, any Cabinet secretary, Steven Spielberg, Sir Ridley Scott or Uncle Tom Cobley.

Okay, for the LAST FRICKIN' TIME.......    There is no Pacific Coast Region.  It's Pacific Region, period...    PCR is used because Puerto Rico wing uses PR.

Comprende?

Rename it as the West Wing. Martin Sheen can be the Region Commander

[lordmonar]

MSG Mac......my security officer would like to have a few words with you.   Can you come to my office and bring all the contents of your desk with you?   :angel: 

No black helos. We use white unmarked vans now.

[MSG Mac]

MSG Mac......my secuirty officer would like to have a few words with you.   Can you come to my office and bring all the contents of your desk with you?   :angel: 

You're not sending the Black Helicopters? P.S. I expect a MSG of the Civil Air Patrol to know how to spell SECURITY or at least how to turn on spell check

[LSThiker]

MSG Mac......my secuirty officer would like to have a few words with you.   Can you come to my office and bring all the contents of your desk with you?   :angel: 

You're not sending the Black Helicopters? P.S. I expect a MSG of the Civil Air Patrol to know how to spell SECURITY or at least how to turn on spell check

MSG = Army Master Sergeant
MSgt = Air Force Master Sergeant

Would expect a retired E-8 to know the difference.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

What it does do is guarantee that a mediocre commander will serve for 4 years, because there's no good reason to punt them before their term is up.

As opposed to a mediocre commander serving for 24 years.

Nope, before the Wing Commander could just say "Hey, Doug, you're doing just fine, but let's get some fresh blood in there."

Now, with a defined term, the Wing/CC pretty much needs a reason to replace.

Really, you had to use my name here?

[MSG Mac]

MSG Mac......my secuirty officer would like to have a few words with you.   Can you come to my office and bring all the contents of your desk with you?   :angel: 

You're not sending the Black Helicopters? P.S. I expect a MSG of the Civil Air Patrol to know how to spell SECURITY or at least how to turn on spell check

MSG = Army Master Sergeant
MSgt = Air Force Master Sergeant

Would expect a retired E-8 to know the difference.

Rather be an E-8 Than an E-7

[BuckeyeDEJ]

MSG Mac......my secuirty officer would like to have a few words with you.   Can you come to my office and bring all the contents of your desk with you?   :angel: 

You're not sending the Black Helicopters? P.S. I expect a MSG of the Civil Air Patrol to know how to spell SECURITY or at least how to turn on spell check

MSG = Army Master Sergeant
MSgt = Air Force Master Sergeant

Would expect a retired E-8 to know the difference.

Funny, I thought MSG was that stuff Chinese restaurants say they don't have. You know — Madison Square Garden.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

One of the greatest guitarists EVER...



This is what I think of when I hear "MSG"...