Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 22, 2017, 03:21:26 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: CAPR 36-1 Violation
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: CAPR 36-1 Violation  (Read 1750 times)
Ravenwings
Recruit

Posts: 14

« on: May 05, 2017, 09:14:48 AM »

Good Morning,

I am a concerned parent. I have learned of Wing level personnel saying that a Cadet that has a learning disability, does not get priority on O flights and instructional flights. This individual has said that the Cadet in question will not succeed, so there fore does not need access to Instruction time, due to his disability.

I know the cadet, his IQ is rated at normal. At his school he is in all regular education classes. He has passed his Achievement tests with no special help at all. My question is how can this continue?  I went online and looked up the CAP policy on discrimination, it was clear. The question is, Now What? The Squadron CC of this Cadet, said that right now it is only "Bias not discrimination" and nothing can be done.

Thanks
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,899

« Reply #1 on: May 05, 2017, 09:28:12 AM »

If this is your child, you can file a complaint as per CAPR 36-2.
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R036_002_D2CD7C6F4C14A.pdf

If it isn't, you can advise the parents to file such a complaint, but you don't have standing to file one for them.

If the latter and they choose not to file a complaint, your best option is to stay out of it beyond making sure
you treat everyone fairly in situations where you have authority or input.

There is no such thing in a CAP parlance as an "instructional flight" (at least in the context suggested), so I am curious as to what you are referring to there,
however all cadets should have an equal chance at Orientation Flights as per the syllabus and program.

In either case, you should cease discussing the situation in an open forum which includes your personally identifiable information, if for
no other reason then to avoid embarrassing the cadet.
Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 10,577

« Reply #2 on: May 05, 2017, 09:35:23 AM »

The ONLY.....ONLY reason why a cadet with special needs (mental or physical) is refused a slot at O-Rides or any other CAP activitiy would be they were a danger to flight.

If your wing has a "Rack and Stack" policy for O-flights......it cannot include their ability to succeed based on a disability.

As Eclipse points out.....there is a procedure for filing a complaint.

Good luck.
Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
stillamarine
400,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 792
Unit: SER-AL-134

« Reply #3 on: May 05, 2017, 10:25:26 AM »

I don't think anyone gets "priority".
Logged
Tim Gardiner, 1st LT, CAP

USMC AD 1996-2001
USMCR    2001-2005  Admiral, Great State of Nebraska Navy  MS, MO, UDF
tim.gardiner@gmail.com
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 10,577

« Reply #4 on: May 05, 2017, 12:17:32 PM »

I don't think anyone gets "priority".
Oh no.....we priorities all the time.   Anyone who does not have an O-ride gets first dibs.  Then those who may be aging out.  We look at how many O-flight a cadet has had.  We look at their progression in the program.

We usually don't have to go too far....as we always have more first timers then we have seat....and then we always have first timer who simply don't want O-rides for some reason.   Yeah?!??  What?  But it's true.

But.....bumping a cadet because of a learning disability?      I'm sure the Officer involved is trying to spread a little bit of butter over a large piece of bread.....but someone needs to educate him on CAP policies, regs and ADA laws.

Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
Ravenwings
Recruit

Posts: 14

« Reply #5 on: May 05, 2017, 12:40:38 PM »

I need to clarify, the officer said that priority went to nuero-typical Cadets over the one with the documented learning disability. He has also passed all of the book work for the rocketry program on his own, and built the rockets with no help.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,899

« Reply #6 on: May 05, 2017, 01:04:51 PM »

I need to clarify, the officer said that priority went to nuero-typical Cadets over the one with the documented learning disability. He has also passed all of the book work for the rocketry program on his own, and built the rockets with no help.

OK, honestly, I have a difficult time believing he, or anyone else used that terminology, unless he has been exposed to
it in the context of the actual cadet, in which case there may be factors you are unaware of. Being able to build a rocket
doesn't mean he's OK in confined spaces, doesn't have balance issues which may be negatively affected by rapid changes in
air pressure, or one of 20 other reasons locking him in a Yugo with a sheet of plywood stapled to the roof is a bad idea.

Also, it sounds like this is not your child, which means you would not have standing for a complaint.

The above advice stands, advise mom and dad, stay out of it, and leave details off the web.





Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

stillamarine
400,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 792
Unit: SER-AL-134

« Reply #7 on: May 05, 2017, 01:15:36 PM »

I don't think anyone gets "priority".
Oh no.....we priorities all the time.   Anyone who does not have an O-ride gets first dibs.  Then those who may be aging out.  We look at how many O-flight a cadet has had.  We look at their progression in the program.

We usually don't have to go too far....as we always have more first timers then we have seat....and then we always have first timer who simply don't want O-rides for some reason.   Yeah?!??  What?  But it's true.

But.....bumping a cadet because of a learning disability?      I'm sure the Officer involved is trying to spread a little bit of butter over a large piece of bread.....but someone needs to educate him on CAP policies, regs and ADA laws.

Valid point.
Logged
Tim Gardiner, 1st LT, CAP

USMC AD 1996-2001
USMCR    2001-2005  Admiral, Great State of Nebraska Navy  MS, MO, UDF
tim.gardiner@gmail.com
airdad
Recruit

Posts: 18
Unit: NY-001

« Reply #8 on: May 08, 2017, 02:41:23 PM »

As others have pointed out, bias is looked at the same as discrimination.  If the squadron commander said that, he or she is dead wrong. 
While as an orientation pilot myself, if there was the possibility that this cadet was a danger to the fight's successful completion, I would not take that cadet on board, but the same holds true for any o-flight that I do and any cadet looking to fly.  Instructional flights are limited to those cadets who have been approved for flight training; o-flights do not fall into that category
The cadet and/or his/her parent always has the right to go to the wing IG and make a formal complaint if it is warranted.
Logged
Len Schindler, Lt Col, CAP
NY Wing Inspector General
Ravenwings
Recruit

Posts: 14

« Reply #9 on: May 08, 2017, 02:48:19 PM »

Thank you for your response. The Cadet's CFI has said that the Cadet has never posed a threat to himself or an aircraft.

According to 36-1 and 36-2 all EOC complaints must go straight to national when the Commander or IG gets it, is that true?
Logged
airdad
Recruit

Posts: 18
Unit: NY-001

« Reply #10 on: May 08, 2017, 03:16:03 PM »

If, in fact it is a valid complaint under 36-1, 36-2 it goes to NHQ (36-2, paragraph 3b).  However, if you look at the wording of paragraph of paragraph 3f, if a complaint is sent to a local IG, it will not be bounced; if the IG feels that it may be a complaint falling under the ambit of 36-1, 36-2, the IG is to call NHQ for guidance.  If the EEO feels it is an EEO complaint, the IG will forward, otherwise the IG will keep it.  It doesn't go into the black hole; someone will review it
Logged
Len Schindler, Lt Col, CAP
NY Wing Inspector General
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,899

« Reply #11 on: May 08, 2017, 04:16:38 PM »

The Cadet's CFI has said that the Cadet has never posed a threat to himself or an aircraft.

How / why does this cadet "have" a CFI?  Is he taking flight instruction?  If so, I can't begin to imagine why this is even a conversation point.

You continue to use very specific terms - "neurotypical", "never posed a threat to himself or an aircraft", etc., not the kinds of things that come up in general conversation.

"You've learned", "you've heard".  Hearsay.

Assuming this cadet isn't on any sort of IEP-type remediation, or isn't marching with a laundry list of accommodations, then
it's pretty remarkable this is even a conversation point.  I have never personally seen any cadet, including those who do have
serious, medically-verified ADHD, or even spectrum issues, who is generally able to function normally within the CAP structures,
and who hasn't self-selected or been medically selected out of flying, being refused flights.

The idea, in fact, is kinda silly.  There's no "priority list" in regards to flying, nor any CAP goal other then to "get as many cadets in the
air as often as possible".  Few, if any wings, ever come close to flying their whole O-Ride budget, and these days the issue is usually
finding some way to drag kids away from X-Station or whatever long enough to sit in an airplane for 45 minutes.

At the most pragmatic level, wings need hours to keep their planes, and that's more of an issue every year, so the idea that a
wing O-ride officer, or anyone else, would deny flying, and the >hours< for a "non-problem", is somewhat suspect.

Drop this thread, and go and ask the people who are supposedly making these decisions.

Then either get the kid in the air or file the complaint.  It's also possible / likely that the light of day on the issue
will also make knock it off.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2017, 04:29:58 PM by Eclipse » Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

Майор Хаткевич
200,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,075
Unit: GLR-IL-049

« Reply #12 on: May 08, 2017, 04:44:32 PM »

Having worked with "atypical" cadets, and being related to one, can confirm that our volunteers, especially those with experience or at least a conversation or two, do the best to accommodate all cadets.
Logged
MSG Mac
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,772
Unit: MER-MD-071

« Reply #13 on: May 08, 2017, 11:42:52 PM »

Good Morning,

I am a concerned parent. I have learned of Wing level personnel saying that a Cadet that has a learning disability, does not get priority on O flights and instructional flights. This individual has said that the Cadet in question will not succeed, so there fore does not need access to Instruction time, due to his disability.

I know the cadet, his IQ is rated at normal. At his school he is in all regular education classes. He has passed his Achievement tests with no special help at all. My question is how can this continue?  I went online and looked up the CAP policy on discrimination, it was clear. The question is, Now What? The Squadron CC of this Cadet, said that right now it is only "Bias not discrimination" and nothing can be done.

Thanks

The OP doesn't say he's not getting the orientation or Instructional flights, but he's not getting a PRIORITY and that ONE instructor (I assume it's a CFI) doesn't want to instruct him. There has to be more than 1 CFI in the Wing to pick up the slack.
Logged
Michael P. McEleney
Lt Col CAP
MSG USA (Retired)
Cliff_Chambliss
Seasoned Member

Posts: 389

« Reply #14 on: May 09, 2017, 09:02:47 AM »

And when is an instructor obligated to teach anyone?  Not all students are for all CFIs and not all CFIs for all students.  As a CAP CFI I refused to instruct several CAP Members, both cadet and senior.  Maybe the refusal was I had a PAYING student somewhere else.  Maybe it was a You Owe Me attitude from some, Maybe it was just "bad vibes".  Whatever the reason the point is that no CFI should ever be put into a position where they are less than 100% comfortable with a student.

Logged
11th Armored Cavalry Regiment
2d Armored Cavalry Regiment
3d Infantry Division
504th BattleField Surveillance Brigade

ARMY:  Because even the Marines need heros.    
CAVALRY:  If it were easy it would be called infantry.
EMT-83
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,811

« Reply #15 on: May 09, 2017, 09:19:33 AM »

Something about this story isn’t right; maybe something got lost in the translation.

If someone at Wing is having heartburn about O-flights, there’s no way that this cadet would have been approved for primary flight instruction with a CFI. I think there’s some confusion in terminology.

As to the Equal Opportunity complaint, I can tell you from first-hand experience that NHQ takes them very seriously. If someone has violated the spirit of the regulation, a complaint should be made.

The whole thing sound like miscommunication, which could probably be resolved with a Difficult Adult Conversation™ between all parties.
Logged
Ned
Resident Philosopher

Posts: 2,110

« Reply #16 on: May 09, 2017, 01:49:21 PM »

And when is an instructor obligated to teach anyone? 

I think we are in basic agreement, but did want to add a note to remind others that it would be improper to refuse to teach a member solely because of certain characteristics protected by CAPR 36-1.  For example, it would be improper to refuse to teach a cadet solely based on their race, color, creed, religion, or national origin.  (Among other reasons.)

 I know that is not what you are advocating, but I wanted to remind the other readers that CAP takes our Non-Discrimination Policy very seriously.  And it applies to all members, all the time.


Ned Lee
COL, CAP
National Cadet Program Manager

Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: CAPR 36-1 Violation
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.241 seconds with 20 queries.