CAP employee Uniform Wear

[Eclipse]

Um, no, they don't, at least not by definition.  They work in civilian dress.

What definition are you talking about?  A uniform doesn't necessarily have to be a military uniform.  Pretty much the definition I use is that if you're required to wear something, it is a uniform. 

Ok, they aren't and they don't.

[DNall]

I don't know if someone has mentioned this already, but miltechs are a large class of civilian contract employees that are also required to be members of the guard/reserve.

1) They are required to wear uniforms with their mil grade to work.

2) Their mil grade may not correspond to their civilian authority level. It is certainly possible to have a LTC assigned under a SSG on the civilian side.

3) They are NOT in any way bound by UCMJ while in their civilian contractor position.

4) They get no military related benefits or retirement points for any part of this employment.

5) They are many times deployable in their civilian status as well as their mil status.

6) None of these are given anything additional for uniforms based on being a civilian employee. If enlisted they can trade in sets every two years if the unit has money avail in the budget. As an officer they buy their own out of pocket, including expensive stuff like gortex, and they're required to have every item in specified quantities.

With that example, how may I ask is CAP different?

[James Shaw]

Color of law is a legal term that is used alot when you have lets say a

Deputy sheriff who is POST certified to carry a gun and make arrest is a "true" Deputy Sheriff.
Deputy sheriff who is POST certified as a correctional officer only and not authorized to make arrest or carry assigned sidearm is not "truly" a Deptuy Sheriff but a correctional officer who works for the Sheriff.

In this respect if you have a NHQ employee who is compensated by NHQ than they should wear a distinctive employee attire when they are performing their paid jobs. When they are not paid they should wear the CAP volunteer uniform.

[DNall]

Lets just talk about color of law.

A CAP civilian employee in a golf shirt has no perceived authority, be they wing commander to director to janitor.

In uniform they have some perceived authority commensurate with their grade. You can argue now about a 2nd Lt in a director job... well, why in the hell are you hiring an inexperienced person in that position anyway? Why would you not select someone who has paid their dues as a CAP volunteer for years & years, and also has the right qualifications.

And, did you just read my post right above yours. The military does not take this view at all with their civilian employees. Meanwhile, you're talking about a group of employees paid from federally appropriated funds that come out of the AF budget, and most of whom are at NHQ on an active military base.

[RiverAux]

It wasn't mentioned, but I did think about DNall's example.  Of course, the military also has civilians who do not wear any uniforms at all and that is also a legit way to go even if I think that wearing uniforms would be preferable.

Judging by the poll results, this might just be the most unpopular idea I've proposed here, maybe even topping the CAP Reserve concept. 

[James Shaw]

Lets just talk about color of law.

A CAP civilian employee in a golf shirt has no perceived authority, be they wing commander to director to janitor.

In uniform they have some perceived authority commensurate with their grade. You can argue now about a 2nd Lt in a director job... well, why in the hell are you hiring an inexperienced person in that position anyway? Why would you not select someone who has paid their dues as a CAP volunteer for years & years, and also has the right qualifications.

And, did you just read my post right above yours. The military does not take this view at all with their civilian employees. Meanwhile, you're talking about a group of employees paid from federally appropriated funds that come out of the AF budget, and most of whom are at NHQ on an active military base.

No disagreement with you on the individual definitions or examples. I did not say this was the law I said this is how I would perceive it. If I work for NHQ as a civilian employee then I would wear the appropriate civilian clothes or NHQ employee approved uniform. If I am performing CAP duties as a volunteer then I would wear the appropriate CAP uniform.

[RiverAux]

Keep in mind that CAP corporate employees sometimes actually do have real authority over CAP members doing their duty.  For example, isn't the NOC manned by CAP corporate employees and they make decisions about CAP corporate mission approvals. 

[Timothy]

Of course they should be required to wear a uniform at work. Shouldn't be much of a problem, since by definition a "CAP uniform" could be anything from the grey polo combo to service dress, and everything in between.

I'm thinking the people voting no are assuming this poll is about making them wear blues? Otherwise, what's the problem? If the guy that makes my fries at McDonalds can wear a "corporate uniform," why can't someone at National or Wing wear one?

[SJFedor]

It's gone a page and a half without someone (while briskly reviewing the thread) bringing this up...


who cares???

They're employees, they're there to do a job. They're doing that job.  Who cares whether they're in a CAP uniform or not?

[DNall]

Yeah, and I as a Major can be under a Capt/IC or in charge of a LtCol GTL... what's your point. In my military unit, I answer to a CWO4 master gunner, and another CWO4 that's chief IP, as do all the pilots there including the LTC BN Commander.

Likewise, I'm a national guard officer, but my uniform says "US Army" on it regardless if I'm on title 10 or 32 orders. I can put it on cause I feel like it & go give orders to people even when I'm not "on duty." Hell, I can show up in civilian cloths off-duty & give orders.

There is no volunteer versus paid uniform. There's just a uniform. Authority ALWAYS comes from position, never cloths.

As far as what the required uniform should be, that should be commander's discretion, but for NHQ or any other Wg/Reg HQ on a mil facility, I would strongly prefer equiv to what other folks on base are wearing for similar duties - so most likely blues/CSU, with maybe Friday can be BDU/BBDU or Golf shirt.

If you'll check, I do believe NHQ is mostly in golf shirts or the CSU on a daily basis.

It's gone a page and a half without someone (while briskly reviewing the thread) bringing this up...

who cares???

They're employees, they're there to do a job. They're doing that job.  Who cares whether they're in a CAP uniform or not?

To that end... I'd agree with you, but I do care about CAP members walking around mil bases on a daily basis.

[RiverAux]

It's gone a page and a half without someone (while briskly reviewing the thread) bringing this up...


who cares???

They're employees, they're there to do a job. They're doing that job.  Who cares whether they're in a CAP uniform or not?

I stated my reasons for proposing this.  If you disagree with them thats fine, but I did provide some justification.

[jimmydeanno]

I don't think that CAP employees should wear CAP uniforms for many reasons.

1) It implies some sort of authority in both directions.  A NHQ employee goes to an NCSA to provide support and ends up being told to go drive a van because they are a 2d Lt and the NCSA LG guy is a Capt.

2) We do not hire or require CAP employees to be members, IIRC it's illegal to.  That is an option to them.  There are many people at NHQ that are not members of the organization, so you would have some wear a uniform and others not?

3) Uniforms and rank do not create an environment of free, open thought and open communication. Something that we desperately need at our NHQ.

4) It separates and differentiates between the volunteer staff and paid employees, and important difference that needs to be made.

5) Does that mean that if one paid employee happens to be a lower rank volunteer can they can't be a higher ranking person's boss?

6) Our uniform represents our volunteer heritage.  Our volunteers sacrifice hundreds of hours every year in the perfomance of their duties.  Our awards and decorations represent actions during volunteer service and I think that our uniform should be reserved to represent that service.

If you'll check, I do believe NHQ is mostly in golf shirts or the CSU on a daily basis.

Paid employees of CAPNHQ do not wear CAP uniforms of any variety in the performance of their duty. 

[RiverAux]

I'm reasonably sure I've seen at least one paid NHQ staffer wearing the blazer uniform with proper CAP nametag at a Wing conference.  I know I have seen another one at Wing conference in regular civilian clothes. 

[Hawk200]

Must be nice to have all this time to dream up solutions looking for a problem.

CAP employes have been doing just fine for a while without a specific uniform.  Ask a few questions:

1. Does this solve a problem?

2. Does it make sense?

3. Would it avoid any problems?

4. Is it worth the expense?

So far, not seeing anything resolved by the idea of wearing a uniform. Seems like a rebel solution to a non-existant problem.

[RiverAux]

Justifications were provided.  If you don't believe they are sufficient, thats fine. 

Incidentally, there doesn't have to be an existing problem to justify changing something.  Things can always be improved, even those things that are currently working.

[jimmydeanno]

IIRC at one time under [a] previous Executive Director some employees did wear their CAP uniforms to work.   This policy was later revoked/changed and employees were told not to wear their CAP uniforms.  My understanding is that it was for many of the reasons that I listed above.

I do not think that CAPNHQ employees or our Administrators wearing CAP uniforms would be any benefit whatsoever.  Believe it or not, most people have credibility based on their actions and demeanor as opposed to what they are wearing.  All seem to be able to do their jobs and accomplish many things without the aide of a uniform, heck, most things they do are done by phone.

I still don't see any benefit or need to force our paid employees to wear uniforms, especially when it wouldn't have any effect on the performance of their jobs.  Even interacting with other agencies, most of them aren't wearing uniforms.

[RiverAux]

I don't think that CAP employees should wear CAP uniforms for many reasons.

1) It implies some sort of authority in both directions.  A NHQ employee goes to an NCSA to provide support and ends up being told to go drive a van because they are a 2d Lt and the NCSA LG guy is a Capt.

How?  No more than faced by CAP members in almost every situation you might name and the fact is that it just doesn't happen.  As you know, CAP authority is generated primarily by position and I can't think of a single time when a senior member in CAP has tried to order someone around based solely on rank.  Your example isn't very realistic. 
2) We do not hire or require CAP employees to be members, IIRC it's illegal to.  That is an option to them.  There are many people at NHQ that are not members of the organization, so you would have some wear a uniform and others not?
Reference for it to be illegal to require CAP membership of an employee?  But, lets assume that you are right, CAP the corporation can still require its employees to wear any uniform it likes whether or not they are CAP members. 

3) Uniforms and rank do not create an environment of free, open thought and open communication. Something that we desperately need at our NHQ.

Gee, I suppose we should get rid of them for all CAP members as well.  If this is your general position, no justification that I might provide, no matter how great, will suffice. 

4) It separates and differentiates between the volunteer staff and paid employees, and important difference that needs to be made.

Why does there need to be a distinction?  The paid staff are very critical to our operations.  If anything, the paid people and the volunteers could benefit from being closer together. 

5) Does that mean that if one paid employee happens to be a lower rank volunteer can they can't be a higher ranking person's boss?

Why not?  It works that way in the rest of CAP. 

6) Our uniform represents our volunteer heritage.  Our volunteers sacrifice hundreds of hours every year in the perfomance of their duties.  Our awards and decorations represent actions during volunteer service and I think that our uniform should be reserved to represent that service.

I'm not sure I've ever heard that before.  Our uniform represents our affiliation with the Air Force, and those folks tend to get paid.

[JayT]

I wouldn't be opposed to a oxford, or a polo shirt, but again, what problem are we looking to solve here? No one has truly be able to answer that, beyond half justifcations such as "Well, they represent CAP."

[Pylon]

Not a fan of the idea.  I don't think it would benefit CAP at all.  I particularly like the obvious distinction between the volunteers at the National level and the paid staff.

[DNall]

Not a fan of the idea.  I don't think it would benefit CAP at all.  I particularly like the obvious distinction between the volunteers at the National level and the paid staff.

I don't! As a guardsmen, there is no difference between me & an active duty officer. I don't care if someone is paid to do full-time work for CAP or they are doing it as a part-time volunteer. POSITION is all that matters. If this person is a director & I'm not then they are in charge of their subject area & I'm not. It doesn't matter if they are a 2LT or a civilian employee. Their authority comes from the person that put them in that position - in this case a Wg/Reg/Nat CC or board. That trumps my grade as a CAP Major and that of my Sq CC.

I'm sure you've noticed the Army now wears ACUs everywhere - in situations where class Bs or even As would traditionally have been more appropriate. That policy was set to psychologically reinforce solidarity of soldiers at home with the ones overseas - ie we're really at war even though you're safe in bed at night, so you better work and train hard cause lives depend on it. Same is true of the flag on BDU/ACUs, which is traditionally worn ONLY overseas in a multinational environment to identify what country you belong to.

I think the same is true in this case. I don't want bland employees just punching a clock & doing their job to minimum standard. I want people that are emphatically part of the same team & working desperately every second of the day to make that team successful. I do believe dressing them the same as the rest of us reinforces that concept - or to be more blunt, makes it impossible for them to forget the weight of responsibility they hold with their position on that team.