Promotion Procedures & Regulations

Started by Pylon, January 24, 2006, 11:13:27 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Pylon

Regarding promotions, National Headquarter's clearly states (with my emphasis added):

Quote from: CAPR 35-5, August 2004Section A.
1. General. Criteria for promotion of CAP senior members will be applied uniformly throughout Civil Air Patrol. CAP unit supplements to this regulation in the form of publications or oral instructions that change the basic policies, criteria, procedures, and practices prescribed herein are prohibited.

NYWG, on the other hand, goes right ahead and clearly publishes a Wing Supplement to CAPR 35-5 (and so labels it as such), which adds a large number of additional requirements to promotions.  In addition, right in the supplement, NYWG states (with no emphasis added):

Quote from: NYWG Policy Letter 05-01, Attach to CAPR 35-5
It should be noted that National criteria for promotions are the minimum requirements for promotion and that NY Wg further stipulates additional criteria.


The NYWG supplement further goes on to stipulate additional requirements for promotions that don't even fall under their authority (such as Captain, which is approved at Group-level).

Some of the interesting stipulations are that in order to be promoted to a grade, the member must be serving at the level of that rank's approving authority.   Promotions to Captain are reserved only for those serving on Group Staff for over a year, or Squadron Commanders.  Promotions to Major are only for Group Commanders and Wing Staffers.  Lt Colonel is only for certain high-level Wing officers, such as Chief of Staff, Wing Vice-Commander, etc.

Those who want to be promoted based on Mission Related Skills or by Professional Appointment can only get those grades if they are contributing those skills at those echelons specified above.

Those promoted under Special Appointment will revert back to their regular earned grade after they are done with their duty.  So for example, if a Captain takes on the Group Commander position and earns Major after a year, the Group/CC will be demoted back to being a Captain if they don't complete all the necessary professional development work first, while being a Group Commander.  NYWg refers to this as "brevet" rank.

Is it me, or is this policy letter waaaay out of whack with what NHQ says on the matter?

Reference:

CAPR 35-5
NYWG 05-01, Attachment to CAPR 35-5
Michael F. Kieloch, Maj, CAP

SarDragon

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

groundpounder

This policy is clearly a violation of National regulations. Anyone that is being discriminated agianst by this regulation should contact the appropriate level of Command to voice an objection.

It is ironic that the NYW CC quotes the regulations when it is to his benefit, but violates them with this supplement without regard to what is clearly written.

Pace

From what I know of the NYWG/CC and how he operates (from personal experience), this does NOT surprise me in the least.

If you are being severely held back from promoting, transfer to another wing and hope your don't see this as a region supplement someday.
Lt Col, CAP

capchiro

Actually, I think you need to take this to National and get them involved.  If that doesn't work, a class action law suit might prompt some attention.  The National Legal Officer is available and might be interested in this situation, especially if it wwere about to become a legal issue.  You are probably going to step on some toes, but what's right is right.  Just my humble opinion.
Lt. Col. Harry E. Siegrist III, CAP
Commander
Sweetwater Comp. Sqdn.
GA154

Eclipse

I'd be curious how they are able to stop promotions up to Captain via eServices, and if they are, likely this is a closed issue (though wouldn't be the first time IT did something against regs only to be corrected later.

It doesn't appear that NHQ cares(ed) about whether local policies step on their regs in  this regard - I know IL wasn't happy about the new system.

A couple clicks and anybody who has been even moderately active since 2002 should be eligible and promotable to at least Capt.

I don't understand why people bother with nonsense like this.  Since there's no pay and no UCMJ, it's all just bling anyway, and beyond a little "sir'in and salutin" doesn't mean much.

I don't even know if I would disagree with this as nat policy if it could be implemented in some fashion that didn't step on current members, but not for just one wing.

I also agree on pushing back if you feel justified. I am amazed at home much I think NHQ is aware of, when in fact it wasn't even on their radar.

"That Others May Zoom"

dwb

We already had this discussion in another thread.  However, to recap...

My interpretation of the policy:

I think 35-5 makes it clear that he has no authority to tell Group CCs how to sign their promotion paperwork.  However, the rules for Maj and Lt Col, as unnecessary as they might be, probably fall in line with "commander's discretion".  At least, they do for duty performance promotions.

It's probably also a bogus policy for special appointment, professional, or mission-related promotions.  I think the intent of the non-duty performance promotions is to make an incentive for those with desirable skills (you know, like nunchuck skills, bowhunting skills, computer hacking skills...) to join CAP.  Placing undue restricitons on those promotions effectively negates them all together, which probably violates the intent of 35-5.

In any case, it would take someone's promotion getting denied, then filing a formal complaint with the IG, and even then, nothing may happen.  IGs are not promotion authorities, and even if the policy is rescinded, there is no proof that the Wing Commander will ever sign the form.

Eclipse -- there is no way for the Wing CC to prevent Group CCs from approving a promotion to Captain, through eServices or otherwise.  You have to take in on faith that the Group CCs will follow the policy letter.

Quote from: dcpacemaker on January 25, 2006, 02:38:38 AMFrom what I know of the NYWG/CC and how he operates (from personal experience), this does NOT surprise me in the least.

You have personal experience with the NYWG/CC?

Eclipse

Which could open an interesting pot of flounder - what happens if a member
violates a policy letter,  which in itself violates a national regulation?

"That Others May Zoom"

capchiro

What happens if Lt. Col. John Doe wants to transfer from Georgia to New York?  Is he given a hard time due to his rank?  If he is not filling a Lt. Col. slot in the NY wing, will they attempt to demote him and to what?  I am just amazed at this and can't belive it is going on.  Having very close contact with my squadron legal officer, I may ask her to run this by the hot line of wing legal officers and national legal officer.   
Lt. Col. Harry E. Siegrist III, CAP
Commander
Sweetwater Comp. Sqdn.
GA154

Eclipse

I thought the same thing. Considering that up in the NE you changes states every block, just transfer to NJWG or similiar - you could stil participate in NY activities, get your bars or leaf, and then x-fer back.

"That Others May Zoom"

Pace

Lt Col, CAP

dwb

Remember that the policy only addresses promotions.  There aren't a special number of Lt Col "slots", and no one is getting demoted if they transfer here.  And yes, if you have a geographic proximity to another Wing, it is possible to abuse the system.

I get what he's trying to do.  He doesn't want someone pinning on field grade rank just because they've checked some boxes and they're friends with the commander.  He wants people earning (present tense) field grade ranks based on a history of performance and a willingness to accept responsibilities commensurate with their rank.

As a theory, there really isn't anything wrong with that.

Unfortunately, what the policy letter does is automatically disqualify people who may otherwise be perfectly qualified for the promotion, just because they don't meet his narrow perception of what "qualified" means.  It eliminates commander's discretion, which is a very powerful tool.

For example, I think the commander of a large, successful squadron should be promoted to Major if they are eligible.  Why not?  The Rochester squadron, for example, had over 100 members last I knew.  Surely, someone who is able to grow and maintain a squadron that size should get his bronze oak leaf if he's completed the requirements.

But according to the policy, he can't, not because he doesn't contribute tremendously to CAP, but because of some hard-and-fast rule that doesn't allow the edge cases to even be considered.  And that's too bad.

Pylon

Quote from: justin_bailey on January 25, 2006, 03:01:13 PM
Remember that the policy only addresses promotions.  There aren't a special number of Lt Col "slots", and no one is getting demoted if they transfer here.  And yes, if you have a geographic proximity to another Wing, it is possible to abuse the system.

I get what he's trying to do.  He doesn't want someone pinning on field grade rank just because they've checked some boxes and they're friends with the commander.  He wants people earning (present tense) field grade ranks based on a history of performance and a willingness to accept responsibilities commensurate with their rank.

As a theory, there really isn't anything wrong with that.

Unfortunately, what the policy letter does is automatically disqualify people who may otherwise be perfectly qualified for the promotion, just because they don't meet his narrow perception of what "qualified" means.  It eliminates commander's discretion, which is a very powerful tool.

For example, I think the commander of a large, successful squadron should be promoted to Major if they are eligible.  Why not?  The Rochester squadron, for example, had over 100 members last I knew.  Surely, someone who is able to grow and maintain a squadron that size should get his bronze oak leaf if he's completed the requirements.

But according to the policy, he can't, not because he doesn't contribute tremendously to CAP, but because of some hard-and-fast rule that doesn't allow the edge cases to even be considered.  And that's too bad.

Right.  It's a double-edged sword, really.  In an effort to exercise Commander's Discretion, he's limited his own discretion.  I understand the rationale and I agree with the intent that members who check the boxes, pay their dues, and show their face at meetings occassionally should not get promoted.  Additionally, just because Maj Bagadonuts has been the Assistant Admin Officer at a unit forever, and has completed all the requirements does not mean that they necessarily ought to qualify for the silver oak leaves -- he may be contributing, but not at a level expected.

The reverse side of this policy letter is that a person who is assigned to Wing HQ, perhaps as Assistant Director of Cadet Programs North, would be qualified for a promotion to Major under this policy, even if they really weren't doing a dang thing.  Every unit roster has people "filing the slots," no matter what the echelon.  A person can, if determined, find and fill a slot at Group for a year very easily.  And as Dan said so aptly, a successful Commander of a very large squadron which actively contributes to the overall well being of CAP would not be eligible for such a promotion.

I think this policy letter seems to be a vehicle to take the place of promotion boards.  Why not let a qualified promotion board review the merits of each promotion request for Major and Lt. Col. separately, on its own merits.  Each promotion should be based on the participation and contributions of the member up for review at that time.  While factors of echelon should be figured in, I don't think it should be the end-all determining factor for every promotion.

Let the promotion board do their deal, and make the recommendation to the Wing King for the final sign-off.  This policy letter just restricts a commander's own discretion.
Michael F. Kieloch, Maj, CAP

Eclipse

Without an NCO corps (an idea which I support), CAP is not currently an organization where responsibility is connected with grade. And until we stop awarding advanced grade to philosophy professors based on their degree, it never will be.

To try and change that at a Wing or lower echelon doesn't work, since it sets them up for conflict with other wings, system abuse and looking silly. Does the NYWG CC some how believe his program is so much better than the other wings' that his bars and leaves are heavier?

A Major is a Major, same salute, same requirements, same pay.

"That Others May Zoom"

dwb

QuoteDoes the NYWG CC some how believe his program is so much better than the other wings' that his bars and leaves are heavier?

To put that another way: Just because some Wings may hand out rank like candy, doesn't mean New York is going to.

Sounds different when you say it that way, doesn't it?

There is a large disparity between what various commanders at various echelons believe is "the standard".  To Commander A, it may sound perfectly fine to promote someone whenever they've checked all their boxes, while Commander B believes you should also contribute to the organization in a significant way.

The same can be said for Commanders Commendations and similar awards.  Some people get them for organizing the snack bar, others part the Red Sea and aren't recognized because "they're just doing their job".

It's a much deeper issue than Col G's policy would lead you to think.  It's not just that it is more difficult to make Major in NY, it's that being a Major in NY should in itself be a symbol that you have your poop in a group and can actually perform.

That's the ideal, anyway.  In practice, people were promoted using all kinds of different standards, from "just check the boxes", all the way to "served one year on Wing staff and actually did something", and everything in between.

Eclipse

#15
Quote from: justin_bailey on January 25, 2006, 04:20:48 PM
QuoteDoes the NYWG CC some how believe his program is so much better than the other wings' that his bars and leaves are heavier?

To put that another way: Just because some Wings may hand out rank like candy, doesn't mean New York is going to.

Sounds different when you say it that way, doesn't it?


That's just spin.

The "commander's discretion" part of the promotion reg is something which must be wielded with great care.  I believe I understand the intention, but don't believe NY has the authority to do this in the way presented.  Its one thing to consider delaying a promotion to a member who never shows and provides no benefit to CAP, or to require the Officer's course or equivelent be completed >before< a member is recommended for special appointment (CFI, Teacher, etc), but not to add non-discretionary requirements. 

Other than tax deductions, the only thing we have to give our members is meaningless bling.  As stated, in CAP, authority does not stem from grade, but from staff position.

So I'm supposed to tell one of my members, who has the time in, has met all the requirements, comes to meetings regularly, and flies whenever he can, but has a job and family and can't devote more time than that to a staff job, that he can't be a Captain, while he can see a "Director of Looking out the Window" wearing leaves right in front of him?

Or what about the highly effective, extremely busy field assets such as check pilots, Ground Team Leaders, Encampment CCs, Drill Team CC's, Color Guard CC's, and all the positions with a "xxBD" after them that keep the wing able to continue in the ES capacity, etc., who are all performing valuable services and throwing 30 hours a week to the program.

Nope, foul.  Its not right.

"That Others May Zoom"

dwb

You'll get no argument from me that the policy is dumb.  I agree with you.  I do maintain that he has authority to create the policy, though.

You bring up several good cases of members that contribute, and should be promoted, yet, under the policy, can't even be considered on their merits, because of an arbitrary requirement to serve on Group/Wing staff.

To my knowledge, no one has challenged the policy.  The IG hasn't struck it down.  I assume that, dumb as it may be, it's allowed to stand.

groundpounder

Quote from: justin_bailey on January 25, 2006, 08:34:36 PM
You'll get no argument from me that the policy is dumb.  I agree with you.  I do maintain that he has authority to create the policy, though.

I do not at all agree that he has the authority to create this policy. He is bound as are we all, by the regulations, regardless of our rank or position in the NY Wing. The 35-5 regulation clearly states that there shall not be any local polices that create further restriction to the promotion criteria or create an atmosphere where members in one wing are subjected to a higher level of scrutiny when it comes to promotion.

There are many instances where the Wing CC could create local polices that are more restrictive than the National regulations - this is not one of them.

Where else do you see a CAP regulation that prohibits stricter regulation at the unit level? I can't find any, which makes it pretty clear that the authors were clearly trying to avoid exactly what has happend in NY.

Further, it is waaaayyyy out of bounds to say that many of the squadron folks are not working harder and doing more for CAP than those serving at Group or Wing. I have witnessed several members at the Wing level that are not fit to walk within 50 feet of some of the folks that we have in our squadrons. We have all seen the slug that shows up at every Group meeting, does little, and makes Capt.

This policy is simply wrong and should have been rescinded before it was ever published. Where is the NER oversight of this policy?



footballrun21

Can someone please tell me why NYWG has their own set of regs on everything?! :-\
C/2d Lt. Stephen Pettit, CAP
New Jersey Wing

MIKE

Quote from: footballrun21 on February 05, 2006, 03:28:42 AM
Can someone please tell me why NYWG has their own set of regs on everything?! :-\

Simple answer... because they believe they have the authority to do so.


Mike Johnston