Uniforms in COV

[manfredvonrichthofen]

I don't see what is so hard about putting on a pair of BDUs, or if you prefer, even just the polo uniform. I would even do it just to go get gas. It isn't that hard, there is no doubt that if anything happens you would be taken care of and covered, plus, when you are in a COV, you are representing CAP, so why not do it in uniform?

(Also, I still don't understand what YMMV means, any explanation would be nice. Thank you.)

[Eclipse]

[lmgtfy]YMMV[/lmgtfy]

[FW]

Guys, you're a tough crowd.

The question asked by the OP referred to the possible mandatory requirements of wearing a CAP uniform when driving a COV.  The answer, according to NHQ, is NO.   Every other argument, while valid, doesn't change the question or, the answer. 

YMMV means "your mileage may vary".   I use it to mean your experience may be different and, good for you....

[Eclipse]

Unless NHQ no longer produces 39-1, then they have clearly said a uniform is required.

77-1 is not the sole authority on this.

[FW]

OK, Eclipse.  The next time the CAP/EX picks me up in his COV in civilian attire and, takes me to my billet at NHQ, I'll ask him if it's OK.....

[Eclipse]

OK, Eclipse.  The next time the CAP/EX picks me up in his COV in civilian attire and, takes me to my billet at NHQ, I'll ask him if it's OK.....

The CAP/EX is not a member of CAP in his role as Executive Director, and he doesn't have a uniform to wear.

The rules are different for paid HQ employees and CAP-USAF, and are irrelevant to this discussion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_V3yfyS1XY

[FW]

When he's picking me up at the airport, he's just another CAP Col picking up a "bud".  What happens during office hours is another coversation.  Good thought though...

[cap235629]

Unless NHQ no longer produces 39-1, then they have clearly said a uniform is required.

77-1 is not the sole authority on this.

The revision date on 77-1 is later than 39-1 so it could be argued that the newest regulation is binding.  77-1 is a REGULATION, 39-1 is a MANUAL by the way........

[Hawk200]

Unless NHQ no longer produces 39-1, then they have clearly said a uniform is required.

77-1 is not the sole authority on this.

The revision date on 77-1 is later than 39-1 so it could be argued that the newest regulation is binding.  77-1 is a REGULATION, 39-1 is a MANUAL by the way........

Oh boy, the "regulation trumps manual" argument.

How about this: CAP Regulation 77-1 is not the publication on uniforms. CAP Manual 39-1 is.

Your ball.

[RiverAux]

You know, I'd be the first to agree that CAP has some regulations that leave a lot to be desired in terms of being clear and straightforward, and 39-1 certainly has its own issues in that area. 

However, when uniform wear is authorized and/or required is one of the clearest rules we have.  Yet, we have some CAPTalkers who apparently believe that it is ok to wear the uniform just about anytime it strikes their fancy (demonstrated in other threads) while others flail about for any excuse not to wear even one of our civilian "uniforms". 

[RADIOMAN015]

Unless NHQ no longer produces 39-1, then they have clearly said a uniform is required.

77-1 is not the sole authority on this.

Wow what a challenging thread this is.....   If senior member X is bringing in the van for preventive maintenance and leaving it there while he's on his lunch break putting on a uniform just to drive it there seem a bit of an overkill.   Even a color guard/drill team being transported to a competition (e.g. NJ wing traveling to MA) wearing their uniforms while in transit for a long ride is questionable.     MY only concern is that any civilian attire being worn should not be a discredit to CAP.  Personally though I like the idea of squadron TShirts or sweatshirts being worn by all during transit. 

HOWEVER, if it is an AF approved ES mission, yes everyone should be in proper uniform.

RM

[Major Carrales]

We usually require everyone to be in a CAP uniform if we are going in the van.  Since any use of the CAP van is a CAP squadron activity (unless you blokes are joy riding in it) that is logged it is not unreasonable to make that request of those that would ride.

I would say that the "inconvenience" of such is one of the best ways to prevent frivolous use.

Again, it is not unreasonable to request that a CAP uniform be worn.

[commando1]

Guys, you're a tough crowd.

The question asked by the OP referred to the possible mandatory requirements of wearing a CAP uniform when driving a COV.  The answer, according to NHQ, is NO.   Every other argument, while valid, doesn't change the question or, the answer. 

I personally know the asker of this question. The circumstance was driving 3+hours to a SAREX. The SAREX began at 0800 Saturday morning. Instead of leaving at 0400 in the morning we obtained permission to spend the night at the ICP. The question was whether or not 15 people had to be all dressed up just to drive 3+ hours just to change into civvies to sleep was really necessary. The whole squadron loves wearing our BDU's but as a matter of convenience we all just wore jeans with encampment/NCSA shirts. 

[Eclipse]

When and if a corporate officer approves no uniform, the onus is on him and that changes the question.

[RVT]

I would say that the "inconvenience" of such is one of the best ways to prevent frivolous use.  Again, it is not unreasonable to request that a CAP uniform be worn.

Making people put on a uniform to use the vehicle is probably the simplest and easiest way to reduce its use for personal errands.

[EMT-83]

If that's really an issue, it's not a uniform problem that you have.

[JoeTomasone]

My personal take: If I am performing a CAP function in public, I wear the uniform.   I don't wear it at home.