http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R035_005_489E25C089E93.pdf (http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R035_005_489E25C089E93.pdf)
Quote from: CAPR 35-5SUMMARY OF CHANGES.
This revision changes the professional development and time in grade requirements for duty performance promotions, revises eligibility for mission related skills promotions, eliminates the squadron commander promotion to captain after one year as commander, clarifies the approving authority for the permanent grade of colonel, authorizes a temporary promotion for those serving as Wing Legislative Officers, authorizes the grade of captain for Financial professionals at the Wing and Region level only, prescribes promotion procedures for Noncommissioned Officers, and eliminates the advanced officer grade promotions for former military NCOs.
They've also made it a little harder to promote...
Promotion To Minimum Skill Level Time-In-Grade
2d Lt Level I 6 months as a member
1st Lt Level II 18 months as 2d Lt or TFO (or combination thereof)
Captain Level III 30 months as 1st Lt or SFO(or combination thereof)
Major Level IV 4 years as Captain
Lt Col Level V 5 years as Major
It's a welcomed setback for me. That said, while many of the changes are positive, in my view, I'm disappointed that they kept many of the advanced promotions in place.
One thing I find puzzling is that only one MSgt can be promoted per squadron/flight, while the same squadron could promote, in theory, 20 Majs and Lt Cols. That makes no sense to me.
The promotion track is certainly a lot clearer for officers.
I think I just joined the Major For Life club.
It appears that they want to mirror the promotion requirements for RealMilitary™ officers as so much is realistic for a all-volunteer civilian force.
The NCO system was officially put into place, as well.
I just came across this note:
Quote from: CAPR 35-5, 11 Aug 2014NOTE: Members applying for duty performance promotions during the period 1 June 2014 to 1 June 2018 may use the previous time-in-grade requirements. All current training requirements must be met but members are eligible for one promotion under the previous time-in-grade requirements during this period. The member's present date of grade must be prior to 1 June 2014 in order to be eligible for this grandfather clause.
I guess everyone who got promoted to their current grade prior to 1 Jun 2014 gets a freebie, as long as they can meet the old requirements by 1 Jun 2018. I think that's more than fair.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 11, 2014, 03:56:38 PM
I just came across this note:
Quote from: CAPR 35-5, 11 Aug 2014NOTE: Members applying for duty performance promotions during the period 1 June 2014 to 1 June 2018 may use the previous time-in-grade requirements. All current training requirements must be met but members are eligible for one promotion under the previous time-in-grade requirements during this period. The member's present date of grade must be prior to 1 June 2014 in order to be eligible for this grandfather clause.
I guess everyone who got promoted to their current grade prior to 1 Jun 2014 gets a freebie, as long as they can meet the old requirements by 1 Jun 2018. I think that's more than fair.
I read that as only applying to the Time-In-Grade requirements. You still have to make the newest Level
X training requirement. (For example: before, to make Major was Level III. Now it's Level IV.)
That was my interpretation.
That's my interpretation as well. You get a freebie on TIG but not on the Level requirement.
I believe you're both correct.
YAY for me, Silver Bar for Life!!
It is my interpretation that PD and requesting a different level has not changed, right?
This morning I was going to request my Level IV when I found this. Scanned the new CAPR 35-5, just want to make sure I can go ahead...
Devil, I was silver bar for about 6 years!
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on August 11, 2014, 04:58:59 PM
It is my interpretation that PD and requesting a different level has not changed, right?
This morning I was going to request my Level IV when I found this. Scanned the new CAPR 35-5, just want to make sure I can go ahead...
No changes I see to the requirements for a level. The change is what that level lets you do once you have it.
Looks like my plan of taking ACSC after I made Major is out the window now.
Guess I'm going to be a Captain for awhile as RSC is not in the cards in the next few years for me.
That said, I don't necessarily disagree with any of the changes, I'm just glad I got captain done.
Quote from: arajca on August 11, 2014, 03:41:19 PM
They've also made it a little harder to promote...
Promotion To Minimum Skill Level Time-In-Grade
2d Lt Level I 6 months as a member
1st Lt Level II 18 months as 2d Lt or TFO (or combination thereof)
Captain Level III 30 months as 1st Lt or SFO(or combination thereof)
Major Level IV 4 years as Captain
Lt Col Level V 5 years as Major
I agree with this timetable. I always thought Lt Cols should be required to have Level V. It makes a lot more sense this way. Harder yes, I agree.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on August 11, 2014, 05:07:55 PM
Guess I'm going to be a Captain for awhile as RSC is not in the cards in the next few years for me.
That said, I don't necessarily disagree with any of the changes, I'm just glad I got captain done.
Why wait for RSC? Sure it's a great course, but if you can't get to it for a few years, look at SOS as an alternative.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 11, 2014, 05:36:44 PM
Quote from: arajca on August 11, 2014, 03:41:19 PM
They've also made it a little harder to promote...
Promotion To Minimum Skill Level Time-In-Grade
2d Lt Level I 6 months as a member
1st Lt Level II 18 months as 2d Lt or TFO (or combination thereof)
Captain Level III 30 months as 1st Lt or SFO(or combination thereof)
Major Level IV 4 years as Captain
Lt Col Level V 5 years as Major
I agree with this timetable. I always thought Lt Cols should be required to have Level V. It makes a lot more sense this way. Harder yes, I agree.
It's also going to thin things out at the top level as well. Having a longer TIS/TIG path, combined with the increased performance requirements, pretty much guarantees fewer members staying around to get their bottlecaps.
Quote from: JeffDG on August 11, 2014, 05:02:16 PM
No changes I see to the requirements for a level. The change is what that level lets you do once you have it.
Looks like my plan of taking ACSC after I made Major is out the window now.
Why? ACSC required you to be a major anyway. Besides, you have until 2018 to complete your promotion requirements before this sets in
Quote from: LSThiker on August 11, 2014, 05:59:41 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on August 11, 2014, 05:02:16 PM
No changes I see to the requirements for a level. The change is what that level lets you do once you have it.
Looks like my plan of taking ACSC after I made Major is out the window now.
Why? ACSC required you to be a major anyway. Besides, you have until 2018 to complete your promotion requirements before this sets in
Yeah, the plan was to make Major, then do ACSC for my Level IV, and use that for Lt Col, at which time I could take AWC.
Before, I could make Major before ACSC...now I'll have to take SOS probably...just another course in the queue that I didn't need before...big deal? Not really. But a wrinkle nonetheless.
Doesn't impact me, but I can't say I'm happy about taking away the bump to Captain as a Squadron/CC + 1 year. That was one of the advanced promotions that was very much a well deserved shortcut for a thankless job.
Or use SOS for Level IV and ACSC for level V. Then take AWC, which some people have been saying that the USAF has been limiting CAP participation, as a leisure. That way, if rumors are true, you do not screw yourself. Once you use ACSC for level IV, NHQ won't let you use it again for Level v.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 11, 2014, 06:15:45 PM
Or use SOS for Level IV and ACSC for level V. Then take AWC, which some people have been saying that the USAF has been limiting CAP participation, as a leisure. That way, if rumors are true, you do not screw yourself. Once you use ACSC for level IV, NHQ won't let you use it again for Level v.
Understood. I had my plan figured out to skip SOS entirely...as I said, not a big deal, but a wrinkle.)
Heck, you can't enroll in SOS right now anyway.QuoteNOTE: To enroll send an email to ProDev@capnhq.gov requesting enrollment information for the SOS DL course. You will be contacted by CAP NHQ staff and provided with enrollment instructions. Your request will be held until we are informed Air University has corrected their system problems.
http://capmembers.com/cap_university/au-a4-6-students-usaf-dl/ (http://capmembers.com/cap_university/au-a4-6-students-usaf-dl/)
See correction below. Send e-mail to prodev@capnhq.gov and they can get you enrolled.
Quote from: JeffDG on August 11, 2014, 06:19:18 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on August 11, 2014, 06:15:45 PM
Or use SOS for Level IV and ACSC for level V. Then take AWC, which some people have been saying that the USAF has been limiting CAP participation, as a leisure. That way, if rumors are true, you do not screw yourself. Once you use ACSC for level IV, NHQ won't let you use it again for Level v.
Understood. I had my plan figured out to skip SOS entirely...as I said, not a big deal, but a wrinkle.)
Heck, you can't enroll in SOS right now anyway.
QuoteNOTE: To enroll send an email to ProDev@capnhq.gov requesting enrollment information for the SOS DL course. You will be contacted by CAP NHQ staff and provided with enrollment instructions. Your request will be held until we are informed Air University has corrected their system problems.
http://capmembers.com/cap_university/au-a4-6-students-usaf-dl/ (http://capmembers.com/cap_university/au-a4-6-students-usaf-dl/)
Yes and no. You can contact NHQ and do the paperwork, but you may have to wait. A few people have enrolled into ACSC since at least Dec. they had to wait a few months before they were officially in the program, but they are in it now.
Quote from: THRAWN on August 11, 2014, 05:47:07 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on August 11, 2014, 05:07:55 PM
Guess I'm going to be a Captain for awhile as RSC is not in the cards in the next few years for me.
That said, I don't necessarily disagree with any of the changes, I'm just glad I got captain done.
Why wait for RSC? Sure it's a great course, but if you can't get to it for a few years, look at SOS as an alternative.
I don't have a bachelor's degree.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on August 11, 2014, 06:27:35 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on August 11, 2014, 05:47:07 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on August 11, 2014, 05:07:55 PM
Guess I'm going to be a Captain for awhile as RSC is not in the cards in the next few years for me.
That said, I don't necessarily disagree with any of the changes, I'm just glad I got captain done.
Why wait for RSC? Sure it's a great course, but if you can't get to it for a few years, look at SOS as an alternative.
I don't have a bachelor's degree.
Welcome to my world. 124 out of 124 credits, need 1 course, owe too much in loans, school will not release grades etc etc.
So just for clarification, the manning authorization is only for promotion and not overall numbers. As NCOs are appointed at the rank they were in the military, if a retired CMSgt joins a squadron, but has no desire to be at Wing level as a senior advisor, that won't affect the wing authorization correct?
Never mind, saw the citation in the reg
Quote from: Garibaldi on August 11, 2014, 06:35:53 PM
Welcome to my world. 124 out of 124 credits, need 1 course, owe too much in loans, school will not release grades etc etc.
Not much CAP can do about the USAF requirements for SOS and above.
Just to correct, the above.
NHQ can get you registered for SOS and the others...just got a quick e-mail back from them in regards to this. Send an e-mail to the suggested address and they can help you get registered if you like.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on August 11, 2014, 06:27:35 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on August 11, 2014, 05:47:07 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on August 11, 2014, 05:07:55 PM
Guess I'm going to be a Captain for awhile as RSC is not in the cards in the next few years for me.
That said, I don't necessarily disagree with any of the changes, I'm just glad I got captain done.
Why wait for RSC? Sure it's a great course, but if you can't get to it for a few years, look at SOS as an alternative.
I don't have a bachelor's degree.
Doh. Keep forgetting that they are actually enforcing that rule now. I think I was one of the last to finish ACSC without it.
I agree with what they are trying to do. I like the new timetable. However, I think that the grandfather clause should cover both TIG and PD LVL not just TIG. This would allow people to complete the promotions they are on and not have a multi year set back.
Quote from: MICT1362 on August 11, 2014, 10:23:20 PM
I agree with what they are trying to do. I like the new timetable. However, I think that the grandfather clause should cover both TIG and PD LVL not just TIG. This would allow people to complete the promotions they are on and not have a multi year set back.
+1
Quote from: MICT1362 on August 11, 2014, 10:23:20 PM
I agree with what they are trying to do. I like the new timetable. However, I think that the grandfather clause should cover both TIG and PD LVL not just TIG. This would allow people to complete the promotions they are on and not have a multi year set back.
I'm one of the people who are caught in the "hole" here. I've met all the previous requirements except Time-in-Grade for my next promotion. I meet that requirement in six weeks. I am very active in the squadron and since I am currently a 2nd Lt. there would not be a problem with getting the promotion to 1st Lt. Except.... Now there is!
You see, the last time Squadron Leadership School was offered in my area was about three years ago.
So, now the new PD requirement means that I am in limbo for the promotion for an indeterminate amount of time. I had recently discussed this with our group commander as we have several people who do not have that training in our squadron, and even offered to help organize it and assist in making it happen. Unfortunately, that group commander decided to leave shortly after we spoke and the new group commander is probably still trying to figure out what hit him!
It's not that big of a deal to me to wait, but it seems rather abrupt given that this regulation came out today, but is backdated to June and does not grandfather people except for the Time in Grade requirement.
I guess I'm disappointed in the leadership here.
That would a good time to offer your services to organize an SLS. If he does not agree, then there is always the long distance option.
Quote from: THRAWN on August 11, 2014, 06:46:36 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on August 11, 2014, 06:27:35 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on August 11, 2014, 05:47:07 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on August 11, 2014, 05:07:55 PM
Guess I'm going to be a Captain for awhile as RSC is not in the cards in the next few years for me.
That said, I don't necessarily disagree with any of the changes, I'm just glad I got captain done.
Why wait for RSC? Sure it's a great course, but if you can't get to it for a few years, look at SOS as an alternative.
I don't have a bachelor's degree.
Doh. Keep forgetting that they are actually enforcing that rule now. I think I was one of the last to finish ACSC without it.
Does this mean that without a Bachelor's degree, you're effectively locked at Major / Level IV now?
I'm not affected by this, so take my comments in that light. I've always thought
that having Level V hanging out on it's own, disconnected from grade was weird.
It's essentially a ribbon for NSC, so requiring it for Lt Col makes sense, however considering
how few spots there are for the single NSC run each year, and that the school's staff
can be subjectively selective, that's a good way to keep the silver oak club closed.
This has zero affect on the organization whatsoever for more then four years, and while
it will theoretically suppress the number of oaks in the room, that won't be won't be
visible for over a decade, meanwhile you'll still have the same people doing the
same jobs with no authority connected to grade whatsoever.
I cannot imagine why anyone would want to be an NCO in the context of this
reg, promotion opportunities will be nearly nonexistent, or if they are plentiful,
we'll have Chief coffee bringer helping Lt Col Coffee bringer back at the unit in a few years.
There's also still the elephant in the room of no real NCO duties in the CAP paradigm.
If you're not already a Captain when you are appointed as a Wing or Region Finance Officer,
you shouldn't be getting appointed as a Wing or Region Finance Officer.
How is it that HSOs, which have no role or duty special from anyone else, and are
basically barred from using their skills in a CAP context, exempt from PD? That makes zero
sense and just perpetuates the uninformed promotions, same goes for Legal.
Two days away from finishing SLS and Level II and they change the rules. Great.
I really could have used the extra money from the Captain promotion! :'(
Quote from: Panache on August 12, 2014, 01:48:22 AM
Does this mean that without a Bachelor's degree, you're effectively locked at Major / Level IV now?
No. The "intended" way to promote is via RSC. The correspondence schools are / were a "nice to have"
that few members completed regardless of the academic requirements.
If being a major is important enough, members will have to make choices as to where to spend their CAP
time. Perhaps one year going to RSC and forgoing NESA or a flight academy.
National also needs to ramp up the RSC's and offer more of them so they aren't such a "quest".
Also, it's too late coming now, but the lesson for many here is "don't delay your PD".
I know more then a few members who have been long eligible for promotions but kept putting it
off, and now they are stuck. TIG is one thing, but having the oaks in your hand and then being
told you need another full level to achieve it is another.
I suppose anything can be back-dated if yo have the right pen, but it would have been nice
to have >some< grace period for people with everything completed and just not submitted,
or even some verbiage that "work completed but not submitted before 1 June 2014 will still
be accepted", etc.
Are you screwed on this if your Major has been sitting in your CC's To-Do bin since April?
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2014, 02:09:51 AM
Are you screwed on this if your Major has been sitting in your CC's To-Do bin since April?
This is literally my posisition. I have been waiting for the approve button to be clicked and now... I'm not sure, but I have worked hard to achieve this.
Does this sudden change really make a difference for CAP? Nope...
And why now?
If my cursory look is accurate, the promotion review board for officers is still at least three members, none of whom are necessarily the commander (personnel officer, professional development officer and a player to be named later)(para 1-10(a)), while the promotion board for NCO promotions is the promotion-authority commander and at least five other members for a total of six members minimum (para 1-10(b)).
Interesting.
Quote from: NCRblues on August 12, 2014, 02:22:51 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2014, 02:09:51 AM
Are you screwed on this if your Major has been sitting in your CC's To-Do bin since April?
This is literally my posisition. I have been waiting for the approve button to be clicked and now... I'm not sure, but I have worked hard to achieve this.
Does this sudden change really make a difference for CAP? Nope...
And why now?
This change has been in the works for at least a year as shown in the CSAG minutes.
Just picked up on this:
CAP Liaison Officer to FEMA and CAP Liaison Officer to the Pentagon. FEMA makes sense, but Pentagon? What is his/her role?
Quote from: NCRblues on August 12, 2014, 02:22:51 AM
Does this sudden change really make a difference for CAP? Nope...
And why now?
I suspect that there was some pressure to get this done before the current National Commander becomes the former National Commander in a few days.
Quote from: NCRblues on August 12, 2014, 02:22:51 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2014, 02:09:51 AM
Are you screwed on this if your Major has been sitting in your CC's To-Do bin since April?
This is literally my posisition. I have been waiting for the approve button to be clicked and now... I'm not sure, but I have worked hard to achieve this.
Does this sudden change really make a difference for CAP? Nope...
And why now?
To give everybody something to talk about at the National Conference.
I wonder if probationary Lt.Cols. with only Level IV will be retained as Majors after their one year? A hard line Region Commander could make the argument that those Lt.Cols. without Level V get to be Majors again.
Quote from: Robert Hartigan on August 12, 2014, 04:53:14 AM
I wonder if probationary Lt.Cols. with only Level IV will be retained as Majors after their one year? A hard line Region Commander could make the argument that those Lt.Cols. without Level V get to be Majors again.
To be quite honest, I don't see how. They were still promoted to Lt Col by regs. The new 35-5 does not make a distinction that to be a permanent Lt Col you need to meet current requirements.
If it does happen, it'll make an interesting MARP case should the member affected chose to go that route.
Quote from: Robert Hartigan on August 12, 2014, 04:53:14 AM
I wonder if probationary Lt.Cols. with only Level IV will be retained as Majors after their one year? A hard line Region Commander could make the argument that those Lt.Cols. without Level V get to be Majors again.
That's going to be interesting... I hope the Region Rajahs don't get too capricious.
Quote from: EMT-83 on August 11, 2014, 03:52:17 PM
I think I just joined the Major For Life club.
I'm in the same boat. I don't see myself going to Alabama for National Staff College or doing the Air University option to get level 5.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2014, 02:01:21 AM
I cannot imagine why anyone would want to be an NCO in the context of this
reg, promotion opportunities will be nearly nonexistent, or if they are plentiful,
we'll have Chief coffee bringer helping Lt Col Coffee bringer back at the unit in a few years.
There's also still the elephant in the room of no real NCO duties in the CAP paradigm.
I started as a SM NCO. I only took promotion to command the unit.
I am split on this issue. As a Level IV complete major with almost 8 years TIG, I was already a Major for life. I wouldn't mind returning to the Enlisted ranks. I mean what difference does it really make. It doesn't insult me that I have to salute everyone. To me the salute is more than a show of respect and courtesy it is also an act of pride, tradition and history. They should have included a conversion table for people who desire to transition to NCO.
Okay beyond the NCO issue, there is the new TIG and training requirements. I have read in countless threads that rank in CAP is not a matter of authority but rather recognition of service, training and experience. I agree with this except for the promotion to LtCol which is a whole other animal and always has been. Just like some awards are political, the promotion to LtCol is also highly political. Folks have to decide they want you in their LtCol club. Which in my opinion made altering this regulation redundant (for LtCol promotions). You can be complete Level V, meet TIG and still not end up a LtCol. Look I'm not bitter, If this was important I wouldn't still be in CAP! I simply don't care anymore, but I do care about others that want this opportunity.
CAP sends you tons of mail if you don't renew your membership. They send pleas to renew, surveys asking you why you didn't. The message from above is do everything possible to retain members. Promotions (and recognition) are the impetus that keeps some SMs active in the program (to a great extent it substitutes for pay). Hopefully, there is another reason for their service, that rank and medals, and I think in 99% of people the rank and awards are secondary. There are others that simply don't care (about either). I would have changed the training requirements, and I would have left TIG alone. I also would have stipulated that the reg doesn't effect any promotion request that has made it to Group by August 11th.
Promotions and awards are motivators. I remember my troop motivation classes from BNCOC, the three motivators are punishment, recognition, and unit cohesion (esprit de corps).
Quote from: catrulz on August 12, 2014, 12:47:48 PMPromotions and awards are motivators.
Agreed, the problem for CAP is it doesn't understand >what< it's motivating. It wants to continue to infer that
grade has the weight of authority and experience and is reflected by staff posting, yet the system and its loopholes insures
that is not the case.
Well, well, well, one more cog in the machine to grind CAP to death. I hope General Carr will be happy to be known as the man that sank CAP. I predict that within 5 years, CAP will have about 25% of the senior members left and if they don't do something to stimulate the cadet program, that will be gone also. For a volunteer organization, it is too much like my full time 40 hour a week job. Too many hoops to jump through, too many requirements that rely on others doing their job properly, and too little fun. We all have better things in life to do than this stuff. If not, then something is wrong. Just as the real military has gotten CS, so has CAP. Don't get me wrong, if my country really needs me to do some dirty work, I will be there, but not just to kill time.. The only thing we have that is irreplaceable is our time and CAP has become the biggest time waster I can think of. As usual, JMHO..
Quote from: AirAux on August 12, 2014, 02:00:15 PM
For a volunteer organization, it is too much like my full time 40 hour a week job. Too many hoops to jump through, too many requirements that rely on others doing their job properly, and too little fun. We all have better things in life to do than this stuff.
CAP has always been like a full time job since it is inception. Nothing has changed in the ~70 years. If you think there are too many hoops to jump through, then stop jumping through the hoops. You can accomplish the same work as a 2d Lt that you can as a Lt Col. No one is requiring you to push through the hoops except those few that are mandatory (i.e. safety, CPPT, etc). You are not required to complete Levels II through V. If you are not having fun, then take the initiative to find a method to make your work fun. Otherwise leave. A local toxic leader is just as detrimental to the organization as poor leadership at the top.
One other thing that this does (to an extent) is mean that you effectively buy/purchase Lt Col now. As a member with 13 years who becomes eligible for Lt Col in 2 months, I now have to wait additional time and attend NSC which would not only require me to change where I spend my CAP time, but where I spend my money. I did a rough calculation last night and found it to be roughly $1200 by the time you figured in tuition, travel, lodging, food, and misc items. Not every member has disposable cash like this lying around. If somebody wants to find that magical stash of cash and start paying for all of this, please by all means, let me know. I have roughly 6-7 members who are immediately advsersely effected by this.
"CAP has always been like a full time job since it is inception. Nothing has changed in the ~70 years." I got news for you, a lot has changed in the last 70 years. I have seen the good times, and these ain't them. Where do you think you are going to get volunteers that will do a full time job along with their real, put food on the table jobs? Commute times are much longer today than in the past. Real jobs expect extra effort just to maintain. People are looking for instant gratification. Do you think the new requirements for promotion are going to help with that? People might as well join the reserves or guard and get paid for the same thing. The only senior members you will be picking up are those with kids and after 5-8 years and their kids are grown, they are gone. Furhter, they are there for the kids, not ES training for themselves. The other adults you will pick up are military wannabees that can't make the grade in the military. I do not see a bright future for CAP. For those of us in the field, we have seen a big disconnect between National and Wing with the local Squadrons. Someone has forgotten, who is supposed to support who..
Man I wish I could disagree.
I take no exception to the new training requirements. I do however, find it hard to swallow, that a member will have to spend 4.5 years to achieve Captain. 8.5 years to achieve Major, 13.5 years to achieve LtCol. Plus the expense to get above Capt. Don't forget, it costs over $500.00 to attend RSC after factoring in transportation, tuition, room and board.
Once again, many of us can't take AFIADL alternate course due to a lack of degree. I would like to go to NSC just to finish my Level V, have wanted to for a long time. I have not, because of the expense.
Quote from: AirAux on August 12, 2014, 02:29:51 PM
"CAP has always been like a full time job since it is inception. Nothing has changed in the ~70 years." I got news for you, a lot has changed in the last 70 years.
Things have changed but the "acting like a full time job" has been around since the flying minutemen. That has not changed.
QuoteWhere do you think you are going to get volunteers that will do a full time job along with their real, put food on the table jobs?
The same place other organizations and CAP continues to find these people.
QuotePeople are looking for instant gratification. Do you think the new requirements for promotion are going to help with that?
So people want instant gratification and CAP needs to cater to that instead of holding a standard? Okay, every one wants a master rating without putting the effort.
The same thing was said when CAP introduced the new GT standards. Oh we are going to loose so many GTMs because it is going to be harder to obtain. Everyone always says the same thing after new standards are introduced and more times than none, it seems to be achieved by the members.
Besides, the new requirements are the same just a little extra time. So not every one will get Lt Col, is that really a loss to the organization?
QuotePeople might as well join the reserves or guard and get paid for the same thing.
.
No where near the same thing. Not even a comparison.
QuoteI do not see a bright future for CAP.
Most people assumed the same after WWII. Odd what happened.
QuoteFor those of us in the field, we have seen a big disconnect between National and Wing with the local Squadrons. Someone has forgotten, who is supposed to support who..
Cannot disagree to a certain extent.
"The same thing was said when CAP introduced the new GT standards. Oh we are going to loose so many GTMs because it is going to be harder to obtain. Everyone always says the same thing after new standards are introduced and more times than none, it seems to be achieved by the members."
I don't know where you are, but our ground team members are down to zilch. We spent 36 hours trying to get a non-distress ground team or UDF team out last month. There are no ground team missions and people are tired of recertifying every 2 years for nada. We have become a large investmetn with very little payback until or unless there is a disaster and then you have the paid FEMA and state and local teams that move in. with possible throwing us a crumb or asking for our aviation resources to keep their expenses down. We are headed for aviator status only. There is no need for the cadet program, recruiting is down, there is no need for the AE program, that stuff is covered on TV and the internet daily. There is no need for ground teams, especially youth ground teams. There is no need for cadet or composite squadrons. We are an albatross and the only thing we can do is fly. So, if you want to be a pilot or observer, enjoy. What with the flight profiles, that is not even so much fun anymore.
Quote from: catrulz on August 12, 2014, 02:58:28 PM
Once again, many of us can't take AFIADL alternate course due to a lack of degree. I would like to go to NSC just to finish my Level V, have wanted to for a long time. I have not, because of the expense.
The same can be said of the cadet program, which there you are under the gun of accomplishing it before your 21st birthday. Want cadet officer, spend $150 to go to encampment plus air/car transportation. Want C/Lt Col, well you need to go to RCLS or COS so another $150 or $450 plus transportation.
Quote from: AirAux on August 12, 2014, 03:37:22 PM
I don't know where you are, but our ground team members are down to zilch. We spent 36 hours trying to get a non-distress ground team or UDF team out last month. There are no ground team missions and people are tired of recertifying every 2 years for nada.
That is not due to the release of new standards as in 2003. That is due to the upgrade in technology and downward trend of less false ELTs.
Quote
There is no need for the cadet program, recruiting is down, there is no need for the AE program, that stuff is covered on TV and the internet daily.
So there is no need for schools or education any more? Well I guess I can tell my government to stop paying teachers.
All of this has nothing to do with new standards for senior member promotions.
I get that the idea was to begin a mental shift on what grade means in CAP, I've advocated a reboot for years,
and there's sadly no way to not catch some people mid-stream, that's going to happen anytime disruptive change happens,
but in typical CAP fashion, the pendulum swung too far the other way, knocking down people on the backswing.
At a minimum, there should have been more thought and process given to those on the fence.
Members engaged in meaningful, high-ROI CAP activities are always less concerned with grade then those
with less to do and more time to think about it. There were times early-on when I was so busy "doing" I could
have cared less about what grade I was, etc. But then you reach a lull, and you look around at a staff meeting,
and you realize "I just spent a year hard-charging for everyone else, and all I have to show for it are the
receipts, while Major Seatfiller over there spent the year pushing his own 120s and 2s up the chain...".
That doesn't engender more initiative, especially if you hit a wall of GOB or "fluid" regulations that favor
those sitting nearest to the approver over those with less direct contact.
It still flabbergasts me that a culture where grade confers no authority or monetary compensation has the allowance
for a subjective end-game "no", which basically comes down to whether or not a member "pleased" someone with
a pen, despite the fact that the pen holder may have never met or worked with that member, never made any expectations,
and generally could not care less about that person's CAP experience. That's part of the paradigm problem - something
which only denotes accomplishment still wants to be treated as if it denotes responsibility and authority, yet CAP does not
even hold itself to it's only policies on who should be assigned where.
If a Region CC is the approver of Lt Col, then no one should be considered for that grade unless they have, or will
assume the commensurate responsibilities, meaning Wing or Higher. But we all know how that works.
Human nature - people aren't necessarily that excited about public recognition, except and until you see people
doing less being praised / advanced more. (The subjective "less" being in the eyes of the beholder.")
Thankfully, for the most part, I had the benefit of good leaders who did their jobs and recognized their people,
though a fair amount of my progression started like Lt Col Blake's initiatives, self-written and initialed in the pile.
With that said, there should be a process to recognize those qualified >today< who simply did not put in for the
promotion, are awaiting that "one more thing", or have any of the other 20 CAP reasons, many times out of their control,
why they didn't progress properly and in the requisite time. There are wings where PD is nearly non-existent,
promotions wind up behind the file cabinet for a year, etc., etc.
Even something as simple as saying "those currently enrolled have until the end of their normal minimum time to
promote to complete the requirements under the current program before changing over." That normalizes things in ~1-3
years without overly alienating those invested in the organization.
Will this kill CAP? No, of course not. Heck, 1/3rd of the membership won't even know anything changed,
and as we all know, the percentage of members who ascend to the field grades is relatively small.
An organization like CAP dies by 1000 cuts, this is just one more on the pile. CAP has a churn that
would kill most businesses. The trend line of membership, without any normalization, has been down
for nearly a decade, and would look worse if CAP reported the numbers properly. Unit charters have shrunk
by at least 10% during that same period, and during that same time our ES mission is struggling for
relevance and viability, while the joiner demographic in the cadet ranks gets smaller every year, and the
economy continues to huff and puff leaving the appropriations vulnerable and the member pool with less
disposable income and time.
These are not guesses, nor conjecture, but simple facts supported by NHQ statistics.
Do the math from there.
One of the real problems is that CAP is falling into alignment with the Air Force, structure and rank wise. That said, I would dare say that less than 10% of all squadrons, Wings, Groups, and Regions are fully staffed. Currently undergoing an IG inspection. The few worker bees are having to do the work of the slots that do not have anyone in them. Do you have any idea what kind of stress this palces on the worker bees? It is also a sham as it will make the unit look on paper like everything is fine, when it is not. Unfortunately, the powers that be, don't care and make no allowances for these things. So, is CAP and the Air Force going to get rid of these diffective squadrons? Time will tell, but that looks like what will happen. I think I read one time that the average squadron size throughout the US is something like 10-14 people (how many active we must wonder?). The new program is not set up to accommodate that.
Quote from: AirAux on August 12, 2014, 04:24:35 PM
The new program is not set up to accommodate that.
How is the new program not set up to accommodate this? There is not anything that different from the "old" program. The changes were simply aligning the SM PD levels with promotions and requiring a little more time for promotion. It is not like they added any major new requirements to the PD levels that were not there before. You do not need to go jumping through any more hoops that were not already in place prior.
The problems such as diminishing charters, relevance, financial burdens were all in place way before and have nothing to do with the release of CAPR 35-5. I am sure if we went back to the 1960s, these same problems were being argued. The fact that now most people will top out at Level 4 Major instead of Level 4 Lt Col has little to do with CAP needing to find a new direction. As pointed out, rank has little to do with authority. So is doing the same job as a Level 4 Major and not as a Level 4 Lt Col going to change anything in the long run?
Soooo... based on the new Regs, When Can I be Eligible for CAPT? DOR is Feb 2014.
My guess is that most members will top out Captain. RSC is a non-trivial pinch point for a lot of members.
Another reason to eliminate mission skills promotions and other special promotions.
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 12, 2014, 04:49:43 PM
Soooo... based on the new Regs, When Can I be Eligible for CAPT? DOR is Feb 2014.
DOR? Did you leave your liner by the bell?
Capt is now Level
III + 2.5 years as a 1st Lt., so +30 months from whatever the 1st Lt. date is in eServices,
assuming you complete Level III.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2014, 04:50:56 PM
My guess is that most members will top out Captain. RSC is a non-trivial pinch point for a lot of members.
Another reason to eliminate mission skills promotions and other special promotions.
Okay true. So people top out as a Level 3 Captain instead of a Level 3 Major.
DOR is Date of Rank, It is now 2.5 Years, but my TIG is grandfathered correct?
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 12, 2014, 05:00:44 PM
DOR is Date of Rank, It is now 2.5 Years, but my TIG is grandfathered correct?
As long as you promote before June 2018, yes.
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 12, 2014, 05:00:44 PM
DOR is Date of Rank, It is now 2.5 Years, but my TIG is grandfathered correct?
Yes, until 2018, however you'll have to get Level III instead of Level II, which includes the wrinkle of a command or staff assignment,
which, if not properly recorded, might prolong the time it takes to complete it. No such requirement was in Level II.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2014, 04:58:50 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 12, 2014, 04:49:43 PM
Soooo... based on the new Regs, When Can I be Eligible for CAPT? DOR is Feb 2014.
DOR? Did you leave your liner by the bell?
Capt is now Level III + 2.5 years as a 1st Lt., so +30 months from whatever the 1st Lt. date is in eServices,
assuming you complete Level III.
Actually, he beat the 1 June 14 date for the grandfather clause, so he SHOULD be allowed 18 months from his promotion to 1st Lt to complete Level III, which I believe gives him until the end of Aug 2015. The trick is that he will probably need to finish Level II and then complete all of Level III by then.
As of today e-services reflects the new requirements for promotion. A member who was eligible for major last week now shows new PD requirements today.
A correction for table numbering was just pushed: http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/R035_005_489E25C089E93.pdf (http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/R035_005_489E25C089E93.pdf)
As well as a new Form 2 showing the updated requirements: http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/F002_F6DCA8184C671.pdf (http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/F002_F6DCA8184C671.pdf)
So are we saying that a Major needs to complete Level 5 to be promoted to LtCol?
Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on August 12, 2014, 06:11:57 PM
So are we saying that a Major needs to complete Level 5 to be promoted to LtCol?
That is correct.
Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on August 12, 2014, 06:11:57 PM
So are we saying that a Major needs to complete Level 5 to be promoted to LtCol?
Yes.
2d Lt -> Level I
1st Lt -> Level II
Captain -> Level III
Major -> Level IV
Lt Col -> Level V
I am in the same boat as Devil Doc. I am just awaiting my time in grade for promotion to Capt, which would come in Feb 2015. Now I have to jump through all sorts of hoops to get Level 3 done while not only running the cadet program at my squadron, going to school full time, and working full time. The new requirements pretty much suck for anyone who is not already in a grade. I have busted my behind for the past 3 years or so and now I am not sure it has been worth it. I don't know that I have the time to complete everything for Level 3 since my wing only runs CLC once per year and I can't travel outside the wing due to school and work. On top of that, I have to start over on my Senior rating in Cadet Programs since they now included the DDR stuff in CP.
If they wanted to make a change, they should make everyone meet the requirements of the new set of skills that I have to meet for grade. There are plenty of people who were pencil whipped into their current grade and are for the most part, non functional in their specialty tracks.
Then again no one listens to the little people who run the day to day squadron level operations.
There is an online version available.
I believe that my wing will not allow me to take the online class unless there is some sort of preclusion from me taking the in residence course (i.e. being deployed to AFG)
Quote from: NC Hokie on August 12, 2014, 05:19:39 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2014, 04:58:50 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 12, 2014, 04:49:43 PM
Soooo... based on the new Regs, When Can I be Eligible for CAPT? DOR is Feb 2014.
DOR? Did you leave your liner by the bell?
Capt is now Level III + 2.5 years as a 1st Lt., so +30 months from whatever the 1st Lt. date is in eServices,
assuming you complete Level III.
Actually, he beat the 1 June 14 date for the grandfather clause, so he SHOULD be allowed 18 months from his promotion to 1st Lt to complete Level III, which I believe gives him until the end of Aug 2015. The trick is that he will probably need to finish Level II and then complete all of Level III by then.
So? Since I have completed lvl II already, All I have to do is complete lvl III by August 2015? Do I have to attend any confrences?
Also, there is a PD Tracker on E-Services?
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 12, 2014, 06:51:45 PM
Quote from: NC Hokie on August 12, 2014, 05:19:39 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2014, 04:58:50 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 12, 2014, 04:49:43 PM
Soooo... based on the new Regs, When Can I be Eligible for CAPT? DOR is Feb 2014.
DOR? Did you leave your liner by the bell?
Capt is now Level III + 2.5 years as a 1st Lt., so +30 months from whatever the 1st Lt. date is in eServices,
assuming you complete Level III.
Actually, he beat the 1 June 14 date for the grandfather clause, so he SHOULD be allowed 18 months from his promotion to 1st Lt to complete Level III, which I believe gives him until the end of Aug 2015. The trick is that he will probably need to finish Level II and then complete all of Level III by then.
So? Since I have completed lvl II already, All I have to do is complete lvl III by August 2015? Do I have to attend any confrences?
You will need to complete Level III for Captain. If you complete it by August 2015, then you will be eligible to promote at that time. If not, then you will be eligible once you have completed Level III.
I think that the better option would have been to grandfather everyone in for the current promotion that they are working on and then to do a 4-5 year phase in. This would allow members to promote on the old time frame and then to require the additional PD requirements within the phase in time frame.
Thoughts?
Sounds good to me but I am a little guy. National I guess has other plans.
Quote from: MICT1362 on August 12, 2014, 07:21:04 PM
I think that the better option would have been to grandfather everyone in for the current promotion that they are working on and then to do a 4-5 year phase in. This would allow members to promote on the old time frame and then to require the additional PD requirements within the phase in time frame.
Thoughts?
CSAG discussed this in May and decided specifically to make the grandfather clause only cover TIG.
I understand that this is a pain for members that have been actively been working towards 1st Lt through Lt Col, but step outside your personal experience and think about what we had before:
- All of the major PME courses (OBC, SLS, CLC, RSC, and NSC) were required AFTER you had already promoted to the rank they were most appropriate for, and Lt Col NEVER had to attend NSC at all.
- Command and staff assignment requirements were also behind the curve, as there was no requirement at all for promotion to Capt, and a minimal requirement of 1 year for promotion to Maj.
- A Spaatz cadet that joined the dark side could become a 21 year-old Capt, a 24 year-old Maj, and a 27 year-old Lt Col. They now start at 1st Lt and promote thru the other ranks at the ages of 22/23, 26/27, and 31/32. Under the new system, those ages become 21, 25, and 30. Those numbers may not seem much better different on the surface, but they represent more years in "grown-up" CAP and a corresponding increase in their personal growth and maturation outside of CAP.
Fixing these issues is a good thing, and I frankly believe that this PD level reassignment should have happened a long ago. Sure, NHQ could have done a better job of mitigating the effects on current members, but the new command staff may address this once they take office.
FWIW, this is coming from a guy that has basically seen Lt Col go from attainable to not very likely due to personal constraints, so I do share in everyone's pain.
Quote from: NC Hokie on August 12, 2014, 07:47:44 PM
- A Spaatz cadet that joined the dark side could become a 21 year-old Capt, a 24 year-old Maj, and a 27 year-old Lt Col. They now start at 1st Lt and promote thru the other ranks at the ages of 22/23, 26/27, and 31/32. Those numbers may not seem much better on the surface, but they represent more years in "grown-up" CAP and a corresponding increase in their personal growth and maturation outside of CAP.
I agree with the point you made overall, but I'm confused about Spaatz Cadets starting at 1st Lt. Para 3-6 & Figure 4 say they're still promotable to Capt, or did I miss something?
They could institute a TIS/TIG concept to stop those 27 year old Lt Cols >:D. But no, always thought it bad to have 27 year olds walking around with Lt Col. Just never seemed right
Quote from: Ed Bos on August 12, 2014, 07:53:26 PM
Quote from: NC Hokie on August 12, 2014, 07:47:44 PM
- A Spaatz cadet that joined the dark side could become a 21 year-old Capt, a 24 year-old Maj, and a 27 year-old Lt Col. They now start at 1st Lt and promote thru the other ranks at the ages of 22/23, 26/27, and 31/32. Those numbers may not seem much better on the surface, but they represent more years in "grown-up" CAP and a corresponding increase in their personal growth and maturation outside of CAP.
I agree with the point you made overall, but I'm confused about Spaatz Cadets starting at 1st Lt. Para 3-6 & Figure 4 say they're still promotable to Capt, or did I miss something?
I based that on the professional development credit former cadets get per CAPR 50-17, which only gives Level II to Spaatz cadets. I thought that was the reason they got Capt previously. Looks like I was wrong.
Quote from: NC Hokie on August 12, 2014, 08:19:32 PM
Quote from: Ed Bos on August 12, 2014, 07:53:26 PM
Quote from: NC Hokie on August 12, 2014, 07:47:44 PM
- A Spaatz cadet that joined the dark side could become a 21 year-old Capt, a 24 year-old Maj, and a 27 year-old Lt Col. They now start at 1st Lt and promote thru the other ranks at the ages of 22/23, 26/27, and 31/32. Those numbers may not seem much better on the surface, but they represent more years in "grown-up" CAP and a corresponding increase in their personal growth and maturation outside of CAP.
I agree with the point you made overall, but I'm confused about Spaatz Cadets starting at 1st Lt. Para 3-6 & Figure 4 say they're still promotable to Capt, or did I miss something?
I based that on the professional development credit former cadets get per CAPR 50-17, which only gives Level II to Spaatz cadets. I thought that was the reason they got Capt previously. Looks like I was wrong.
Roger, thanks.
Wait, What?? N C Hokie, you just took a shot at our Spaatz cadets? Those cadets are the sharpest in the nation and know the cadet program inside and out and if their commanders have been abiding by the rules and requiring SDA's, they probably have a better grasp on the senior side than most 35 year old senior Captains. Further, keeping them in the Corps is something we cherish. Think what great National Commanders they could possible turn out to be. I can't believe you would step so low. Ouch!!!!
Most members who care about this are already figuring out what it will take them to get promoted.
It may take more time to make it to LT Col, however, I think it gives a member more time to deal with getting more experience in CAP, it's members, and its missions; all good things IMHO.
Getting promoted is no longer an issue for me, however enjoying CAP is. That means keeping mission current, and helping cadets get their Spaatz (so they can become CAPT's when they "go dark"... 8)
Quote from: Panache on August 12, 2014, 01:48:22 AM
Quote from: THRAWN on August 11, 2014, 06:46:36 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on August 11, 2014, 06:27:35 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on August 11, 2014, 05:47:07 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on August 11, 2014, 05:07:55 PM
Guess I'm going to be a Captain for awhile as RSC is not in the cards in the next few years for me.
That said, I don't necessarily disagree with any of the changes, I'm just glad I got captain done.
Why wait for RSC? Sure it's a great course, but if you can't get to it for a few years, look at SOS as an alternative.
I don't have a bachelor's degree.
Doh. Keep forgetting that they are actually enforcing that rule now. I think I was one of the last to finish ACSC without it.
Does this mean that without a Bachelor's degree, you're effectively locked at Major / Level IV now?
Or you live relatively close to Maxwell AFB or don't mind using Vacation and financially sound enough to travel there.
"MFL" = Major For Life
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2014, 02:04:34 AM
Quote from: Panache on August 12, 2014, 01:48:22 AM
Does this mean that without a Bachelor's degree, you're effectively locked at Major / Level IV now?
No. The "intended" way to promote is via RSC. The correspondence schools are / were a "nice to have"
that few members completed regardless of the academic requirements.
If being a major is important enough, members will have to make choices as to where to spend their CAP
time. Perhaps one year going to RSC and forgoing NESA or a flight academy.
National also needs to ramp up the RSC's and offer more of them so they aren't such a "quest".
But Yes, he'll be locked at Major unless he goes to National Staff College, not Region Staff College. Now, that Level 5 is required for Lieutenant Colonel.
Quote from: AirAux on August 12, 2014, 08:21:01 PM
Wait, What?? N C Hokie, you just took a shot at our Spaatz cadets? Those cadets are the sharpest in the nation and know the cadet program inside and out and if their commanders have been abiding by the rules and requiring SDA's, they probably have a better grasp on the senior side than most 35 year old senior Captains. Further, keeping them in the Corps is something we cherish. Think what great National Commanders they could possible turn out to be. I can't believe you would step so low. Ouch!!!!
I took no more shot at Spaatz alumni than NHQ took at the rest of the senior member population, and I seriously question your assertion that any cadet can "have a better grasp on the senior side than most 35 year old senior Captains." Most of those Captains have years of experience in a program that even the most most high speed cadet can only read about.
Finishing the cadet program does not make one an expert on all things CAP. This attitude is EXACTLY why I think it's a good thing for Spaatz alumni to have a few more years in the senior program before they can pin on silver oak leaves.
As of right now, CyBorg is no longer the ONLY Captain in perpetuity. There will be a LOT of folks in the same boat for different reasons. Becoming a field grade officer is now expensive both in terms of time and money (classroom and specialty track requirements). I wonder why should I even bother with PD anymore. Life is not fair, and HQ just made it a little worse. On top of that the new reg makes me feel even more like a second class citizen when compared to a nurse or "Other professionals" who join. Bravo Sierra of epic proportions.
Quote from: AirAux on August 12, 2014, 08:21:01 PM
Wait, What?? N C Hokie, you just took a shot at our Spaatz cadets? Those cadets are the sharpest in the nation and know the cadet program inside and out and if their commanders have been abiding by the rules and requiring SDA's, they probably have a better grasp on the senior side than most 35 year old senior Captains. Further, keeping them in the Corps is something we cherish. Think what great National Commanders they could possible turn out to be. I can't believe you would step so low. Ouch!!!!
Suffice to say, that must be your personal experience, one not shared by all.
Yes, Spaatz Cadets are the top tier of the cadets, but few are prepared for leading in the senior side, nor have a clue
about what running a CAP unit entails, and only a small percentage have any idea how to lead adult volunteers, further,
many never move out of being cadets.
Does the average Spaatz cadet have a better grasp on the cadet program then the average lifer pilot Captain? Yes.
Beyond that, all bets are off.
One thing that has been asked in the last few days, by active members downstream,
is "If I know I will never be able to get to RSC, why bother with PD at all?"
The term is "unintended consequences".
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2014, 11:07:58 PM
One thing that has been asked in the last few days, by active members downstream,
is "If I know I will never be able to get to RSC, why bother with PD at all?"
The term is "unintended consequences".
What was your reply?
Quote from: Ed Bos on August 12, 2014, 11:12:29 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2014, 11:07:58 PM
One thing that has been asked in the last few days, by active members downstream,
is "If I know I will never be able to get to RSC, why bother with PD at all?"
The term is "unintended consequences".
What was your reply?
They weren't asking me, but frankly, I'd be at a loss.
One of the few carrots Commanders had to spur initiative and staff service has been
negated for a fair number of members, not to mention the bad feeling of having the rules changed
midstream.
Consider this. Say a Major serving on Wing staff, days from Lt Col, was expecting a same-day click
from the Region CC. He's ordered his grade, been assured it's a "done deal", and was watching the
clock.
Now he's told "Sorry, see you next year, assuming you complete NSC..."
The idea is fine, the implementation is flawed, and will engender a lot of negative feeling,
unnecessarilyand counter to the purpose intended.
Unfortunately, some cadet units have failed to utilize the required SDA portion of cadet officer training in their squadrons. SDA stands for staff duty analysis and requires a cadet to spend time shadowing and working with senior members in their staff duty positions. After doing so for a sufficient amount of time, could be six weeks, could be twelve weeks, they have to write an analysis describing what reg's, manuals, publications, are needed for that staff duty position, what they observed, what they did, and what the position requires. So now you have a cadet with probably three years leadership training and responsibility, basically running the cadet program, that has displayed the required level of maturity, and has studied and prepared a graded paper on most of the squadron staff officer positions, and you say they are not prepared? The Spaatz cadets I have met and worked with have outshone most senior members in responsibility and CAP knowledge under the grade of Captain. JMHO and Spaatz Moms everywhere.
Just see how many people get to Major through the public affairs track now. Not only do they have to take a week for the Region Staff College, they also have to do 5 in-residence ES courses (PIO stuff) to get to the Master level in the PAO track.
You know, I think enough people believed that old canard about everyone in CAP being a Lt. Col. that they thought they better do something about it.
The thing is that CAP has never exactly been overwhelmed with people that were hard-charging up the PD tracks. Now, most people are even going to be less likely to seriously start down the path at all.
Does it serve CAP better to have a few people that have obtained a high level of training and have been rewarded with high rank or to have many more CAP members get a mid-level amount of training? The way it is going very few members are going to have any incentive or interest to go beyond the lowest level (Technician) in their specialty.
Quote from: AirAux on August 13, 2014, 12:18:19 AMSo now you have a cadet with probably three years leadership training and responsibility, basically running the cadet program, that has displayed the required level of maturity, and has studied and prepared a graded paper on most of the squadron staff officer positions, and you say they are not prepared?
"Basically running the cadet program?"
Where do you get that? Writing 5 framed / structured papers, walking through some very specific tasks, and being penned into two a/staff positions does not equal "basically running the cadet program". It equals checking the boxes as indicated. You're also being somewhat
"generous" in the tie you think most cadets are serving the apprenticeships. 52-14 says "should be 4-6 weeks", "should" being the key.
A "4-week apprenticeship" for some duty positions equals one discussion with the staff officer who only has something to do once a month,
and few cadets are ever exceeded 6 weeks unless the position happens to interest them separate from the apprenticeship.
Yes, this puts them ahead of their peers, but not necessarily adult members who are >not< their peers.
There's also the issue that most Spaatz-agish cadets are in late high school / college, and some of the most
distracted members we have. For every candidate that is still home serving as C/CC or other meaningful staff, there
a 5 off on NCSAs, encampments, or non=CAP activities like college and treating the CP like a correspondence school, showing up
when required, and doing a lot over the phone.
Again, Spaatz cadets are the top tier, no way around it, most will run rings around adult members regarding
the minutia of D&C, promotion eligibility, and shining shoes, that doesn't make them capable of leading adult volunteers,
nor, frankly, is their >any< requirement that they have ever lead "anyone" in any meaningful manner.
There are far too many who are 1-hit encampment wonders, venturing out of the unit only to get that ticket punched,
and otherwise just going about at weekly meetings quietly and checking boxes until they have three diamonds.
There's a guy in my squadron who just got smacked down for the second time.
First time around, he was working on the Flight Operations specialty track. He completed his Technician rating and was working on Senior. Sorry, no more Flight Operations, start over with something else. So, he starts over.
He lost a couple of years with the restart, and now needs RSC to be promoted. Another happy member, another Captain For Life. I don't see him having any more interest in PD. Why should he?
Now, it is difficult to stay positive about this topic since cronyism is a perception if not still a real problem within the walls of the Emerald City and behind the curtain in the Wizard's chambers. But, it will be obvious who the 'Good Ole Boys' of CAP are because their network will work GOBN, Level IV, Majors into Wing CC, Region Vice Commander, and other Colonel slots. So, the dead give away will be the Level IV Colonel! Maybe that is a good thing?
If the intent of the recent change is to put weight and gravitas into the PD program, I would be all for a provision that if you only have Level IV and you are at end of Full Colonel assignment you have 12 months to complete Level V or you revert to your permanent Major grade.
Furthermore, I believe there should be a provision for continuing education for everyone: don't hold the CURRENT PD requirement for your grade? You have 12 months to achieve the missing requirement(s) to keep your grade or revert to commensurate grade.
Quote from: Robert Hartigan on August 13, 2014, 03:57:17 AMIf the intent of the recent change is to put weight and gravitas into the PD program, I would be all for a provision that if you only have Level IV and you are at end of Full Colonel assignment you have 12 months to complete Level V or you revert to your permanent Major grade.
The issue here is that unless they increase the slots or frequency of NSC, there's a self-limiting factor that is
out of the control of the member.
Based on the last few rounds of NSC, most wings won't be able to produce more then one or two Lt Cols
(on average) a year.
I am actually in the that position. I am two months from my Lt. Col. Everything done all I'm waiting for is TIG. I have held multiple wing/region positions and have been in CAP for 15 years. It is very frustrating being told that instead of waiting two more month now I have to attend NSC to be promotion. It took me two years to save up to go to IG school, so it will take another few years for NSC. If CAP wanted to get rid of members this was a great way to do it.
Quote from: AirAux on August 13, 2014, 12:18:19 AM
So now you have a cadet with probably three years leadership training and responsibility, basically running the cadet program, that has displayed the required level of maturity, and has studied and prepared a graded paper on most of the squadron staff officer positions, and you say they are not prepared? The Spaatz cadets I have met and worked with have outshone most senior members in responsibility and CAP knowledge under the grade of Captain.
I would not say all Spaatz cadets are prepared. As with any position, they come in all walks of life. Some are terrible leaders that only achieved the Spaatz Award because they could test well. Some are great and knowledgable staff personnel but have no ounce of leadership ability. Some are great leaders with no ounce of staff concepts. Some are both great leaders and great staff personnel.
To outshine senior members that are below the rank of captain is not really that difficult. For one, a large number of those senior members are relatively new and you are comparing them to a person that has been in the program for at least 3 years. Two, senior members at the start generally worry about learning their field before learning all the nuances of the program. Realistically, you are comparing apples to oranges.
While most Spaatz cadets are driven and motivated, it does not tell me what kind of street/real knowledge or leadership potential they have. After all, some Spaatz cadets have never lead anything larger than their 8 cadet sized squadron while others have lead squadrons that have 50+ cadets to some that actually serve on wing staff.
Quote from: RiverAux on August 13, 2014, 03:12:57 AM
The way it is going very few members are going to have any incentive or interest to go beyond the lowest level (Technician) in their specialty.
Which is not necessarily a problem. I have met people that only had BS degrees and were more knowledgeable than people holding a PhD in the same field. I have met nurses that knew more about medicine than some doctors. I have met some police officers that had better understanding of the law than a criminal lawyer. I have met freelance photographers that understood photography better than their professors.
Quote from: jbekker on August 13, 2014, 04:08:35 AM
I am actually in the that position. I am two months from my Lt. Col. Everything done all I'm waiting for is TIG. I have held multiple wing/region positions and have been in CAP for 15 years. It is very frustrating being told that instead of waiting two more month now I have to attend NSC to be promotion. It took me two years to save up to go to IG school, so it will take another few years for NCS. If CAP wanted to get rid of members this was a great way to do it.
This is exactly why the grandfather should cover both the PD and TIG, for at least the minimum clock time since the
last promotion under the old system.
There are people reading this who may well have either skated by a day, or missed it by a day - wholly unfair when the
new requirement is self-limited and costs somewhere in the neighborhood of $1200. Not to mention those who
were fully qualified under the old system and simply didn't submit because they were otherwise busy, perhaps, with
you know, summer activities. Those members should not be punished by an arbitrary date, or because they, or their CC's
were busy.
Why not just chuck all the standards out and promote everyone to Maj Gen?
Yes......it sucks.....life ain't fair......move on.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 04:23:56 AM
Quote from: jbekker on August 13, 2014, 04:08:35 AM
I am actually in the that position. I am two months from my Lt. Col. Everything done all I'm waiting for is TIG. I have held multiple wing/region positions and have been in CAP for 15 years. It is very frustrating being told that instead of waiting two more month now I have to attend NSC to be promotion. It took me two years to save up to go to IG school, so it will take another few years for NCS. If CAP wanted to get rid of members this was a great way to do it.
This is exactly why the grandfather should cover both the PD and TIG, for at least the minimum clock time since the
last promotion under the old system.
Well, the members in the CSAG are already Lt Colonels and Colonels.
They have nothing to loose.
The way this reg revision is implemented is really punishing the friendly and helping the foe of PD. People who had faith and worked the PD program get hosed while people who didn't care about PD are laughing their bellies off. People who supported PD now will probably look the other way (I do). Maybe it is the right direction but the grandfather clauses simply don't work. Come on, even uniforms have a phase out period. I wonder if people in this forum who are going to Vegas can relay some of the sentiments to the policy makers. They really need some reality check.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 13, 2014, 04:43:24 AM
Why not just chuck all the standards out and promote everyone to Maj Gen?
Yes......it sucks.....life ain't fair......move on.
Or how about MSgt?
The response "Life ain't fair" doesn't work in situations where the the organization is
dependent on the benevolence of those it just told to "go salute themselves".
There are ways to implement change that don't punish the very people you need to make those changes.
Then you can't ever criticize any CAP member again for not following regs
We are dependent on their good will
Quote from: lordmonar on August 13, 2014, 04:43:24 AM
Why not just chuck all the standards out and promote everyone to Maj Gen?
Yes......it sucks.....life ain't fair......move on.
That's hyperbole, right?
Nobody is saying chuck all the standards, and I don't think anyone here really thinks that the new standards are bad. We just dislike the abruptness with which they are being implemented.
A few hours ago, I had to tell a 2d Lt on the cusp of promoting that she now has to attend SLS in November before she can polish her butter bars. You can probably guess how well that conversation went. Would it have hurt CAP to put a future phase in date on the new requirements to avoid situations like that? Probably not, but it is DEFINITELY going to hurt CAP if members get discouraged and quit over this.
Quote from: vento on August 13, 2014, 05:07:26 AM
I wonder if people in this forum who are going to Vegas can relay some of the sentiments to the policy makers. They really need some reality check.
I suspect you would be wasting your breath.
Someone is going to get screwed. We screw people in the pipeline now or we screw everyone who follows.
Like I said before. Life ain't fair. Press on.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 13, 2014, 05:22:59 AM
Someone is going to get screwed. We screw people in the pipeline now or we screw everyone who follows.
Like I said before. Life ain't fair. Press on.
The problem with this line of thinking is that CAP is a volunteer organization. You "screw" to many people and you lose all your members.
I do not have a problem with the new requirements, in fact I support it. What I have a problem with is your type of thinking. It is similar to nationals. Who cares about those who have worked countless hours and years building and supporting the program. When making these types of changs they should consider those who have worked hard in this program, and not "screw" them, as you put it. Unfortunately, it is people with your line of thinking that are making these types of decision.
I am hearing all sorts of excellent views on this topic and I for one am not happy in one area and that is the movement of the goal posts. I am a major with more than enough time in grade for Lt Col however due to cost I am not able to go to RSC or National but have completed all the other tasks. I hold a Region position, 3 Wing positions and a number of Squadron positions. I think the grade should reflect what you do for CAP rather than just course work. If you are content to function at squadron level only then you shouldn't advance past Captain, Major and Lt Col should be for Wing and Group level. Col/B Gen Region and National Commander Maj Gen.
The British Air Training Corps has a system where rank matters. Highest level at squadron is Flight Lieutenant (Capt), the Wing Commander holds the rank of Wing Commander (Lt Col). He has a certain number of Squadron Leaders (Major) who are responsible for a number of squadrons and there are some Flight Lieutenants also with various duties. Of course for certain duties they do get paid (Max of 28 days a year) which more than helps with the courses which are free.
In a nut shell as much as I am disappointed not to be able to advance further (unless I win the lottery) I think a better system would be to have the rank/grade for the position/duties you hold. What level you have completed can be shown by a ribbon or badge. Just a thought.
QuoteIf CAP wanted to get rid of members this was a great way to do it.
You know that is just history repeating itself. Members have always complained about something. 8)
Of course there is still the good old fashion waiver. CAPR 35-5 1-8d. They have made these waivers a little more difficult to process, but the ability to do so still exists. There is also still CAPR 35-5 3-9 Exceptional Qualifications. Both of these chapters and paras give the higher level leadership a free ticket to promote who they wish, without placing them in a COL slot.
Did this regulation update ever go to draft status for member input?
Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on August 13, 2014, 03:40:32 PM
Did this regulation update ever go to draft status for member input?
The Echelons-above-reality no longer need input from mere members.
I was close to completing Level IV. Now I need Level V as well. A minor setback, but nothing that will dramatically impact my participation and contribution in CAP.
I agree that the transition could've been better thought out and implemented, but overall I think this will have a positive impact in the future of CAP. Of course, that doesn't eliminate the pain caused to those who just got hosed by the new requirements. It happens. Maybe they'll back track a bit, just like they did with the Cadet Programs Specialty Track. But even if the don't, life will go on.
I strongly recommend that if anyone has ideas on how to better implement these new requirements, that they submit them through their chain of command. Perhaps some of this transition can be fixed. But just complaining about it and threatening to leave the organization won't necessarily have the expected result. After all, we all want to have the best CAP possible and not just to get promoted (I hope).
http://www.capmembers.com/cap_university/level-iii-management/ (http://www.capmembers.com/cap_university/level-iii-management/)
I am stuck waiting for TIG in Dec in the same situation for my railroad tracks and quite pissed about this...
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 12, 2014, 06:51:45 PM
Quote from: NC Hokie on August 12, 2014, 05:19:39 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2014, 04:58:50 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 12, 2014, 04:49:43 PM
Soooo... based on the new Regs, When Can I be Eligible for CAPT? DOR is Feb 2014.
DOR? Did you leave your liner by the bell?
Capt is now Level III + 2.5 years as a 1st Lt., so +30 months from whatever the 1st Lt. date is in eServices,
assuming you complete Level III.
Actually, he beat the 1 June 14 date for the grandfather clause, so he SHOULD be allowed 18 months from his promotion to 1st Lt to complete Level III, which I believe gives him until the end of Aug 2015. The trick is that he will probably need to finish Level II and then complete all of Level III by then.
So? Since I have completed lvl II already, All I have to do is complete lvl III by August 2015? Do I have to attend any confrences?
Quote from: JeffDG on August 13, 2014, 03:41:50 PM
Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on August 13, 2014, 03:40:32 PM
Did this regulation update ever go to draft status for member input?
The Echelons-above-reality no longer need input from mere members.
This is probably the most unfortunate apparent reality.
NHQ provides neither strategic vision, comprehensive planning, nor accounts for the ramifications
at the rank and file level. Everything is piecemeal "when we get around to it".
Ten years to publish an update to a baseline regulation is counted as a "win" and when it's finally "done"
it sits in an IN box for 6 months and is released "broken" because of "not invented here". Rhetoric and effort
around an unworkable NCO tier that will make the grade situation even worse, seemingly small tweaks to
PD and promotions that add to the general ennui while disincentivizing those actually doing the heavy lifting.
Meanwhile the organization trend lines looks like a Form 5 Cross Country flight plan from RMR to MER and
no one is acknowledging that, let alone addressing it.
Quote from: andysum15 on August 13, 2014, 05:52:58 AM
I am hearing all sorts of excellent views on this topic and I for one am not happy in one area and that is the movement of the goal posts. I am a major with more than enough time in grade for Lt Col however due to cost I am not able to go to RSC or National but have completed all the other tasks. I hold a Region position, 3 Wing positions and a number of Squadron positions. I think the grade should reflect what you do for CAP rather than just course work. If you are content to function at squadron level only then you shouldn't advance past Captain, Major and Lt Col should be for Wing and Group level. Col/B Gen Region and National Commander Maj Gen.
The British Air Training Corps has a system where rank matters. Highest level at squadron is Flight Lieutenant (Capt), the Wing Commander holds the rank of Wing Commander (Lt Col). He has a certain number of Squadron Leaders (Major) who are responsible for a number of squadrons and there are some Flight Lieutenants also with various duties. Of course for certain duties they do get paid (Max of 28 days a year) which more than helps with the courses which are free.
In a nut shell as much as I am disappointed not to be able to advance further (unless I win the lottery) I think a better system would be to have the rank/grade for the position/duties you hold. What level you have completed can be shown by a ribbon or badge. Just a thought.
That is the way the military and usually the Cadet program as well: promotions equal increased responsibility. Senior promotions should be along those lines as well. If you are going to be a Major or above then you should have been in a Group or higher position at some point.
Also, I really hope that National rethinks not grandfathering the PD requirement. I was just 2 days away from making Captain and now I have to go through Level III.
I am prior USAF enlisted so I don't have to worry about RSC or NSC thanks to my Air Force PME. I just have to find time to attend conferences, go to CLC, get my master rating, and just wait for the years to go by.
Quote from: Private Investigator on August 13, 2014, 07:41:14 AM
QuoteIf CAP wanted to get rid of members this was a great way to do it.
You know that is just history repeating itself. Members have always complained about something. 8)
Same argument used when fingerprinting became mandatory for all Senior Members
Same argument when the dreaded Maroon epaulets and fruit loops were introduced.
Why not go all the way back to good old days when Level 2 would cry you through to Major, No Height/Weight standards so even Jabba the Hutt could wear the AF uniform, and there was no CPPT.
I live in the corporate world, and when a change like this is discussed (analogies to the promotion policies, or salary increase policies) there is a step that I have always seen taken, or performed myself. I am speaking of an impact analysis. This would show how many people are impacted, and in what ways. Some will be impacted positively, some negatively, and some not at all. For instance, I was part of a company management team that was looking at making changes to the point in time when we would hand out raises. The proposal was to delay it by six months each year for two straight years, and thereby eliminate one annual raise cycle. One of the tasks was to figure out how many people would be so offended by this proposed change that they would choose to leave our organization and go somewhere else. Of course, there are a whole bunch of assumptions involved, but it is a tool used to figure out the price of a major policy change so then management can decide whether it makes sense to do it, or not.
All of this is a preliminary to asking if anyone knows if NHQ performed such an analysis as part of the discussions on this? Maybe it was done, and only a handful of members are actually affected? I suppose I am being too optimistic....
For my squadron, I will be doing precisely this kind of analysis this weekend. I already know that I was impacted negatively as were three others, and we just had one person promoted (two days before the regulation went into effect!!!) who otherwise would have had to wait for at least one more year before getting their promotion. I would think that we are reasonably representative of CAP as a whole. Of course, the right people to do this for all of CAP would be at NHQ...
Quote from: MSG Mac on August 13, 2014, 04:52:17 PM
Same argument used when fingerprinting became mandatory for all Senior Members
Just as a historical note, fingerprinting has been required since 1942 for both senior members and cadets. When CAP was started, the OCD wanted all members fingerprinted and ran over to the FBI to check for possible spies and saboteurs.
Quote from: catrulz on August 13, 2014, 10:51:03 AM
Of course there is still the good old fashion waiver. CAPR 35-5 1-8d. They have made these waivers a little more difficult to process, but the ability to do so still exists. There is also still CAPR 35-5 3-9 Exceptional Qualifications. Both of these chapters and paras give the higher level leadership a free ticket to promote who they wish, without placing them in a COL slot.
There is one waiver of promotion requirement per CAP career and the same for Exceptional Qualifications. You give the impression that these actions are routine, but as Wing DP for 10 years, I only had 3 cross my desk. One was approved.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 13, 2014, 05:14:45 AM
Then you can't ever criticize any CAP member again for not following regs
We are dependent on their good will
Not the same thing, even a little.
This is akin to requiring a member to have a PPL in order to take off in a CAP plane, and then
radioing him in the air and telling him he needs an instrument rating to land.
Those that already have it just land and say "meh, whatever", those who have the ability
will complete things in the air, and those who can't will just circle until they run out of gas, and
then we lose them.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 13, 2014, 05:00:14 PM
Quote from: MSG Mac on August 13, 2014, 04:52:17 PM
Same argument used when fingerprinting became mandatory for all Senior Members
Just as a historical note, fingerprinting has been required since 1942 for both senior members and cadets. When CAP was started, the OCD wanted all members fingerprinted and ran over to the FBI to check for possible spies and saboteurs.
And wasn't reintroduced until the late 1980's.
Quote from: MSG Mac on August 13, 2014, 05:07:28 PM
Quote from: catrulz on August 13, 2014, 10:51:03 AM
Of course there is still the good old fashion waiver. CAPR 35-5 1-8d. They have made these waivers a little more difficult to process, but the ability to do so still exists. There is also still CAPR 35-5 3-9 Exceptional Qualifications. Both of these chapters and paras give the higher level leadership a free ticket to promote who they wish, without placing them in a COL slot.
There is one waiver of promotion requirement per CAP career and the same for Exceptional Qualifications. You give the impression that these actions are routine, but as Wing DP for 10 years, I only had 3 cross my desk. One was approved.
Yeah, that shouldn't even be counted on as an option. "I can't find the time to do RSC and don't qualify for SOS." Is not an "exceptional qualification" fair or not.
No one is going to approve a Lt Col as an exceptional unless the Region HQ bathroom is locked, you have the only key, and they just served Chili Mac for lunch.
Quote from: MSG Mac on August 13, 2014, 05:07:28 PM
There is one waiver of promotion requirement per CAP career and the same for Exceptional Qualifications. You give the impression that these actions are routine, but as Wing DP for 10 years, I only had 3 cross my desk. One was approved.
Can you cite a regulation for that?
Not quite that drastic. But the bottom line is that CAP has determined that these are the requirements needed for promotion. Even if we grand fathered everyone now in CAP until they die those that joined tomorrow will be "screwed" or "punished".
If we can't use the "shut up and color" argument for fear of losing members on this case. How can we hold the sky gods to 60-1? Or the general member to 39-1?
Sure we need to be mindful of how it will impact our members. But if they are going to quit because it is now a little harder to make Lt Col then maybe they should not be in CAP.
Sure it sucks. You think you got all boxes checked and now you got another one to check off. Such is life.
Quote from: MSG Mac on August 13, 2014, 04:52:17 PM
Same argument when the dreaded Maroon epaulets and fruit loops were introduced.
And didn't CAP take quite a hit in membership when the maroon epaulets were forced upon us?
Quote from: lordmonar on August 13, 2014, 05:19:08 PM
Not quite that drastic. But the bottom line is that CAP has determined that these are the requirements needed for promotion. Even if we grand fathered everyone now in CAP until they die those that joined tomorrow will be "screwed" or "punished".
...
MSgt, with all due respect I don't think that is a fair statement.
People who were working on their PD had an expectation and goal in mind when they started the path, but the expectation changed midway.
Those that join tomorrow will not be screwed or punished because since day one they will be working toward the expectation they were taught to expect, unless National decides to change it again of course.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 13, 2014, 05:19:08 PM
If we can't use the "shut up and color" argument for fear of losing members on this case.
SUAC is fine, when the leadership follows the mandates and provides the security inherent with
being good Shepard. The current situation is "do as I say, not as I do", which only flies until you hit a bump.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 13, 2014, 05:19:08 PM
How can we hold the sky gods to 60-1? Or the general member to 39-1?
If CAP ever starts holding people to anything, you can make that argument. Right now, it doesn't.
It makes "suggestions" and then looks the other way, and we've been told by a recent former board member
that when commanders fail in their mandate, there is really nothing that can be done.
Quote from: JeffDG on August 13, 2014, 05:12:31 PM
Quote from: MSG Mac on August 13, 2014, 05:07:28 PM
There is one waiver of promotion requirement per CAP career and the same for Exceptional Qualifications. You give the impression that these actions are routine, but as Wing DP for 10 years, I only had 3 cross my desk. One was approved.
Can you cite a regulation for that?
Don't want to put words in his mouth, but I believe MSG Mac meant limitation, not requirement. A one waiver per career limitation has always been the policy in 35-5. And yes waivers are rare, and like LtCol promotions and awards are for the most part popularity contests anyways.
I don't think CAP is going to lose a lot of membership over this. But, as previously stated, and made obvious by the posts on this thread, it is a de-motivator. Don't misread that to mean people will not be motivated, but that people will loose this as a carrot/morale boost.
Quote from: catrulz on August 13, 2014, 06:23:55 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on August 13, 2014, 05:12:31 PM
Quote from: MSG Mac on August 13, 2014, 05:07:28 PM
There is one waiver of promotion requirement per CAP career and the same for Exceptional Qualifications. You give the impression that these actions are routine, but as Wing DP for 10 years, I only had 3 cross my desk. One was approved.
Can you cite a regulation for that?
Don't want to put words in his mouth, but I believe MSG Mac meant limitation, not requirement. A one waiver per career limitation has always been the policy in 35-5. And yes waivers are rare, and like LtCol promotions and awards are for the most part popularity contests anyways.
I don't think CAP is going to lose a lot of membership over this. But, as previously stated, and made obvious by the posts on this thread, it is a de-motivator. Don't misread that to mean people will not be motivated, but that people will loose this as a carrot/morale boost.
The "once in a lifetime" is not policy, it's not in any regulation anywhere. Nowhere is it written that you can only have one, or that you can have one at all. If a member justifies 3 waivers, then they will get 3 waivers. If they don't justify any, then they won't receive any.
Quote from: catrulz on August 13, 2014, 06:23:55 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on August 13, 2014, 05:12:31 PM
Quote from: MSG Mac on August 13, 2014, 05:07:28 PM
There is one waiver of promotion requirement per CAP career and the same for Exceptional Qualifications. You give the impression that these actions are routine, but as Wing DP for 10 years, I only had 3 cross my desk. One was approved.
Can you cite a regulation for that?
Don't want to put words in his mouth, but I believe MSG Mac meant limitation, not requirement. A one waiver per career limitation has always been the policy in 35-5. And yes waivers are rare, and like LtCol promotions and awards are for the most part popularity contests anyways.
I don't think CAP is going to lose a lot of membership over this. But, as previously stated, and made obvious by the posts on this thread, it is a de-motivator. Don't misread that to mean people will not be motivated, but that people will loose this as a carrot/morale boost.
I think we'll all "Shut Up And Color", but tolerating a policy is not endorsement of. Nor was anyone from above looking for endorsement, obviously. This not well thought out policy, where most people used to max out at LtCol most will not max at Capt or Maj. Okay for those that came in to primarily to support the kids, questionable for those that decided to make this a long lasting hobby/serious volunteer activity.
Quote from: JeffDG on August 13, 2014, 06:29:38 PM
Quote from: catrulz on August 13, 2014, 06:23:55 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on August 13, 2014, 05:12:31 PM
Quote from: MSG Mac on August 13, 2014, 05:07:28 PM
There is one waiver of promotion requirement per CAP career and the same for Exceptional Qualifications. You give the impression that these actions are routine, but as Wing DP for 10 years, I only had 3 cross my desk. One was approved.
Can you cite a regulation for that?
Don't want to put words in his mouth, but I believe MSG Mac meant limitation, not requirement. A one waiver per career limitation has always been the policy in 35-5. And yes waivers are rare, and like LtCol promotions and awards are for the most part popularity contests anyways.
I don't think CAP is going to lose a lot of membership over this. But, as previously stated, and made obvious by the posts on this thread, it is a de-motivator. Don't misread that to mean people will not be motivated, but that people will loose this as a carrot/morale boost.
The "once in a lifetime" is not policy, it's not in any regulation anywhere. Nowhere is it written that you can only have one, or that you can have one at all. If a member justifies 3 waivers, then they will get 3 waivers. If they don't justify any, then they won't receive any.
You are correct, in both the current and Jun 2014 issues of CAPR 35-5 there is no limit on waivers. But there was in older versions. When I initially joined there was a sub-section in 35-5 titled Waivers. I may have an older version at home on a flash drive or external. And I agree waivers are not and were never assured. You had to justify, and over justify. I only know of one member that has ever received one.
The current regulation doesn't have a limitation.
Quote from: catrulz on August 13, 2014, 06:23:55 PM
.....
I don't think CAP is going to lose a lot of membership over this. But, as previously stated, and made obvious by the posts on this thread, it is a de-motivator. Don't misread that to mean people will not be motivated, but that people will loose this as a carrot/morale boost.
No, CAP is not going to lose a lot of membership over this. It is only affecting the Senior members who care about PD and that is the minority within CAP anyway. Not sure what will be the effect on the health of the PD program, I am one that will stop right here with my PD and I have very little incentive to help promote the program anymore, after all who wants to be biten twice?
This rev does very little to address the problem we have with higher ranking officers who received their ranks thru special promotions bypassing the PD system.
Quote from: vento on August 13, 2014, 06:53:54 PM
I am one that will stop right here with my PD and I have very little incentive to help promote the program anymore, after all who wants to be biten twice?
Other than having to wait time wise, what in the PD system has changed that you were not already required to get for your next PD level?
I will be interested to see the impact on RSC attendance. I've been a Major for 15 years after getting it at age 26 (yes, one of the dreaded Spaatzen). At first I turned down encouragements to become a Lt Col for the very reason that's been cited... I had no desire to be a sub-30 Lt Col. Heck, I didn't even want to be a 35 year old Lt Col. Who's going to take that seriously? (not that grade in CAP is really all that serious to start with).
But lately I've been kicking around the Lt Col thing. Partly because they made it more difficult... when everyone and their dog can qualify for Lt Col, well I have little interest in that. And partly because I'm tired of interacting with Lt Cols who can't lead ants to a picnic but will routinely remind you of their grade (to which I routinely remind them that I don't care).
But I still need to do RSC to complete Level IV. I just haven't been able to get myself to go spend a week learning what I already get ad nauseum in the corporate world. But I thought, maybe next summer... get that knocked out, apply for Lt Col and call it a day.
But now with NSC on the docket... well, I'll have to decide whether NSC is something I want to do along with RSC. Another week, more money, and from the stories I've heard, limited educational value (at NSC). I can't imagine I'm the only longer-term member facing that question.
Don't get me wrong... I think changing the requirements and standards is overdue. I'm not convinced this is necessarily the solution, but you have to try something.
Though it would mean I don't have to sewn on new grade insignia at least.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 13, 2014, 07:08:53 PM
Quote from: vento on August 13, 2014, 06:53:54 PM
I am one that will stop right here with my PD and I have very little incentive to help promote the program anymore, after all who wants to be biten twice?
Other than having to wait time wise, what in the PD system has changed that you were not already required to get for your next PD level?
It's not just TIG - they bumped the whole structure up a Level and now require Level V for Lt Col.
Which means that Lt Col now costs about ~$1200 more today then it did on Saturday.
Quote from: vento on August 13, 2014, 06:53:54 PM
Quote from: catrulz on August 13, 2014, 06:23:55 PM
.....
I don't think CAP is going to lose a lot of membership over this. But, as previously stated, and made obvious by the posts on this thread, it is a de-motivator. Don't misread that to mean people will not be motivated, but that people will loose this as a carrot/morale boost.
It is only affecting the Senior members who care about PD and that is the minority within CAP anyway.
I fail to see how this is going to affect "members who care about PD..." Those who care about Professional Development will continue to participate and progress in the PD program. Maybe you meant to say that it will affect those
members who care about promotions, as they may not be able to promote as easily with the new requirements.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 13, 2014, 08:35:33 PM
Quote from: vento on August 13, 2014, 06:53:54 PM
Quote from: catrulz on August 13, 2014, 06:23:55 PM
.....
I don't think CAP is going to lose a lot of membership over this. But, as previously stated, and made obvious by the posts on this thread, it is a de-motivator. Don't misread that to mean people will not be motivated, but that people will loose this as a carrot/morale boost.
It is only affecting the Senior members who care about PD and that is the minority within CAP anyway.
I fail to see how this is going to affect "members who care about PD..." Those who care about Professional Development will continue to participate and progress in the PD program. Maybe you meant to say that it will affect those members who care about promotions, as they may not be able to promote as easily with the new requirements.
I give not a scat for my final promotion. As stated, it is out of my reach for several reasons. I will continue to get PD "awards" when I can. Right now, working on Senior level for CP, Tech for ES, and possibly may go for AE one day. The tri-fecta.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 08:19:44 PM
It's not just TIG - they bumped the whole structure up a Level and now require Level V for Lt Col.
Which means that Lt Col now costs about ~$1200 more today then it did on Saturday.
It cost about that to get Level V before the change. People will stay at major instead of moving to Lt Col. So what is your point?
Quote from: LSThiker on August 13, 2014, 08:43:25 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 08:19:44 PM
It's not just TIG - they bumped the whole structure up a Level and now require Level V for Lt Col.
Which means that Lt Col now costs about ~$1200 more today then it did on Saturday.
It cost about that to get Level V before the change. People will stay at major instead of moving to Lt Col. So what is your point?
The point is that before the change, Level V was the senior equivalent of the Falcon. "Something more" for those
interested, but not required for a complete CAP career.
In fact the Falcon description is apropos for the old Level V.
"This award is given only to those Cadets senior members who have achieved the highest accomplishments possible within the Cadet Senior Program and have taken subsequent steps to become a dynamic American and Aerospace CAP leader.."For the record, I don't have an issue with the levels as posted, only with the lack of proper transition.
Quote from: MICT1362 on August 12, 2014, 02:26:39 PM
If somebody wants to find that magical stash of cash and start paying for all of this, please by all means, let me know. I have roughly 6-7 members who are immediately advsersely effected by this.
:clap: :clap: :clap:
That's why I committed to being a Captain for life or at least a few more years. I can't afford that kind of investment in cash, let alone the **additional* CAP time.
>:(
Quote from: Garibaldi on August 13, 2014, 08:42:19 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 13, 2014, 08:35:33 PM
Quote from: vento on August 13, 2014, 06:53:54 PM
Quote from: catrulz on August 13, 2014, 06:23:55 PM
.....
I don't think CAP is going to lose a lot of membership over this. But, as previously stated, and made obvious by the posts on this thread, it is a de-motivator. Don't misread that to mean people will not be motivated, but that people will loose this as a carrot/morale boost.
It is only affecting the Senior members who care about PD and that is the minority within CAP anyway.
I fail to see how this is going to affect "members who care about PD..." Those who care about Professional Development will continue to participate and progress in the PD program. Maybe you meant to say that it will affect those members who care about promotions, as they may not be able to promote as easily with the new requirements.
I give not a scat for my final promotion. As stated, it is out of my reach for several reasons. I will continue to get PD "awards" when I can. Right now, working on Senior level for CP, Tech for ES, and possibly may go for AE one day. The tri-fecta.
I see point from both of you. In our world PD is intertwined so deeply with promotion that it is not even funny. I very often think if people do PD just for the sake of PD. I do know for sure that when a member asks how s/he can earn a promotion, very often the answer is do PD and some other stuff. In a way you are right, OTOH, for some if there is no future in promotion then what is the point of doing PD? A guy who makes his living as CPA or finance doesn't really need a Senior or Master rating in CAP to prove himself. There are also many really good CAP trainers out there who has no Senior or Master rating in a specialty and is still highly respected by other members.
CAPR35-5 is about promotions and promotions lead members to get interested in PD.
Agreed - that's the carrot, and it's much higher up on the string now.
There is no requirement that PD, or any training for that matter, be accomplished to hold >any< staff job,
and in a paradigm of "you're lucky I showed up at all", good luck with implementing that mandate.
Even the CIs and SUIs ask the question, but don't mandate the completion.
Proper completion of the requisite PD make a member a better staffer, no question there, but the only
way people already giving "almost all" to CAP were encouraged to "give the rest" via PD was with the
promise of making them write another check to Vanguard as recognition.
If Major and Lt Col are off the table for some people, then I would imagine the interest in Senior and Master
are going to wane as well. As I said before "unintended consequences".
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 09:05:35 PM
There is no requirement that PD, or any training for that matter, be accomplished to hold >any< staff job,
and in a paradigm of "you're lucky I showed up at all", good luck with implementing that mandate.
Wing / Region IGs have to take the IG Basic on line, attend a Senior course and then IG College. I think Safety has some similar requirements.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 08:46:40 PM
The point is that before the change, Level V was the senior equivalent of the Falcon. "Something more" for those
interested, but not required for a complete CAP career.
In fact the Falcon description is apropos for the old Level V.
And the Falcon was gotten rid a long time ago. The only thing presented by anyone as to an argument is that they cannot get Lt Col. Which again, I am just not seeing that as an effective argument. Sure I agree, the transition could have been handled better.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 09:05:35 PM
If Major and Lt Col are off the table for some people, then I would imagine the interest in Senior and Master
are going to wane as well. As I said before "unintended consequences".
In the previous program, Lt Col was off the table. So the unintended consequences were the same then as it is now, just not able to obtain major. Instead of stalling at Major, they now stall at Captain.
Heh.
Guess if I ever re-engage, there's no real rush to get my Senior Rating in Cadet Programs. The push would have been for my requirements for Major, along with knocking out TWO conferences in the next year and a half. With these changes? If I do return to active participation, I doubt I'll be pursuing either Major or the Senior rating, at least any time soon. No point, and no rush now.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 13, 2014, 09:30:14 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 09:05:35 PM
If Major and Lt Col are off the table for some people, then I would imagine the interest in Senior and Master
are going to wane as well. As I said before "unintended consequences".
In the previous program, Lt Col was off the table. So the unintended consequences were the same then as it is now, just not able to obtain major. Instead of stalling at Major, they now stall at Captain.
How do you figure it was off the table before?
Quote from: Phil Hirons, Jr. on August 13, 2014, 09:09:53 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 09:05:35 PM
There is no requirement that PD, or any training for that matter, be accomplished to hold >any< staff job,
and in a paradigm of "you're lucky I showed up at all", good luck with implementing that mandate.
Wing / Region IGs have to take the IG Basic on line, attend a Senior course and then IG College. I think Safety has some similar requirements.
Wing & region IG and assistants can be appointed with no particular skills or experience.
The IG needs to complete the IC college within the next cycle, and the A/IG(s) need to complete
the IG senior course within 13 months of appointment.
Safety needs the basic online Safety course and nothing else.
The only ramifications for non-compliance, just like any other CAP staff job, would be a discrepancy during a CI.
Those only happen every two years.
Just between us kids, how do you think the real-world handles the lack of compliance when no one else wants those jobs?
You could be a wing IG or safety officer for at least two years before the subject even came up in conversation.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 09:43:09 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on August 13, 2014, 09:30:14 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 09:05:35 PM
If Major and Lt Col are off the table for some people, then I would imagine the interest in Senior and Master
are going to wane as well. As I said before "unintended consequences".
In the previous program, Lt Col was off the table. So the unintended consequences were the same then as it is now, just not able to obtain major. Instead of stalling at Major, they now stall at Captain.
How do you figure it was off the table before?
You said, if Major and Lt Col are off the table, thus meaning Levels 4 and 5 are off the table. So under the old program, Levels 4 and 5 would have been Lt Col. Thus, Lt Col was off the table in the previous requirements.
Also, since a Master rating only requires Level III, not being able to obtain Levels 4 and 5 are the same regardless of whether it was the old or the new requirements. Thus, the "unintended consequences" are the same before as they are now.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 13, 2014, 10:05:56 PMYou said, if Major and Lt Col are off the table, thus meaning Levels 4 and 5 are off the table. So under the old program, Levels 4 and 5 would have been Lt Col. Thus, Lt Col was off the table in the previous requirements.
Level IV was Lt Col. Level V was a $1200 ribbon and a photo in front of the plane.
Something to do if you were bored or looking to check another box on the CAP bucket list, but unconnected to any progression.
Under the old system, Level IV was much more attainable then now. RSC was the only pinchpoint, and
that is offered >8< times a year, and if you got the lucky draw of being in a wing that offered it,
you could even be a day player and not incur the expense of travel and lodging. I drove to mine and
shared a hotel room. It was about $600.
NSC is only offered once a year, in one place, which means there will be seat constraints as well
as the expense. A nice way to back-channel hold someone back is to simply not approve their NSC application.
Not to mention the $1200+ it costs to get there and attend.
Considering the rest of Level V are classes offered locally (relatively speaking), under the old system,
Lt Col cost ~$7-800 in hard costs, it now costs over $2000. CAP professional development and progression
should not be dependent on writing a check. RSC was bad enough, and held a lot of people back as it was.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 13, 2014, 10:05:56 PM
Also, since a Master rating only requires Level III, not being able to obtain Levels 4 and 5 are the same regardless of whether it was the old or the new requirements. Thus, the "unintended consequences" are the same before as they are now.
I'm having trouble parsing that sentence.
Level III requires a >senior< rating, not a master. Level IV still requires a master as before.
If your personal circumstance precludes you from RSC, why bother with the master? You top out at Captain,
hot glue the senior pin on your shirt and forget about bothering with any more PD.
Another unintended consequence - less people interested in being directors of SLS/CLS, etc. A lot of members only
stepped up when the clock started ticking on Level IV.
Another - the last incentive of getting pilots to "kit-up" on PD is gone. They are already Captains, with no chance
of Major. Why bother?
However, again, I'm not against the idea of raising the bar, the PD levels are actually more properly aligned now,
it's the transition that is wrong and unfair.
I know "life's not fair" - maybe that should be added to the exit surveys.
Speaking only for myself: I'm happy that you need to take SOS or RSC for a promotion to major. Frankly, I think SOS — yes, the Air Force PME course — should be required for captain. The only snag for CAP members is that you need to have a bachelor's degree to take SOS. But the things SOS teaches are things you need to effectively and intelligently run a unit and to be a good officer. Maybe CAP should develop a course for lieutenants that matches much of SOS.
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on August 13, 2014, 10:27:13 PM
Speaking only for myself: I'm happy that you need to take SOS or RSC for a promotion to major. Frankly, I think SOS — yes, the Air Force PME course — should be required for captain. The only snag for CAP members is that you need to have a bachelor's degree to take SOS. But the things SOS teaches are things you need to effectively and intelligently run a unit and to be a good officer. Maybe CAP should develop a course for lieutenants that matches much of SOS.
I don't understand why CAP can't ask for a waiver on the degree requirements for this.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 10:22:56 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on August 13, 2014, 10:05:56 PMYou said, if Major and Lt Col are off the table, thus meaning Levels 4 and 5 are off the table. So under the old program, Levels 4 and 5 would have been Lt Col. Thus, Lt Col was off the table in the previous requirements.
Level IV was Lt Col. Level V was a $1200 ribbon and a photo in front of the plane.
Yes I know. The rest of the prices have nothing to do with what you said earlier, which is what I was replying to:
Quote
If Major and Lt Col are off the table for some people, then I would imagine the interest in Senior and Master
are going to wane as well. As I said before "unintended consequences".
Again, if, as you claim above, major and Lt Col are off the table for some people because they cannot get Level 4 and 5 (due to what ever reason), they stall at Level 3. This is the same thing in the previous program. If the person cannot obtain Level 4 and 5 (due to what ever reason), they stall at Level 3. So instead of stalling at major (old), they now only stall at captain. Therefore, the unintended consequences are the same now as they were a week ago.
Quote
Quote from: LSThiker on August 13, 2014, 10:05:56 PM
Also, since a Master rating only requires Level III, not being able to obtain Levels 4 and 5 are the same regardless of whether it was the old or the new requirements. Thus, the "unintended consequences" are the same before as they are now.
I'm having trouble parsing that sentence.
Level III requires a >senior< rating, not a master. Level IV still requires a master as before.
If your personal circumstance precludes you from RSC, why bother with the master?
Yes I know. To get Level 3 requires Senior Rating. To get a Master rating requires Level III.
QuoteIf your personal circumstance precludes you from RSC, why bother with the master?
The same question could be asked 3 months ago as it can be asked today. Nothing has changed. If they were not able to go to RSC before the change, then why bother with the master?
When I attended NSC a couple of years ago, I submitted a fairly detailed AAR and one of my primary criticisms was the cost to the student. In my year, government quarters were not available and the class resided at a local hotel. (CAP had negotiated a substantial discount, but it was still more expensive than the BOQ).
My cost that year was about $1,500 (airfare into tiny little Montgomery is not very competative). Some of my classmates faced much smaller costs (lived close enough to drive,etc) and some had their costs underwritten by their units.
Regardless of whether the cost to the student is $1,500 or less, the cost level is still too high and the result means that only folks who can afford to pay that kind of money will be able to play. And that in turn affects the demographics of our senior leadership.
But it is easy to spot the problem, but harder to find a satisfactory answer. It is easy to say that "NHQ should just find $100,000 a year and use it to pay for airfare, billetting, and class fees" and a lot harder to either identify what could be cut to pay for it or find a new revenue stream. ("The Mircrosoft National Staff Colllege," perhaps? ;D )
Of course, the choices are not simply "too expensive" or "free" there is a lot of room in the middle.
Any ideas for reducing the cost of Staff College?
Quote from: Ned on August 13, 2014, 10:46:00 PM
Any ideas for reducing the cost of Staff College?
How are the quarters for COS worked out to keep the program at $450 per cadet?
Quote from: Ned on August 13, 2014, 10:46:00 PM
Any ideas for reducing the cost of Staff College?
Eliminate it as irrelevant (based on what I have seen in the curriculum).
Offer NSC as a Region activity as well - no reason it has to be at Maxwell.
More then once a year and make the staff travel instead of the students.
Offer a correspondence option open to all members.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 13, 2014, 10:42:26 PMIf they were not able to go to RSC before the change, then why bother with the master?
How can you say "nothing has changed".
It's gone from $600 and one week to $2000 and two weeks.
That's another "not Nesa" "not encampment" or "not Osh Kosh".
Members would get the Master in hopes of having the opportunity for RSC, plus it got them to Major.
Also it's only been what, a year or two that the correspondence options closed for many members?
I'm right there with you. I took SLS, finished Lv 2, earned my Yeager, Tech in PD, CP and waiting my TIG until Dec. Now I have to do 2 conferences, get senior rating, and CLC >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(. This new crap sucks for the non-aviators... >:( >:( >:(
Quote from: kwe1009 on August 12, 2014, 02:03:42 AM
Two days away from finishing SLS and Level II and they change the rules. Great.
I really could have used the extra money from the Captain promotion! :'(
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 11:24:46 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on August 13, 2014, 10:42:26 PMIf they were not able to go to RSC before the change, then why bother with the master?
How can you say "nothing has changed".
It's gone from $600 and one week to $2000 and two weeks.
That's another "not Nesa" "not encampment" or "not Osh Kosh".
Members would get the Master in hopes of having the opportunity for RSC, plus it got them to Major.
Also it's only been what, a year or two that the correspondence options closed for many members?
Okay, I will explain this once more.
Had the change never occurred, level 4 would still cost $600 and level V would still cost $1200. With the change, level 4 costs $600 and level V would still cost $1200. Nothing has changed in that regard. Again, price does not matter in this regard. The only thing this system has changed is that at Level 3, they are no longer able to call themselves major.
So with the current system: Members would get the Master in hopes of having the opportunity for RSC. This is the same with the old system except they do not get to be promoted to major.
Again, nothing has changed except the fact that at Level 3 they can be promoted to captains and level 4 they can be promoted to majors and level 5 they can be promoted to Lt Col.
So if as you are claiming, a person says well I cannot make level 4 because I cannot go to RSC so no need to make master or senior rating, this same argument is true had the change never occurred. The only difference is that they won't get promoted to major, but their PD levels are the same.
Therefore, any unintended consequences are the same before the change as it was after the change except for the fact that at level 3, they won't be called major.
The new system has not changed anyone's ability to obtain a PD level. It has only affected their title/rank. If you were unable to obtain Level 4 before the change due to cost, then you still will not be able to obtain level 4 after the change. The change has not affected anyone's ability to obtain a PD level.
So a person claiming that there is no reason to go any higher than tech because they cannot obtain Level 4, would still make the same argument before the change. Therefore, nothing has changed in this regard. So if the only reason a person got a master rating was so that they could be called major and not captain, I guess they are more worried about the rank.
So a wing that has 400 captains and 4 majors is no different than a wing that has 400 majors and 4 captains. Over all, nothing has changed for CAP as a whole.
Understand now?
I got it the first time. ;)
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 11:04:16 PM
Quote from: Ned on August 13, 2014, 10:46:00 PM
Any ideas for reducing the cost of Staff College?
Eliminate it as irrelevant (base don what I have seen in the curriculum.
Offer NSC as a Region activity as well - no reason it has to be at Maxwell.
More then once a year and make the staff travel instead of the students.
Offer a correspondence option open to all members.
I actually thought the curricula was well thought out and appropriate for the most part. And the reason that it is held at Maxwell is the same reason we have COS there -- the extensive use of AF instructors from the Squadron Officers College and ACSC who are stationed there, as well as access to the support provided by the corporate staff at NHQ. It is theoretically possible, of course, to fly the AF instructors and supporting CAP corporate staffers to another location. I haven't run the numbers, but it might not result in a significant cost savings.
In theory, it is also possible to use qualified CAP volunteer instructors for the classes currently taught by our AF colleauges and use additional volunteer staff in lieu of the support we receive from corporate employees. Certainly worth looking at, but I would be concerned about changing the fundamental nature of the course by elminating the AF instructors.
One of the key differences between COS and NSC is that -- because CP is a Congressionally and AFI-directed mission -- the AF authorizes the use of appropriated funds to pay for the cadets' travel and some expenses associated with COS. There is no similar provision that would permit the expenditure of appropriated funds for senior member professional development. Sounds strange, but makes sense when you look at it from their perspective.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 13, 2014, 11:58:24 PMOver all, nothing has changed for CAP as a whole.
Wow - maybe this is the attitude that allowed this to pass.
No one said the PD changed.
It's the
incentive to complete it that has changed.
I also think it's quite remarkable that you can discount the fact that a huge percentage of members now do not have the possibility of making major,
as if that will have no effect on the organization. The average member had only 5 lifetime promotions to look forward to, now it's only 3.
I can tell you for a fact that the general attitude in this regard is "Well there's no reason I can't make major, which is fine, and someday I might be
able to get to Lt Col". Now it will be "well Captain is it", and those pilots get it for writing a check, so what's the point?"
This doesn't add weight, authority, or incentive to grade. It only adds irrelevant hurdles. It's somebody's "good idea", and probably
started as a good-faith effort to revamp the system as a whole, and by the time the naysayers were done, this is all that could get through
because it didn't effect anyone in the room.
Show me a situation where you require all >current< officers to make PD level by 2018, and I'll show you a plan with some teeth.
This just annoys the monkey to no actual value.
Yep, someones thought of a good idea. They'll get a commanders comm probably a national one for it and who cares about the people it impacts.
Quote from: Ned on August 14, 2014, 12:13:47 AM
I actually thought the curricula was well thought out and appropriate for the most part. And the reason that it is held at Maxwell is the same reason we have COS there -- the extensive use of AF instructors from the Squadron Officers College and ACSC who are stationed there, as well as access to the support provided by the corporate staff at NHQ. It is theoretically possible, of course, to fly the AF instructors and supporting CAP corporate staffers to another location. I haven't run the numbers, but it might not result in a significant cost savings.
I'll say this, the singular advantage of having it at Maxwell is the ability for NHQ to insure a consistency of execution and
presentation. The RSC I attended (at which I was the distinguished graduate, just sayin'), was a poorly executed
rehash of SLS topics presented literally on transparencies and included a trip to the Circus.
It was essentially band camp for the staff at the expense of the participants. Thankfully that group has been moved out and
a fresh set of staffers are running it.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 14, 2014, 12:17:14 AM
It's the incentive to complete it that has changed.
If your incentive is to be called major at level 3 instead of captain, then yes your incentive has changed. If your incentive is to obtain your personal highest PD level, which in this case is level 3, then no it has not.
Quote
The average member had only 5 lifetime promotions to look forward to, now it's only 3.
Explain your math on this one because a person that is unable to obtain level 4 has 4 promotions under the old system. With the current system, it is 3 promotions. This only affects you if the only thing you are worrying about is what your title is. Regardless of whether I am a Lt Col, a major, or a captain has no bearing on my work or my authority.
Quote from: Ned on August 14, 2014, 12:13:47 AM
One of the key differences between COS and NSC is that -- because CP is a Congressionally and AFI-directed mission -- the AF authorizes the use of appropriated funds to pay for the cadets' travel and some expenses associated with COS. There is no similar provision that would permit the expenditure of appropriated funds for senior member professional development. Sounds strange, but makes sense when you look at it from their perspective.
Makes sense really. Just did not know that.
The comment "well Captain it is" rings true for me. I was eligible for Major 1 July 2014. The promotion was not, has not, been submitted by the Squadron CC. There's no way I can afford to attend RSC unless it's not too far from where I live which is very unlikely. And getting to Montgomery some day.....no way. Maybe, things will change for the better, correspondence courses are a possibility...maybe I'll win the lottery, buy a plane and have someone fly me to.......oh, sorry I must have dosed off there. So I guess for now, I'll shine my boots, press the BDU's and carry on. Captain for Life....not so bad.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 14, 2014, 12:29:37 AMRegardless of whether I am a Lt Col, a major, or a captain has no bearing on my work or my authority.
And that's very magnanimous of you, the problem is that isn't true for all the members, nor for the organization as a whole.
The message is that grade isn't important, except it is, other then when it isn't, though normally it is, and you should aspire,
but you know, some can't really wear it, um...what was the question?
Thanks.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 14, 2014, 12:37:13 AM
nor for the organization as a whole.
Do not know if that is true. In my neck of the woods, as long as the pilot can fly, he does not care whether he is a 1st Lt or a lt Col. The same is true for the ES all the time people. In fact, I have surpassed many members that that were members when I was a cadet. It has not affected them as they are still wing operations officers, wing safety, etc. as long as they are doing the job they like, rank is not important to them.
Now whether that is correct or not, is an entirely different topic. One that really I won't get into.
You've characterized the challenge nicely.
Grade and PD is wholly unnecessary to participate fully in the core missions, yet loads of time
and calories are spent around the issue. It's meaningless in a meaningful kind of way.
When you walk in the door you want it, and by the time you get it you realize it wasn't that big a deal.
Eclipse....you seem to arguing both sides of the issue now.
Bottom line......here are the rules to get the rank.
PD courses, Sepcialty Levels, TIG, pleasing the promotion boards.
35-5 has changed....it is now harder to get Lt Col. Some specialty tracks are harder to get Senior and Master then others.
Nothing.....nothing has fundamentally changed.
Fill the boxes, do your time, please the promotion board.
That is the same.
Now Lt Col costs more of your time, more of your money. It should be hard to get Lt Col.
I still think it is too easy to get Lt Col.
If you don't want to advance in your specialty track, don't want to go to the next level of PD......then you won't get promoted.
If Silver Oaks are what you want....here are the hoops to jump through.
And remember.....just because you have jumped through the hoops....does not mean you will get your promotion.
No one......I SAY AGAIN.....no one is being punished. It is just the way it is.
Sure it sucks that last week you may have been looking forward to putting in your promotion request.....now you got to fill one more hoop. Sorry that it sucks that it means spending a week down in Montgomery.
But I can't see what the problem is beyond those who are going to be disappointed and now have a little more to do.
I don't see how this is going to hurt the organization in any way.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 14, 2014, 04:10:11 AM
I still think it is too easy to get Lt Col.
Spoken like somebody who has no skin in this particular game.
I'll say this, they have definitely upped the requirements, which frankly I don't mind very much. I was 1 month away from being eligible for promotion to Major, now I need Level IV. SOS is an attractive option for me. If you can't do SOS because you don't have a bachelors degree, do what others have done and go get one, I did, and I don't mind the perks in life that occasionally come with it. So what is the big deal, I have more to do? I have barely touched my PD for 2 years now, because I didn't need to...So now I will. Oh my did they actually add more to a program we pay to be a part of ;D? Folks the reality here is, it affects nothing! You want something to complain about, we can talk about the new CPPT albatross... :clap:
Quote from: Panache on August 14, 2014, 04:15:31 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 14, 2014, 04:10:11 AM
I still think it is too easy to get Lt Col.
Spoken like somebody who has no skin in this particular game.
No.....spoken like someone who quit the game because it had no meaning, it was too easy to play, and the opponents where not in my weight class.
Sorry to be blunt.....but really. I was six months from putting on Lt Col when I decided to just be a MSgt. And this what before there was any talk about being able to promote.
I think it is silly that a CAP member can become a Lt Col in CAP with out ever......EVER holding any sort of significant staff position outside of the squadron. Never ever have to hold command.
I would have added mandatory group/wing/regional staff time for members seeking promotion beyond Capt. I would certainly require significant staff time at wing/region/national level for anyone seeking Lt Col.
And that's not to say that those guys who like working their squadron staff job are not important.....but it is capt work.....and if that is as far as you want to do....good for you Capt.
If wearing oak leaves is something that you aspire to......then here is how you do that.
It is exactly what the NCO corp is doing with their top three ranks.
Want to be MSgt.....where here it is....this is the job you got to have and this is the PD levels you got to get and you got to do it for this long or you lose your rank.
So.....you all complain about how hard it is going to be Lt Col now....I'm working on making CMSgt......from where I sit right now....that's a SEVEN year commitment and getting my Level V and I have to deal with a quota.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 14, 2014, 01:06:23 AM
You've characterized the challenge nicely.
Grade and PD is wholly unnecessary to participate fully in the core missions, yet loads of time
and calories are spent around the issue. It's meaningless in a meaningful kind of way.
When you walk in the door you want it, and by the time you get it you realize it wasn't that big a deal.
Interesting hypothosis. My advancement thru the PD program helped me a great deal. Not only did I learn more about CAP, I met many members who became my friends, improved my management skills (which helped in my mission skills), and advanced in grade (which cost me money in buying insignia, and coffee for serving >:D ). Is this "meaningless in a meaningful kind of way"? Not to me. I continue to enjoy the journey; even the bumps. I am happy I went the course, and would reccomend it to anyone. Yes, it has become a bit more time consuming and costly to achieve grade. It may "weed out" some good candidates for command, but I think the changes are good.
Members don't have to advance. Many don't. It's ok. Finding a meaningful place is the important part of joining. Everything else is extra....
+1
+1 to Col. Weiss.
I too have no skin in this game ... I'm already a Lt Col and that's as high as I'm ever going to get. I also earned my Level V back about 20+ years ago and that's as high in PD as I'm ever going to get. (Heck, I had Level V while still a major - but that's just me.)
And a +1 to MSgt Harris too - it should be difficult to make lieutenant colonel. Anyone who wants silver bottlecaps can earn them ... if they want to. Making it a little more time-consuming (and expensive) doesn't prevent anyone from doing so. It actually gives you more of the sense of having earned something that not everyone else will get.
Jack
Jack, I didn't think they had Level V 20 years ago, I thought that was relatively new, like in the last 10 years. Am I wrong on that?? We had Level IV back then, but I think it topped out with that..
Quote from: ColonelJack on August 14, 2014, 01:35:54 PM
+1 to Col. Weiss.
I too have no skin in this game ... I'm already a Lt Col and that's as high as I'm ever going to get. I also earned my Level V back about 20+ years ago and that's as high in PD as I'm ever going to get. (Heck, I had Level V while still a major - but that's just me.)
And a +1 to MSgt Harris too - it should be difficult to make lieutenant colonel. Anyone who wants silver bottlecaps can earn them ... if they want to. Making it a little more time-consuming (and expensive) doesn't prevent anyone from doing so. It actually gives you more of the sense of having earned something that not everyone else will get.
Jack
I agree, but for those of us who do not have a college degree, and can't go to RSC for one reason or another, it seems there is no other alternative but to stay a major for life. I cannot, and do not, want to go to RSC. I cannot finish my degree, so even though I do not want to promote to Lt Col, being told I can't due to the aforementioned reasons above seems very maddening. At one time, I had enrolled in the correspondence course alternative, but for one reason and another I couldn't finish it, and that option is closed to me because I don't have a degree.
I guess since I don't want to promote this all is moot, but there are others in the same boat who DO want to go as far as they can.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 14, 2014, 04:10:11 AM
Eclipse....you seem to arguing both sides of the issue now.
Yes, I've said that about 4 times. I agree with the stepping, not the transition.
The average member, with the average service does not have the options, nor the atypical access and activities
you have. They don't have the option to wake up one day and decide to trade their "irrelevant" metal
for "irrelevant" stripes on a whim, and pencil whip PD because of unrelated external classes.
The average member who is on the fence here, especially in the Major / Lt Col area, has about 10 years in,
strong experience in CAP with good overall effort and initiative.
They have a garage full of SAR gear they have no use for because of the shrinking operational mission.
They have a closet full of uniforms they never wear either because they can't wear them anymore or
because CAP isn't active even at the level it was when they joined, so there's no place to wear them, anyway.
They attend meetings and watch as the number of people in the room gets less and less every year.
They look around their wing as they see units fold every year.
They hear a lot of rhetoric about "new missions" and "renewed involvement", that winds up
never even getting passed the brochure, being far outside CAP's core, or stays locked in the same GOB they have never been in.
Then something like this comes up, they sigh, add it all up, and start spending less time worrying about going
to meetings and more time catching up on American Ninja. They don't quit right away because of
sunk cost and some feelings of commitment they still feel towards the organization, so they renew, maybe a couple of
times.
People start asking "Where's Jim?" "Meh, has other stuff to do, etc., etc."
Meanwhile CAP churns something like 30% of new members and most never get to the level that replaces Jim.
Not hurting CAP at all...
Quote from: FW on August 14, 2014, 01:15:32 PM
Members don't have to advance. Many don't. It's ok. Finding a meaningful place is the important part of joining. Everything else is extra....
Except that's not how CAP characterizes the situation.
PD is important unless no one else will take the job, at which time, that's more important.
Promoting isn't important, except to those that do.
The organization needs to pick a vector and stick with it, including the harder work it makes for the
leadership when you tell people things are important and that shrinks your pool of manpower.
How can you have a paramilitary organization where people are fully allowed to participate in
the grade and PD structure, or not, at their whim, and still say you're a team with a straight face?
Quote from: AirAux on August 14, 2014, 01:49:28 PM
Jack, I didn't think they had Level V 20 years ago, I thought that was relatively new, like in the last 10 years. Am I wrong on that?? We had Level IV back then, but I think it topped out with that..
CAP Report to Congress 1964:
QuoteThe new, five-phase Senior Training Program commenced April 20, 1964.
LSThiker, thanks for the info, I guess i was too busy to pay attention to it back then.
Eclipse, one other thing, I feel that 90-95% of recruiting comes from members talking to nonmembers. If the enthusiasm is gone, if morale sucketh, will anybody be bringing anybody in??
Quote from: Garibaldi on August 14, 2014, 02:09:54 PM
there are others in the same boat who DO want to go as far as they can.
Either Level 3 is as far as they can go or they pony up the money to go to RSC and NSC. We force cadets to pony up the money to go encampment for cadet officer and RCLS/COS for C/Lt Col. Yes, it costs more for seniors and there is more logistics involved. So the real question, as posed by Ned, how do you lower the cost to attend the programs?
Quote from: Eclipse on August 14, 2014, 02:25:54 PM
Quote from: FW on August 14, 2014, 01:15:32 PM
Members don't have to advance. Many don't. It's ok. Finding a meaningful place is the important part of joining. Everything else is extra....
Except that's not how CAP characterizes the situation.
PD is important unless no one else will take the job, at which time, that's more important.
Promoting isn't important, except to those that do.
The organization needs to pick a vector and stick with it, including the harder work it makes for the
leadership when you tell people things are important and that shrinks your pool of manpower.
How can you have a paramilitary organization where people are fully allowed to participate in
the grade and PD structure, or not, at their whim, and still say you're a team with a straight face?
Such is the nature of a volunteer organization. There is no requirement to advance. Even the "requirements" for National Commander are "fluid". I don't think there is a really good answer to your question. You are part of the team by virtue of your paid up membership card. What a member does after paying dues is up to them. We can only lead them to the path of advancement. We can use every tool to help them see the way, however it's up to the individual member to take that step. Successful leaders can motivate members to progress. Not to brag, but I got 3 of my former cadets to get their Wilson and become wing kings, and two members of my staff to "go there" . Someone motivated me to progress. I'm sure you had your motivators, and motivated others. It's a process. CAPR 35-5 is just a guide. Where do we go from here?
Quote from: FW on August 14, 2014, 03:10:57 PMWhere do we go from here?
How about requirements instead of suggestions?
All the other organizations we look like or aspire to be have those.
Quote from: AirAux on August 14, 2014, 01:49:28 PM
Jack, I didn't think they had Level V 20 years ago, I thought that was relatively new, like in the last 10 years. Am I wrong on that?? We had Level IV back then, but I think it topped out with that..
I'm glad somebody else chimed in with the date involved. My GRW is dated 1991, which is more than 20 years ago ... and which comes at the end of the PD program, Level V.
Jack
Jack, it's hard to believe 1991 was more than 20 years ago. Where has the time gone??
Quote from: Eclipse on August 14, 2014, 03:16:28 PM
Quote from: FW on August 14, 2014, 03:10:57 PMWhere do we go from here?
How about requirements instead of suggestions?
All the other organizations we look like or aspire to be have those.
I know you would like to see requirements for higher level staff/command positions be firm, and no advanced grade for any reason. And, in a perfect world, they should. Do you think we have real problems because of our present process? Do we foster the "GOBN" by allowing for "flexibility" in the system? Do the "suggestions" give us unprepared leaders, or unqualified mission staffers? Do we foster resentments? Does a mission pilot care what is worn on their shoulders?
Oh, and by the way, big blue (and all other services) have direct and advanced commissioning programs (I started out as a captain). I know someone with a PHD who was commissioned as a LT Col. Things are always more than they appear. There are reasons for everything... ::)
Quote from: FW on August 14, 2014, 05:00:48 PM
Do you think we have real problems because of our present process?
>YES<Quote from: FW on August 14, 2014, 05:00:48 PM
Do we foster the "GOBN" by allowing for "flexibility" in the system?
>YES<Quote from: FW on August 14, 2014, 05:00:48 PM
Do the "suggestions" give us unprepared leaders, or unqualified mission staffers?
>YES<Quote from: FW on August 14, 2014, 05:00:48 PM
Do we foster resentments?
>YES<Quote from: FW on August 14, 2014, 05:00:48 PM
Does a mission pilot care what is worn on their shoulders?
Yes. Usually around the time those that joined with them and >didn't< get free railroad tracks surpass them.
Quote from: FW on August 14, 2014, 05:00:48 PM
Oh, and by the way, big blue (and all other services) have direct and advanced commissioning programs (I started out as a captain). I know someone with a PHD who was commissioned as a LT Col. Things are always more than they appear. There are reasons for everything... ::)
I would think that you, of anyone, would know that comparing CAP's grade structure to the way the military handles things is foolish.
However you both went to "salutin' school", a baseline of training CAP doesn't have, and had significant expectations of performance.
Quote from: ColonelJack on August 14, 2014, 03:51:32 PM
Quote from: AirAux on August 14, 2014, 01:49:28 PM
Jack, I didn't think they had Level V 20 years ago, I thought that was relatively new, like in the last 10 years. Am I wrong on that?? We had Level IV back then, but I think it topped out with that..
I'm glad somebody else chimed in with the date involved. My GRW is dated 1991, which is more than 20 years ago ... and which comes at the end of the PD program, Level V.
Jack
The SM PD was revamped in 1983. So all the GRWs that you see (with a few rare exceptions) are dated from the National Board when it was enacted-1983 to the present (mine was in 1985 as a Captain). Prior to this you had a 5 level program where the GRW was the 4th step. The highest was the National Commanders Citation which required completion of the Industrial College of the Armed Forces and carried with it appointment to the grade of Lt Col.
OK, so did you really have to use me as your example????
>:D
Quote from: Eclipse on August 14, 2014, 02:18:43 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 14, 2014, 04:10:11 AM
Eclipse....you seem to arguing both sides of the issue now.
Yes, I've said that about 4 times. I agree with the stepping, not the transition.
The average member, with the average service does not have the options, nor the atypical access and activities
you have. They don't have the option to wake up one day and decide to trade their "irrelevant" metal
for "irrelevant" stripes on a whim, and pencil whip PD because of unrelated external classes.
The average member who is on the fence here, especially in the Major / Lt Col area, has about 10 years in,
strong experience in CAP with good overall effort and initiative.
They have a garage full of SAR gear they have no use for because of the shrinking operational mission.
They have a closet full of uniforms they never wear either because they can't wear them anymore or
because CAP isn't active even at the level it was when they joined, so there's no place to wear them, anyway.
They attend meetings and watch as the number of people in the room gets less and less every year.
They look around their wing as they see units fold every year.
They hear a lot of rhetoric about "new missions" and "renewed involvement", that winds up
never even getting passed the brochure, being far outside CAP's core, or stays locked in the same GOB they have never been in.
Then something like this comes up, they sigh, add it all up, and start spending less time worrying about going
to meetings and more time catching up on American Ninja. They don't quit right away because of
sunk cost and some feelings of commitment they still feel towards the organization, so they renew, maybe a couple of
times.
People start asking "Where's Jim?" "Meh, has other stuff to do, etc., etc."
Meanwhile CAP churns something like 30% of new members and most never get to the level that replaces Jim.
Not hurting CAP at all...
Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on August 14, 2014, 09:08:34 PM
OK, so did you really have to use me as your example????
>:D
Aha - sorry, wasn't pointing at you, tried to just pull a random name from my hat,
but if you get stuck bu this it would certainly make my argument.
Hope you don't...
Okay, I have stayed quiet on this topic for quite some time but since they have a new reg out I'm going to comment on it a little more directly.
First I will be using a number of references from the Nov 2013 CSAG meeting minutes. The area that starts talking about this is on page 30 and goes back to the original proposal to increase the requirements and the work that was done there.
I can personally guarantee several things about the committee's work as I was on it:
1) Comments and discussion on this board were considered and discussed. I know this because I read concerns and discussions here and brought up some of the points that were made. Not everything you may have liked or wanted was necessarily included, but your comments were read and considered.
2) The committee was not just a group of old wing commanders and above making decisions way above reality or only from big wings etc. We had quite a mix of experience from larger wings to smaller wings and people from small squadrons up to larger squadrons. Committee members were also Major (Me) through Colonel and ranged in age from 27 to older than that. Some had a little bit of previous experience and one was a current active duty USAF officer who was not representing the USAF but does have some experience with the officer side of the house and PD in the USAF.
3) This was not some half-assed zero-research program. The committee spent close to 400 hrs discussing/researching/considering and creating its final report.
So all that being said.
I) Not everything the committee recommended was adopted. This included the elimination of the VAST majority of special promotions retaining only the advanced ones for Lawyers and Chaplains. Additionally the reverting back to highest grade eligible for former Wing/CC and Legislative Liaison squadron commanders is also in the recommendation, but was not adopted. This was to recognize there is some value in having titles of rank with certain positions. You may not like it, you may not believe it, but it really is true.
The advanced grade for military officers being eliminated was discussed but as is pointed out by the CAP-USAF director
" While it's true the Air Force has authority over the CAP grade structure, the introduction of the NCO Corps and the attention garnered at the Air Staff will compel a standardized approach between officer and NCO promotion opportunities. " Convincing CAP to shed the advanced promotion for military members may not be as great a challenge (as most aren't former military members), convincing the USAF of that? A lot less likely. It was dropped. Sometimes its best to pick your battles and that is one that really isn't worth fighting at this time. Maybe another day...maybe not.
II) The goal was to start to really change the attitude that promotions are not supposed to be carrots and 'Good job you've done good stuff at this point' but instead 'Hey, we think you are qualified to operate at this next higher level' This would also mean the PD courses could be better tailored to acting at those levels. If you want 'attaboys good job on staff or for this long service' that's what Achievement and up awards are for.
III) Take a look at Table 1 in the recommendation of the committee. That's what the goal was and what PD courses could then be tailored to more adequately go after. Heck, they may still be able to be changed to go after those recommendations a bit better. If you see no value in RSC or NSC or PD, or can't articulate the importance of PD then that is an area to work on.
IV) The 'Life isn't fair someone is going to get screwed' argument was considered as well. The original thought was actually to have the reg go through a comment period but have ZERO grand-father time. You have to make a cut somewhere. The idea of 'well just finish the promotion you're working on!' was kicked around too but how long do we let them do that? You can be working on a promotion for years and years. Tracking that would be a nightmare to begin with. We've seen this sort of requirement shift in the cadet program and it was about as harsh as this current change is. If they can adapt and overcome...and possibly have to learn entirely new material.
The committee was fully aware that people are going to get stuck. One of the members specifically had a dog in that fight because they were not yet a Lt Col and still had several years TIG to burn. So it wasn't just a 'ignore the members we don't remember what it was like' type situation. Absolutely this issue was taken into account, it burns, it bites, but anywhere you draw a line SOMEONE is going to get unhappy.
Right now RSC or equivalent is the requirement for Level IV. It's expensive and long and difficult. Got it...so commanders who want to take care of their people should really look at finding ways of lowering costs. For a 20 person course for 1 week you are looking at a cost of $18,000 (if you include the cost of food/lodging but not transportation) most of which comes out of the pocket of members right now. So get creative in finding ways to find that much money, it's out there.
There are also other courses which are being looked at that could meet the overall objectives of RSC/NSC or perhaps be more specialized (national IG college for example instead of NSC)
At the end of the day there is also this sitting out there:
"CAP members are achieving rank far too quickly and automatically. Too often CAP officer grade is a misleading indication of ability or experience. The general civilian population cannot tell the difference and draws no distinction between CAP officers and Air Force officers"
There is a perception by many there are too many field grade officers and that it doesn't mean anything. There are clearly feelings that Maj and Lt Col will now be 'bought' and yes there is quite a bit of work/effort and sacrifice if you want to get to those highest levels now. If you see absolutely no value to PD at all, and don't want to do any beyond the minimum Level I that's fine. You'll remain a 2d Lt in perpetuity (With some noted exceptions which I already addressed.) If you're then not picked up for opportunities because you don't have the training they are looking for, you really will have no one to truly blame but yourself.
So how about that that actively pursued their PD that will now stagnate? Basically thanks for working in the program but it is just not good enough.
Rank in CAP meant nothing last week when it came to operations, and nothing has changed. CP, ES, and AE will still be done by people who are interested and motivated, regardless of what rank they wear on their shoulders. Since the regulations are not demoting people who already have rank, regardless of experience, it will take years for this to actually make a difference, and by the time it does it will probably be replaced by new regulations or so few people will be staying in the organization for extended periods it just won't matter.
The fact that they still have advanced promotions for medical officers who cannot practice medicine proves logic was not at work here. Much like having aircrew wings before updating the regulations which would allow their issuance.
Quote from: LGM30GMCC on August 15, 2014, 12:16:49 AMThere is a perception by many there are too many field grade officers and that it doesn't mean anything.
The former is irrelevant because the latter is 100% true.
Quote from: LGM30GMCC on August 15, 2014, 12:16:49 AM
II) The goal was to start to really change the attitude that promotions are not supposed to be carrots and 'Good job you've done good stuff at this point' but instead 'Hey, we think you are qualified to operate at this next higher level' This would also mean the PD courses could be better tailored to acting at those levels. If you want 'attaboys good job on staff or for this long service' that's what Achievement and up awards are for.
Wasted effort until grade confers authority, or that the PD has to be completed >before< you get the cool job. Literally not possible in
a paradigm where people beg you to take a job you don't want and aren't qualified to do anyway.
Fix >that< and forget about grade.
Two other points - the committee may have had people affected, but the decision makers, the ones who chose
not to adopt all the recommendations, likely didn't, which is the real issue.
Beyond that, I can't fathom how this could possibly have encompassed 400 hours of work.
Thank you for the effort, but this just made things worse.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 01:17:57 AM
Beyond that, I can't fathom how this could possibly have encompassed 400 hours of work.
Thank you for the effort, but this just made things worse.
A bit condescending there.
Quote from: Alaric on August 15, 2014, 12:42:38 AM
The fact that they still have advanced promotions for medical officers who cannot practice medicine proves logic was not at work here. Much like having aircrew wings before updating the regulations which would allow their issuance.
Spot on.
Pilots who never fly an hour for CAP, HSOs not allowed to do used their skills, military officers with zero relevent experience,
etc., etc.
You cannot fix this piecemeal.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 15, 2014, 01:21:40 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 01:17:57 AM
Beyond that, I can't fathom how this could possibly have encompassed 400 hours of work.
Thank you for the effort, but this just made things worse.
A bit condescending there.
Maybe. I don't like to degenerate good faith effort by well-intentioned people, but it is what it is.
I would imagine there were some pretty "direct" conversations when the powers didn't adopted
the whole recommendation, but instead picked and chose to avoid the majority of uncomfortable conversations.
As as the tag says "effort does not equal results".
The end of the effort was a "solution" that solves not a single problem, but makes things less
fun for those involved.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 01:17:57 AM
Wasted effort until grade confers authority, or that the PD has to be completed >before< you get the cool job. Literally not possible in
a paradigm where people beg you to take a job you don't want and aren't qualified to do anyway.
Fix >that< and forget about grade.
Since you keep bringing this up, what is your solution?
Quote from: LSThiker on August 15, 2014, 01:37:20 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 01:17:57 AM
Wasted effort until grade confers authority, or that the PD has to be completed >before< you get the cool job. Literally not possible in
a paradigm where people beg you to take a job you don't want and aren't qualified to do anyway.
Fix >that< and forget about grade.
Since you keep bringing this up, what is your solution?
You spread the pain.
The simplest solution is that only Commanders hold any grade and only while in office.
If that is too hard...
Eliminate all special promotions.
Require all members to normalize their PD within 1-2 years or revert to whatever grade their PD qualifies for.
Grade confers actual authority, can only be achieved when billets are open, and there is no "return to the squadron" option
for members. It's "up and out". Want Oaks? Assume the requisite mantel and risk losing them if you are not suited to the task.
No one says you can't stay in a unit your whole life, but once you ascend, you can't be assigned at a lower level, ever.
You can always go back and play with your friends, but you stay assigned at the higher level.
No double billeting. You get a CAP job and work that until you take a different
one. No multi-echelon billeting.
You work at the level of your unit of record.
Desperate for a return path? Then accept demotion to the grade commensurate with whatever staff job you accept
at the lower echelon. Just like the big boys do it. No more Lt Col Coffeebringer, because Unit Morale Office is a 1st Lt billet.
His PD badges and decs will speak his experience, and no more question about who's in charge.
NCSAs, encampments, and similar activities can have charters to allow members who wish to participate twice a
year to be assigned to those activities instead of a unit.
Each wing has one operational squadron for those who have no interest in PD or the just want to fly, etc.
They stay SMWOG, the wing Vice Commander is the Commander of record for this charter, and there are no expectations
beyond operational status. Members participate as they will, or won't. The SUI is minimal and related only to ops.
NHQ starts concerted recruiting initiatives to fill the spaces the way they should be so that members feel free to ascend without
feeling like they are leaving their unit in a lurch.
Done.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 01:46:31 AM
Require all members to normalize their PD within 1-2 years or revert to whatever grade their PD qualifies for.
Why bother about PD? Why would anyone need a master rating or a senior rating?
QuoteGrade confers actual authority, can only be achieved when billets are open, and there is no "return to the squadron" option
for members. It's "up and out". Want Oaks? Assume the requisite mantel and risk losing them if you are not suited to the task.
No one says you can't stay in a unit your whole life, but once you ascend, you can't be assigned at a lower level, ever.
You can always go back and play with your friends, but you stay assigned at the higher level.
So why bother going to Wing or higher headquarters?
QuoteNo double billeting. You get a CAP job and work that until you take a different one. No multi-echelon billeting.
You work at the level of your unit of record.
So who does the work of vacant positions? Surely the commander cannot because that would be double billeting? Why even become a commander when I could just go to the operational unit and not have to worry about all the other work.
QuoteNCSAs, encampments, and similar activities can have charters to allow members who wish to participate twice a
year to be assigned to those activities instead of a unit.
So why bother being assigned to a unit in the first place then?
QuoteEach wing has one operational squadron for those who have no interest in PD or the just want to fly, etc.
They stay SMWOG, the wing Vice Commander is the Commander of record for this charter, and there are no expectations
beyond operational status. Members participate as they will, or won't.
So why bother even having a cadet program then? I mean, if I can be assigned to that squadron and just fly or do just GT, then who cares about PD or the cadet program? So who is going to take care of the administrative work? Logistics? Safety?
I think your "solution" has done far more harm to the organization than anything.
The answer to every question is in my message, if you read it, especially the second from last sentence.
CAP is in the position it is in because it has propagated an environment of lax adherence to the regulations
in favor or retention, to the ultimate detriment of all involved. It is churning at a 20-40% rate, depending
on how you do the math, because people join with an assumption and promises, and what they find is
a shell of the brochure. There are pockets of anecdotal success, but in most cases those people involved
spend as much time fighting inertia and naysayers as they do executing the mission.
You do PD because you >want< the cool job and it requires PD. You don't get the cool job until your training
is done. No more of this SMWOG Wing-level director of finance nonsesne with a wet ID card
who hasn't a clue about CAP and wrecks havoc before getting the wing frozen and quitting in 6 months.
You aspire to command because you want to command, have the training, experience, and the initiative.
Not just because you were in the bathroom when they handed out assignments.
Commanders command, their job is oversight and management, not wrench turning.
My plan cause chaos and attrition in year 1-2, and fixes CAP by year three. It's also not a "plan" per se,
it's an off-cuff response, however every initiaitive indicated actually fixes a real problem or answers a real question.
Instead of stirring the pot to no one's advantage.
Everyone is on the same page, people can do what they want to in CAP, and no one is confused about
who's in charge or what grade means.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 01:46:31 AM
Quote from: LSThiker on August 15, 2014, 01:37:20 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 01:17:57 AM
Wasted effort until grade confers authority, or that the PD has to be completed >before< you get the cool job. Literally not possible in
a paradigm where people beg you to take a job you don't want and aren't qualified to do anyway.
Fix >that< and forget about grade.
Since you keep bringing this up, what is your solution?
You spread the pain.
The simplest solution is that only Commanders hold any grade and only while in office.
If that is too hard...
Eliminate all special promotions.
Require all members to normalize their PD within 1-2 years or revert to whatever grade their PD qualifies for.
Grade confers actual authority, can only be achieved when billets are open, and there is no "return to the squadron" option
for members. It's "up and out". Want Oaks? Assume the requisite mantel and risk losing them if you are not suited to the task.
No one says you can't stay in a unit your whole life, but once you ascend, you can't be assigned at a lower level, ever.
You can always go back and play with your friends, but you stay assigned at the higher level.
No double billeting. You get a CAP job and work that until you take a different one. No multi-echelon billeting.
You work at the level of your unit of record.
Desperate for a return path? Then accept demotion to the grade commensurate with whatever staff job you accept
at the lower echelon. Just like the big boys do it. No more Lt Col Coffeebringer, because Unit Morale Office is a 1st Lt billet.
His PD badges and decs will speak his experience, and no more question about who's in charge.
NCSAs, encampments, and similar activities can have charters to allow members who wish to participate twice a
year to be assigned to those activities instead of a unit.
Each wing has one operational squadron for those who have no interest in PD or the just want to fly, etc.
They stay SMWOG, the wing Vice Commander is the Commander of record for this charter, and there are no expectations
beyond operational status. Members participate as they will, or won't. The SUI is minimal and related only to ops.
NHQ starts concerted recruiting initiatives to fill the spaces the way they should be so that members feel free to ascend without
feeling like they are leaving their unit in a lurch.
Done.
^ if only..... :D
There is so much contention, we will never get agreement on what is appropriate for grade here. IMHO, there is absolutely no reason to grant advanced grade to anyone except commanders. Commanders should be mandated to complete the PD equivilent before their term expires for their grade to be permanent. As Eclipse states so well, there are plenty of ways we can make grade more meaninful. Right now, it seems we just rearrainged the desks in the classroom, and added some time before being eligible for promotion, while the certain few can get promoted for any reason a higher commander wants (or, at least, the perception of such).
While the changes in this regulation are a good start, I would hope our new National Commander would revisit this and make changes which would make more sense. We really shouldn't be using grade as a recruiting tool or a gift for being a good friend of the "boss". We have much better carrots than that.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 02:21:54 AM
You do PD because you >want< the cool job and it requires PD. You don't get the cool job until your training
is done. No more of this SMWOG Wing-level director of finance nonsesne with a wet ID card
who hasn't a clue about CAP and wrecks havoc before getting the wing frozen and quitting in 6 months.
You aspire to command because you want to command, have the training, experience, and the initiative.
The key word in all of this is "want".
As a new member, if you were to say well you can join this unit and be required to complete all of this PD or you join that operational unit and just do ES or fly, you are going to find the vast majority of your wing's population in that operational unit. If I had the option of just doing ES, I would have joined that unit a long time ago.
Or if you say, well you can either stay at unit finance officer and not have to complete any additional PD or you can spend several hundred or thousand dollars and be the wing finance officer, you will find a lot of your wings and regions without finance officers. Legal officers, chaplains, safety, etc.
Or if you tell me, to be a commander you need to have XYZ, then you will find a lot of people not getting XYZ just for the purpose of not being asked to be a commander.
So again, why bother?
I did not want to be a commander initially. After the current commander stepped down, I was asked and accepted. Nor did I want to be a wing historian. I got asked and accepted. I later was glad I did accept those positions, but at first, I did not want.
Or what happens if the only person qualified with XYZ professional development is not fit for command or that wing staff position? How many commanders are going to say "yeah, he was not really our choice to be wing/region finance officer but he is the only person qualified with XYZ level so what were we to do?"
So I guess "unintended consequences".
If you choose to characterize this in the most negative light possible just to make your argument, so be it.
The real bottom line is that if CAP concentrated on recruiting, retention and mission, there would be
more then enough people for everyone to do what they "want" relatively speaking. The problem
with your responses is that they presupposes the current CAP where there is little choice and few
options when filling staff positions. Respiration and gravitational attraction are no way to choose people
to run an organization that purports to save lives and mentor youth.
Increased expectations would not work in that environment, and dare I say, CAP will never flourish
or come close to its rhetorical potential if if doesn't accept this.
The change includes the general thread that the majority of members will be "mission-doers" not
administrative staff. A cadre of members with an MOS and nothing more. Lord(monar) help us, an
actual enlisted corps. Right now, most members are so focused on running CAP, that they aren't involved in doing CAP.
Rooms and rooms of managers with no one to direct.
Why on earth should someone who joined CAP to do ground SAR be burdened with running
Logistics the first day they walk in? Let them look for stuff for several years and then they can consider
different challenges. LIKE THE REAL WORLD.
As we see here on CT, there are many members, perhaps even a majority who are not involved, nor have an interest in
operations, but far too many who have been conferred grade with no meaning, purpose, and without
doing any of the work. The majority of the membership would >not< flock to the ops-only unit.
Most would welcome the full CAP experience, but for those that don't care. Fine. You're now no one's problem
and still a valuable asset.
You would be surprised what people "want" to do when given opportunity and expectation, in
an environment where things are fair and rules are followed.
QuoteII) The goal was to start to really change the attitude that promotions are not supposed to be carrots and 'Good job you've done good stuff at this point' but instead 'Hey, we think you are qualified to operate at this next higher level'
Uh, so we've increased requirements to get higher rank, but have no requirement that you have a certain rank to hold a certain position, so what was accomplished?
It was stated several times that "obtaining Lt. Col. should be hard." Why?
Shouldn't our goal be to get as many people as possible trained to be able to handle the tasks we want? Restricting what I suppose we think our best training is to a few dozen people a year doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Shouldn't we be pushing out the content of NSC to as many possible CAP members as possible rather than trying to get some people in a hot room in AL?
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 03:28:21 AM
If you choose to characterize this in the most negative light possible just to make your argument, so be it.
I characterize this in no different light than when you said these. So I guess if that is the most negative light possible, so be it:
QuoteIf Major and Lt Col are off the table for some people, then I would imagine the interest in Senior and Master
are going to wane as well. As I said before "unintended consequences".
QuoteNow it will be "well Captain is it", and those pilots get it for writing a check, so what's the point?"
Quotethe last incentive of getting pilots to "kit-up" on PD is gone. They are already Captains, with no chance
of Major. Why bother?
So I guess if you want to characterize this change in the most negative light possible, so be it.
QuoteThe real bottom line is that if CAP concentrated on recruiting, retention and mission, there would be
more then enough people for everyone to do what they "want" relatively speaking.
Sure. This is something that commanders from Squadron Level to National Level should be addressing in their own AORs.
Quote
Why on earth should someone who joined CAP to do ground SAR be burdened with running
Logistics the first day they walk in? Let them look for stuff for several years and then they can consider
different challenges.
No one said burden a new member on their first day with running logistics, nor suggested otherwise.
QuoteAs we see here on CT, there are many members, perhaps even a majority who are not involved, nor have an interest in
operations,
If you take CapTalk as a representation of CAP, then your stats are going to be skewed horribly. The only thing CAPTalk represents is the group of people that participate on it.
QuoteThe majority of the membership would >not< flock to the ops-only unit.
Most would welcome the full CAP experience
Well I guess if that is true, then the below are false because being these are all part of the CAP experience:
Quoteless people interested in being directors of SLS/CLS
Quotethe last incentive of getting pilots to "kit-up" on PD is gone
QuoteAgreed - that's the carrot,
So if most would welcome the CAP experience, there is no reason why less people are interested in being directors, why pilots are not completing PD, and why there even needs to be a carrot.
QuoteYou would be surprised what people "want" to do when given opportunity and expectation, in
an environment where things are fair and rules are followed.
No I will not because I already expect that. However, to have an environment where things are fair and rules are followed require none of the changes above. It just requires commanders to follow the rules.
[/quote]
The SM PD was revamped in 1983. So all the GRWs that you see (with a few rare exceptions) are dated from the National Board when it was enacted-1983 to the present (mine was in 1985 as a Captain). Prior to this you had a 5 level program where the GRW was the 4th step. The highest was the National Commanders Citation which required completion of the Industrial College of the Armed Forces and carried with it appointment to the grade of Lt Col.
[/quote]
As I remember it was the Air War College that was needed. But, you had to complete SOS and ACSC first.
Wait till they change the requirements for wing and region commanders to have a bachelors degree before appointments. Then an Associate's degree to be a 2d Lt.
Looks like I'll have to blow the Dust off of my EMT card and be reappointed as a Health Services Officer. I'll make Lieutenant Colonel without doing anymore PD...just time in grade. >:D
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 10:39:18 PM
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on August 13, 2014, 10:27:13 PM
Speaking only for myself: I'm happy that you need to take SOS or RSC for a promotion to major. Frankly, I think SOS — yes, the Air Force PME course — should be required for captain. The only snag for CAP members is that you need to have a bachelor's degree to take SOS. But the things SOS teaches are things you need to effectively and intelligently run a unit and to be a good officer. Maybe CAP should develop a course for lieutenants that matches much of SOS.
I don't understand why CAP can't ask for a waiver on the degree requirements for this.
I thought they did. Air University responded that that the courses they offered were graduate level and that because they required to have a Bachelor's Degree due to their accreditation status with the Commission of Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools they weren't willing to risk their accreditation by granting a waiver.
SARDOC you may want to re-read the regulation.
5-3.c. Health Service Personnel. Upon successful completion of Level I, unit commanders may initiate a CAPF 2 on health service personnel recommending appointment to an appropriate grade, as outlined below. The member's qualifications will be evaluated by the wing health service program officer, who will provide his or her comments and recommendations to the wing commander prior to approval. (Specific qualifications for medical personnel are outlined in CAPR 160-1.)
(1) Second Lieutenant. Licensed practical or vocational nurse, paramedic or other health technician.
(2) First Lieutenant. Registered nurse, physician assistant or other health professional with a bachelor's or master's degree as outlined in CAPR 160-1.
(3) Captain. Licensed physician, dentist or other health professional with an earned doctorate degree in a health care discipline.
(4) Major. Licensed physician appointed a unit health service program officer in accordance with CAPR 160-1 who has served 1 year time-in-grade as a captain.
I don't see a path to Lt Col here.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 14, 2014, 04:10:11 AM
Now Lt Col costs more of your time, more of your money. It should be hard to get Lt Col.
Time and Effort...Yes, it should be more difficult. But, No, it shouldn't cost you more of your money. If I had the money to just blow $1200.00 for a Grade for which there is no financial recovery...nah I'd blow it on Pilot Lessons.
Being the expensive part I take exception with. Being in all fairness, I have members of my Wing that are Super Dedicated to this organization and dedicated to the mission...but they barely have enough money to go stay a single night at a hotel never mind going all the way to Maxwell.
I think that if the Civil Air Patrol wanted to limit the numbers...they should make a real honest to God, Promotion system ie. USAF.
Limit the Spots of Captains, Majors and Lieutenant Colonels, with increasing grade and responsibility. Based on membership forecasts, trending, they can determine the numbers of positions in any given year, each wing gets a percentage of the Quota based on the size of their Wing.
Florida...this year you get 12 Lt Cols, 17 Majors and 28 Captains, Rhode Island...You get 1 Captain. (numbers may vary for demonstrable purposes only...not actual reflection). When a National Promotion Board gets to look at the top candidates based on a CAP resume maybe testing or Occupational Specialty (specialty track) and compares to staff vacancies and recommendations or evaluations.
Oh...you scored higher on a test, but the Lt. Col position we have is the Wing Director of Safety and your Master's rating is in Emergency Services. They might skip over you to someone who has a Masters in safety. If you have Master Ratings in Multiple in demand specialty tracks you might get an early promote (if your performance is demonstrated by evals and/or recommendation letters.
Grade might actually mean something here. Serve in that role well for a term, you keep the grade and maybe transfer elsewhere (Special Projects, Region Staff, NHQ)
Just a thought...performance is my point, not the extra money to burn.
Quote from: Lord of the North on August 15, 2014, 06:42:42 AM
SARDOC you may want to re-read the regulation.
5-3.c. Health Service Personnel. Upon successful completion of Level I, unit commanders may initiate a CAPF 2 on health service personnel recommending appointment to an appropriate grade, as outlined below. The member's qualifications will be evaluated by the wing health service program officer, who will provide his or her comments and recommendations to the wing commander prior to approval. (Specific qualifications for medical personnel are outlined in CAPR 160-1.)
(1) Second Lieutenant. Licensed practical or vocational nurse, paramedic or other health technician.
(2) First Lieutenant. Registered nurse, physician assistant or other health professional with a bachelor's or master's degree as outlined in CAPR 160-1.
(3) Captain. Licensed physician, dentist or other health professional with an earned doctorate degree in a health care discipline.
(4) Major. Licensed physician appointed a unit health service program officer in accordance with CAPR 160-1 who has served 1 year time-in-grade as a captain.
I don't see a path to Lt Col here.
Nope, I read just fine.
The section you quoted from CAPR 35-5 is under section 5-3 titled
INITIAL APPOINTMENT. This section only applies to the First entry level grade to which you are appointed.
Look at this section of 35-5
Quote from: 5-2. Training Requirements. Professional personnel must complete Level I prior to
appointment to CAP officer grade. Health Service personnel, professional educators serving as
aerospace education officers are exempt from all other training requirements prescribed for
promotion to additional grades.
This makes Level 5 not a requirement for Lieutenant Colonel...just Time in Grade
If they want Grade to signify authority, it would be incredibly simple...
For Commanders start with the national commander, and each echelon drops one grade, so:
National Commander: Maj Gen
Region Commander: Brig Gen
Wing Commander: Col
Group Commander: Lt Col
Squadron Commander: Major
Flight Commander: Capt
Now, for what I call the "Command Staff" (Vice Commander, Deputy Commander, Chief of Staff at Wing and above), they get one step below the commander:
National C-Staff: Brig Gen
Region C-Staff: Col
Wing C-Staff: Lt Col
Group C-Staff: Maj
Squadron C-Staff: Capt
Flight C-Staff: 1st Lt
Senior Staff (those that at Wing are Director of...) get 1 below the C-Staff:
National S-Staff: Col
Region S-Staff: Lt Col
Wing S-Staff: Maj
Group S-Staff: Capt
Squadron S-Staff: 1st Lt
Flight S-Staff: 2nd Lt
Junior Staff (Rest of the staff), 1 below S-Staff:
National J-Staff: Lt Col
Region J-Staff: Maj
Wing J-Staff: Capt
Group J-Staff: 1st Lt
Squadron J-Staff: 2nd Lt
Flight J-Staff: SMWOG
Assistants at any level get one grade below the primary...So, the Asst ES Training Officer at Wing gets 1st Lt (ESTO is not Director, so Wing is Capt, Asst is 1 bump down), while the Asst Director of Communications at National get Lt. Col (Senior Staff=Col, 1 bump down). Establish a Time in Service requirement to make these permanent.
That way, if you see a Lt Col around, you know they've either commanded a Group, been a Wing CV/CS, or served on the senior staff at region...either way, they either hold, or have held, a position of considerable responsibility and/or authority.
Do PD by the ribbons issued up to the GRW.
Quote from: JeffDG on August 15, 2014, 11:45:36 AM
If they want Grade to signify authority, it would be incredibly simple...
For Commanders start with the national commander, and each echelon drops one grade, so:
National Commander: Maj Gen
Region Commander: Brig Gen
Wing Commander: Col
Group Commander: Lt Col
Squadron Commander: Major
Flight Commander: Capt
Now, for what I call the "Command Staff" (Vice Commander, Deputy Commander, Chief of Staff at Wing and above), they get one step below the commander:
National C-Staff: Brig Gen
Region C-Staff: Col
Wing C-Staff: Lt Col
Group C-Staff: Maj
Squadron C-Staff: Capt
Flight C-Staff: 1st Lt
Senior Staff (those that at Wing are Director of...) get 1 below the C-Staff:
National S-Staff: Col
Region S-Staff: Lt Col
Wing S-Staff: Maj
Group S-Staff: Capt
Squadron S-Staff: 1st Lt
Flight S-Staff: 2nd Lt
Junior Staff (Rest of the staff), 1 below S-Staff:
National J-Staff: Lt Col
Region J-Staff: Maj
Wing J-Staff: Capt
Group J-Staff: 1st Lt
Squadron J-Staff: 2nd Lt
Flight J-Staff: SMWOG
Assistants at any level get one grade below the primary...So, the Asst ES Training Officer at Wing gets 1st Lt (ESTO is not Director, so Wing is Capt, Asst is 1 bump down), while the Asst Director of Communications at National get Lt. Col (Senior Staff=Col, 1 bump down). Establish a Time in Service requirement to make these permanent.
That way, if you see a Lt Col around, you know they've either commanded a Group, been a Wing CV/CS, or served on the senior staff at region...either way, they either hold, or have held, a position of considerable responsibility and/or authority.
Do PD by the ribbons issued up to the GRW.
This will never work. It's too simple. Might run into some issues with the number of BGs, but other than that, it just makes too much sense to implement.
The USAF has always said no to having Region Commanders as Brig Gen.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 15, 2014, 12:23:55 PM
The USAF has always said no to having Region Commanders as Brig Gen.
OK...the exact details aren't that important, mainly included for illustrative purposes. But the principle that grade flows from responsibility and authority, either past successful service, or present service, is the overarching principle.
Quote from: LGM30GMCC on August 15, 2014, 12:16:49 AM
II) The goal was to start to really change the attitude that promotions are not supposed to be carrots and 'Good job you've done good stuff at this point' but instead 'Hey, we think you are qualified to operate at this next higher level' This would also mean the PD courses could be better tailored to acting at those levels. If you want 'attaboys good job on staff or for this long service' that's what Achievement and up awards are for.
IV) The 'Life isn't fair someone is going to get screwed' argument was considered as well. The original thought was actually to have the reg go through a comment period but have ZERO grand-father time. You have to make a cut somewhere. The idea of 'well just finish the promotion you're working on!' was kicked around too but how long do we let them do that? You can be working on a promotion for years and years. Tracking that would be a nightmare to begin with. We've seen this sort of requirement shift in the cadet program and it was about as harsh as this current change is. If they can adapt and overcome...and possibly have to learn entirely new material.
Right now RSC or equivalent is the requirement for Level IV. It's expensive and long and difficult. Got it...so commanders who want to take care of their people should really look at finding ways of lowering costs. For a 20 person course for 1 week you are looking at a cost of $18,000 (if you include the cost of food/lodging but not transportation) most of which comes out of the pocket of members right now. So get creative in finding ways to find that much money, it's out there.
There are also other courses which are being looked at that could meet the overall objectives of RSC/NSC or perhaps be more specialized (national IG college for example instead of NSC)
At the end of the day there is also this sitting out there:
"CAP members are achieving rank far too quickly and automatically. Too often CAP officer grade is a misleading indication of ability or experience. The general civilian population cannot tell the difference and draws no distinction between CAP officers and Air Force officers"
There is a perception by many there are too many field grade officers and that it doesn't mean anything. There are clearly feelings that Maj and Lt Col will now be 'bought' and yes there is quite a bit of work/effort and sacrifice if you want to get to those highest levels now. If you see absolutely no value to PD at all, and don't want to do any beyond the minimum Level I that's fine. You'll remain a 2d Lt in perpetuity (With some noted exceptions which I already addressed.) If you're then not picked up for opportunities because you don't have the training they are looking for, you really will have no one to truly blame but yourself.
Perhaps the perception that promotions are carrots came from the fact that rank and authority were never connected, and really still will not be. The purpose of rank, until the Wing CC and above were never defined. Obviously, Wing CC and above were meant through wearing COL or BG MG rank to signify higher status and authority within the corporation.
Part of the problem with everything we are discussing here, is PD. There was a SM in my RSC class that was illiterate. Everyone passed RSC, everyone passes SLS and CLC, even if you sleep through the course. There are many majors that are beloved above because they are yes men and nice guys, that don't know the regulations or cannot find anything in the regulations, know who to go to for assistance. These guys are always viewed as geniuses from above, because the staff gets it done for them. Yet, these are the guys that will move up. Regardless of the promotion criteria, the GOBN will find a way.
If CAP had a meaningful PD program, that actually had to be passed at every level, if CAP defined what rank means with the membership structure, if CAP was a serious enough military (or para-military) organization and SM's had to at least partially learn what we require and C/SrA to know, then I would agree with everything written here.
I'm actually a bigger fan of just doing away with SM rank altogether. Use the Flight Officer insignia, FO means squadron staff, TFO group staff, SFO Wing staff. Squadron CC wears Capt, Group CC wears Major, Wing LtCol (yikes get they would never agree to this sacrifice), Region COL, and National of course could remain like it is. We can still call each other by first name, and not worry about any of this BS.
There are so many current field grade officers because anyone who sticks around for 10 years or more will naturally end up in a field grade grade. It doesn't mean anything, because CAP officers do not have to prove they can write a coherent paper, or brief a group on a topic, or illustrate leadership potential. You can show up to your weekly meeting (not having shaved) with your coffee cup in your hand, accomplish nothing, but as long as your friendly and don't make waves, you will get where you want to go.
Personally rather than fix CAPR 35-5, maybe someone should fix CAPR 50-17! All the actual problems illustrated over the last 24hrs stem from Rank below Wing CC has no real purpose (only determines who receives salutes from whom, and who cares about that!), and that PD at the corporate level doesn't actually insure that anyone learns anything. Squadron CC pulls out a specialty track, guys has 6 months in, yep I think he did this and that, sign, sign, sign. Even the online tests are open book!
Quote from: LGM30GMCC on August 15, 2014, 12:16:49 AM
Okay, I have stayed quiet on this topic for quite some time but since they have a new reg out I'm going to comment on it a little more directly.
First I will be using a number of references from the Nov 2013 CSAG meeting minutes. The area that starts talking about this is on page 30 and goes back to the original proposal to increase the requirements and the work that was done there.
I can personally guarantee several things about the committee's work as I was on it:
1) Comments and discussion on this board were considered and discussed. I know this because I read concerns and discussions here and brought up some of the points that were made. Not everything you may have liked or wanted was necessarily included, but your comments were read and considered.
2) The committee was not just a group of old wing commanders and above making decisions way above reality or only from big wings etc. We had quite a mix of experience from larger wings to smaller wings and people from small squadrons up to larger squadrons. Committee members were also Major (Me) through Colonel and ranged in age from 27 to older than that. Some had a little bit of previous experience and one was a current active duty USAF officer who was not representing the USAF but does have some experience with the officer side of the house and PD in the USAF.
3) This was not some half-assed zero-research program. The committee spent close to 400 hrs discussing/researching/considering and creating its final report.
So all that being said.
I) Not everything the committee recommended was adopted. This included the elimination of the VAST majority of special promotions retaining only the advanced ones for Lawyers and Chaplains. Additionally the reverting back to highest grade eligible for former Wing/CC and Legislative Liaison squadron commanders is also in the recommendation, but was not adopted. This was to recognize there is some value in having titles of rank with certain positions. You may not like it, you may not believe it, but it really is true.
The advanced grade for military officers being eliminated was discussed but as is pointed out by the CAP-USAF director
" While it's true the Air Force has authority over the CAP grade structure, the introduction of the NCO Corps and the attention garnered at the Air Staff will compel a standardized approach between officer and NCO promotion opportunities. " Convincing CAP to shed the advanced promotion for military members may not be as great a challenge (as most aren't former military members), convincing the USAF of that? A lot less likely. It was dropped. Sometimes its best to pick your battles and that is one that really isn't worth fighting at this time. Maybe another day...maybe not.
II) The goal was to start to really change the attitude that promotions are not supposed to be carrots and 'Good job you've done good stuff at this point' but instead 'Hey, we think you are qualified to operate at this next higher level' This would also mean the PD courses could be better tailored to acting at those levels. If you want 'attaboys good job on staff or for this long service' that's what Achievement and up awards are for.
III) Take a look at Table 1 in the recommendation of the committee. That's what the goal was and what PD courses could then be tailored to more adequately go after. Heck, they may still be able to be changed to go after those recommendations a bit better. If you see no value in RSC or NSC or PD, or can't articulate the importance of PD then that is an area to work on.
IV) The 'Life isn't fair someone is going to get screwed' argument was considered as well. The original thought was actually to have the reg go through a comment period but have ZERO grand-father time. You have to make a cut somewhere. The idea of 'well just finish the promotion you're working on!' was kicked around too but how long do we let them do that? You can be working on a promotion for years and years. Tracking that would be a nightmare to begin with. We've seen this sort of requirement shift in the cadet program and it was about as harsh as this current change is. If they can adapt and overcome...and possibly have to learn entirely new material.
The committee was fully aware that people are going to get stuck. One of the members specifically had a dog in that fight because they were not yet a Lt Col and still had several years TIG to burn. So it wasn't just a 'ignore the members we don't remember what it was like' type situation. Absolutely this issue was taken into account, it burns, it bites, but anywhere you draw a line SOMEONE is going to get unhappy.
Right now RSC or equivalent is the requirement for Level IV. It's expensive and long and difficult. Got it...so commanders who want to take care of their people should really look at finding ways of lowering costs. For a 20 person course for 1 week you are looking at a cost of $18,000 (if you include the cost of food/lodging but not transportation) most of which comes out of the pocket of members right now. So get creative in finding ways to find that much money, it's out there.
There are also other courses which are being looked at that could meet the overall objectives of RSC/NSC or perhaps be more specialized (national IG college for example instead of NSC)
At the end of the day there is also this sitting out there:
"CAP members are achieving rank far too quickly and automatically. Too often CAP officer grade is a misleading indication of ability or experience. The general civilian population cannot tell the difference and draws no distinction between CAP officers and Air Force officers"
There is a perception by many there are too many field grade officers and that it doesn't mean anything. There are clearly feelings that Maj and Lt Col will now be 'bought' and yes there is quite a bit of work/effort and sacrifice if you want to get to those highest levels now. If you see absolutely no value to PD at all, and don't want to do any beyond the minimum Level I that's fine. You'll remain a 2d Lt in perpetuity (With some noted exceptions which I already addressed.) If you're then not picked up for opportunities because you don't have the training they are looking for, you really will have no one to truly blame but yourself.
With no disrespect and I can sense that you are trying help, but I really wish this post didn't exist. It only made things that much worse. After reading it, I felt that either the committee or the decision makers were arrogant or they are totally disconnected with reality as the new reg doesn't solve ANY of the problems you cited as trying to solve. The committee will also be more representative if you included Captains and 1st Lt with over 5 years in the program.
In my neck of woods, a large Navy town, there are way too may Majors and LtCol because they all came from the real military after retirement. Civilians, myself included, with no military experience work very hard at the program doing whatever we can and after 5-7 years of busting our chops we are all 1st Lt or Captains, and we are still the lowery ranked officers in the large group.
Until the committee can level the field for everybody, those of us without special appointments will always be the ordinary people to be overlooked and those with special appointments be seen as somebody with royal blood flowing in their veins.
I don't see how the new reg will change the situation a bit for people with previous military experience or professionals that don't really contribute to the overall program wearing advanced grades. It only demotivates and makes the rest of us feel unworthy of the committee's grand scheme for the greater good. Whatever the excuse or reasoning behind it, the committee and decision makers should consider the perception of it's affected members, at least a little bit. Just remove the grade from everybody and all of us will be that much healthier. The result that I see is that there will be very little change, hard working members will hold even lower grades while higher grades are still given via exceptions.
The problem is, is the lack of integrity and credibility. They come out with all the new regulations and attempt to micromanage everything and then secretly realize the program won't work, so they still appoint squadron commanders that may be 2 Lts. with no experience, leadership training, or ability. But if they placed requirements on commanders, they know they would lose a certain percentage of squadrons and no new squadrons would appear. Tis a dilemma..
Quote from: AirAux on August 15, 2014, 01:25:56 PM
The problem is, is the lack of integrity and credibility. They come out with all the new regulations and attempt to micromanage everything and then secretly realize the program won't work, so they still appoint squadron commanders that may be 2 Lts. with no experience, leadership training, or ability. But if they placed requirements on commanders, they know they would lose a certain percentage of squadrons and no new squadrons would appear. Tis a dilemma..
They appoint lieutenants as squadron commanders because in many cases no one else is available or wants the job.
In my group, all unit commanders are field grade officers, but one.
Perhaps NHQ is going to a similar concept. To do such is not really that difficult. Master rating is required for Level 4. Change the requirements for master rating to require time on Wing/group staff after the senior level. The Historian track has already done this. Therefore, the only way to get Major is to have served on Group or Wing Staff.
Of course the problem with this is that it may create a GOBN as only those people will be put on Group + staff. A lot changes may create a GOBN. Also, a number of people will complain and it will reduce the "want of master rating". Realistically, there really is not a single solution as all of these will have positives and negatives. So the best part is to create the less change with the largest bang. And do it slowly to get people accustomed to the changes.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 15, 2014, 02:03:56 PMSo the best part is to create the less change with the largest bang. And do it slowly to get people accustomed to the changes.
Clearly, because if experience has taught people anything, pulling off a band-aid slowly is much preferred to doing it quickly.
There's nothing that inspires initiative and confidence like piecemeal change stretched out over a prolonged period of time.
"CAP members are achieving rank far too quickly and automatically."
If this was, in fact, the premise for the working group, then it was doomed from the beginning, because it is a flawed premise.
It's actually a symptom of the real problem which is:
"Grade is not aligned with responsibility or authority."
The idea that people achieve it "too quickly", whatever that means, is a symptom of the fact that since it means nothing
in the greater context, there is no risk to "promoting the wrong people", so a lot of CCs don't even consider not promoting
a member as an option.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 02:12:32 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on August 15, 2014, 02:03:56 PMSo the best part is to create the less change with the largest bang. And do it slowly to get people accustomed to the changes.
Clearly, because if experience has taught people anything, pulling off a band-aid slowly is much preferred to doing it quickly.
There's nothing that inspires initiative and confidence like piecemeal change stretched out over a prolonged period of time.
The appropriate term I should have used is "at appropriate pace".
Regardless, comparing pulling off a Band-Aid to human corporate psychology is a terrible analogy. Also, the pulling off a Band-Aid is dependent on the person. For me, which has a large amount of hair, yes pulling it off fast is better. However, for my daughter, which has little amount of hair and soft skin, slower is better. So I guess yes clearly experience has taught us that pulling off a Band-Aid is a variable experience dependent on the person and that no one solution can be used.
Besides, who said piecemeal? Having a plan that is communicated to its membership can mitigate what you are describing.
Quote from: JeffDG on August 15, 2014, 11:45:36 AM
If they want Grade to signify authority, it would be incredibly simple...
For Commanders start with the national commander, and each echelon drops one grade, so:
National Commander: Maj Gen
Region Commander: Brig Gen
Wing Commander: Col
Group Commander: Lt Col
Squadron Commander: Major
Flight Commander: Capt
Now, for what I call the "Command Staff" (Vice Commander, Deputy Commander, Chief of Staff at Wing and above), they get one step below the commander:
National C-Staff: Brig Gen
Region C-Staff: Col
Wing C-Staff: Lt Col
Group C-Staff: Maj
Squadron C-Staff: Capt
Flight C-Staff: 1st Lt
Senior Staff (those that at Wing are Director of...) get 1 below the C-Staff:
National S-Staff: Col
Region S-Staff: Lt Col
Wing S-Staff: Maj
Group S-Staff: Capt
Squadron S-Staff: 1st Lt
Flight S-Staff: 2nd Lt
Junior Staff (Rest of the staff), 1 below S-Staff:
National J-Staff: Lt Col
Region J-Staff: Maj
Wing J-Staff: Capt
Group J-Staff: 1st Lt
Squadron J-Staff: 2nd Lt
Flight J-Staff: SMWOG
Assistants at any level get one grade below the primary...So, the Asst ES Training Officer at Wing gets 1st Lt (ESTO is not Director, so Wing is Capt, Asst is 1 bump down), while the Asst Director of Communications at National get Lt. Col (Senior Staff=Col, 1 bump down). Establish a Time in Service requirement to make these permanent.
That way, if you see a Lt Col around, you know they've either commanded a Group, been a Wing CV/CS, or served on the senior staff at region...either way, they either hold, or have held, a position of considerable responsibility and/or authority.
Do PD by the ribbons issued up to the GRW.
Limiting the number of officers based on a manning table was used many years ago. It did not work. I agree that there are too many field grade officers at squadron level, but they do not want to take staff positions above the unit. Group, wing and region needs to have these jobs filled in order to complete their mission, but no one wants to step up. Some new specialty tracks are now requiring members to serve in these position to achieve their ratings.
Great, let's discuss the scientific basis for an analogy understood by everyone.
This is why it takes ten years to reformat a regulation.
Yes, plans mitigate these issues. This isn't a plan. This is a piecemeal answer to a flawed premise.
Quote from: CAP_truth on August 15, 2014, 03:57:40 PM
Limiting the number of officers based on a manning table was used many years ago. It did not work. I agree that there are too many field grade officers at squadron level, but they do not want to take staff positions above the unit. Group, wing and region needs to have these jobs filled in order to complete their mission, but no one wants to step up. Some new specialty tracks are now requiring members to serve in these position to achieve their ratings.
And that's the issue, which has no solution in the current paradigm.
CAP wants to have grade that is meaningful, but needs people to do the jobs, regardless of grade or training.
Those are not positions which can co-exist in the same dimension without conflict and failure on both sides.
Pick >one< whichever is important to the mission, and take the steps to implement it, along with accepting
the ramifications.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 04:00:08 PM
Great, let's discuss the scientific basis for an analogy understood by everyone.
This is why it takes ten years to reformat a regulation.
Yes, plans mitigate these issues. This isn't a plan. This is a piecemeal answer to a flawed premise.
Even if it understood by everyone, it is a terrible analogy based on a false premise. So yes.
Quote from: MSG Mac on August 14, 2014, 08:41:50 PM
The SM PD was revamped in 1983. So all the GRWs that you see (with a few rare exceptions) are dated from the National Board when it was enacted-1983 to the present (mine was in 1985 as a Captain). Prior to this you had a 5 level program where the GRW was the 4th step. The highest was the National Commanders Citation which required completion of the Industrial College of the Armed Forces and carried with it appointment to the grade of Lt Col.
Since 1964, the program has been 5 levels. From 1964 to 1978, the wilson was Level 4. However, after 1978, it became Level 5 as the National Commander Citation was phased out. The Wilson list has been renumbered about 3 times.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 15, 2014, 04:11:16 PM
Even if it understood by everyone, it is a terrible analogy based on a false premise. So yes.
TMFT for the win!
https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2009/191/11/fast-versus-slow-bandaid-removal-randomised-trial (https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2009/191/11/fast-versus-slow-bandaid-removal-randomised-trial)
"Results: 65 participants were included in the study. The overall mean pain score for fast bandaid removal was 0.92 and for slow bandaid removal was 1.58. This represents a highly significant difference of 0.66 (P < 0.001)."
Conclusion: In young healthy volunteers, fast bandaid removal caused less pain than slow bandaid removal.
I know this has been discussed ad Nausem in other threads. However, if they are worried about too many Field Grade officers they should create a realistic promotion system that doesn't need to be so strongly rigid to the point of being strictly associated with Command Positions.
There are promotion and Professional development options for members that have no desire for Command or Senior Staff. Bring in Warrant Officer and Enlisted grades. You can have members that promote automatically up through a Technical Sergeant at Master Sergeant is becomes a little more competitive. If there is a Specialty that needs specific demonstrable leadership maybe a Warrant Officer is more appropriate. Those who are in the organization for at least a year can take a Correspondence course pertaining a more in depth look at Regulations, Policies, Missions, Leadership, etc (more substantial than OBC) and can be slotted into a Officer position.
It would be a huge cultural shift for our agency but it isn't outside the realm of possibility.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 04:22:31 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on August 15, 2014, 04:11:16 PM
Even if it understood by everyone, it is a terrible analogy based on a false premise. So yes.
TMFT for the win!
And FAIL.
You cited a Christmas Offerings Paper. You do realize what those are correct?
QuoteIt is tradition for doctors to descend into a state of inane infatuation with esoteric in-jokes, trifling trivia and medical mockery as seasonal silliness reaches its Christmas crescendo. Nowhere is this more evident than the annual hospital Christmas Quiz, an institution perpetuated throughout the anglocentric medical world, or the 'Christmas issues' of the British Medical Journal and the Medical Journal of Australia.
This discussion is over.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 15, 2014, 05:46:24 PM
You cited a Christmas Offerings Paper. You do realize what those are correct?
Yes, apparently >that< point was missed as well.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 05:56:07 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on August 15, 2014, 05:46:24 PM
You cited a Christmas Offerings Paper. You do realize what those are correct?
Yes, apparently >that< point was missed as well.
(https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/6165300480/h62D153EF/)
Anyway, I have real science to do that won't get published in a Xmas offering paper.
Just for fun I checked the stats and in my 45% of Majors don't have Level 4 and 80% of Lt. Cols. don't have Level V.
Now, if we look at the old standards, only 25% of Majors and 25% of Lt. Cols. didn't have Level 4.
In other words, a very strong majority of field grade officers had grade appropriate with the PD requirements for that grade. So, the overall problem that this was in part meant to fix was not big. And, as we know, the only way you can get to field grade without doing PD is through the special promotion system.
So, what did we do -- make it incredibly harder for the vast majority of CAP members to move up while not changing the special promotion system that is at the root of the problem of people not doing the PD program appropriate to their grade.
I do agree that having that Level V out there without a real reward didn't make much sense. But instead of messing up the system for most members, why not make Level V a Col? Fewer than 4% of officers in my Wing have Level V and I don't think it would hurt at all if they were promoted to Col. I wouldn't mind adding other significant barriers to getting that Col. promotion such as command of a squadron or group and service at Region staff.
Based on the current standard ~23% of the field grade officers in my wing do not have the requisite PD.
Across the board, 1st Lt to Lt Col, about 20% of the officers do not have proper PD.
35% of the Lt Cols have Level 5
Only ~9% of the Majors have level 4, this, I would hazard, is because of the pinch point of RSC.
Here's another idea. What about establishing a service-based waiver of RSC & NSC? Heck, double
the TIG, and require a staff posting of "x" for "Y" years as the equivalent for those who can't get there.
As an example, any Operations officer posted for 6 years at the Group Level will have more then the requisite knowledge
attained from RSC, ditto for a Wing or Region assignment and NSC, same goes for a commander at those levels, though I
guess the eagles negate that piece.
Granted, plenty of room for whipping there.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 06:51:57 PM
Based on the current standard ~23% of the field grade officers in my wing do not have the requisite PD.
Across the board, 1st Lt to Lt Col, about 20% of the officers do not have proper PD.
35% of the Lt Cols have Level 5
Only ~9% of the Majors have level 4, this, I would hazard, is because of the pinch point of RSC.
Here's another idea. What about establishing a service-based waiver of RSC & NSC? Heck, double
the TIG, and require a staff posting of "x" for "Y" years as the equivalent for those who can't get there.
As an example, any Operations officer posted for 6 years at the Group Level will have more then the requisite knowledge
attained from RSC, ditto for a Wing or Region assignment and NSC, same goes for a commander at those levels, though I
guess the eagles negate that piece.
Granted, plenty of room for whipping there.
Why not take it a step further? If you plan to be on, or are appointed to, Wing, Region, or National staff, THEN you take RSC/NSC. For a Lt Col, who may or may not serve at Wing, just don't make it a requirement. I know a few Lt Cols who have never gotten out of their home unit.
I love the idea of doubling down on TIG requirements to bypass RSC/NSC. I currently don't give a turkey if it takes me another 10 years. It would also cut down on the number of Lt Col coffee-bringers...
Needs a little finessing, but you've got a million dollar idea.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 14, 2014, 02:52:22 PM
Quote from: Garibaldi on August 14, 2014, 02:09:54 PM
there are others in the same boat who DO want to go as far as they can.
Either Level 3 is as far as they can go or they pony up the money to go to RSC and NSC. We force cadets to pony up the money to go encampment for cadet officer and RCLS/COS for C/Lt Col. Yes, it costs more for seniors and there is more logistics involved. So the real question, as posed by Ned, how do you lower the cost to attend the programs?
Enroll all level 5 members into trainers for NSC. Locally.
Why not develop an online version of RSC and NSC? The Air Force have online versions of SOS, ACSC and AWC. This would make the courses available to anyone who wants to take them, regardless of financial considerations.
Great idea! I'd be among the first to sign up. Let's hope it comes to pass.
Quote from: usafaux2004 on August 15, 2014, 07:31:35 PM
Enroll all level 5 members into trainers for NSC. Locally.
You already hear about people complaining how worthless SLS and CLC are. Heck, you already hear people complain about how worthless RSC and NSC in their current forms. Besides, a point of RSC and NSC is to get members outside of their units and wings and have them interact with other wings and regions (NSC). So by having it local, you loose a strong point of the programs. Also, if it is offered locally, is it really a National Staff College with national being the operative word?
Having an online version would be a great concept. However, I have a feeling NSC and RSC classes would disappear and the only thing to remain would be the online course unless you impose strong restrictions. Unlike the USAF, you are not required to pay for SOS, ACSC, and AWC. So if a member had the opportunity between the physical NSC for $1,200 or the online NSC for $100 (making that number up), how many would really choose the physical form?
Ned, what about having NSC at a National Guard base? I understand you do not get the USAF instructors, but it would be easier to get base housing and typically cost for facilities is lower. Or at Alabama State University? Guess I do not know anything about the area around the college (so maybe a bad idea).
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2014, 02:04:34 AM
Quote from: Panache on August 12, 2014, 01:48:22 AM
Does this mean that without a Bachelor's degree, you're effectively locked at Major / Level IV now?
No. The "intended" way to promote is via RSC. The correspondence schools are / were a "nice to have"
that few members completed regardless of the academic requirements.
If being a major is important enough, members will have to make choices as to where to spend their CAP
time. Perhaps one year going to RSC and forgoing NESA or a flight academy.
National also needs to ramp up the RSC's and offer more of them so they aren't such a "quest".
Or it's a back door to bring CAP Senior Officers in line with USAF Officer education requirements. ;)
Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2014, 10:39:18 PM
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on August 13, 2014, 10:27:13 PM
Speaking only for myself: I'm happy that you need to take SOS or RSC for a promotion to major. Frankly, I think SOS — yes, the Air Force PME course — should be required for captain. The only snag for CAP members is that you need to have a bachelor's degree to take SOS. But the things SOS teaches are things you need to effectively and intelligently run a unit and to be a good officer. Maybe CAP should develop a course for lieutenants that matches much of SOS.
I don't understand why CAP can't ask for a waiver on the degree requirements for this.
Most likely because the USAF wants college degrees as part the education requirements for CAP Officers.
That and that they don't want to screw up their education accreditations for their PME courses.
Quote from: shuman14 on August 15, 2014, 08:13:07 PM
Most likely because the USAF wants college degrees as part the education requirements for CAP Officers.
They clearly do not, since that is not, in any way a requirments for promotion.
Quote from: shuman14 on August 15, 2014, 08:13:07 PM
That and that they don't want to screw up their education accreditation for their PME courses.
The classes could be offered internally to CAP, without conferring college credit, negating the issue.
If the training is appropriate and important to CAP members in positions of leadership, it should be
available to all of them. If not, then it should not be viewed as an option.
Considering the curriculum in RSC and NSC, the correspondence course have little relevance to CAP.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 15, 2014, 01:21:40 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 01:17:57 AM
Beyond that, I can't fathom how this could possibly have encompassed 400 hours of work.
Thank you for the effort, but this just made things worse.
A bit condescending there.
He excels at condescendence actually. ;)
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 01:24:35 AM
Quote from: Alaric on August 15, 2014, 12:42:38 AM
The fact that they still have advanced promotions for medical officers who cannot practice medicine proves logic was not at work here. Much like having aircrew wings before updating the regulations which would allow their issuance.
Spot on.
Pilots who never fly an hour for CAP, HSOs not allowed to do used their skills, military officers with zero relevent experience,
etc., etc.
You cannot fix this piecemeal.
You always seem to take shots at prior military... why is that? ???
Quote from: CAP_truth on August 15, 2014, 05:27:41 AM
Wait till they change the requirements for wing and region commanders to have a bachelors degree before appointments. Then an Associate's degree to be a 2d Lt.
You know, I suggested something to that effect several months a go... and was told that would never happen.
Funny how time can change things.
Why are USAF instructor important for teaching CAP officers to lead CAP volunteers in CAP operations?
How is their experience relevent to the actual curriculum being taught?
This idea that somehow people in the military are more capable then CAP's own people in
teaching relevent lessons continues to confound me - more affectation instead of performance.
Having experienced successful wing, region, and nation commanders and staff should
have a lot more value then an O-6 who is not in CAP but happens to be assigned to Maxwell.
As we've tried to impart time and again, leading inconsistently trained, diversely motivated volunteers who,
on some level always, feel they are doing you a favor just being there, is not the same as leading people
consistently trained, aptitudinally vetted, and contractually obligated to follow your orders.
to follow your directions.
Quote from: shuman14 on August 15, 2014, 08:24:21 PM
You always seem to take shots at prior military... why is that? ???
There is no "shot" there. Just because someone was in the military, does not mean they necessarily have any skills
relevent to CAP at a level that would mandate advanced promotion.
I've seen time and again successful company grade and above military commanders fail because they think
CAP is "military lite". Walking in the door they think their grade and former postings are relevent in
doing SAR planning or running a CAP unit. They find they aren't, and then get resentful about
CAP's lack of discipline and proper training, etc.
Quote from: SARDOC on August 15, 2014, 05:34:32 PM
I know this has been discussed ad Nausem in other threads. However, if they are worried about too many Field Grade officers they should create a realistic promotion system that doesn't need to be so strongly rigid to the point of being strictly associated with Command Positions.
There are promotion and Professional development options for members that have no desire for Command or Senior Staff. Bring in Warrant Officer and Enlisted grades. You can have members that promote automatically up through a Technical Sergeant at Master Sergeant is becomes a little more competitive. If there is a Specialty that needs specific demonstrable leadership maybe a Warrant Officer is more appropriate. Those who are in the organization for at least a year can take a Correspondence course pertaining a more in depth look at Regulations, Policies, Missions, Leadership, etc (more substantial than OBC) and can be slotted into a Officer position.
It would be a huge cultural shift for our agency but it isn't outside the realm of possibility.
:clap:
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 08:17:52 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on August 15, 2014, 08:13:07 PM
Most likely because the USAF wants college degrees as part the education requirements for CAP Officers.
They clearly do not, since that is not, in any way a requirments for promotion.
Quote from: shuman14 on August 15, 2014, 08:13:07 PM
That and that they don't want to screw up their education accreditation for their PME courses.
The classes could be offered internally to CAP, without conferring college credit, negating the issue.
If the training is appropriate and important to CAP members in positions of leadership, it should be
available to all of them. If not, then it should not be viewed as an option.
Considering the curriculum in RSC and NSC, the correspondence course have little relevance to CAP.
After reading thru this thread it is clear that to get promoted beyond Captain you must either:
A. Have surplus capital to afford to go to the additional conferences.
or
B. Have the college education requirements to take the alternative USAF PME courses.
(I'll also point out that those with college educations tend to also have the "surplus capital" because those with degrees tend, on average, to make more money over their lifetimes than those without.)
As to your second point, CAP developing a Distance Learning program to cover these PD requirements, I can't say that would be a terrible idea. In fact you might be able to partner with a university/college, like FEMA's EMI does, to get some college credits for completing the DL-PD requirements.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 08:30:31 PM
Why are USAF instructor important for teaching CAP officers to lead CAP volunteers in CAP operations?
How is their experience relevent to the actual curriculum being taught?
Because having a person such as Dr. John Kline (do not know if he is still there) teach communication and effective speaking might be useful as he has 30+ years post-graduate training in both corporate and military settings.
There is nothing with having a diversity of instructors.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 08:31:38 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on August 15, 2014, 08:24:21 PM
You always seem to take shots at prior military... why is that? ???
There is no "shot" there. Just because someone was in the military, does not mean they necessarily have any skills
relevent to CAP at a level that would mandate advanced promotion.
I've seen time and again successful company grade and above military commanders fail because they think
CAP is "military lite". Walking in the door they think their grade and former postings are relevent in
doing SAR planning or running a CAP unit. They find they aren't, and then get resentful about
CAP's lack of discipline and proper training, etc.
I've seen quite a few former or retired military who come in with unrealistic expectations regarding what CAP is. They leave after 6 months or so. There are a few who recognize what is expected of them and are able to navigate around. Most of these are pilots who have no use for PD or promotions past their current/retired grade. Some even make it as squadron commanders and even they realize that command of a Navy squadron or an Army company has little to do with the day to day running of a CAP unit. Some of the skills transfer, but the vast majority of military experience, outside of knowing how to wear a uniform and customs and courtesies, do not.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 08:30:31 PM
Why are USAF instructor important for teaching CAP officers to lead CAP volunteers in CAP operations?
How is their experience relevent to the actual curriculum being taught?
This idea that somehow people in the military are more capable then CAP's own people in
teaching relevent lessons continues to confound me - more affectation instead of performance.
Having experienced successful wing, region, and nation commanders and staff should
have a lot more value then an O-6 who is not in CAP but happens to be assigned to Maxwell.
As we've tried to impart time and again, leading inconsistently trained, diversely motivated volunteers who,
on some level always, feel they are doing you a favor just being there, is not the same as leading people
consistently trained, aptitudinally vetted, and contractually obligated to follow your orders.
to follow your directions.
You do understand that CAP is the
auxiliary of the United States Air Force, a branch of the
Military don't you?
To insist that Military rank/leadership is irrelevent make you appear intentionally obtuse.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 15, 2014, 08:51:46 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 08:30:31 PM
Why are USAF instructor important for teaching CAP officers to lead CAP volunteers in CAP operations?
How is their experience relevent to the actual curriculum being taught?
Because having a person such as Dr. John Kline (do not know if he is still there) teach communication and effective speaking might be useful as he has 30+ years post-graduate training in both corporate and military settings.
There is nothing with having a diversity of instructors.
Yes, diversity of instructor is good. Pinning NSC to Maxwell because there are USAF people there
presupposes that they are somehow more capable by that affiliation then people internally or
the good Dr. above, who lives in Oregon.
It was Ned who said that was why it is important to have NSC there.
There's other bases, including non-USAF that could provide the same or better resources,
and lots of motivational speakers and experts who would be wiling to impart their expertise
in managing a volunteer organization.
Say perhaps leaders in the ARC, BSA, even FEMA.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 08:31:38 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on August 15, 2014, 08:24:21 PM
You always seem to take shots at prior military... why is that? ???
There is no "shot" there. Just because someone was in the military, does not mean they necessarily have any skills
relevent to CAP at a level that would mandate advanced promotion.
I've seen time and again successful company grade and above military commanders fail because they think
CAP is "military lite". Walking in the door they think their grade and former postings are relevent in
doing SAR planning or running a CAP unit. They find they aren't, and then get resentful about
CAP's lack of discipline and proper training, etc.
I'm glad CAP-USAF disagrees with you. ::)
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 08:59:08 PM
It was Ned who said that was why it is important to have NSC there.
There's other bases, including non-USAF that could provide the same or better resources,
and lots of motivational speakers and experts who would be wiling to impart their expertise
in managing a volunteer organization.
Say perhaps leaders in the ARC, BSA, even FEMA.
Yes, there are many people nation wide that can be good instructors. However, the ones that worked at Maxwell AFB were generally free as they worked for USAF. Getting someone of the same caliber as Dr. Kline might cost you $10,000. I remember in helping my university organize an event with Former President Clinton, he charged $75,000 for 1 hour of speaking.
Having a speaker from ARC, BSA, or even FEMA may cost you in having to fly that person out, house them, feed them, plus any talking fees (minus FEMA). So now instead of paying $1,200 for NSC, you end up paying $3500.
You found him in Oregon? I still find his address listed in Montgomery, AL.
If CAP is incapable of finding qualified people, both internally and externally to speak
and instruct internally, for free, well then maybe things are worse then characterized.
Trying to compare the profit-driven world of academic speakers to a CAP training seminar
just indicates a misunderstanding of both situations.
RSC and NSC is not about building dynamic military commanders or business leaders,
and certainly not from scratch, it is about extending and enhancing existing
experience and training in officers who have already established a proven history, and
trying to instill the understanding of the responsibilities of that level of disconnected management,
not to mention some people skills in dealing with subordinates who have as much, or sometimes
more, knowledge and ability then you do.
Maybe sprinkle in a little real-world project and activity management, and the difference
between a plan, with deliverables, and an idea.
It's supposed to be about bringing adults, with staff and command experience, across the
last mile of the understanding of a scope at the Region or higher, and why that is nothing
like running a unit.
It should be practical, hands-on sessions of real world use in running directorates and
commands. Details on online systems, negotiating with state level and 3- & 4 letter
federal agencies, and working with donors who write checks with 5+ figures.
I was a little POed, as I WAS 15 months into the 48 month TIG for LTC. But I looked at the requirements for level 5: 3 years command or staff (got that plus), course staff or director (I directed an SLS a couple of years ago), NSC or ACSC (ACSC is in progress), and mentor a member through a tech rating (have a couple of those I can point at). So... all I need to do is finish ACSC in the next 33 months, and I'm good to go under the old TIG. I'm not feeling too bad. Look at the PD requirements, maybe you're closer than you think to having them done.
BTW, I was advanced to Capt based on my pilot ratings, then I did all the Level 2,3,4 PD stuff. Not all advanced grade placement is evil.
Quote from: AirDX on August 15, 2014, 10:12:27 PM
I was a little POed, as I WAS 15 months into the 48 month TIG for LTC. But I looked at the requirements for level 5: 3 years command or staff (got that plus), course staff or director (I directed an SLS a couple of years ago), NSC or ACSC (ACSC is in progress), and mentor a member through a tech rating (have a couple of those I can point at). So... all I need to do is finish ACSC in the next 33 months, and I'm good to go under the old TIG. I'm not feeling too bad. Look at the PD requirements, maybe you're closer than you think to having them done.
Most members deserving of field grade will find themselves completing the rest of the PD as a matter of course.
They are active in their wing and contribute to the various courses without giving it much thought and
will find they have completed the fairly simple requirements without too much effort. Frankly the Level V
requirements, other then NSC, are really unit-level things. For example, how is a wing-level staffer going to
mentor a new member? Odds are most people get credit for something they did when they were still assigned to a unit.
The issue is the in-residence courses - those become the pinch points due to schedule issues and cost.
If there were alternatives open to all members, there would be much less heartburn.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 10:10:59 PM
If CAP is incapable of finding qualified people, both internally and externally to speak
and instruct internally, for free, well then maybe things are worse then characterized.
I think they did. It is called Maxwell AFB.
QuoteDetails on online systems, negotiating with state level and 3- & 4 letter
federal agencies, and working with donors who write checks with 5+ figures.
And if you want people that are experts in such areas for free, then you need to sprinkle in a little real-world. If I were an expert on negotiating with federal agencies and donors with 5+ figures, would I rather teach a group of volunteers for free or teach a business group and make $10,000 for 1 hour of speaking? I know it is tough decision.
Easier said then done. I am sure you know how so you could contact NSC and solve the issue with reducing the cost. So problem solved.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 10:18:09 PM
For example, how is a wing-level staffer going to
mentor a new member? Odds are most people get credit for something they did when they were still assigned to a unit.
I can tell you how I did it as a wing staff member. I called them, talked issues with them. Visited the unit on a quarterly basis. Helped them understand the regulations until they were proficient enough they no longer needed my help. Not difficult in today's age of modern technology.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 15, 2014, 10:44:04 PM
And if you want people that are experts in such areas for free, then you need to sprinkle in a little real-world. If I were an expert on negotiating with federal agencies and donors with 5+ figures, would I rather teach a group of volunteers for free or teach a business group and make $10,000 for 1 hour of speaking? I know it is tough decision.
Hmmm...too bad there is no one internally, somewhere in CAP, who know how to do that, or for that matter military
bases anywhere else but in Ala.
Oh well, status quo it is!
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 10:59:59 PM
Hmmm...too bad there is no one internally, somewhere in CAP, who know how to do that, or for that matter military
bases anywhere else but in Ala.
Oh well, status quo it is!
so you are refusing to help when you apparently have the answer to the problem?
Quote from: AirDX on August 15, 2014, 10:12:27 PM
BTW, I was advanced to Capt based on my pilot ratings, then I did all the Level 2,3,4 PD stuff. Not all advanced grade placement is evil.
Evil, no; Necessary and/or useful also no. What could you do as a CAP Captain, that you could not have done if you had not received an advanced promotion?
Quote from: LSThiker on August 15, 2014, 11:15:57 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2014, 10:59:59 PM
Hmmm...too bad there is no one internally, somewhere in CAP, who know how to do that, or for that matter military
bases anywhere else but in Ala.
Oh well, status quo it is!
so you are refusing to help when you apparently have the answer to the problem?
"Refusing to help". Where do you get this stuff?
Few are interested, no one is asking.
Refusing to help and being asked to help are two sep things. And let's be honest the folks at NHQ have demonstrated they do not really care about input from membership or how their decisions impact membership.
Bull Hocky
Quote from: lordmonar on August 16, 2014, 04:53:32 PM
Bull Hocky
Yeah, you'll really have to cite on that, because there's a fair amount of evidence that "not invented here"
is alive and well in CAP at all levels.
Been spending all week with the NHQ typed and they do listen and car about in put from the field.
They may not agree with everything from the field but they do listen and the do consider how their changes affect the general membership and the mission.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 16, 2014, 05:10:40 PM
Been spending all week with the NHQ typed and they do listen and car about in put from the field.
They may not agree with everything from the field but they do listen and the do consider how their changes affect the general membership and the mission.
Actions say otherwise.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 16, 2014, 05:10:40 PM
Been spending all week with the NHQ typed and they do listen and car about in put from the field.
They may not agree with everything from the field but they do listen and the do consider how their changes affect the general membership and the mission.
What do you expect them to do when you are standing in front of them?
No one said they were
rude, nor for that matter intentionally inconsiderate.
There's a big difference between listening quietly when someone shales your hand,
and actually being interested in member input, or more importantly >help<.
Pick one, IT, regulatory mess, lack of strategic plan, PAO issues, brand and identity, etc., etc.
The thread of response is "we're too short handed", despite supposedly having 60,000 members
more then 1/2 of which are adults who joined for no other reason then to help.
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 16, 2014, 05:17:58 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 16, 2014, 05:10:40 PM
Been spending all week with the NHQ typed and they do listen and car about in put from the field.
They may not agree with everything from the field but they do listen and the do consider how their changes affect the general membership and the mission.
Actions say otherwise.
I see them doing it. So you must not see the same things as I do.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 16, 2014, 05:28:32 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 16, 2014, 05:17:58 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 16, 2014, 05:10:40 PM
Been spending all week with the NHQ typed and they do listen and car about in put from the field.
They may not agree with everything from the field but they do listen and the do consider how their changes affect the general membership and the mission.
Actions say otherwise.
I see them doing it. So you must not see the same things as I do.
And that's where we differ, I do not see it.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 16, 2014, 05:28:32 PM
I see them doing it. So you must not see the same things as I do.
I guess not. Perhaps I should have had them add a rose-tint to my new glasses.
I'm sure we'd all love to hear about this great stuff, feel free...
Fortunately for us, CAP Talk is not CAP.
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 16, 2014, 04:00:20 PM
Refusing to help and being asked to help are two sep things. And let's be honest the folks at NHQ have demonstrated they do not really care about input from membership or how their decisions impact membership.
Well, I let the Chief Historian know there were a few mistakes in the Historian pamphlet. The update was posted 3 days later.
I talked with Jennifer Carroll about a few things about my record, they were corrected the next day.
I talked with Jennifer Carroll about pulling all the wing CAPF 27s dating as far back as NHQ had, she sent them a week later. they went back as far as 1978.
I have sent emails to Susie Parker on the weekend and she has replied to them on the weekend.
I have talked with Curt LaFond about a few Cadet Programs items. Not all of my suggestions were added, but nevertheless, we had a few conversations about them.
When the Blue BDUs came out, I was asked for my opinion about them from an NHQ member (do not remember who any more). I gave them my suggestions and later I had a follow-up email that addressed those concerns.
I had a conversation with Col Wheless (when he was the Vice Commander) about concerns I had. He actually pulled out a notebook and wrote down what I said.
At a region conference, Brig Gen Bobick struck up a conversation with me and asked about concerns.
Talked with Brig Gen Glasgow a few times about things.
Sure I have disagreed about a few things with NHQ, such as how long it takes to get a uniform manual published, but overall, I have a fairly positive view about NHQ. Granted, not every person listens nor does every suggestion get implemented, but that is true no matter where you go. I have never worked for an organization where I have agreed with all of their decisions, nor do I expect the same from NHQ.
Overall, mileage varies considerably.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 16, 2014, 05:49:47 PM
Fortunately for us, CAP Talk is not CAP.
Oh how very true.
Many of you may bash me, but I have thought over this for several days.
This new regulation is the straw that broke my camels back, and I will not be renewing when my membership comes due.
This decision pains me greatly, a former cadet and now senior, my heart and soul has been with CAP for 15 years. But not anymore.
My promotion to Major was pending for approval from my wing king from a couple months ago, but due to missed communications and the wing king going out of town it was simply not clicked on eServices.
Now I am told I no longer qualify for promotion, and due to my work and finance situation it will be years and years before I can even contemplate going to a RSC (NSC will almost always be out of the question).
I do not believe I should be held back from advancing because I am (and not ashamed to say it) working poor.
I am (was I guess now) active on multiple levels (local, Wing and NCSA) including command staff of the NCSA and several wing director level slots.
I now have to watch as others who are less active (and IMHO, less worthy) are able to afford to purchase a promotion, one that just a couple weeks ago I was eligible for, but suddenly no longer.
I am an AF veteran, current LEO and supervisor of multiple programs at my SO, yet no longer rate a promotion in CAP.
The lack of care from NHQ for the membership working hard for the origination fascinates me.
I will miss CAP greatly, and I shall always love the real idea of CAP, but what we have now is not what our founders and supporters in the greatest generation would appreciate.
Yes I am upset, sadden that I will not make Major. Some will say I am hung up on grade, and this is simply not true. But I feel that hard work should be rewarded, no matter the members ability to spend cash on courses that may or may not be a proper learning environment (I have great doubt that my RSC can offer good training , but that's another discussion).
Thanks everyone for the years of service, and I wish you all the best.
(Typing on my in car computer, so excuse any mistakes)
Quote from: NCRblues on August 16, 2014, 11:32:33 PM
Many of you may bash me, but I have thought over this for several days.
This new regulation is the straw that broke my camels back, and I will not be renewing when my membership comes due.
This decision pains me greatly, a former cadet and now senior, my heart and soul has been with CAP for 15 years. But not anymore.
My promotion to Major was pending for approval from my wing king from a couple months ago, but due to missed communications and the wing king going out of town it was simply not clicked on eServices.
Now I am told I no longer qualify for promotion, and due to my work and finance situation it will be years and years before I can even contemplate going to a RSC (NSC will almost always be out of the question).
I do not believe I should be held back from advancing because I am (and not ashamed to say it) working poor.
I am (was I guess now) active on multiple levels (local, Wing and NCSA) including command staff of the NCSA and several wing director level slots.
I now have to watch as others who are less active (and IMHO, less worthy) are able to afford to purchase a promotion, one that just a couple weeks ago I was eligible for, but suddenly no longer.
I am an AF veteran, current LEO and supervisor of multiple programs at my SO, yet no longer rate a promotion in CAP.
The lack of care from NHQ for the membership working hard for the origination fascinates me.
I will miss CAP greatly, and I shall always love the real idea of CAP, but what we have now is not what our founders and supporters in the greatest generation would appreciate.
Yes I am upset, sadden that I will not make Major. Some will say I am hung up on grade, and this is simply not true. But I feel that hard work should be rewarded, no matter the members ability to spend cash on courses that may or may not be a proper learning environment (I have great doubt that my RSC can offer good training , but that's another discussion).
Thanks everyone for the years of service, and I wish you all the best.
(Typing on my in car computer, so excuse any mistakes)
Have a degree? SOS and ACSC are an option....if not, it is sad to see you go. You addressed a couple of the points that a few others were attempting to make....
The waiver process should have included any previously submitted promotion paperwork that had not yet been approved or denied prior to the new regulation being published would fall under the old requirements. NCRblues is a perfect example as to why.
Quote from: Fubar on August 16, 2014, 11:40:40 PM
The waiver process should have included any previously submitted promotion paperwork that had not yet been approved or denied prior to the new regulation being published would fall under the old requirements. NCRblues is a perfect example as to why.
Yep.
Quote from: NCRblues on August 16, 2014, 11:32:33 PM
Many of you may bash me, but I have thought over this for several days.
This new regulation is the straw that broke my camels back, and I will not be renewing when my membership comes due.
This decision pains me greatly, a former cadet and now senior, my heart and soul has been with CAP for 15 years. But not anymore.
My promotion to Major was pending for approval from my wing king from a couple months ago, but due to missed communications and the wing king going out of town it was simply not clicked on eServices.
Now I am told I no longer qualify for promotion, and due to my work and finance situation it will be years and years before I can even contemplate going to a RSC (NSC will almost always be out of the question).
I do not believe I should be held back from advancing because I am (and not ashamed to say it) working poor.
I am (was I guess now) active on multiple levels (local, Wing and NCSA) including command staff of the NCSA and several wing director level slots.
I now have to watch as others who are less active (and IMHO, less worthy) are able to afford to purchase a promotion, one that just a couple weeks ago I was eligible for, but suddenly no longer.
I am an AF veteran, current LEO and supervisor of multiple programs at my SO, yet no longer rate a promotion in CAP.
The lack of care from NHQ for the membership working hard for the origination fascinates me.
I will miss CAP greatly, and I shall always love the real idea of CAP, but what we have now is not what our founders and supporters in the greatest generation would appreciate.
Yes I am upset, sadden that I will not make Major. Some will say I am hung up on grade, and this is simply not true. But I feel that hard work should be rewarded, no matter the members ability to spend cash on courses that may or may not be a proper learning environment (I have great doubt that my RSC can offer good training , but that's another discussion).
Thanks everyone for the years of service, and I wish you all the best.
(Typing on my in car computer, so excuse any mistakes)
Speak to the Wing/CC or the DP to move the Major appointment up by a month. As the approval authority he should be able to do that.
Quote from: Fubar on August 16, 2014, 11:40:40 PM
The waiver process should have included any previously submitted promotion paperwork that had not yet been approved or denied prior to the new regulation being published would fall under the old requirements. NCRblues is a perfect example as to why.
The waiver is a major joke. They decided to waive TIG only and not the PD level. Guess what? For most of us, by the time the member completes the new PD level requirement he or she will meet the new TIG requirement anyway. The TIG waiver is practically just a gesture without ANY meat in it.
Hold off any decisions. Promotion committee is going to make a change to the reg soon.
My guess is they are going to expand the grandfathering.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 17, 2014, 12:34:58 AM
Hold off any decisions. Promotion committee is going to make a change to the reg soon.
My guess is they are going to expand the grandfathering.
Damage control....
Quote from: lordmonar on August 17, 2014, 12:34:58 AM
Hold off any decisions. Promotion committee is going to make a change to the reg soon.
My guess is they are going to expand the grandfathering.
Is this an old promotion committee or a new one?
My better half is also in the same boat as some other people. She is eligible for Maj but it was held back by the Group King because she isn't on Group Staff. Now she has to complete a Master rating and go to RSC even though she has been eligible for promotion for 4 or 5 months. I hope they do something because there will be a lot of people who won't do PD because it is not workable both money wise and time off of work.
Heated topic!
I've done the analysis I earlier spoke about by taking every Active Senior Member (did you also notice that they are changing the title from Senior Member to Active Member in the regulation?) and figuring out the impact on each.
First, the distribution in my squadron
Major - 13%
Captain - 25%
1st Lieut - 17%
2nd Lieut - 21%
SM - 21%
Only the SMs are totally NOT affected by the rule change.
Of the others:
13% will have their next promotion be delayed by 6 months due to new TIG requirement
50% will have to wait a full year of additional TIG
As far as PD goes:
33% need to move up one PD level from where they are now
33% need to move up two PD levels
4% need to move up three PD levels
I suspect my squadron is reasonably representative and we have over two thirds of our Active Members (Seniors?) affected by this.
I had my assistant director crunch some numbers region-wide, when I get back from Vegas and he gets back from a family trip, I'll see if I can't get him to post the results, or get the info from him.
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
People are mad because they've been working towards a goal, investing time and money, only to have the bar moved significantly.
To say that the members who are upset are only in it to be military wannabe's is highly disrespectful of their effort and service to our organization.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on August 17, 2014, 05:18:05 AM
People are mad because they've been working towards a goal, investing time and money, only to have the bar moved significantly.
To say that the members who are upset are only in it to be military wannabe's is highly disrespectful of their effort and service to our organization.
Bravo
Quote from: captdomke on August 17, 2014, 05:25:27 AM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on August 17, 2014, 05:18:05 AM
People are mad because they've been working towards a goal, investing time and money, only to have the bar moved significantly.
To say that the members who are upset are only in it to be military wannabe's is highly disrespectful of their effort and service to our organization.
Bravo
+1 - and it's another place that you can't have it both ways.
When we discuss bling and awards, we're told by various members what an important part of the
reward system that is. People quote Napoleon and Maslow, and generally go on about how
the decs and badges are an inexpensive way to reward people, and if a badge gets them to show up,
so be it, etc., etc.
And that's fair. There's no question the military affiliation and pomp and circumstance is a recruiting attractor.
Then if that's on the table, it's not cricket to call it into question when rules are arbitrarily changed.
There are people who have to work >very< hard towards their grade, count it as a major life achievement,
and have every right to be bent when they are ONE DAY from their goal and NHQ decides they should do
some more work and spend a good deal more money. Why? Well..."because they
should...."
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
In a perfect world there should be no difference to what you put as "enjoy their membership and service". But in reality, members are not treated the same for doing the same job.
We are all volunteers trying to do the job professionally and I would say that the majority joined to serve and it was definitely not for the uniform. Problem is that members like myself then find out after being in the organization for a while that while we emphasize "Equal opportunity" and we even have to pass a test, the organization doesn't really practice it. Grade is a very visible area where the problem is magnified. Initially I learned to live with it even if I didn't like or agree with it. What difference did this new revision make? You ask. The difference for me is that the inequality in opportunities is now even larger and I no longer want to learn to live with it. If grade means nothing for CAP, then why have it? Just remove the grade and rank from everybody and let us all focus on the missions.
I would not say the changes to 35-5 are arbitrary. I get it you get miffed when the bar is moved but to quit over it kind of speaks that maybe you are in CAP for the wrong reasons. I know I would be pissed if my "free ride" suddenly cost me more time and money. But to say that CAP is making theses changes just because is just not true. And it is language like that that stops the discussion and makes it harder to make needed changes to the program
Quote from: lordmonar on August 17, 2014, 12:34:58 AM
Hold off any decisions. Promotion committee is going to make a change to the reg soon.
My guess is they are going to expand the grandfathering.
I'm just wondering; "Back in the day", we had an open comment period before publishing regulations. Did that practice come to an end with CAPM 39-1? We also had a National Board to vet and approve regulations before they became the "law of the land". Regulation by committee may be swinging the pendulum a little too far the other way.
In any event; it seems to be a poor practice to publish, get feedback, change, get more feedback, change, get more feedback, and then apply waivers, exceptions, etc... There must be a better way.
YMMV!
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
In any volunteer Service the "paycheck"
is the bling (military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade).
Mess anyone's paycheck there
will be a case of butt-hurt.
Simple human nature.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on August 17, 2014, 05:18:05 AM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
People are mad because they've been working towards a goal, investing time and money, only to have the bar moved significantly.
To say that the members who are upset are only in it to be military wannabe's is highly disrespectful of their effort and service to our organization.
There was no disrespect intended. The bar was moved on me as well, but the mission continues. I'm not quitting because it'll take me longer to make Lt Col. That's not why I joined CAP.
Quote from: shuman14 on August 17, 2014, 02:33:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
In any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling (military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade).
Mess anyone's paycheck there will be a case of butt-hurt.
Simple human nature.
Where's the "bling" in organizations such as the ARC, AmeriCorps, Boys and Girls Club, Habitat for Humanity, etc. The list of volunteer organizations is long and the majority of them don't offer "bling" as an incentive.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 09:36:34 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on August 17, 2014, 02:33:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
In any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling (military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade).
Mess anyone's paycheck there will be a case of butt-hurt.
Simple human nature.
Where's the "bling" in organizations such as the ARC, AmeriCorps, Boys and Girls Club, Habitat for Humanity, etc. The list of volunteer organizations is long and the majority of them don't offer "bling" as an incentive.
And that would be fine too if we gave no blings. As matter of fact in my city there are a variety of volunteer jobs and none has any bling. On the same page an ex police chief that joins the police volunteer patrol does not get any special promotion or title neither, everybody is treated the same way. We treating members differently with special promotions is a big part of the problem, we always fix the non special peoples requirements but do nothing about the "special" ones. If they are really special, then fine. But over half of them can't even use their skill for the good of our mission. I too joined the program for the mission and that is all I will do now, PD is irrelevant and I could care less.
I agree for the most part, although I wouldn't go as far as to say that PD is irrelevant. It can be better, yes. But it's not irrelevant.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 09:36:34 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on August 17, 2014, 02:33:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
In any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling (military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade).
Mess anyone's paycheck there will be a case of butt-hurt.
Simple human nature.
Where's the "bling" in organizations such as the ARC, AmeriCorps, Boys and Girls Club, Habitat for Humanity, etc. The list of volunteer organizations is long and the majority of them don't offer "bling" as an incentive.
Most of those examples have different models for their volunteer service. CAP isn't a "show up on the day and we'll use you" type of organization. It requires a long-term committed membership to be able to do the missions that we perform. You can't just show up that day and do some volunteer work. People regard many of those organizations as something to do if they have an extra day. "Oh, wouldn't it be cool to help build a habitat house next weekend?"
Quote from: jimmydeanno on August 17, 2014, 10:31:44 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 09:36:34 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on August 17, 2014, 02:33:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
In any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling (military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade).
Mess anyone's paycheck there will be a case of butt-hurt.
Simple human nature.
Where's the "bling" in organizations such as the ARC, AmeriCorps, Boys and Girls Club, Habitat for Humanity, etc. The list of volunteer organizations is long and the majority of them don't offer "bling" as an incentive.
Most of those examples have different models for their volunteer service. CAP isn't a "show up on the day and we'll use you" type of organization. It requires a long-term committed membership to be able to do the missions that we perform. You can't just show up that day and do some volunteer work. People regard many of those organizations as something to do if they have an extra day. "Oh, wouldn't it be cool to help build a habitat house next weekend?"
I agree to an extent. However, I was replying to the comment "In
any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling..." That's just not true of every volunteer organization.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 10:39:22 PM
Quote from: jimmydeanno on August 17, 2014, 10:31:44 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 09:36:34 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on August 17, 2014, 02:33:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
In any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling (military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade).
Mess anyone's paycheck there will be a case of butt-hurt.
Simple human nature.
Where's the "bling" in organizations such as the ARC, AmeriCorps, Boys and Girls Club, Habitat for Humanity, etc. The list of volunteer organizations is long and the majority of them don't offer "bling" as an incentive.
Most of those examples have different models for their volunteer service. CAP isn't a "show up on the day and we'll use you" type of organization. It requires a long-term committed membership to be able to do the missions that we perform. You can't just show up that day and do some volunteer work. People regard many of those organizations as something to do if they have an extra day. "Oh, wouldn't it be cool to help build a habitat house next weekend?"
I agree to an extent. However, I was replying to the comment "In any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling..." That's just not true of every volunteer organization.
However, you have to admit that to a very large extent, it
is true about CAP. Oh, sure, there are members who couldn't care two buckets of swill about rank, bling, or anything else ... but that attitude is NOT shared by the majority of the membership. (No, I can't cite anything ... I'm speaking from the hip here.)
Jack
Quote from: ColonelJack on August 17, 2014, 11:34:22 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 10:39:22 PM
Quote from: jimmydeanno on August 17, 2014, 10:31:44 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 09:36:34 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on August 17, 2014, 02:33:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
In any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling (military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade).
Mess anyone's paycheck there will be a case of butt-hurt.
Simple human nature.
Where's the "bling" in organizations such as the ARC, AmeriCorps, Boys and Girls Club, Habitat for Humanity, etc. The list of volunteer organizations is long and the majority of them don't offer "bling" as an incentive.
Most of those examples have different models for their volunteer service. CAP isn't a "show up on the day and we'll use you" type of organization. It requires a long-term committed membership to be able to do the missions that we perform. You can't just show up that day and do some volunteer work. People regard many of those organizations as something to do if they have an extra day. "Oh, wouldn't it be cool to help build a habitat house next weekend?"
I agree to an extent. However, I was replying to the comment "In any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling..." That's just not true of every volunteer organization.
However, you have to admit that to a very large extent, it is true about CAP. Oh, sure, there are members who couldn't care two buckets of swill about rank, bling, or anything else ... but that attitude is NOT shared by the majority of the membership. (No, I can't cite anything ... I'm speaking from the hip here.)
Jack
You are correct, sir.
Quote from: NC Hokie on August 17, 2014, 01:08:18 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 17, 2014, 12:34:58 AM
Hold off any decisions. Promotion committee is going to make a change to the reg soon.
My guess is they are going to expand the grandfathering.
Is this an old promotion committee or a new one?
Seeing that the new CAP/CC made the motion at CSAG to include THIS grandfathering clause, don't expect a lot of changes.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 17, 2014, 07:20:13 AM
I know I would be pissed if my "free ride" suddenly cost me more time and money.
This statement makes no sense. If it costs "more", it wasn't free in the first place, was it?
So.......If you dont have the Dough or the Education, Advancing to LtCol is Slim to none. Looks like CAPT FO LIFE!!
Quote from: Panache on August 18, 2014, 02:34:43 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 17, 2014, 07:20:13 AM
I know I would be pissed if my "free ride" suddenly cost me more time and money.
This statement makes no sense. If it costs "more", it wasn't free in the first place, was it?
Time is the fire in which we burn, so nothing is "free", even that second Sham-Wow.
However until now there was no
fixed cost associated specifically with attaining Lt Col.
Quote from: FW on August 17, 2014, 01:54:07 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 17, 2014, 12:34:58 AM
Hold off any decisions. Promotion committee is going to make a change to the reg soon.
My guess is they are going to expand the grandfathering.
I'm just wondering; "Back in the day", we had an open comment period before publishing regulations. Did that practice come to an end with CAPM 39-1? We also had a National Board to vet and approve regulations before they became the "law of the land". Regulation by committee may be swinging the pendulum a little too far the other way.
In any event; it seems to be a poor practice to publish, get feedback, change, get more feedback, change, get more feedback, and then apply waivers, exceptions, etc... There must be a better way.
YMMV!
Are you suggesting that CAP still has a lot to learn? You bet.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 09:36:34 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on August 17, 2014, 02:33:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
In any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling (military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade).
Mess anyone's paycheck there will be a case of butt-hurt.
Simple human nature.
Where's the "bling" in organizations such as the ARC, AmeriCorps, Boys and Girls Club, Habitat for Humanity, etc. The list of volunteer organizations is long and the majority of them don't offer "bling" as an incentive.
We are not ARC, AmeriCorps et al.
Quote from: Panache on August 18, 2014, 02:34:43 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 17, 2014, 07:20:13 AM
I know I would be pissed if my "free ride" suddenly cost me more time and money.
This statement makes no sense. If it costs "more", it wasn't free in the first place, was it?
You are right it makes no sense......why is anyone here or out in the real world butt hurt over these changes?
The bar got moved. Move on.
All this rhetoric about "punishment" and "not caring about the members" and then we slap "Bling is just stupid" and "PD is irrelevant" and "rank is meaning less"......one wonders why NHQ volunteers cring at the thought of dealing with "feed back from the field".
And you know the funny part is.....I agree with most of you that the grandfathering clause was screwed up. But the level of angst on this topic on this board....and the threatening to quit over this.........now that is just silly.
And that is why CAPTALK is just not taken seriously.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 18, 2014, 03:38:30 PM
Quote from: Panache on August 18, 2014, 02:34:43 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 17, 2014, 07:20:13 AM
I know I would be pissed if my "free ride" suddenly cost me more time and money.
This statement makes no sense. If it costs "more", it wasn't free in the first place, was it?
You are right it makes no sense......why is anyone here or out in the real world butt hurt over these changes?
It's a matter of perspective.
If you were a Captain who was 10 days from making TIG for Major, or your paperwork was being processed, and then all of the sudden you were told the rules were changed and you were not being promoted
through no fault of your own, yeah, I can see how this would anger people.
But, apparently, since the rule change does not immediately impact you personally, you simply fail to see why anybody would be upset.
Quote from: Panache on August 18, 2014, 03:53:32 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 18, 2014, 03:38:30 PM
Quote from: Panache on August 18, 2014, 02:34:43 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 17, 2014, 07:20:13 AM
I know I would be pissed if my "free ride" suddenly cost me more time and money.
This statement makes no sense. If it costs "more", it wasn't free in the first place, was it?
You are right it makes no sense......why is anyone here or out in the real world butt hurt over these changes?
It's a matter of perspective.
If you were a Captain who was 10 days from making TIG for Major, or your paperwork was being processed, and then all of the sudden you were told the rules were changed and you were not being promoted through no fault of your own, yeah, I can see how this would anger people.
But, apparently, since the rule change does not immediately impact you personally, you simply fail to see why anybody would be upset.]/b]
You apparently don't read my posts. I do understand that we moved the bar on people. I do understand that Lt Col is now going to cost people more money. But I don't understand the level of angst this has generated.
I don't understand the out and out hatred and contempt people have shown towards "THEM" who have made these changes.
I agree....I said I agreed......that the grandfathering was not well thought out. But bottom line.....it is CAP. It is the way it is and the way it has always has been. Have your say, get a drink, move on.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 18, 2014, 03:29:17 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 09:36:34 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on August 17, 2014, 02:33:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
In any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling (military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade).
Mess anyone's paycheck there will be a case of butt-hurt.
Simple human nature.
Where's the "bling" in organizations such as the ARC, AmeriCorps, Boys and Girls Club, Habitat for Humanity, etc. The list of volunteer organizations is long and the majority of them don't offer "bling" as an incentive.
We are not ARC, AmeriCorps et al.
I never suggested that we were. If you read my previous post carefully, you'll notice that I was replying to the absolute statement "In
any volunteer Service the "paycheck"
is the bling...", which as I said before, may be true of CAP, but not of every volunteer organization out there.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 18, 2014, 04:01:40 PM
I don't understand the out and out hatred and contempt people have shown towards "THEM" who have made these changes.
"Hatred"?
Cite please.
There's a chasm of difference between "strong disagreement" and "hatred".
I haven't seen any "hatred" here in quite a while, it's usually not tolerated, nor should it be.
Consideration should have been made for those who had completed a level but waiting for TIG for the promotion. Especially if that TIG was less than a year, or month, or week.
Several have said that grade and/or bling are the rewards for the time and monies we spend in this organization. Remove those rewards, and folks may wonder if their time is being prioritized correctly.
Patrick, CAPtalk is an unofficial forum to discuss issues of importance to its subscribers. I can assure you CT is taken seriously by many with influence to change things. As a former AF NCO, you know the importance of the "grapevine". For better or worse, CT has become that source of information.
In fact, it was this forum's predicessor which was the impotous for the creation of the BoG.
CAP has much to learn, without listening, it won't.
Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on August 18, 2014, 05:07:27 PM
Consideration should have been made for those who had completed a level but waiting for TIG for the promotion. Especially if that TIG was less than a year, or month, or week.
Agree. That would've been a better transition for these new requirements.
Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on August 18, 2014, 05:07:27 PM
Several have said that grade and/or bling are the rewards for the time and monies we spend in this organization. Remove those rewards, and folks may wonder if their time is being prioritized correctly.
Sad, indeed.
Quote from: FW on August 18, 2014, 05:28:01 PM
Patrick, CAPtalk is an unofficial forum to discuss issues of importance to its subscribers. I can assure you CT is taken seriously by many with influence to change things. As a former AF NCO, you know the importance of the "grapevine". For better or worse, CT has become that source of information.
In fact, it was this forum's predicessor which was the impotous for the creation of the BoG.
CAP has much to learn, without listening, it won't.
Yes I know. And I also know that just as many thing CT is so full of BS that any good ideas that we may have get left by the road side. My point was that if we try to moderate our own rantings and keep the language civil we (CAP and CT) can do a whole lot more.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 18, 2014, 05:57:55 PM
Yes I know. And I also know that just as many thing CT is so full of BS that any good ideas that we may have get left by the road side. My point was that if we try to moderate our own rantings and keep the language civil we (CAP and CT) can do a whole lot more.
So full of "BS"? Redundancy? Yes. Misinformation? Some.
BS? Where?
And again, what needs to be "moderated" in this thread?
Having a forum for the flow of information and ideas are great and no one will against that. However, numerous people mock CAPTalk and at a time Cadetstuff.org. So MSgt Harris' comment is spot on with certain member populations. So, when a person says "CAPTalk", a number of people moan about it. A few people that I know had told their cadets and seniors to stay away as:
"it is a forum where seniors can be dicks to other seniors and bully cadets"
"It is a place where it is dominated by a few members, if you do not agree with their point of view, you will not last long"
"Even if you are right, if they do not agree, then you are wrong"
"Pointless things will be argued by making mountains out of rather insignificant problems"
And plenty more.
I won't argue that a number of great discussions, ideas, and views can be had from this place, but the majority of people that I know, including my wing, have no favorable view of this website. Do not know if the same views are held about the Facebook groups, as I do not participate in those since I refuse to use my Facebook for anything CAP.
I could cite the comments where those views come from, but I will not. It will become counterproductive as people will either try to justify them, say "too bad, I am right", "not my problem if they can't handle it", or say "so we should just talk about stupid ideas as everyone wearing berets".
In a lot of cases, the people making these comments wandered in looking for validation of a failed premise,
bad idea, or couldn't be bothered to use Google or their own chain when asking a very specific question,
that or they wanted to "out" some questionable behavior, or "right some wrong" but no matter
how many times you ask for detail, the story changes as the person realizes they have no recourse,
or that they might be the person with the issue, even if it's only because they don't understand CAP.
In most of those cases, these adults need to learn that the internet is not a place for validation
or to be vindicated because of "Forum Outrage Syndrome".
Ideas stand on their own merits, if you can't articulate them properly, then perhaps the written form
of expression is not for you.
What a lot of people don't understand is that when you are arguing opinion or interpretation
then it is possible for their to be more then one person who is "right", and then that "right"
extends exactly as far as the AOR of the person making the interpretation. CAP causes
a lot of its own problems in that it allows for 20 shades of gray (sorry Cyborg), and then
further allows people with no authority to interpret things in a manner which appears
official. That doesn't help.
Bottom line, if people spoke with shorter sentences and were more clear and direct, things
would go a lot smoother in CAP.
May be true for some, but not all that I know.
Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on August 18, 2014, 05:07:27 PM
Consideration should have been made for those who had completed a level but waiting for TIG for the promotion. Especially if that TIG was less than a year, or month, or week.
Bluelakes - The scenario you describe has been taken care of as part of the regulation. You can have a one-time waiver of TIG for the next four years. The problem that many people have is that the PD levels have also increased and there is NO waiver for that.
Quote from: MacGruff on August 18, 2014, 08:20:45 PM
Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on August 18, 2014, 05:07:27 PM
Consideration should have been made for those who had completed a level but waiting for TIG for the promotion. Especially if that TIG was less than a year, or month, or week.
Bluelakes - The scenario you describe has been taken care of as part of the regulation. You can have a one-time waiver of TIG for the next four years. The problem that many people have is that the PD levels have also increased and there is NO waiver for that.
That's precisely the issue. A Capt who completed Level III and was waiting for TIG before the new reg, now has to complete Level IV to qualify for promotion to Maj.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 18, 2014, 08:28:32 PM
Quote from: MacGruff on August 18, 2014, 08:20:45 PM
Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on August 18, 2014, 05:07:27 PM
Consideration should have been made for those who had completed a level but waiting for TIG for the promotion. Especially if that TIG was less than a year, or month, or week.
Bluelakes - The scenario you describe has been taken care of as part of the regulation. You can have a one-time waiver of TIG for the next four years. The problem that many people have is that the PD levels have also increased and there is NO waiver for that.
That's precisely the issue. A Capt who completed Level III and was waiting for TIG before the new reg, now has to complete Level IV to qualify for promotion to Maj.
Look at the note to Figure 2: Members applying for duty performance promotions during the period 1 June 2014 to 1 June 2018 may use the previous time-in-grade requirements. etc.
So, to use your example, that Capt that has his Level III and is ONLY waiting on TIG under the old rules, can apply for this one-time exception to promote to Major
Quote from: MacGruff on August 18, 2014, 08:44:44 PM
So, to use your example, that Capt that has his Level III and is ONLY waiting on TIG under the old rules, can apply for this one-time exception to promote to Major
Key phrase: "Time in Grade requirement may be waived". You still have to meet the new PD level requirement.
Quote from: Panache on August 18, 2014, 08:47:09 PM
Quote from: MacGruff on August 18, 2014, 08:44:44 PM
So, to use your example, that Capt that has his Level III and is ONLY waiting on TIG under the old rules, can apply for this one-time exception to promote to Major
Key phrase: "Time in Grade requirement may be waived". You still have to meet the new PD level requirement.
Oops. You're right. I mis-stated my position.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 18, 2014, 07:18:04 PM
May be true for some, but not all that I know.
Yep! This is why we develop "filters". I, for one, don't read uniform threads unless I have lots of popcorn and nothing better to do. I've been participating on CAP forums now for close to 25 years, and I've noticed nothing different about the quality of the posts, the thought behind them, or the passion about them. I find it both entertaining and enlightening; even when those opinions are based on nothing but the "ether".
I wouldn't fault this forum for anything. It enables those of us who need an outlet. It gives our leaders another tool to gauge member temperament. When things get out of hand, we have moderators and administrators who step in. There is balance in the force... ;D
I would love to see the numbers on members who don't renew due to this.
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 19, 2014, 12:47:16 AM
I would love to see the numbers on members who don't renew due to this.
Unless that is specifically asked for the next year, you won't. Reason being is that failed to renew is simply failed to renew. It could be as simple as a member who moved away or got a new job and was not able to stay active, or could simply be someone who forgot or didn't have the money at the time. So all we have is "failed to renew" not "failed to renew because x"
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 19, 2014, 12:47:16 AM
I would love to see the numbers on members who don't renew due to this.
If this reg change makes you not renew, then you were a member for the wrong reasons.
Quote from: PHall on August 19, 2014, 02:39:20 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 19, 2014, 12:47:16 AM
I would love to see the numbers on members who don't renew due to this.
If this reg change makes you not renew, then you were a member for the wrong reasons.
Once again missing the point. Death by a thousand cuts doesn't happen with the first one.
Quote from: Panache on August 18, 2014, 08:47:09 PM
Quote from: MacGruff on August 18, 2014, 08:44:44 PM
So, to use your example, that Capt that has his Level III and is ONLY waiting on TIG under the old rules, can apply for this one-time exception to promote to Major
Key phrase: "Time in Grade requirement may be waived". You still have to meet the new PD level requirement.
Word passed at National Conference is to expect a change that both new TIG & PD can be waived for one promotion, i.e. your next promotion will be under the old rules until 2018, after that the new rules will apply. Expect a reg update very soon.
Quote from: usafaux2004 on August 19, 2014, 03:49:51 AM
Quote from: PHall on August 19, 2014, 02:39:20 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 19, 2014, 12:47:16 AM
I would love to see the numbers on members who don't renew due to this.
If this reg change makes you not renew, then you were a member for the wrong reasons.
Once again missing the point. Death by a thousand cuts doesn't happen with the first one.
And again.....if this makes you quit....you may be in the wrong organization.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 19, 2014, 06:24:58 PM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on August 19, 2014, 03:49:51 AM
Quote from: PHall on August 19, 2014, 02:39:20 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 19, 2014, 12:47:16 AM
I would love to see the numbers on members who don't renew due to this.
If this reg change makes you not renew, then you were a member for the wrong reasons.
Once again missing the point. Death by a thousand cuts doesn't happen with the first one.
And again.....if this makes you quit....you may be in the wrong organization.
I can't 100% agree with that. We teach our cadets and extoll the idea of SMART goals. Setting them and achieving or surpassing them. So someone decides I'd like to complete Level III and get promoted to Major by X. They start pursuing this goal, which may have been a stretch for them, only to have it fairly arbitrarily and suddenly made much harder if not impossible under their circumstances. Certainly might be the proverbial straw.
If the earlier comment about the grandfathering being changed is correct I think it will go a long way in addressing the issue
While I favor the grandfathering of those currently working or having completed the PD requirements under the old reg for their next promotion and recognize their service and hard work, I agree with Lordmonar's comments. Anyone wanting to quit because of this should reexamine if they're in CAP for the right reasons. After all, CAP is much more than uniforms, awards and grades.
Quote from: Phil Hirons, Jr. on August 19, 2014, 06:54:58 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 19, 2014, 06:24:58 PM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on August 19, 2014, 03:49:51 AM
Quote from: PHall on August 19, 2014, 02:39:20 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 19, 2014, 12:47:16 AM
I would love to see the numbers on members who don't renew due to this.
If this reg change makes you not renew, then you were a member for the wrong reasons.
Once again missing the point. Death by a thousand cuts doesn't happen with the first one.
And again.....if this makes you quit....you may be in the wrong organization.
I can't 100% agree with that. We teach our cadets and extoll the idea of SMART goals. Setting them and achieving or surpassing them. So someone decides I'd like to complete Level III and get promoted to Major by X. They start pursuing this goal, which may have been a stretch for them, only to have it fairly arbitrarily and suddenly made much harder if not impossible under their circumstances. Certainly might be the proverbial straw.
If the earlier comment about the grandfathering being changed is correct I think it will go a long way in addressing the issue
Not arbitrarily. Not suddenly. Not impossible or even "much harder".
If that is the last straw...then again......maybe CAP is not right for you.
If you are an adult in the real world and you don't know life ain't fair........and your reaction is to take your ball and go home......have fun. Thanks for playing.
I'm sorry that I'm being so blunt.
Look I get it....I really do.....it sucks. But if your reaction to it is to quit.....good bye....thanks for playing....I think maybe the organization will be better with out you.....and maybe you may be better off with out CAP.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 19, 2014, 08:00:28 PM
Quote from: Phil Hirons, Jr. on August 19, 2014, 06:54:58 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 19, 2014, 06:24:58 PM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on August 19, 2014, 03:49:51 AM
Quote from: PHall on August 19, 2014, 02:39:20 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 19, 2014, 12:47:16 AM
I would love to see the numbers on members who don't renew due to this.
If this reg change makes you not renew, then you were a member for the wrong reasons.
Once again missing the point. Death by a thousand cuts doesn't happen with the first one.
And again.....if this makes you quit....you may be in the wrong organization.
I can't 100% agree with that. We teach our cadets and extoll the idea of SMART goals. Setting them and achieving or surpassing them. So someone decides I'd like to complete Level III and get promoted to Major by X. They start pursuing this goal, which may have been a stretch for them, only to have it fairly arbitrarily and suddenly made much harder if not impossible under their circumstances. Certainly might be the proverbial straw.
If the earlier comment about the grandfathering being changed is correct I think it will go a long way in addressing the issue
Not arbitrarily. Not suddenly. Not impossible or even "much harder".
If that is the last straw...then again......maybe CAP is not right for you.
If you are an adult in the real world and you don't know life ain't fair........and your reaction is to take your ball and go home......have fun. Thanks for playing.
I'm sorry that I'm being so blunt.
Look I get it....I really do.....it sucks. But if your reaction to it is to quit.....good bye....thanks for playing....I think maybe the organization will be better with out you.....and maybe you may be better off with out CAP.
How is it that such a hard-core, party-line-at-all-costs Kool-aid drinker like you didn't make E-9 in today's AF?
I'd like another glass, please. Mmmmmm, grape--my favorite!
Quote from: Nuke52 on August 19, 2014, 09:16:04 PM
How is it that such a hard-core, party-line-at-all-costs Kool-aid drinker like you didn't make E-9 in today's AF?
I'd like another glass, please. Mmmmmm, grape--my favorite!
Are you implying that Air Force CMSgts are Kool-Aid drinkers? :o
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 19, 2014, 09:56:02 PM
Quote from: Nuke52 on August 19, 2014, 09:16:04 PM
How is it that such a hard-core, party-line-at-all-costs Kool-aid drinker like you didn't make E-9 in today's AF?
I'd like another glass, please. Mmmmmm, grape--my favorite!
Are you implying that Air Force CMSgts are Kool-Aid drinkers? :o
The E-9's are and there are a lot more E-9's than Chiefs in today's Air Force.
Quote from: kwe1009 on August 19, 2014, 10:01:18 PM
The E-9's are and there are a lot more E-9's than Chiefs in today's Air Force.
Are you sure you are not a Kool-Aid drinker? That makes no sense at all. How are there more E-9s than Chiefs in today's USAF?
Only 1% of the Air Force total enlisted force holds the rank of CMSgt (E-9). That's quite an accomplishment for those attaining that rank/pay grade. To question the dedication and service of the majority of our top enlisted members is not just disrespectful, but unbecoming of a CAP officer.
Quote from: kwe1009 on August 19, 2014, 10:01:18 PM
The E-9's are and there are a lot more E-9's than Chiefs in today's Air Force.
That makes absolutely no sense.
He is implying that There is a difference between chiefs and those who get promoted to E-9.
Which in MHO is true.
As to the kool aide drinking comment. Yes I will support my leaders and the program as written. In public and voice my concerns up the chain as all leaders should do.
And if that is the worse you can call me. I'll take that as a complement.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 19, 2014, 10:38:24 PM
He is implying that There is a difference between chiefs and those who get promoted to E-9.
Which in MHO is true.
As to the kool aide drinking comment. Yes I will support my leaders and the program as written. In public and voice my concerns up the chain as all leaders should do.
And if that is the worse you can call me. I'll take that as a complement.
:o It was great....much better than Cats....I'm going to see it again and again.... :o
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 19, 2014, 10:34:56 PM
Only 1% of the Air Force total enlisted force holds the rank of CMSgt (E-9). That's quite an accomplishment for those attaining that rank/pay grade. To question the dedication and service of the majority of our top enlisted members is not just disrespectful, but unbecoming of a CAP officer.
I am an Air Force SNCO.
Yes unfortunately too many SNCO go the political route to get E-9 and forget what being a chief is all about.
I have watched this thread and it saddens me that members here are quick to condemn someone for leaving or desiring to leave based on anything.
If a member wants to leave because something changed that impacts them who are we to judge them. We can tout mission mission mission all day long but in the end even the most die hard volunteer has their breaking point.
We are not compensated as SM outside of decorations, awards and yes promotions. But when you impact your people in a major way, especially with little compensation you impact your mission. I bet if the requirements changed to fly and pilots where deciding to leave it be a different tune sung.
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 20, 2014, 12:29:00 AM
I have watched this thread and it saddens me that members here are quick to condemn someone for leaving or desiring to leave based on anything.
If a member wants to leave because something changed that impacts them who are we to judge them. We can tout mission mission mission all day long but in the end even the most die hard volunteer has their breaking point.
We are not compensated as SM outside of decorations, awards and yes promotions. But when you impact your people in a major way, especially with little compensation you impact your mission. I bet if the requirements changed to fly and pilots where deciding to leave it be a different tune sung.
I made my comment because there are some CAP Senior Members who are only here because they can be an "officer".
And just to get it out there, I too am a Retired Air Force Reserve SNCO. And I didn't find the Kool Aide joke that funny either.
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 20, 2014, 12:29:00 AM
I have watched this thread and it saddens me that members here are quick to condemn someone for leaving or desiring to leave based on anything.
If a member wants to leave because something changed that impacts them who are we to judge them. We can tout mission mission mission all day long but in the end even the most die hard volunteer has their breaking point.
We are not compensated as SM outside of decorations, awards and yes promotions. But when you impact your people in a major way, especially with little compensation you impact your mission. I bet if the requirements changed to fly and pilots where deciding to leave it be a different tune sung.
Well put. The "mission" depends on the individual. For some the CAP mission is about flying and for others it is about ES or cadet programs. Some even join CAP because they want to lend their administrative and leadership skills to the organization. We all join for different reasons and people leave for different reasons.
Quote from: PHall on August 20, 2014, 12:50:22 AMI made my comment because there are some CAP Senior Members who are only here because they can be an "officer".
Please indicate where that is a problem?
NHQ obviously feels that is still a recruiting draw, and if necessary we can burn up the search engine
and find comments from people in this thread who have indicated, in similar contexts, that
"if that's what draws them to CAP, whatever works..." in terms of bling, extra uniform items, whatever.
You reap what you sow.
While I do not agree with the "kool-aide" comment, I see the point that was trying to be made. I think and it's just an opinion and perspective but people want to focus way to much on the mission and not the members and the impact change/s have on them. Without people there is no mission.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 20, 2014, 01:01:46 AM
Quote from: PHall on August 20, 2014, 12:50:22 AMI made my comment because there are some CAP Senior Members who are only here because they can be an "officer".
Please indicate where that is a problem?
NHQ obviously feels that is still a recruiting draw, and if necessary we can burn up the search engine and find comments from people in this thread who have indicated, in similar contexts, that "if that's what draws them to CAP, whatever works..." in terms of bling, extra uniform items, whatever.
You reap what you sow.
But is that what we really want; individuals whose primary motivation in CAP is to be "officers" and wear "uniforms"? While there's nothing inherently wrong with those things, one would hope that membership in CAP be more than that.
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 20, 2014, 01:09:41 AM
Without people there is no mission.
That's very true. However, without grades, military-style uniforms, etc. we would still have a mission and people ready to serve to accomplish that mission.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 20, 2014, 01:15:43 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 20, 2014, 01:01:46 AM
Quote from: PHall on August 20, 2014, 12:50:22 AMI made my comment because there are some CAP Senior Members who are only here because they can be an "officer".
Please indicate where that is a problem?
NHQ obviously feels that is still a recruiting draw, and if necessary we can burn up the search engine and find comments from people in this thread who have indicated, in similar contexts, that "if that's what draws them to CAP, whatever works..." in terms of bling, extra uniform items, whatever.
You reap what you sow.
But is that what we really want; individuals whose primary motivation in CAP is to be "officers" and wear "uniforms"? While there's nothing inherently wrong with those things, one would hope that membership in CAP be more than that.
Of course not, however human nature is working against that.
There's plenty of people in the military who are there just for the paycheck, schooling, or both. Same goes for FDs, LEAs, and certainly
a lot of jobs. How about politicians? In a perfect world, everyone would "seek service before self" over "self-aggrandizement".
In that same perfect world, CAP would be fully manned and staff so that members wouldn't have to choose - the "doers" would be too
busy "doing" to give it much thought, and they'd be backed up by a full complement of administrative personnel to handle the
running of the store.
In CAP's current situation, the majority of the time for most members, is spent just running CAP, with no actual single-purposed
cadre of "doers".
Nonetheless, the conditions for promotion remain subjective rather than objective.
I am an unapologetically "if there is not a logical explanation, chances are I will not understand" type of person.
When I first joined CAP in 1993, my first CC went over the levels with me quite closely. I understood (wrongly, it seems) a quite linear path along the lines of "complete A, B, C, etc.," much like rank progression as a Boy Scout (I was almost an Eagle but turned 18 before I could finish my project). However, I found out painfully, as most of you know, that such an approach is just "box checking" and does not take at all into account personality differences between the one applying for promotion and those approving (or not) said promotions.
I still think giving Captain just for being a "financial professional" is a bad, bad idea. I knew one of those and he may have been good with the numbers, but he didn't know a bloody thing about CAP (or the Air Force, for that matter) and hardly ever wore a uniform...but he had brown nosing schmoozing skills par excellence and I think he is a Lt. Col. now.
Ah yes, the phrase that has always frustrated me: "Mission First, People Always"
Air Force Dilemma: "Mission First" — What About "People Always"?
Written by Michelle Zook on April 2, 2014
Of all the Air Force catchphrases, this one bothers me the most. It's technically supposed to be "Mission First, People Always," but somehow that second half gets left off a lot. In a quest to shorten dwell time, turn crews faster, and maintain a morale crushing operations tempo, the "Mission First" gets thrown out there to justify just about all types of shenanigans. And it doesn't really make all that much sense—"first" implies a sense of priority, while "always" is a sense of time, a habit if you will. So which is it? I think that it gets shortened so often to just the first two words is pretty telling.
No doubt the Air Force—and military in general—has a morale problem, but the Air Force's seemed to have been most highlighted lately. Whether it's the AFPC issue (I hesitate to use the word "scandal" because it's so far off of most Americans' radar, but within the service, it at least approaches travesty level) or the ICBM career field rot, you can sum it up with one phrase: "Mission First".
Read more at http://clashdaily.com/2014/04/air-force-dilemma-mission-first-people-always/#572PIglsJtWfU52M.99 (http://clashdaily.com/2014/04/air-force-dilemma-mission-first-people-always/#572PIglsJtWfU52M.99)
Quote from: CyBorg on August 20, 2014, 07:18:28 AM
Nonetheless, the conditions for promotion remain subjective rather than objective.
That's true in the military and corporate world as well. It's just a fact of life.
Quote from: CyBorg on August 20, 2014, 07:18:28 AM
I still think giving Captain just for being a "financial professional" is a bad, bad idea.
I don't disagree. In the military, rank/pay grade is linked to financial compensation. Advanced appointments/promotions are designed to recruit needed talent, in a competitive job market, that otherwise wouldn't be available to meet service needs.
In CAP, it's used as an incentive as well, with the difference that grade is not linked to money. That makes the insignia/title the"carrot" to attract these needed volunteers. The problem is that, unlike the military where these professionals are limited to specific career fields, in CAP a legal, finance or health services officer, for example, can assume other roles in the organization even though they lack the experience/training normally associated with the grade being held. Furthermore, if grade is the only or primary motivator for these professionals to volunteer, then that may lead to many joining for the wrong reasons, thus adversely affecting the organization in the long run.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 20, 2014, 04:49:46 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on August 20, 2014, 07:18:28 AM
Nonetheless, the conditions for promotion remain subjective rather than objective.
That's true in the military and corporate world as well. It's just a fact of life.
To a certain extent.
However, in both the military and corporate worlds (in my experience), in some cases I have been fortunate enough to have supervisory types who did adhere to the published standards, and if I did not meet them, was usually (not always) given remedial direction on how
to meet them.
In CAP if someone has a burr in their butt about you...they do not
have to give a reason why. The more professional ones will, but nonetheless it is not required.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 09:36:34 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on August 17, 2014, 02:33:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
In any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling (military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade).
Mess anyone's paycheck there will be a case of butt-hurt.
Simple human nature.
Where's the "bling" in organizations such as the ARC, AmeriCorps, Boys and Girls Club, Habitat for Humanity, etc. The list of volunteer organizations is long and the majority of them don't offer "bling" as an incentive.
The certificates they hand out at the end of each year, the "cool" title on the business card, the head-shot picture on their corproate website. Not "bling" per say, but a reward that if taken away would make them butt hurt as well.
Quote from: vento on August 17, 2014, 09:58:00 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 09:36:34 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on August 17, 2014, 02:33:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
In any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling (military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade).
Mess anyone's paycheck there will be a case of butt-hurt.
Simple human nature.
Where's the "bling" in organizations such as the ARC, AmeriCorps, Boys and Girls Club, Habitat for Humanity, etc. The list of volunteer organizations is long and the majority of them don't offer "bling" as an incentive.
And that would be fine too if we gave no blings. As matter of fact in my city there are a variety of volunteer jobs and none has any bling. On the same page an ex police chief that joins the police volunteer patrol does not get any special promotion or title neither, everybody is treated the same way. We treating members differently with special promotions is a big part of the problem, we always fix the non special peoples requirements but do nothing about the "special" ones. If they are really special, then fine. But over half of them can't even use their skill for the good of our mission. I too joined the program for the mission and that is all I will do now, PD is irrelevant and I could care less.
And there may be a Police Reserve down the road in the next town or county that would give a former chief a title/rank for joining them.
Apples and oranges but I see your point.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 11:35:33 PM
Quote from: ColonelJack on August 17, 2014, 11:34:22 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 10:39:22 PM
Quote from: jimmydeanno on August 17, 2014, 10:31:44 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 09:36:34 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on August 17, 2014, 02:33:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 17, 2014, 04:50:38 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the main reason many join CAP is to wear a military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade. Anyone who was committed to the organization before this revision and was enjoying their membership and service in CAP, could still do so now even with the new PD requirements for promotion. What have change with regards to their service? Is getting promoted more important than volunteering and accomplishing the mission?
In any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling (military-style uniform, awards, badges and grade).
Mess anyone's paycheck there will be a case of butt-hurt.
Simple human nature.
Where's the "bling" in organizations such as the ARC, AmeriCorps, Boys and Girls Club, Habitat for Humanity, etc. The list of volunteer organizations is long and the majority of them don't offer "bling" as an incentive.
Most of those examples have different models for their volunteer service. CAP isn't a "show up on the day and we'll use you" type of organization. It requires a long-term committed membership to be able to do the missions that we perform. You can't just show up that day and do some volunteer work. People regard many of those organizations as something to do if they have an extra day. "Oh, wouldn't it be cool to help build a habitat house next weekend?"
I agree to an extent. However, I was replying to the comment "In any volunteer Service the "paycheck" is the bling..." That's just not true of every volunteer organization.
However, you have to admit that to a very large extent, it is true about CAP. Oh, sure, there are members who couldn't care two buckets of swill about rank, bling, or anything else ... but that attitude is NOT shared by the majority of the membership. (No, I can't cite anything ... I'm speaking from the hip here.)
Jack
You are correct, sir.
And I think that's the point I was trying to make and it didn't come out right.
Quote from: FW on August 18, 2014, 05:28:01 PM
Patrick, CAPtalk is an unofficial forum to discuss issues of importance to its subscribers. I can assure you CT is taken seriously by many with influence to change things. As a former AF NCO, you know the importance of the "grapevine". For better or worse, CT has become that source of information.
In fact, it was this forum's predicessor which was the impotous for the creation of the BoG.
CAP has much to learn, without listening, it won't.
Which is why I post my suggestions here, I know that they
are being seen.
Taken seriously... that's another issue altogether.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 19, 2014, 10:23:53 PM
Quote from: kwe1009 on August 19, 2014, 10:01:18 PM
The E-9's are and there are a lot more E-9's than Chiefs in today's Air Force.
Are you sure you are not a Kool-Aid drinker? That makes no sense at all. How are there more E-9s than Chiefs in today's USAF?
For someone who portrays himself as having some sort of military connection, this post of yours really makes me wonder... Are you just pretending to not get it or are you really in that much need of a clue? No, wait, nevermind--I've read your other posts. I have my answer.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 19, 2014, 10:34:56 PM
Only 1% of the Air Force total enlisted force holds the rank of CMSgt (E-9). That's quite an accomplishment for those attaining that rank/pay grade. To question the dedication and service of the majority of our top enlisted members is not just disrespectful, but unbecoming of a CAP officer.
Ahh... now I get it. I see what you did there! Nice use of (completely contrived) righteous indignation! Here have another glass--this one's blueberry!
Quote from: lordmonar on August 19, 2014, 10:38:24 PM
He is implying that There is a difference between chiefs and those who get promoted to E-9.
Which in MHO is true.
As to the kool aide drinking comment. Yes I will support my leaders and the program as written. In public and voice my concerns up the chain as all leaders should do.
And if that is the worse you can call me. I'll take that as a complement.
Oops, did I inadvertantly compliment you for telling our valued members to "suck it up, life's not fair"? How clumsy of me--I instead meant to imply your people/leadership skills aren't quite up to par. I hope you have more than just that one line to motivate your troops...
I got a whole tool box full of motivational aids. I hope drive by sarcasm is not your only tool.
I'll take that as "message received."
Although I disagree with your stated opinion on how CAP treated its valued members in this issue, I do believe that, at the end of the day, you do have CAP's best interest at heart. Here's to a CAP future where the organization eschews ill-conceived knee-jerk reg changes and instead implements thought-out COAs that properly consider its members before executing those changes...
Cheers.
Quote from: Nuke52 on August 20, 2014, 10:00:45 PM
For someone who portrays himself as having some sort of military connection, this post of yours really makes me wonder... Are you just pretending to not get it or are you really in that much need of a clue? No, wait, nevermind--I've read your other posts. I have my answer.
Eh, I have heard better.
Quote from: Nuke52 on August 20, 2014, 10:03:51 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 19, 2014, 10:34:56 PM
Only 1% of the Air Force total enlisted force holds the rank of CMSgt (E-9). That's quite an accomplishment for those attaining that rank/pay grade. To question the dedication and service of the majority of our top enlisted members is not just disrespectful, but unbecoming of a CAP officer.
Ahh... now I get it. I see what you did there! Nice use of (completely contrived) righteous indignation! Here have another glass--this one's blueberry!
Thanks, but I prefer cranberry, 100% real juice.
I feel that I need to answer some of the people who are bashing my choice to walk away. I will try and explain, but I am sure they won't see my point of view.
I have dedicated a huge portion of my life to CAP over the past 15 years. I have spent thousands of hours and dollars, gave up many weekends and weeks as have many of you.
But, to wake up one morning and be told basically " thanks for doing the missions for 15 years, but because you are unable to spend thousands more dollars and can't take a few more weeks off, your stuck for years and years to come" is a slap to my face.
I had aspirations to go higher than just Wing staff, wanted to make a difference and motivate, teach and lead the next generations, but because I am not retired or independently wealthy, I'm SOL.
If CAP is going to restrict promotions this hard, than an online course, or distance learning style RSC/NSC needs to be done up.
I simply do not have the cash flow to make the promotions happen, and I am not one to sit idle for years and years at a time while others who care and know less are able to purchase their promotion.
I still care just as much about that CAP does, but this will stagnate the leadership pool, and don't we already complain about the caliber of some of our leaders? The I don't care attitudes and the I'm better than you because (insert reason here) will just get worse with this.
You all have no idea how much this pains me to basically have to sit on the side lines while the rich kids get to play ball, but I guess I'll put on my other uniform and go to work each day. Maybe when I'm 65 and on SS I can afford all CAP wants out of me... Maybe not by that time either.
Quote from: NCRblues on August 20, 2014, 11:16:36 PM
.....
If CAP is going to restrict promotions this hard, than an online course, or distance learning style RSC/NSC needs to be done up.
.....
I was thinking along the same line. Networking and expanding the view is a big part of RSC/NSC, but it is just not feasible for many of us to leave our day job and spend a week somewhere else.
If the course is offered online (like OBC) and also mandate a two days course in person over weekends (like SLS and CLC), then it is a lot more approachable for most of us. We will still have to spend money but the impact on lost income is much less and therefore making it a lot easier to swallow.
Quote from: NCRblues on August 20, 2014, 11:16:36 PM
I feel that I need to answer some of the people who are bashing my choice to walk away. I will try and explain, but I am sure they won't see my point of view.
I have dedicated a huge portion of my life to CAP over the past 15 years. I have spent thousands of hours and dollars, gave up many weekends and weeks as have many of you.
But, to wake up one morning and be told basically " thanks for doing the missions for 15 years, but because you are unable to spend thousands more dollars and can't take a few more weeks off, your stuck for years and years to come" is a slap to my face.
I had aspirations to go higher than just Wing staff, wanted to make a difference and motivate, teach and lead the next generations, but because I am not retired or independently wealthy, I'm SOL.
If CAP is going to restrict promotions this hard, than an online course, or distance learning style RSC/NSC needs to be done up.
I simply do not have the cash flow to make the promotions happen, and I am not one to sit idle for years and years at a time while others who care and know less are able to purchase their promotion.
I still care just as much about that CAP does, but this will stagnate the leadership pool, and don't we already complain about the caliber of some of our leaders? The I don't care attitudes and the I'm better than you because (insert reason here) will just get worse with this.
You all have no idea how much this pains me to basically have to sit on the side lines while the rich kids get to play ball, but I guess I'll put on my other uniform and go to work each day. Maybe when I'm 65 and on SS I can afford all CAP wants out of me... Maybe not by that time either.
Just curious what is it you want to do that you can't do without a promotion? I was on Wing Staff (albeit.as a deputy) when I was a first lieutenant. Is there a restriction in your wing?
I see a lot of complaining about a lack of opportunities to promote causing some to contemplate ending their CAP careers.
My 2 cents:
1) You don't need to promote to a higher rank to hold most positions. Specialty Track training is almost always sufficient.
2) You don't need to have a Bachelors degree to promote. You do need it to take the USAF Professional Military Education alternatives, but those are alternative to CAP's training (which doesn't require the degree).
3) You don't need to be rich to attend CAP training. Some courses have fees. You can always attempt fundraising at your unit or wing to defer costs before crying out how expensive training is.
4) Distance learning is not the same as attending in-residence course, and these courses are good, and offered at a reasonable cost, reasonably timely. To change the way we deliver the in-residence courses would be detrimental to those course, IMHO. To transition to Distance Learning would be to lose a lot in terms of networking and collaboration. Not to mention, developing such courses is a pretty big undertaking that I haven't seen anyone complaining offer to assist with (did I miss it somewhere?).
I earned my Level V, and I am still continuing to pursue professional development opportunities that I can find. I hope that they will make me a better-rounded and more capable CAP officer. I appreciate the rank that comes with them, but that's secondary as far as the mission is concerned.
TL:DR - There's a lot of complaining and not a lot of solution-seeking. Improvise, adapt, overcome, and you will be fine.
You don't need grade for >anything<, you don't need PD for >anything<.
Then.
Why.
Does.
CAP.
Have.
It?
Quote from: Eclipse on August 21, 2014, 03:03:50 AM
You don't need grade for >anything<, you don't need PD for >anything<.
Then.
Why.
Does.
CAP.
Have.
It?
:) it is one of the things they are going to fix in the next few years. :)
Quote from: Ed Bos on August 21, 2014, 02:23:19 AM
I see a lot of complaining about a lack of opportunities to promote causing some to contemplate ending their CAP careers.
My 2 cents:
1) You don't need to promote to a higher rank to hold most positions. Specialty Track training is almost always sufficient.
2) You don't need to have a Bachelors degree to promote. You do need it to take the USAF Professional Military Education alternatives, but those are alternative to CAP's training (which doesn't require the degree).
3) You don't need to be rich to attend CAP training. Some courses have fees. You can always attempt fundraising at your unit or wing to defer costs before crying out how expensive training is.
4) Distance learning is not the same as attending in-residence course, and these courses are good, and offered at a reasonable cost, reasonably timely. To change the way we deliver the in-residence courses would be detrimental to those course, IMHO. To transition to Distance Learning would be to lose a lot in terms of networking and collaboration. Not to mention, developing such courses is a pretty big undertaking that I haven't seen anyone complaining offer to assist with (did I miss it somewhere?).
I earned my Level V, and I am still to pursue professional development opportunities that I can find. I hope that they will make me a better-rounded and more capable CAP officer. I appreciate the rank that comes with them, but that's secondary as far as the mission is concerned.
TL:DR - There's a lot of complaining and not a lot of solution-seeking. Improvise, adapt, overcome, and you will be fine.
#1. Oh come on, sure you do. Lets be very honest now, if you are selecting a staff slot and have to pick between 2 members with the same training and experience but one is a topped out Captain and one is a Lt. Col you are going to pick the Lt. Col 9 times out of 10. Grade means something no matter how hard we pretend on here that it does not.
#2. Nope, just to be the Nat/CC. But if you are unable to attend RSC/NSC due to cost restrictions than the only other option is the AF courses or using PME (if you have that).
#3. You do have to be able to afford the training. RSC is NOT cheap. NSC is NOT cheap. So, lets figure my regions staff college cost shall we?
150 $ for the fee to attend, 65$ a night for a room x 7 days = 455$, 3 meals a day at 10$ a meal = 210$, transport to and from (for me that is 2 and half states away with my small car at 35$ per tank) is 140$ giving me a grand total of 955$. OH YA, not to mention that I have to get off work by using my small amount of vacation or sick days, because I am not wealthy and must work for a living.
Fundraising at my unit and Wing? That is so funny. No unit in my Wing or even the Wing itself has seen a fundraiser that got almost 1000$ for the entire time I have been in CAP. Then, which lucky topped out Captain in the Wing gets the Money? GOBN will just be all over that one.
#4. My RSC is offered the from the day after xmas to the day after new years, timely? I think not. Reasonable cost? I do not think so, but YMMV. Networking and collaboration? Everyone talks about this, but I have yet to see anything grand come about. My Region is facing the same issues it was 15 years ago, if not more with the lack of ES missions now days. If RSC and NSC is supposed to produce the doers and shakers, where are they? I have yet to hear anything ground breaking come out of a RSC.
I am not even sure how this regulation is going to work. Is this 60,000 or so member organization supposed to fight over who gets one of the limited slots for NSC a year? NSC is going to have to be expanded or we will starve of Lt. Cols. (hey, maybe that is the original idea)
I am happy you got to achieve level V. I appreciate the time and energy you have put into CAP, but just because I can not afford to take weeks off and spend thousands of dollars I do not have should not mean I should become a second class member. I have sacrificed a lot of time and energy when I can to include Wing staff and NCSA staff, along with local squadron staffing.
I would LOVE to help set up a distance learning program for RSC, love love love to. No one has asked this lowly Captain for that help yet (oh look, rank is important in deciding who gets neat committees as well)
Besides everything Eclipse said...
Quote from: Ed Bos on August 21, 2014, 02:23:19 AM
1) You don't need to promote to a higher rank to hold most positions. Specialty Track training is almost always sufficient.
Agreed.
Quote from: Ed Bos on August 21, 2014, 02:23:19 AM
2) You don't need to have a Bachelors degree to promote. You do need it to take the USAF Professional Military Education alternatives, but those are alternative to CAP's training (which doesn't require the degree).
So...either my $108K degree or a few K on classes that I don't want to spend money on.
Quote from: Ed Bos on August 21, 2014, 02:23:19 AM
3) You don't need to be rich to attend CAP training. Some courses have fees. You can always attempt fundraising at your unit or wing to defer costs before crying out how expensive training is.
Seriously?
Quote from: Ed Bos on August 21, 2014, 02:23:19 AM
4) Distance learning is not the same as attending in-residence course, and these courses are good, and offered at a reasonable cost, reasonably timely. To change the way we deliver the in-residence courses would be detrimental to those course, IMHO. To transition to Distance Learning would be to lose a lot in terms of networking and collaboration. Not to mention, developing such courses is a pretty big undertaking that I haven't seen anyone complaining offer to assist with (did I miss it somewhere?).
Been to a wing conference? Pretty useless. I think OBC was more helpful.
Quote from: Ed Bos on August 21, 2014, 02:23:19 AM
I earned my Level V, and I am still continuing to pursue professional development opportunities that I can find. I hope that they will make me a better-rounded and more capable CAP officer. I appreciate the rank that comes with them, but that's secondary as far as the mission is concerned.
Good for you! But many with a goal in mind now don't have that to look forward to. Things change, and sometimes it's detrimental. Lets look at it this way, it's the NATIONAL STAFF College. If I'm going to be a Squadron/Group/Wing level staffer, why do I need it? Keep it for those who want it, but remove it from Level V.
Quote from: Ed Bos on August 21, 2014, 02:23:19 AM
TL:DR - There's a lot of complaining and not a lot of solution-seeking. Improvise, adapt, overcome, and you will be fine.
People suggested online courses...you said they were useless. What's your solution?
Quote from: NCRblues on August 21, 2014, 03:18:19 AM
150 $ for the fee to attend, 65$ a night for a room x 7 days = 455$, 3 meals a day at 10$ a meal = 210$, transport to and from (for me that is 2 and half states away with my small car at 35$ per tank) is 140$ giving me a grand total of 955$.
Why is it Senior Members are still opposed to sleeping in barracks for an RSC. There are numerous National Guard bases throughout this country that offer barracks buildings at a price of $20-$30 a night which can house 20 individuals. Before any one says, can you imagine having to live with that sleeping snoring fat/fuzzy. Yeah been there done that with an open bay building that housed 300 Soldiers that had 24 hour operations for 6 months. If that does not work, BEQs are usually $34 a night. Lastly, check about extended stay hotels. I have stayed in a few where the entire week is $210 plus you get a small stove. If your region is hosting the RSC at a place where you have to spend $455 for sleeping, talk with your RSC coordinator to see if there is a better location. .
Also, $10 a meal? There is another simple way of reducing the cost. Stop by a Randall's, Kroger, HEB, Hy-Vee and pick up some food. I could easily find food that would cost me $10 a whole day. If I really thought about it, I could probably feed myself with less than $70 for the whole week with little sacrifice of comfort.
QuoteOH YA, not to mention that I have to get off work by using my small amount of vacation or sick days, because I am not wealthy and must work for a living.
You and 95% of Americans are in the same boat.
QuoteFundraising at my unit and Wing? That is so funny. No unit in my Wing or even the Wing itself has seen a fundraiser that got almost 1000$ for the entire time I have been in CAP. Then, which lucky topped out Captain in the Wing gets the Money? GOBN will just be all over that one.
If your squadron does a fundraiser and some other Captain in the Wing gets the money, then your wing has a serious issue. Also, really no unit in your wing has gotten over $1000?
I used to walk into Wal-Mart each year and fill out the forms for their charitable donations Each year I received $1000 for my squadron. Even today, the Wally World next to my house has a wall with donations. Not one is under $750. The Target is the same, but they are at $500. Our local McDonalds has a number of donations, but they do not advertise the amount. Our squadron would receive another good chunk of money from United Way.
Also, look into grant money. Again, places like Wal-Mart and Target offer small grants for non-profits. Other local agencies might offer grant money that can be applied to the cadets, especially if they can be considered high-risk group. Do not forget about national groups as well.
For something non-CAP, I wrote a small grant to my state's public health department. I was surprised to receive $5000 in funding. When I talked with the group, I was shocked to find out they only gave 75% of their grant money away as not enough people had applied. That was not that long ago.
Quote
I would LOVE to help set up a distance learning program for RSC, love love love to. No one has asked this lowly Captain for that help yet (oh look, rank is important in deciding who gets neat committees as well)
Not necessarily pertaining to this conversation, but why does everyone say "well no one has me for that help yet"? That is why we network. No one is going to ask you unless you have a name or reputation. No one at my university is going to ask me to serve on a university committee without the administration knowing who I am. So I would suggest practicing your elevator speech. I assume you have an elevator speech already prepared right?
As far as rank being important:
The Historian of the Year was a 1st Lt that had just joined CAP. How did he get onto a national committee?
Quote"Though he had just joined CAP, Lt Gopperton agreed to take on the job of Wing Historian and, in less than one month, had researched and written a report chronicling the Wyoming Wing's annual activities. He was one of four members nationwide to serve on the review boards to revise CAP Pamphlet 5 aand CAP Pamphlet 6, which were instrumental in creating the historian specialty track.
Ah, well, seems like another mechanism to ensure some CAP members never promote beyond Captain.
Everything here is different perspectives. But let's be honest this change will stagnate membership plain and simple. Members who stagnate will lose the desire to participate and perform. We can talk about mission, improvising and adapting all day long but lets be real you can't honestly expect people in a volunteer org to keep sucking it up and performing.
I see, I love your "fixes" for the issues.
Basically, you want me to be not only a basic student at RSC but also the director, because according to you the answer is "find someplace cheaper". Ya, ok that will work out great, I will just call up the Region/CC and tell him I am taking over and moving the dates away from the holidays and moving it to a cheaper location. You think they will give me credit for both a student and director at the same time? ::)
Quote from: NCRblues on August 21, 2014, 01:17:33 PM
I see, I love your "fixes" for the issues.
Basically, you want me to be not only a basic student at RSC but also the director, because according to you the answer is "find someplace cheaper". Ya, ok that will work out great, I will just call up the Region/CC and tell him I am taking over and moving the dates away from the holidays and moving it to a cheaper location. You think they will give me credit for both a student and director at the same time? ::)
No where did I say be the director. I said talk with the RSC coordinator. Those fixes are a combination of things that you can do personally and suggestions for lowering the cost of RSC as a whole. If you are paying $455 for a hotel, look for cheaper options as they exist. If you are close to a guard base, talk with the RSC director about a possible barracks building for other students in the same situation.
Food cost is simple to lower on an individual basis.
Also, talk with others in the wing that are having the same difficulties in transportation. It may be more economical for 5 people to fit into a van rather than a single car per person. It may also help reduce the hotel cost having 2 people in a room. In the end, it may reduce the cost to something affordable for you and the others not able to make it.
Work with local corporations that are looking to give donations. They can donate to your squadron to help offset the cost of attendance or offset other items that will ultimately help you or your squadron. Even if you still cannot go to RSC, talk with local corporations about donations for your squadron, especially if you are having a hard time getting over $1000 for a fundraiser.
Some of American's most creative moments came during the Great Depression.
Assuming you are apart of NCR, it looks like NCR is offering/had offered two RSCs for 2014:
One in December hosted by Col Aye and another one 23-28 June (Monday - Saturday) hosted in Minnesota by Lt Col Tom Theis. the June one appears to solve the problem of the holiday issue.
I do not know anything about Tom Theis, but Col Aye is a great person. So was her husband before he passed away. I have worked with her. She is a great woman that is open to suggestions. Plus, she is very willing to help people out where she can.
For several years members of this forum have been complaining about it's too easy to make Field grade andthe quality of those who did achieve it. Now that National HQ's has strengthened the requirements the same people are irate that standards have been raised. While I can empathize with those who missed promotion by a few weeks, I have none for those who have been members for decades and never took advantage of training opportunities and are now saying it's inconvenient to attend the Training. RSCs are held all over the country and there's no requirement to attend the local one. One gentleman commented that his is over the Christmas holiday, there are at least five encampments accommodating 1000+ cadets which are held during the same period-why isn't it a hardship for them? Travel costs-carpool, lodging-BOQ/BEQ. Some companies may actually consider NSC or RSC as a management course and pay you to attend.
MSG Mac......you are not supposed to remind them that "they asked for it".
We are supposed to pander to their doom and gloom out look and just give out Lt Col for free.
Quote from: MSG Mac on August 21, 2014, 02:02:14 PM
For several years members of this forum have been complaining about it's too easy to make Field grade andthe quality of those who did achieve it. Now that National HQ's has strengthened the requirements the same people are irate that standards have been raised. While I can empathize with those who missed promotion by a few weeks, I have none for those who have been members for decades and never took advantage of training opportunities and are now saying it's inconvenient to attend the Training. RSCs are held all over the country and there's no requirement to attend the local one. One gentleman commented that his is over the Christmas holiday, there are at least five encampments accommodating 1000+ cadets which are held during the same period-why isn't it a hardship for them? Travel costs-carpool, lodging-BOQ/BEQ. Some companies may actually consider NSC or RSC as a management course and pay you to attend.
Parent and CAP subsidies is why Cadets can go to encampment usually, also most children are out of school then. I don't know about you but unless your in the education field, Christmas week is not a holiday
Quote from: Alaric on August 21, 2014, 02:53:48 PM
Parent and CAP subsidies is why Cadets can go to encampment usually, also most children are out of school then. I don't know about you but unless your in the education field, Christmas week is not a holiday
Well apparently, NCR offers two options: winter and summer RSCs.
Quote from: NCRblues on August 20, 2014, 11:16:36 PM
I feel that I need to answer some of the people who are bashing my choice to walk away. I will try and explain, but I am sure they won't see my point of view.
I have dedicated a huge portion of my life to CAP over the past 15 years. I have spent thousands of hours and dollars, gave up many weekends and weeks as have many of you.
But, to wake up one morning and be told basically " thanks for doing the missions for 15 years, but because you are unable to spend thousands more dollars and can't take a few more weeks off, your stuck for years and years to come" is a slap to my face.
I had aspirations to go higher than just Wing staff, wanted to make a difference and motivate, teach and lead the next generations, but because I am not retired or independently wealthy, I'm SOL.
If CAP is going to restrict promotions this hard, than an online course, or distance learning style RSC/NSC needs to be done up.
I simply do not have the cash flow to make the promotions happen, and I am not one to sit idle for years and years at a time while others who care and know less are able to purchase their promotion.
I still care just as much about that CAP does, but this will stagnate the leadership pool, and don't we already complain about the caliber of some of our leaders? The I don't care attitudes and the I'm better than you because (insert reason here) will just get worse with this.
You all have no idea how much this pains me to basically have to sit on the side lines while the rich kids get to play ball, but I guess I'll put on my other uniform and go to work each day. Maybe when I'm 65 and on SS I can afford all CAP wants out of me... Maybe not by that time either.
First, let me say that you don't have to explain why you're considering leaving CAP. No one is required to spend their entire life in CAP and members are free to take a break or walk away completely any time they want and for whatever reasons they may have. Walking away doesn't diminish your previous contributions in any way.
For the most part, I agree with your post. But I do have an issue with your statement about "purchasing" promotions. To imply that someone who was able to attend RSC/NSC and complete Level 4/5 has "purchase" their promotion is not only wrong, but disrespectful to those members and their contributions. Why would their contributions be less valuable than yours just because they were able to attend RSC/NSC and you weren't? Please think about that.
I suspect that NHQ will make changes to the current grandfathering to take care of those who were affected by this change... and I agree that they should. I have no issue with those who are upset because they have to do more to get promoted or because the transition was poorly implemented or just want to walk away for whatever reasons. My issue is that we're supposed to be officers and yet some of the comments and attitudes on this board (and I'm not singling out anyone in particular) leave much to be desired and some are even unbecoming of a CAP officer. How can we expect NHQ or the USAF or anyone else to take us seriously with some of the things we post on this board?
Quote from: lordmonar on August 21, 2014, 02:43:42 PM
MSG Mac......you are not supposed to remind them that "they asked for it".
We are supposed to pander to their doom and gloom out look and just give out Lt Col for free.
They "asked for it" to be changed on a whim with no notice?
Let's talk when you are eligible for Chief and someone decides to change the service requirements on you.
(Of course you'll say it wouldn't matter, which, if true, actually validates my argument.)
Whether or not the tiering is appropriate is separate from the poor implementation.
For the record, if field grade is happening "too fast and too often", it is not the fault of the membership,
it is the fault of the leadership who wants to have things both ways - pass out bling to people with no
business getting it (i.e. special promotions and avoidance of making people sad), while at the same time holding
others to some amorphous "higher standard", not to mention posting people all across the board
on with the clarity and planning of feathers in a windstorm, with more concern for "attendance" then ability.
a) Not on a whim.
b) I'll give you the no notice.....but it was in the works for a while and it was not a secret so it is not like they were trying to trick anyone.
I understand the frustration of the bar moving......but you have to admit the bar needed to be moved. So are you hypocritical enough to say....."the bar needed to be moved....but not for me/us, just everyone who comes after us."
Quote from: MSG Mac on August 21, 2014, 02:02:14 PM...there are at least five encampments accommodating 1000+ cadets which are held during the same period-why isn't it a hardship for them? Travel costs-carpool, lodging-BOQ/BEQ.
Because the average adolescent has >nothing to do< over that period, and some encampments cost under $100.
Few adults get paid time off during that period as another point, and have double their normal daily responsibilities
because of those very holidays (dinners and other activities, etc.). Mom or dad being gone when everyone is home
is not the same as Cadet Johnny not being there.
Further, being dropped off by mom and dad is not the same as having to take vacation time and flying 1/2 way across the country.
That cadet cost is lodging and meals, all inclusive.
Then there's the fact that it's an expectation that has been on the books since day one.
Want some fun? Tell a Spaatz candidate, days before he expects to pin, that he'll need another NCSA to be promoted,
and oh, by the way, it's only this specific NCSA that just finished and won't be back for another year, and sets are limited.
Good luck with
that.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 21, 2014, 03:11:07 PM
a) Not on a whim.
b) I'll give you the no notice.....but it was in the works for a while and it was not a secret so it is not like they were trying to trick anyone.
I understand the frustration of the bar moving......but you have to admit the bar needed to be moved. So are you hypocritical enough to say....."the bar needed to be moved....but not for me/us, just everyone who comes after us."
It may not have been a secret >here<, it sure was in most of CAP, which, as is pointed out on a regular basis, doesn't get involved
in this stuff. We still have members wearing wing patches on shirts, I'd bet 1/3rd of the membership doesn't even know there >is< a new 39-1,
and few members, and far too few commanders ever look at something like 35-5 until they absolutely have to.
Yes, the system has to be changed - COMPREHENSIVELY - not piecemeal, on a whim, and to NO ONE'S GAIN.
As indicated in this thread, the leadership ignored a number of key tenants recommended by the committee that had spent 400 hours
trying to come up with a new plan that made sense. That is the very definition of "whim".
Quote from: lordmonar on August 21, 2014, 03:11:07 PM
a) Not on a whim.
b) I'll give you the no notice.....but it was in the works for a while and it was not a secret so it is not like they were trying to trick anyone.
I understand the frustration of the bar moving......but you have to admit the bar needed to be moved. So are you hypocritical enough to say....."the bar needed to be moved....but not for me/us, just everyone who comes after us."
I work in regulatory compliance, specifically trade regulations (ITAR and EAR). When these rules are being reformed, the final change notice comes out but it is
NOT in effect the day it comes out. In the case of the ITAR/EAR changes there is a 6 month time period before the new regs go into effect. This allows business and government time to adapt processes to the new rules. I don't think anyone is arguing that 35-5 didn't need to change. All that would have been needed is present the regs with an effective date of XXX days in the future. This would have allowed people already in the queue to get processed, and others to make plans to get the *new* necessary education.
BTW - Alaric called me last night and gave me grief about arguing both sides of the fence on the golf shirt issue,
and it's the same problem here, and a much larger issue in CAP's paradigm.
The simple fact of the matter is that there are valid reasons on both sides, and someone trying to understand it
comprehensively has to see them.
The fail point is picking and choosing one or two pieces and pushing them out because they look like they might
"fix" something without breaking too much else.
Those of us who actually understand the issue realize that CAP is like a game of Jenga, and you can't build things up for an hour,
and then pull our a bottom piece without reinforcing the whole structure.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 21, 2014, 03:12:50 PM
Want some fun? Tell a Spaatz candidate, days before he expects to pin, that he'll need another NCSA to be promoted,
and oh, by the way, it's only this specific NCSA that just finished and won't be back for another year, and sets are limited.
Good luck with that.
:clap:
Quote from: Eclipse on August 21, 2014, 03:12:50 PM
Want some fun? Tell a Spaatz candidate, days before he expects to pin, that he'll need another NCSA to be promoted,
and oh, by the way, it's only this specific NCSA that just finished and won't be back for another year, and sets are limited.
Not exactly comparable. A person going for the Spaatz is under a time crunch of their 21st birthday. A person going for Level 5 can do it at any time, whether it is 5 years, 10 years, 15 years, or 30 years from now.
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 21, 2014, 01:00:09 PM
Everything here is different perspectives. But let's be honest this change will stagnate membership plain and simple. Members who stagnate will lose the desire to participate and perform. We can talk about mission, improvising and adapting all day long but lets be real you can't honestly expect people in a volunteer org to keep sucking it up and performing.
Especially if said members feel that they are not being recognised for their contributions. Dispute what one may, but it does not take university level courses in psychology (which I have had) or knowledge of Abraham Mazlow's Hierarchy Of Needs to know that it is innate within human beings to know that they are appreciated and valued for what they do. I have said this before, but very often I doubt that too many in my unit would notice if I would have decided not to renew this time. OK, say "transfer to another unit"...but that applies if you have one within driving distance, and being on a fixed income with the price of liquid car gold being what it is, that is just a bit too much Come And Pay for my resources.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 21, 2014, 02:43:42 PM
We are supposed to pander to their doom and gloom out look and just give out Lt Col for free.
Now who the heck is saying that?
Quote from: Eclipse on August 21, 2014, 03:01:44 PM
For the record, if field grade is happening "too fast and too often", it is not the fault of the membership, it is the fault of the leadership who wants to have things both ways - pass out bling to people with no business getting it (i.e. special promotions and avoidance of making people sad), while at the same time holding others to some amorphous "higher standard", not to mention posting people all across the board on with the clarity and planning of feathers in a windstorm, with more concern for "attendance" then ability.
Thank you, sir. This reflects my situation almost 100%. I know people who were lieutenants when I rejoined in '09 who are now Majors and I cannot promote past Captain.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 21, 2014, 03:11:07 PM
b) I'll give you the no notice.....but it was in the works for a while and it was not a secret so it is not like they were trying to trick anyone.
Um...no, there was plenty of notice.
The "Level for Grade" proposal (ie. removing the stutter-step at 1st Lt) seems to have originated at the November 2012 CSAG meeting (to be precise 647 days before the regulation was issued). It included significantly more steps to promote, inlcuding a Wing Level Board to become a 2nd Lt. It was referred to a committee at this time. That committee delivered an interim report at the May, 2013 CSAG meeting with not notation as to recommendations made in the interim report, but the committee was instructed to report to the next meeting.
At the November 2013 CSAG meeting, the committee delivered a report (reproduced in the minutes of said meeting), and CSAG recommended (by a vote of 7-3) that "CAP/CC form a working group to study revisions to the rank structure and requirements). Their report (17 pages worth) is worth a read. For example, a Major was expected to be able to "Develop and implement strategic policy above local level" and "Serve successfully as a commander or deputy commander or chief of staff for a unit. For one year". Additionally, they recommended removing (entirely) grade advancements for Squadron and Group commanders, along with all "Mission Related Skills". The committee also did significant research into levels and grade of members. Definitely worth a read, particularly if you think this was done arbitrarily.
Finally, at the May, 2014 CSAG meeting, a final report came forward. It reflected may of the November recommendations, but not all. It kept the Level-Grade link (that by this time was years old), and had no phase-in period as proposed. CSAG considered and amended the proposal to include a TIG grandfather, but considered and rejected other grandfathering proposals.
Put simply, to claim this was done arbitrarily or with no notice is both false and disingenuous.
^ Members have been trained to watch E-services for "open comment" periods for draft regulations. Until recently, it was the practice.
If a member is interested in these things, following the CSAG is now a good idea. Comments should be sent up the chain. We need to get used to the new way of doing things.
If it was truly "level for grade," I would not have a problem with it.
However, I do not see much really changing.
I have had my Grover Loening (Level III) since 2005 and have almost everything for my Paul E. Garber.
It would be something worthy of a story in CAP Volunteer if I were to get my Gill Robb Wilson but still not promote, yes?
There are a number of interest items in those reports.
The biggest is the grade breakdown:
SM: 15%
2d Lt: 16%
1st Lt: 17%
Capt: 22%
Maj: 15%
Lt Col: 13%
I like the idea to require 1 year as commander and complete the Command Tech Rating for Maj. The requirement for evaluations. The additional year for Lt Col is interesting. I like the idea of 1 year as Lt Col for Wing Commander.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 21, 2014, 06:30:38 PM
There are a number of interest items in those reports.
The biggest is the grade breakdown:
SM: 15%
2d Lt: 16%
1st Lt: 17%
Capt: 22%
Maj: 15%
Lt Col: 13%
I like the idea to require 1 year as commander and complete the Command Tech Rating for Maj. The requirement for evaluations. The additional year for Lt Col is interesting. I like the idea of 1 year as Lt Col for Wing Commander.
Then all pilots have to do oflights and everyone needs to get a tech rating in cp.
Quote from: JeffDG on August 21, 2014, 05:40:41 PMPut simply, to claim this was done arbitrarily or with no notice is both false and disingenuous.
Please cite the notice(s) that was sent to members since 2012 that indicated that the PC bar was about to be raised significantly,
when that change would happen, and the justifications for the change. Maybe they were in the renewal packets, but I don't recall seeing them.
In the case of the Levels changing, this doesn't just affect new members, or members deficient in meeting the standard,
it also affects members who simply never got around to being submitted by their CC's, whether for PD or promotion.
There are lots of members in that position, with seemingly no interest in re-meditating the issue. Punishing volunteers
for the lax adherence to procedure of commanders and staff is self-defeating.
Working committees have essentially no visibility to the membership, and further, it's been indicated by a member of
the respective committee that many of their recommendations were ignored, so even knowing about the discussions
would be meaningless. Are you implying the average member should take action based on CSAG minutes and non-public meeting
notes?
Members had visibility on the NUCs discussions of an ABU proposal. That also went nowhere.
The only meaningful notification is when a reg is published.
Then all pilots have to do oflights and everyone needs to get a tech rating in cp.
[/quote]
That sounds good to me!
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 21, 2014, 07:24:47 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on August 21, 2014, 06:30:38 PM
There are a number of interest items in those reports.
The biggest is the grade breakdown:
SM: 15%
2d Lt: 16%
1st Lt: 17%
Capt: 22%
Maj: 15%
Lt Col: 13%
I like the idea to require 1 year as commander and complete the Command Tech Rating for Maj. The requirement for evaluations. The additional year for Lt Col is interesting. I like the idea of 1 year as Lt Col for Wing Commander.
Then all pilots have to do oflights and everyone needs to get a tech rating in cp.
And don't forget tech rating in Safety as well. Tech rating in ES shall be encouraged for all Mission Pilots.
Quote from: JeffDG on August 21, 2014, 05:40:41 PM
Um...no, there was plenty of notice.
Um...no, there was not.
I am a very active region staff member.
I checked my CAP inbox, no notification there.
I checked in Eservices, no notification there.
I checked with my region vice, he was not aware.
I checked with my region commander, he was not aware.
I checked all notification avenues available to me, none were there. I will presume this is very indicative of the majority of members.
Saying it happened and there were meeting notes, so you were notified, is, well... I'll keep my colorful adverbs to myself.
Well,
I'm not on region staff. I hold a junior role on Wing Staff (ES Training). I hold a role at Group level.
I don't think I've done more than say "Good afternoon, sir" to the Region Commander.
However, I've known this was coming for quite a while. The CSAG agendas and minutes are published for all members to see. Heck, I've seen people who are [censored]ing here that there was no notice comment on agendas and minutes where this matter was documented in some detail.
A note in the minutes that "we are thinking about doing" something is not the same as a notice the "we are doing" something. Many items in the minutes do not go anywhere or get modified significantly between the minutes and the publication.
So, some people here are now saying that proposed changes to regulations buried in some CSAG meeting notes is now "proper notification to the membership at large"?
Is that the story we're going with now?
Quote from: JeffDG on August 21, 2014, 05:40:41 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 21, 2014, 03:11:07 PM
b) I'll give you the no notice.....but it was in the works for a while and it was not a secret so it is not like they were trying to trick anyone.
Um...no, there was plenty of notice.
The "Level for Grade" proposal (ie. removing the stutter-step at 1st Lt) seems to have originated at the November 2012 CSAG meeting (to be precise 647 days before the regulation was issued). It included significantly more steps to promote, inlcuding a Wing Level Board to become a 2nd Lt. It was referred to a committee at this time. That committee delivered an interim report at the May, 2013 CSAG meeting with not notation as to recommendations made in the interim report, but the committee was instructed to report to the next meeting.
At the November 2013 CSAG meeting, the committee delivered a report (reproduced in the minutes of said meeting), and CSAG recommended (by a vote of 7-3) that "CAP/CC form a working group to study revisions to the rank structure and requirements). Their report (17 pages worth) is worth a read. For example, a Major was expected to be able to "Develop and implement strategic policy above local level" and "Serve successfully as a commander or deputy commander or chief of staff for a unit. For one year". Additionally, they recommended removing (entirely) grade advancements for Squadron and Group commanders, along with all "Mission Related Skills". The committee also did significant research into levels and grade of members. Definitely worth a read, particularly if you think this was done arbitrarily.
Finally, at the May, 2014 CSAG meeting, a final report came forward. It reflected may of the November recommendations, but not all. It kept the Level-Grade link (that by this time was years old), and had no phase-in period as proposed. CSAG considered and amended the proposal to include a TIG grandfather, but considered and rejected other grandfathering proposals.
Put simply, to claim this was done arbitrarily or with no notice is both false and disingenuous.
It is neither false nor disingenuous. A minutes from a meeting saying that they are thinking of doing something is not notification any more than if I say I'm thinking about Chinese for dinner is notification that I will be at Fantastic Wok in Maineville. Notifying means sending out a notification to the membership
http://youtu.be/HNmIQX_ImgM (http://youtu.be/HNmIQX_ImgM)
Mr. Prosser: But, Mr. Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months.
Arthur: Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you? I mean like actually telling anybody or anything.
Mr. Prosser: But the plans were on display...
Arthur: On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.
Mr. Prosser: That's the display department.
Arthur: With a torch.
Mr. Prosser: The lights had probably gone out.
Arthur: So had the stairs.
Mr. Prosser: But look, you found the notice, didn't you?
Arthur: Yes yes I did. It was on display at the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard."
Quote from: Panache on August 22, 2014, 05:49:43 AM
So, some people here are now saying that proposed changes to regulations buried in some CSAG meeting notes is now "proper notification to the membership at large"?
Is that the story we're going with now?
Yes.
Publicly available agendas and meeting minutes from the body charged with reviewing and recommending changes to the regulations over a year and a half before the regulation change occurs are absolutely proper notification.
Quote from: Panache on August 22, 2014, 06:19:03 AM
http://youtu.be/HNmIQX_ImgM (http://youtu.be/HNmIQX_ImgM)
Mr. Prosser: But, Mr. Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months.
Arthur: Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you? I mean like actually telling anybody or anything.
Mr. Prosser: But the plans were on display...
Arthur: On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.
Mr. Prosser: That's the display department.
Arthur: With a torch.
Mr. Prosser: The lights had probably gone out.
Arthur: So had the stairs.
Mr. Prosser: But look, you found the notice, didn't you?
Arthur: Yes yes I did. It was on display at the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard."
Makes you wonder if the CSAG has ever considered going into advertising.......
Jack
Change 1 posted today. Updated grandfather clause.
QuoteNOTE:Members applying for duty performance promotions during the period 11 August 2014 to 11 August 2018 may use the previous duty performance promotion requirements for their next promotion. The member's present date of grade must be prior to 11 August 2014 in order to be eligible for this grandfather clause. This clause may only be used once for the member's next promotion.[/font]
[/font]
No more griping allowed.
[darn]. Now I have to go to CLC, get my Senior rating, and go to two conferences. Bummer.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 21, 2014, 06:30:38 PM
There are a number of interest items in those reports.
The biggest is the grade breakdown:
SM: 15%
2d Lt: 16%
1st Lt: 17%
Capt: 22%
Maj: 15%
Lt Col: 13%
I like the idea to require 1 year as commander and complete the Command Tech Rating for Maj. The requirement for evaluations. The additional year for Lt Col is interesting. I like the idea of 1 year as Lt Col for Wing Commander.
This breakdown is interesting, it also indicates, that once again maybe a solution was applied to where there was no problem. Turn over amongst within the field grade ranks will be less than withing the company grade ranks. There are always Capt becoming Maj and Maj Becoming LtCol, and there are LtCol stepping up into the executive levels becoming COL. But there are also Maj and LtCol retiring every year.
Why is 25% of the total CAP officer force, considered too high?
If the other problem is field grade officers that don't know anything, sorry but no system that can be printed is going to stop pencil whipping. While I would agree that I have never met a Level V individual that was not knowledgeable. I attribute this to those with the impetus to go that far in PD, are pretty much not slackers. I had intended to get my GRW someday. But since NSC will now be filled with LtCol seekers, I probably won't be able to get one of the limited slots. Tag on that most new Wing CC's are not GRW, some of the annual slots are for new Wing CC's so that also reduces the slots available. Agreed in 10 years this problem will self correct, but most of us aren't spring chickens.
But the problem was not in the old 35-5, it has always been a CAPR 50-17 issue! SLS & CLC, shoot even RSC do not have to be passed, just attended. You can sleep through all of the above and check a box, and your done. The guy that sleeps or plays during these classes get the same credit as they individual that really learns from them. This Reg change doesn't address the real problem. I found the training and curriculum in all tree of these courses to be excellent. So, I don't think they were a waste of my time.
I have seen this at NESA, encampments, local SAR schools, RSC, SLS and CLC. Activity directors do not fail people! I know of an individual who received credit for SLS and didn't even return for the second day of training. I know lots of cases of tech ratings where the person simply spent six months in the track and got the rating. Without completing required distance learning and so on.
Just like in our legal system, it's better to let a guilty man walk free that to incarcerate an innocent. This change penalizes those that completed their requirements with integrity, right along with those that are guilty of cheating the system. Also, let me add that I believe in many cases when the system is cheated, it's not all on the member, this is also a leadership issue. The commander that hasn't read the applicable regs or the specialty track pamphlet, or has an agenda to advance someone.
I wish I could suggest a solution. If training and certification gets too hard on the membership, you'll get just as many if not more complaints as there have been in this thread. But, when you consider that the promotion authority for all field grade officers is Wing or higher, and most Wings have no qualms with saying no to a promotion, this reg change was not IMO the correct solution to real issue.
Quote from: ßτε on August 22, 2014, 01:43:51 PM
Change 1 posted today. Updated grandfather clause.
QuoteNOTE:Members applying for duty performance promotions during the period 11 August 2014 to 11 August 2018 may use the previous duty performance promotion requirements for their next promotion. The member's present date of grade must be prior to 11 August 2014 in order to be eligible for this grandfather clause. This clause may only be used once for the member's next promotion.[/font]
[/font]
No more griping allowed.
There's a glass 1/2 full and a glass 1/2 empty stance on this, but the bottom line is that a comment period would have
likely avoided the appearance of NHQ not being sensitive to what motivates the membership.
Say what you will about CT, but it's interesting what came out of this discussion - a committee worked 10 man weeks to
put together what they considered to be a comprehensive fix for a long-standing tenuous situation, and the people
who charged that committee decided to adopt only parts of the recommendation, potentially making the situation worse
then before the "fix".
It has also been asserted that there may be members of the Command Council who were unaware of this
significant change, even after it was adopted, leading one to believe that while the new governance may be more
efficacious, it isn't necessarily "better" in regards to the affect on the rank and file, or the voice of the membership being
heard through that council.
Of course the CSAG and Board aren't required to get buy-in from the Council on everything any more, but something
that affects the rank and file as directly as this did should have (maybe it did) and at the least none of the Council should be caught unaware,
because it's the council who will have to deal with what I'm sure we some pretty "direct" emails and phones calls, not to
mention the risk of attrition at a time when CAP can ill afford to lose anyone participating at a level deserving or promotion.
This will still ultimately accomplish the stated goal of reducing the number of field grade officers in the organization,
just more slowly, however no one has yet been able to articulate why this is a "problem" in the greater context of CAP as a whole.
From a technical / IT perspective, this now creates two classes of promotion submission procedures, so
that will be fun for those who need to make that work.
Strange how the requirements are so well laid out for the rank and file, but virtually non-existent for full bird or general. Basically the requirement is to be part of the GOB system. No additional levels required at all.. But then again, I forgot, not all pigs are created equal..
Quote from: AirAux on August 22, 2014, 02:32:15 PM
I forgot, not all pigs are created equal..
Man, if you're going to allude to a classic work of literature, at least get it right...
Quote from: catrulz on August 22, 2014, 02:12:49 PM
Why is 25% of the total CAP officer force, considered too high?
While you cannot compare the real military to CAP in terms of percentages, but essentially, this is how the CAP / USAF looks at rank structure in CAP:
Grade
Air Force percentage
Colonel 1.8
Lieutenant colonel 4.6
Major 14.0
Captain 32.0
First lieutenant and second lieutenant (when combined with the number authorized for general officer grades under section 12004 of this title) 47.6
So it is interesting in that there is essentially a 1:1:1:1:1:1 ratio of CAP officers.
Quote
I have seen this at NESA, encampments, local SAR schools, RSC, SLS and CLC. Activity directors do not fail people! I know of an individual who received credit for SLS and didn't even return for the second day of training. I know lots of cases of tech ratings where the person simply spent six months in the track and got the rating. Without completing required distance learning and so on.
Well this a combination of commanders and directors not wanting to deal with the issue of failing people and the general membership wanting the credit without having to do the work. At the same time, the criteria for credit is so broad that really it is hard to fail.
Quote from: AirAux on August 22, 2014, 02:32:15 PM
Strange how the requirements are so well laid out for the rank and file, but virtually non-existent for full bird or general. Basically the requirement is to be part of the GOB system. No additional levels required at all.. But then again, I forgot, not all pigs are created equal..
I think you mean "All animals are created equal but some are more equal than others" (Orwell, Animal Farm).
What do you mean the requirements are non-existent for full bird or general? If you are talking about the CSAG report, they were only asked to consider SM-Lt Col. Besides, Wing Commander and above has always been a political position. This is why I liked the idea of "Preferred Min 1 yr TIG as Lt Col." for wing commanders and the requirement for completion of the Master Rating in the Command track (although if you serve as Wing Commander you are nearly guaranteed to complete this anyway).
As I understand the very basics of the AF system that 14% of Majors tend to make Lt Col or leave in the near term. Considering we don't limit field grade to the number of required slots I don't think our structure is too far out of alignment.
Quote from: catrulz on August 22, 2014, 02:12:49 PM
Why is 25% of the total CAP officer force, considered too high?
In the current paradigm it is actually TOO LOW.
Since the stated goal of CAP PD is to build better officers and staff, at least theoretically,
any member in the organization for at least 10 years should be expected to achieve Lt Col.
There are no billets or manning tables in regards to grade, so there is no reason every members
can't attain the silver oaks (financial issues regarding in-residence classes not withstanding).
So any assertion that indicates that any arbitrary number of "x" grade is "too high" has to also
provide what the optimum number should be, along with some sort of actual reason behind the number.
Quote from: JeffDG on August 22, 2014, 11:40:08 AM
Quote from: Panache on August 22, 2014, 05:49:43 AM
So, some people here are now saying that proposed changes to regulations buried in some CSAG meeting notes is now "proper notification to the membership at large"?
Is that the story we're going with now?
Yes.
Publicly available agendas and meeting minutes from the body charged with reviewing and recommending changes to the regulations over a year and a half before the regulation change occurs are absolutely proper notification.
I honestly do not know if this is sarcasm or not.
I still wish there was a path to colonel that didn't involve becoming a wing/region commander.
But, that's just me.
Jack
Actually, I guess I got my quotes confused. Instead of Orwell, I was recalling a medical treatise: Searching for Trichinella: not all pigs are created equal.
Pozio E.
LOL..
Quote from: AirAux on August 22, 2014, 03:49:28 PM
Actually, I guess I got my quotes confused. Instead of Orwell, I was recalling a medical treatise: Searching for Trichinella: not all pigs are created equal.
Pozio E.
LOL..
I remember looking at that article. Did not pay too much attention to the title obviously.
Quote from: ColonelJack on August 22, 2014, 03:35:47 PM
I still wish there was a path to colonel that didn't involve becoming a wing/region commander.
But, that's just me.
Jack
There is. It is called either Chief IG or go and become a Chaplain or Lawyer (or both).
Quote
The grade of colonel is reserved for members of the CAP Command Council, region vice commanders, the Chief of the Chaplain Corps, Chief of the Legal Officer Corps, and the CAP Inspector General.
Although previously you could have been:
QuoteThe grade of colonel is reserved for members of the CAP Command Council, region vice commanders, the Chief of the Chaplain Corps, Chief of the Legal Officer Corps, CAP Inspector General, National Chief of Safety, National Historian, National Controller and the Chief of the CAP Health Program.
:)
I thought region commanders were commanders and not vice commanders, interesting...
Quote from: AirAux on August 22, 2014, 04:35:05 PM
I thought region commanders were commanders and not vice commanders, interesting...
They are. The region commander falls under the Command Council in that list. Region vice commanders are also afforded the rank of colonel, if not already a previous wing commander.
Quote10. Minimum Qualifications for Consideration as Region Commander are:
a. Hold the CAP grade of Colonel.
4 CAPR 35-9 22 OCTOBER 2012
b. Completed Level IV of the CAP Professional Development Training Program.
c. Served as wing commander, region vice commander or member of the NEC (prior to
October 2012).
d. Budget and asset acquisition knowledge gained within or outside CAP.
e. Five years supervisory experience gained within or outside CAP.
f. Ten years total CAP membership with no less than 5 continuous years of service prior to
appointment.
g. Live within the region for which applying for.
h. Prior to appointment as region commander, individual must complete a successful
fingerprint rescreening.
Quote from: ColonelJack on August 22, 2014, 03:35:47 PM
I still wish there was a path to colonel that didn't involve becoming a wing/region commander.
But, that's just me.
Jack
Jack, as noted previously, you are promoted to the grade of Col if you are appointed a region vice commander. You are also promoted to Col when appointed to the position of National Historian, National Safety Officer, National IG, and National HS officer. The National Commander may also promote individuals to the grade of Colonel for special reasons; sort of the ultimate "GOBN" award... >:D
I wouldn't call the Grade of Colonel "political" though. :angel:
Quote from: FW on August 22, 2014, 04:46:23 PM
You are also promoted to Col when appointed to the position of National Historian, National Safety Officer, National IG, and National HS officer.
No longer. Just chief chaplain, lawyer, or IG. All others were removed.
I guess I will no longer be able to make full colonel anymore. Oh well. (<<no sarcasm in that, I actually would not mind taking the National Historian position some day in the medium-long distance future when more free time opens up).
Quote from: usafaux2004 on August 22, 2014, 01:49:40 PM
[darn]. Now I have to go to CLC, get my Senior rating, and go to two conferences. Bummer.
I already have all those...I went to CLC in 1994, have attended every Wing conference (in my former Wing) between 1994 and 1998, a Region Conference in 1999...
and a Master rating in Administration.
Quote from: AirAux on August 22, 2014, 04:35:05 PM
I thought region commanders were commanders and not vice commanders, interesting...
Region commanders are covered as members of the Command Council. Region CVs are in addition to.
Quote from: Panache on August 11, 2014, 03:53:35 PM
It appears that they want to mirror the promotion requirements for RealMilitary™ officers as so much is realistic for a all-volunteer civilian force.
The NCO system was officially put into place, as well.
Has anyone been able to determine what the duties and responsibilities of the new wazoo CAP NCOs are going to be or is this just another case of putting the cart before the horse?
Got this Email from my Wing Commander:
FYI - this addresses several of the concerns that were raised when 35-5 was published early last week. In particular the grandfathering has now been extended to include both time in grade and Professional Development progression, for the next promotion, provided that the date of grade for the current grade is on or before 11 Aug 2014. Bottom line is that if you were promoted to your current grade on or before 11 Aug 2014, the "old" requirements for your next grade are in effect. An example would be a Major who was promoted on 31 May 2014, would require 4 years time in grade and Level IV to be completed prior to promotion to Lt Colonel.
Just got this Email from Susie Parker:
For your attention,
CAPR 35-5, Change 1, 22 Aug 14, CAP Officer and Noncommissioned Officer Appointments and Promotions, is posted on the publications page at:
http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/R035_005_489E25C089E93.pdf (http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/R035_005_489E25C089E93.pdf)
The most recent changes are to page 5, paragraph 1-5c and the Figure 2 Note on page 11. The IT department is in the process of updating the online promotion application to reflect the grandfather clause. Any promotions that need to be processed prior to the change to the online system can be submitted to National Headquarters/DP for processing.
Additionally, CAP Pamphlet 20, Civil Air Patrol National Staff Structure, Selection Process and Job Descriptions, dated December 2011 has been rescinded. The staffing process is being revised as described in the National Commander's briefing to the Region and Wing Commanders at the Annual Conference. The new process will be published as soon as it is finalized.
VR,
Quote from: LSThiker on August 22, 2014, 04:51:42 PM
Quote from: FW on August 22, 2014, 04:46:23 PM
You are also promoted to Col when appointed to the position of National Historian, National Safety Officer, National IG, and National HS officer.
No longer. Just chief chaplain, lawyer, or IG. All others were removed.
I guess I will no longer be able to make full colonel anymore. Oh well. (<<no sarcasm in that, I actually would not mind taking the National Historian position some day in the medium-long distance future when more free time opens up).
Although not specifically mentioned in 35-5, the CSAG will may promote those members assigned to those positions. We shall see... ;)
Quote from: CyBorg on August 22, 2014, 04:54:02 PM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on August 22, 2014, 01:49:40 PM
[darn]. Now I have to go to CLC, get my Senior rating, and go to two conferences. Bummer.
I already have all those...I went to CLC in 1994, have attended every Wing conference (in my former Wing) between 1994 and 1998, a Region Conference in 1999...and a Master rating in Administration.
When was the last time you submitted your case for promotion? Or did you piss off somebody spectacularly? :o
Quote from: FW on August 22, 2014, 04:46:23 PM
Quote from: ColonelJack on August 22, 2014, 03:35:47 PM
I still wish there was a path to colonel that didn't involve becoming a wing/region commander.
But, that's just me.
Jack
Jack, as noted previously, you are promoted to the grade of Col if you are appointed a region vice commander. You are also promoted to Col when appointed to the position of National Historian, National Safety Officer, National IG, and National HS officer. The National Commander may also promote individuals to the grade of Colonel for special reasons; sort of the ultimate "GOBN" award... >:D
I wouldn't call the Grade of Colonel "political" though. :angel:
Just a coincidence that right around the time Region CVs got eagles, Regions started appointing more then one.
Quote from: vento on August 22, 2014, 06:09:22 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on August 22, 2014, 04:54:02 PM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on August 22, 2014, 01:49:40 PM
[darn]. Now I have to go to CLC, get my Senior rating, and go to two conferences. Bummer.
I already have all those...I went to CLC in 1994, have attended every Wing conference (in my former Wing) between 1994 and 1998, a Region Conference in 1999...and a Master rating in Administration.
When was the last time you submitted your case for promotion? Or did you piss off somebody spectacularly? :o
PM sent as most of the regulars here know the story.
Soooo...there really is no provision for someone like me, who really wants to be an NCO, to be one, right? You would have to be one in the Real Military(tm) in order to be a CAPNCO, right?
Correct.
Quote from: Garibaldi on August 22, 2014, 09:26:42 PM
Soooo...there really is no provision for someone like me, who really wants to be an NCO, to be one, right? You would have to be one in the Real Military(tm) in order to be a CAPNCO, right?
as of right now no. But part of phase two is to correct that and open the NCO corps to all by phase three.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 22, 2014, 11:10:04 PM
Quote from: Garibaldi on August 22, 2014, 09:26:42 PM
Soooo...there really is no provision for someone like me, who really wants to be an NCO, to be one, right? You would have to be one in the Real Military(tm) in order to be a CAPNCO, right?
as of right now no. But part of phase two is to correct that and open the NCO corps to all by phase three.
So, If I'm reading the PD/TIG scale correctly, I can be a TSGT, having completed Level 3. Nice. I can live with that, one more stripe than I got as a cadet anyway.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 22, 2014, 11:10:04 PM
Quote from: Garibaldi on August 22, 2014, 09:26:42 PM
Soooo...there really is no provision for someone like me, who really wants to be an NCO, to be one, right? You would have to be one in the Real Military(tm) in order to be a CAPNCO, right?
as of right now no. But part of phase two is to correct that and open the NCO corps to all by phase three.
And by "correct that" you mean try and squeeze out some justification that doesn't actually exist?
Or is it because..."reasons"?
Quote from: Eclipse on August 23, 2014, 12:00:13 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 22, 2014, 11:10:04 PM
Quote from: Garibaldi on August 22, 2014, 09:26:42 PM
Soooo...there really is no provision for someone like me, who really wants to be an NCO, to be one, right? You would have to be one in the Real Military(tm) in order to be a CAPNCO, right?
as of right now no. But part of phase two is to correct that and open the NCO corps to all by phase three.
And by "correct that" you mean try and squeeze out some justification that doesn't actually exist?
Or is it because..."reasons"?
If I were a cynic, I would reason that the regulation dropped in the last week of the CAP/CC emeritus' term because he had more enthusiasm for the NCO stuff than his successor did, and that perhaps the "Phase 2/3" might have less enthusiasm behind them going forward.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 23, 2014, 12:00:13 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 22, 2014, 11:10:04 PM
Quote from: Garibaldi on August 22, 2014, 09:26:42 PM
Soooo...there really is no provision for someone like me, who really wants to be an NCO, to be one, right? You would have to be one in the Real Military(tm) in order to be a CAPNCO, right?
as of right now no. But part of phase two is to correct that and open the NCO corps to all by phase three.
And by "correct that" you mean try and squeeze out some justification that doesn't actually exist?
Or is it because..."reasons"?
If you read the white paper....the whole reason for the NCO corps is written right there. It is kind of buried....but if you read for comprehension you will see it.
Why not give us the TL:DR version?
Quote from: Eclipse on August 22, 2014, 03:02:48 PM
Quote from: catrulz on August 22, 2014, 02:12:49 PM
Why is 25% of the total CAP officer force, considered too high?
In the current paradigm it is actually TOO LOW.
Since the stated goal of CAP PD is to build better officers and staff, at least theoretically,
any member in the organization for at least 10 years should be expected to achieve Lt Col.
I think that this is pretty much what I've been saying -- CAP's goal should be to have all officers trained to the highest level available within the organization within a certain amount of time. Someone that has been a Major for 10 years should probably be considered to be a failure of the PD system.
On a different issue -- I do wonder if the percentage of members with Level IV and V increases with proximity to the Region Staff College and National Staff College. Since these never move it is always going to be easier for locals to attend since their cost is significantly reduced.
I have been a Captain since 1997, with breaks in service.
Any way I can trade that for SSgt?
Quote from: CyBorg on August 23, 2014, 02:42:12 PM
Any way I can trade that for SSgt?
Under the current system no.
Quote from: CyBorg on August 23, 2014, 02:42:12 PM
I have been a Captain since 1997, with breaks in service.
Any way I can trade that for SSgt?
Only if you have served as an E-5 in the RM.
Or an E-6 Army type...........
Quote from: CapCapt on August 24, 2014, 12:09:00 AM
Or an E-6 Army type...........
Army SSG = USAF TSgt.
Roger that...........
Quote from: RiverAux on August 23, 2014, 01:47:02 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 22, 2014, 03:02:48 PM
Quote from: catrulz on August 22, 2014, 02:12:49 PM
Why is 25% of the total CAP officer force, considered too high?
In the current paradigm it is actually TOO LOW.
Since the stated goal of CAP PD is to build better officers and staff, at least theoretically,
any member in the organization for at least 10 years should be expected to achieve Lt Col.
I think that this is pretty much what I've been saying -- CAP's goal should be to have all officers trained to the highest level available within the organization within a certain amount of time. Someone that has been a Major for 10 years should probably be considered to be a failure of the PD system.
On a different issue -- I do wonder if the percentage of members with Level IV and V increases with proximity to the Region Staff College and National Staff College. Since these never move it is always going to be easier for locals to attend since their cost is significantly reduced.
Whyzat? I've been a Major for 11 years. I was a Captain for 14 years before that. I've basically reached my level of incompetence. I have neither the skills nor interest in going any farther, and am content where I am.
So do we consider those who have never promoted since they joined a failure as well?
Honestly this was change for the sake of change, and there is no data to support this will make our officers better.
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 24, 2014, 02:22:07 AM
So do we consider those who have never promoted since they joined a failure as well?
If we think that it is important that CAP members obtain PD training and if that person hasn't obtained any, then yes. If they have gone all the way up to NSC and never promoted, I'd be fine with that.
On the one hand, yes, but on the other, there is no real accountability for member officers to not promote. I don't think we can be 2B'd for failure to progress like cadets, but it behooves us to promote at least once. You can't really be effective if you are a SWOG (or OWOG, in the new parlance) for umpteen years. I mean, what is the point? Take the PD, get the grade, advance. Or, if you already have done what you intend to have done in the program, and are resting at Major or Lt Col. then by all means coast. Not much more farther that you can go anyway.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 22, 2014, 04:51:42 PMNo longer. Just chief chaplain, lawyer, or IG. All others were removed.
..as the current National Historian managed to just sneak under that wire. The whole historian program with the recent changes, "Chief" and all, seems like a spectacular gag to me. Total GOBN Extreme.
Quote from: a2capt on August 24, 2014, 10:00:06 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on August 22, 2014, 04:51:42 PMNo longer. Just chief chaplain, lawyer, or IG. All others were removed.
..as the current National Historian managed to just sneak under that wire. The whole historian program with the recent changes, "Chief" and all, seems like a spectacular gag to me. Total GOBN Extreme.
In what way?
Quote from: Eclipse on August 22, 2014, 06:18:35 PM
Just a coincidence that right around the time Region CVs got eagles, Regions started appointing more then one.
I thought I was the only one that noticed that one.
I'm not sure if this is the proper place to plug this in but it relates to the original topic, so here goes.
Today I sent an e-mail to NHQ about my promotion status. I was eligible for Major 20 July 2014 but the promotion wasn't processed in a timely manner, the 11 Aug 2014 CAPR 35-5 took effect and I'm still a Captain. My inquiry was that I must now complete Level 4 for Major and the TIG would remain at 36 months.
The reply back from Susan Parker at NHQ states "Not under the revised grandfather clause---if your current date of grade is before 11 August 2014 you can have your next promotion under the old duty performance requirements. We put out a change to 35-5 last week."
So if my Squadron/CC submits the promotion, references the change to CAPR 35-5, I should make it....right? I do understand this is a one time only proposition.
Has anyone else dealt with this type of situation?
Thanks!
^^ correct the old rules apply to you, once.
Excellent, thanks for the response. I'll run it by the /CC tomorrow night.
Now here is the kicker
If yo back date you major to July. Then you are still under the old rules for Lt Col
Training How Completed Completed
Technician Rating Exam: Safety Online 01 Apr 2014
CAPT 117 ES Continuing Education Exam - Part 3 MIMS 30 Jan 2014
CAPT 117 ES Continuing Education Exam - Part 2 MIMS 30 Jan 2014
CAPT 117 ES Continuing Education Exam - Part 1 MIMS 30 Jan 2014
CAP Test 116 GES Questionnaire MIMS 30 Jan 2014
Basic Instructor Course LMS 10 May 2013
Aircraft Ground Handling CAP_Multimedia 16 May 2012
Wing Runner Test MIMS 12 May 2012
Master Rating Exam: Cadet Program ONLINE 22 Apr 2012
CLC Course 01 Apr 2012
ORM Advanced ONLINE 20 May 2011
SLS Course 22 Mar 2011
Intro to CAP Safety ONLINE 07 Jun 2010
ORM Intermed. ONLINE 29 Aug 2009
ORM Basic ONLINE 28 Aug 2009
Senior Rating Exam: Cadet Program ONLINE 28 Aug 2009
ECI 13 INFANTRY UNIT LEADER COURSE 30 Mar 2009
NSC USMC STAFF NCO ADVANCED 30 Mar 2009
RSC US MC STAFF NCO ACADEMY 30 Mar 2009
AEPSM ONLINE 06 Mar 2009
EO ONLINE 06 Mar 2009
Technician Rating Exam: Communications ONLINE 02 Sep 2008
Technician Rating Exam: Cadet Program ONLINE 28 Aug 2008
Foundations Course 28 Aug 2008
CPPT Course 21 Aug 2008
OPS - OPSEC Online 01 Aug 2008
Specialty Tracks
Specialty Track Level Completed
I'm set
As of today, grandfather's clause has been instituted to senior members duty performance requirement in e-services.
Roger that, I just checked eServices and all my requirements have gone back to prior 11 August 2014. Let's hope for the best!
We just promoted two captains under the old rules, they were promotable 11Aug, we put that in as the date and eservices took it. It also seems like eservices is now setup for the grandfathering (it wasn't last week)
Also- this NCO one per squadron-group-wing is a recipe for a political disaster. Thankfully we converted most of our to the officer corps when we still could get them an advanced grade.
IMHO the advanced grade for SNCO was a complete insult...but there you go.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 27, 2014, 04:09:08 AM
IMHO the advanced grade for SNCO was a complete insult...but there you go.
Why?
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 27, 2014, 04:13:39 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 27, 2014, 04:09:08 AM
IMHO the advanced grade for SNCO was a complete insult...but there you go.
Why?
MSgt comes in as a 2d Lt....CMSgt came in as a Capt......A Mitchell cadet comes in as a 2d Lt and Spaatz comes in as Capt......now what is wrong with that picture?
But I was not that butt hurt about it.....but really. :)
Quote from: lordmonar on August 27, 2014, 04:16:07 AM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 27, 2014, 04:13:39 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 27, 2014, 04:09:08 AM
IMHO the advanced grade for SNCO was a complete insult...but there you go.
Why?
MSgt comes in as a 2d Lt....CMSgt came in as a Capt......A Mitchell cadet comes in as a 2d Lt and Spaatz comes in as Capt......now what is wrong with that picture?
But I was not that butt hurt about it.....but really. :)
I see your point. That said, if a MSgt, SMSgt or CMSgt pursues a commission in the Air Force (although not common, I've seen it happened), he/she would also be commissioned as a 2d Lt after completing OTS (I know, CAP is not the Air Force).
Maybe we should reconsider all these different advanced appointments/promotions. But I doubt we'll ever reach a consensus.
Ahhhh....but CAP is not the USAF....so that point is not really germain.
Either way...it is all moot as there are no more advanced promotions for NCOs.
^^In the other four services, such a one would more likely be promoted to Warrant Officer. I think the Navy and Coast Guard require a minimum of E-7 to be "warranted."
Of course, the Air Force (inexplicably) does not have them, and neither does CAP.
Quote from: CyBorg on August 27, 2014, 04:36:45 AM
^^In the other four services, such a one would more likely be promoted to Warrant Officer. I think the Navy and Coast Guard require a minimum of E-7 to be "warranted."
Of course, the Air Force (inexplicably) does not have them, and neither does CAP.
Apples and oranges......warrents are not commissioned line officers.....even in the army and and navy you would not necessary go from E-7 to WO-1 they are two different tracks with different requirements.
And yes the USAF does not use WO grades......but it has been that way for 30 years now.....we do just fine with out them.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 27, 2014, 04:42:35 AM
Apples and oranges......warrents are not commissioned line officers
W-2's and up are, indeed, commissioned officers.
In the Canoe Club, the two usual E -> O tracks are Warrant Officer, and LDO (Limited Duty Officer).
SNCOs from E-7 to E-9 can promote into the Warrant Officer program.
NCOs from E-6 to E-8 can promote into the LDO program.
Where are you guys seeing this stuff in e Services? Few of you have mentioned that the grandfather clause shows up on eServices im confused.
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 27, 2014, 12:20:09 PM
Where are you guys seeing this stuff in e Services? Few of you have mentioned that the grandfather clause shows up on eServices im confused.
It's in the online promotion module. It allows you to submit grandfathered promotions online.
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 27, 2014, 12:20:09 PM
Where are you guys seeing this stuff in e Services? Few of you have mentioned that the grandfather clause shows up on eServices im confused.
The promotions module - if you don't have the rights to submit or approve someone, you won't see it.
I dont have access to that Module, IMO shouldnt everybody have some form of access so they can see what is needed to be on the right track? Promotion Module should include a Check List of the next promotion, and if it is checked, that means you have completed it, Example ( 30 Months untill next rank, it shows that you have been the rank for 24 Months)
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 27, 2014, 12:35:01 PM
I dont have access to that Module, IMO shouldnt everybody have some form of access so they can see what is needed to be on the right track? Promotion Module should include a Check List of the next promotion, and if it is checked, that means you have completed it, Example ( 30 Months untill next rank, it shows that you have been the rank for 24 Months)
Except that even having all the items "checked" will not get you promoted.
They can make it an Automatic Promotion if all the items are checked, If not, atleast you know to submit a 2b.
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 27, 2014, 03:58:52 PM
They can make it an Automatic Promotion if all the items are checked, If not, atleast you know to submit a 2b.
I want to get promoted so I am terminating my membership. :)
I think you mean CAPF 2.
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 27, 2014, 03:58:52 PM
They can make it an Automatic Promotion if all the items are checked, If not, atleast you know to submit a 2b.
Problem is, there are promotion requirements in the regulation that are not checkboxes.
Quote from: CyBorg on August 27, 2014, 03:10:39 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 27, 2014, 12:35:01 PM
I dont have access to that Module, IMO shouldnt everybody have some form of access so they can see what is needed to be on the right track? Promotion Module should include a Check List of the next promotion, and if it is checked, that means you have completed it, Example ( 30 Months untill next rank, it shows that you have been the rank for 24 Months)
Except that even having all the items "checked" will not get you promoted.
And it shouldn't.
Brandon-your DCS or PD officer should log onto that screen with you- "PD Award Entry" is the actual name- and it shows all the requirements, and they updated it so that it shows the "grandfather" requirements for all grandfather clause eligible members. Currently the way the program is built when I log in I can enter things like conferences, speaking to groups, command/ staff assignments so they currently can't open that program up. The levels just went online so I think it is good feed back for big brother out there to open up a module that shows what we see in that screen without command permissions.
Quote from: CAPAPRN on August 28, 2014, 06:43:45 PM
Brandon-your DCS or PD officer should log onto that screen with you- "PD Award Entry" is the actual name- and it shows all the requirements, and they updated it so that it shows the "grandfather" requirements for all grandfather clause eligible members. Currently the way the program is built when I log in I can enter things like conferences, speaking to groups, command/ staff assignments so they currently can't open that program up. The levels just went online so I think it is good feed back for big brother out there to open up a module that shows what we see in that screen without command permissions.
PD Award Entry is very different from the promotions module. Also, the PD Award Entry and its associated approvals module were released Aug 20 of last year. One recent change, likely spurred by a question at one of the IT learning labs during the national conference, is that the PD Award Entry module can now be assigned by a WSA to any member in the WSAs scope.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 27, 2014, 05:08:53 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on August 27, 2014, 03:10:39 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 27, 2014, 12:35:01 PM
I dont have access to that Module, IMO shouldnt everybody have some form of access so they can see what is needed to be on the right track? Promotion Module should include a Check List of the next promotion, and if it is checked, that means you have completed it, Example ( 30 Months untill next rank, it shows that you have been the rank for 24 Months)
Except that even having all the items "checked" will not get you promoted.
And it shouldn't.
And the issues outside of "having your boxes checked" can be so wildly divergent between wings/groups/squadrons as to defy logic.
Quote from: CyBorg on August 29, 2014, 09:39:18 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 27, 2014, 05:08:53 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on August 27, 2014, 03:10:39 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 27, 2014, 12:35:01 PM
I dont have access to that Module, IMO shouldnt everybody have some form of access so they can see what is needed to be on the right track? Promotion Module should include a Check List of the next promotion, and if it is checked, that means you have completed it, Example ( 30 Months untill next rank, it shows that you have been the rank for 24 Months)
Except that even having all the items "checked" will not get you promoted.
And it shouldn't.
And the issues outside of "having your boxes checked" can be so wildly divergent between wings/groups/squadrons as to defy logic.
Or not....YMMV.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 27, 2014, 04:04:32 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 27, 2014, 03:58:52 PM
They can make it an Automatic Promotion if all the items are checked, If not, atleast you know to submit a 2b.
I want to get promoted so I am terminating my membership. :)
I think you mean CAPF 2.
I do not think he wants a "2b" but you never know. 8)
Quote from: lordmonar on August 29, 2014, 09:42:12 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on August 29, 2014, 09:39:18 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 27, 2014, 05:08:53 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on August 27, 2014, 03:10:39 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 27, 2014, 12:35:01 PM
I dont have access to that Module, IMO shouldnt everybody have some form of access so they can see what is needed to be on the right track? Promotion Module should include a Check List of the next promotion, and if it is checked, that means you have completed it, Example ( 30 Months untill next rank, it shows that you have been the rank for 24 Months)
Except that even having all the items "checked" will not get you promoted.
And it shouldn't.
And the issues outside of "having your boxes checked" can be so wildly divergent between wings/groups/squadrons as to defy logic.
Or not....YMMV.
In this case, your LIGHT-YEARS may vary.
Quote from: CyBorg on August 29, 2014, 09:39:18 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 27, 2014, 05:08:53 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on August 27, 2014, 03:10:39 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on August 27, 2014, 12:35:01 PM
I dont have access to that Module, IMO shouldnt everybody have some form of access so they can see what is needed to be on the right track? Promotion Module should include a Check List of the next promotion, and if it is checked, that means you have completed it, Example ( 30 Months untill next rank, it shows that you have been the rank for 24 Months)
Except that even having all the items "checked" will not get you promoted.
And it shouldn't.
And the issues outside of "having your boxes checked" can be so wildly divergent between wings/groups/squadrons as to defy logic.
Sometimes, regulations are vague on purpose, and the purpose is to give local commanders some discretion to command.
Quote from: JeffDG on August 30, 2014, 04:13:42 PM
Sometimes, regulations are vague on purpose, and the purpose is to give local commanders some discretion to command.
Sadly, that idea breaks down quickly with inconsistently trained commanders, 1100+ different agendas, and no imperative from higher HQ.
You've mentioned the need for "imperative from higher HQ" in multiple posts. What exactly do you mean by that?
Are you referring to mandates? Vision? Direction? Enforcement of current regulations and policies? "Imperative" is a broad term with different possible connotations.
I've seen "imperatives" of varying degrees throughout the organization. But I suspect that many of them don't align with your view of what they should be.
We have regulations and policies at different levels throughout CAP (some members actually believe we have too many for being a civilian, non-profit, volunteer organization). What more "imperatives" do we need? What's the "magic formula" to fix CAP that no one's been able to crack? What are the National Commander, all 8 Region Commanders, all 52 Wing Commanders and 1100+ Unit Commanders not doing?
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 30, 2014, 06:52:12 PMAre you referring to mandates? Vision? Direction? Enforcement of current regulations and policies? "Imperative" is a broad term with different possible connotations.
All of those, most of which is sorely lacking.
You start by enforcing all the rules, the same way, for everyone, and when people don't comply, the
"sad" is focused there, not on changing the system because of a few bad actors.
The tone and timbre is set at the national level, either CAP is a no-nonsense organization with a mission and purpose,
or a GOB flying club with some cadets here and there. That's the pendulum. Things are enforced at the lowest level possible,
but that doesn't relieve the next HQ from involvement when the lower rungs fail or abdicate.
Work your way out from there.
Most people can work with a micro manager, and they can work with a hands-off manager, but what CAP
generally presents is "micro hands off" meaning "leaders" who don't want to get their hands dirty, but
have no compunction to wander into a room on a whim and "leading" into a brick wall, many times
making "decisions" for other people that have no basis in reality, nor which align with months or years
or work in a different direction.
Having provided "leadership" these people then wander off again for 6 months to a year until more "leadership"
is needed. This cycle comes from having a lot of "leaders" who have never managed anything more complicated
then a Netflix que in their private lives.
Command imperative is trading friends for the good of the company, something many (most?) CAP "leaders" are
won't to do, if for no other reason then the manpower is so low as to leave anyone you made sad's job open,
sometimes permanently.
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
Quote from: Eclipse on August 30, 2014, 07:59:15 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 30, 2014, 06:52:12 PMAre you referring to mandates? Vision? Direction? Enforcement of current regulations and policies? "Imperative" is a broad term with different possible connotations.
All of those, most of which is sorely lacking.
You start by enforcing all the rules, the same way, for everyone, and when people don't comply, the
"sad" is focused there, not on changing the system because of a few bad actors.
The tone and timbre is set at the national level, either CAP is a non-nonsense organization with a mission and purpose,
or a GOB flying club with some cadets here and there. That's the pendulum. Things are enforced at the lowest level possible,
but that doesn't relive the next HQ from involvement when the lower rungs fail or abdicate.
Work your way out from there.
Most people can work with a micro manager, and they can work with a hands-off manager, but what CAP
generally presents is "micro hands off" meaning "leaders" who don't want to get their hands dirty, but
have no compunction to wander into a room on a whim and "leading" into a brick wall, many times
making "decisions" for other people that have no basis in reality, nor which align with months or years
or work in a different direction.
Having provided "leadership" these people then wander off again for 6 months to a year until more "leadership"
is needed. This cycle comes from having a lot of "leaders" who have never managed anything more complicated
then a Netflix que in the private lives.
Command imperative is trading friends for the good of the company, something many (most?) CAP "leaders" are
won't ton do, if for no other reason then the manpower is so low as to leave anyone you made sad's job open,
sometimes permanently.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 30, 2014, 05:02:55 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on August 30, 2014, 04:13:42 PM
Sometimes, regulations are vague on purpose, and the purpose is to give local commanders some discretion to command.
Sadly, that idea breaks down quickly with inconsistently trained commanders, 1100+ different agendas, and no imperative from higher HQ.
When the regulations are vague, that's a feature, not a bug.
Sometimes when you have different ways of doing things, people find better ways of doing it that others can learn from.
Unfortunately, the general trend in CAP is to dictate everything down from NHQ, stifling the opportunity to discover new and innovative ways of doing things.
Yeah, no.
That's the excuse people who can't write or enforce regulations properly use.
A standardized program has..."standards", not suggestions.
Also, you don't get to be "creative" until you have achieved a baseline level of performance
CAP hasn't seen in 20 some years.
Further to that, the time standardization really pays off, or hurts you, is when people
who haven't worked together are thrown together with no warning. That's why the military
has standardized training and systems, because every Load Toad has been sitting in the
same classroom at Lackland, etc., etc.
You don't appoint people with no zero experience, provide them zero training or guidance,
and then further handicap them by inferring they can be "creative" with regulations and policies.
In >fact< exactly the opposite is why you have standards in the first place, so that poorly trained,
inexperienced, but well-meaning people with initiative can figure it out on their own.
Except the military does not have "standardized" training.
The military know that the guys in the field "know better" then the guys at HQ.
They not only expect leaders in the field to be creative.....they demand it.
Tech school provides a nice base.....but it does not even come close to making an Airman (that is airman with a BIG A...meaning all AFSCs and all Ranks) mission ready.
Quote from: JeffDG on August 30, 2014, 04:13:42 PM
Sometimes, regulations are vague on purpose, and the purpose is to give local commanders some discretion to command.
Can you cite information for your assertion, JeffDG?
I was in the ANG, just like you were almost in the Canadian Forces (Navy, right?). In the RealMilitary, they do not want to hand out promotions to those who are unready, unprepared, etc., because in a combat situation, an ineffective leader, whether NCO, warrant officer or commissioned officer, can be called upon to lead his/her charges in a combat situation. And the stipulations that most GOOD commanders follow
usually give germane reasoning as to WHY someone should or should not be promoted.
Of course, there are those who slip through the cracks. To this day, it still boggles me what an incompetent DORK (silly word, I know) my MTI (team chief) was, especially when I saw so many others who
were good leaders and teachers. Of course, when you let a Senior Airman who has not been to Airman Leadership School and has the maturity level of a playground bully wear The Hat, you're bound to have bad things happen (I later found out from another former MTI that he "got into some trouble," not surprising).
CAP is not a combat organisation, nor do we wield the power over subordinates that an NCO/WO/CO does by virtue of the UCMJ.
For an organisation such as this to simply allow a "commander" to brick-wall a subordinate's career because "I don't like you," "your farts stink," "your politics are too left/right wing," etc., and not have to provide objective reasoning, says there is something fundamentally flawed with the way the organisation operates.
This is not quite the same, but I have served as a Testing Officer in quite a few instances. Even though regulations specifically did not
require me to, I always sat down with the cadet (this was in a cadet squadron) after the test, and gave them a written evaluation of how I believed they could improve, and on what I believed their strengths were. I certainly worked hard to divorce my personal opinions of the cadet in question from said evaluation.
Of course, nobody can be
completely objective, but I did the best I could.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 31, 2014, 03:15:47 AM
Except the military does not have "standardized" training.
You're right, of course.
If there is one place which is still a bastion of individuality, creativity, and free expression it's the military.
With no specific training regimes, no expectation of performance, and of course the "wear what you will"
attitude, it's the one place people can still "be who they are" with no one telling them what to do,
where to go, or how to do their jobs or operate the weapons systems and other equipment they
might need to defend this nation.
Seriously, if there is one place that CAP can help the military get over its reputation of nonchalance,
it's in structure and discipline, not to mention performance exceeding expectations.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 31, 2014, 01:32:09 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 31, 2014, 03:15:47 AM
Except the military does not have "standardized" training.
You're right, of course.
If there is one place which is still a bastion of individuality, creativity, and free expression it's the military.
With no specific training regimes, no expectation of performance, and of course the "wear what you will"
attitude, it's the one place people can still "be who they are" with no one telling them what to do,
where to go, or how to do their jobs or operate the weapons systems and other equipment they
might need to defend this nation.
Seriously, if there is one place that CAP can help the military get over its reputation of nonchalance,
it's in structure and discipline, not to mention performance exceeding expectations.
Which one of us were in the military?
+1 :clap:
Quote from: Eclipse on August 31, 2014, 01:32:09 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 31, 2014, 03:15:47 AM
Except the military does not have "standardized" training.
You're right, of course.
If there is one place which is still a bastion of individuality, creativity, and free expression it's the military.
With no specific training regimes, no expectation of performance, and of course the "wear what you will"
attitude, it's the one place people can still "be who they are" with no one telling them what to do,
where to go, or how to do their jobs or operate the weapons systems and other equipment they
might need to defend this nation.
Seriously, if there is one place that CAP can help the military get over its reputation of nonchalance,
it's in structure and discipline, not to mention performance exceeding expectations.
Love the Sarcasm, Eclipse. I spewed out my coffee on the monitor once I picked up on how not-serious you were being!
:D :D :D
Quote from: lordmonar on August 31, 2014, 02:03:48 PM
Which one of us were in the military?
Based on your responses, especially lately, sometimes it is hard to tell...
It takes at least a year, many times longer, of extensive / intensive hands-on standards-based training
before any FNG, enlisted or officer, gets to start doing their job in the military (yeah, yeah, salutin' school,
then those people have degrees and are already essentially "trained" in at least their discipline).
And certainly no one is walking into a recruiter's office and walking out the same day with a fancy uniform
and a commander's badge, while that is a fairly common occurrence in CAP.
CAP provides ZERO baseline training or expectations of performance. CC's struggle for years sometimes
with no support or direction from higher HQ beyond a check-box SUI, and then are told "don't be so poor anymore"
and then are left to their own devices again.
Standardization is supposed to alleviate that situation, being "creative" makes it worse. Standardization and
inflexible standards provide security and confidence to inexperienced commanders who have nothing but the
text to guide them, and it alleviates the time wasted arguing about things that are ultimately ridiculous but keep coming up
because no one wil draw simple lines or enforce clear regulations.
Quote from: lordmonar on August 31, 2014, 03:15:47 AM
Except the military does not have "standardized" training.
The military know that the guys in the field "know better" then the guys at HQ.
They not only expect leaders in the field to be creative.....they demand it.
Tech school provides a nice base.....but it does not even come close to making an Airman (that is airman with a BIG A...meaning all AFSCs and all Ranks) mission ready.
I remember reading "It Doesn't Take a Hero" back in the 90s. Schwarzkopf's autobiography.
He spoke of two wars. Vietnam, where you had the "Commander in the Sky", or folks back in the rear echelons micro-managing battles. Telling individual squads and platoons where to go and whom to shoot.
Then he talked about the first Gulf War. He, literally, had the capability to watch individual units and tell some 2nd Lt where to go on the battlefield with his platoon. However, he let his subordinate commanders know their job, and let them work out the details. From the CENTCOM level to the corps level to the division level to the brigade level to the battalion to the company to the platoon to the squad, commanders and leaders at each level had the flexibility and the authority to carry out their missions as the local circumstances warranted. The amount of discretion narrowed at each level, but ultimately, each individual soldier on the ground had the authority to carry out his mission.
^ No argument, the key being "knowing your mission" (i.e. your job).
How can you seriously compare the allowance for creativity of someone who is highly trained and vetted,
a professional who does nothing but eat, sleep and work their job, with someone who has had >zero<
or little training just trying to do enough to keep the doors open, and in his spare time?
I've been in technology for 25+ years, I can smell the problem most times from 10 feet away, or figure it out
based on the description alone. Compare that to your average geek squad guy who can't spell PC?
Who gets to be "creative" and who runs the script?
Any "creativity" in CAP should be coming from echelons higher then the units, and only >after< a baseline
of consistent proficiency has been achieved, and further, Unit 1's "creativity" can't come at the expense
of Unit's 2's, nor the SOP of the organization.
"Creativity" does not equal "reinvent the wheel every activity or mission" just because you don't like
the guy who invented the current wheel.
Otherwise you wind up with what many members >perceive< CAP to be, namely a "constantly moving target"
that is too complicated for the average volunteer to understand, much less keep up with.
Now, the reality of this is much more complicated, and for the most part CAP has been the "same" for 20 years,
but the lack of enforcement of standards and regs is the reason the perception exists. Sprinkle on some
GOBN with people just making up the rules as they stand there, and "Bob's your uncle".
Quote from: JeffDG on August 31, 2014, 09:34:51 PM
I remember reading "It Doesn't Take a Hero" back in the 90s. Schwarzkopf's autobiography.
I loved the part where Gen. Schwarzkopf was telling about an attack about to take place, with some bean-counter back at the Pentagon saying they had to wait because fuel funds had not yet been transferred from the Navy to the Army accounts (or something like that). Stormin' Norman told that particular bean-counter where to go and what to do with himself when he got there and ordered the attack to proceed.
We need more guys like that these days.
Now, back to your topic ...
Jack
Quote from: Eclipse on August 31, 2014, 01:32:09 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on August 31, 2014, 03:15:47 AM
Except the military does not have "standardized" training.
You're right, of course.
If there is one place which is still a bastion of individuality, creativity, and free expression it's the military.
With no specific training regimes, no expectation of performance, and of course the "wear what you will"
attitude, it's the one place people can still "be who they are" with no one telling them what to do,
where to go, or how to do their jobs or operate the weapons systems and other equipment they
might need to defend this nation.
Seriously, if there is one place that CAP can help the military get over its reputation of nonchalance,
it's in structure and discipline, not to mention performance exceeding expectations.
;D
Eclipse's little bit of philosophy should be etched into a stone marker and posted out front of CAP NHQ.
FYE -
"The reason the American Army does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the American Army practices it on a daily basis."
- from a WW2 era post-war debriefing of a German General
and this -
"One of the serious problems in planning the fight against American doctrine, is that the Americans do not read their manuals, nor do they feel any obligation to follow their doctrine..."
- from a Soviet Junior Lt's notebook
Cast in that light, CAP has achieved success.
So lets watch re-runs of Stripes, Pvt Benjamin, Kellys Heroes, and Three Kings...
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on September 03, 2014, 04:09:09 AM
So lets watch re-runs of Stripes, Pvt Benjamin, Kellys Heroes, and Three Kings...
:clap:
Or just one episode of Sgt Bilko.
McHale's Navy!