Does anyone see the issue with this picture. It comes directly from a post on Facebook, for the Kentucky Wing and locally as shown in the link..
https://metroairportnews.com/to-focus-on-service/?fbclid=IwAR27VksCyu40uL4Puy-s_Q-PdPo60rIdh1ntbvFpwzELOFOej8iS62SMJf8
[attachment deleted by admin]
Religious exemption I believe. While I don't agree with it fully, it is what it is. The possible weight issue is different though, there is no religious exemption for the height and weight standards.
Mighty long day to have such an extreme 5 o'clock shadow.
The bearded chaplain might have a religious exemption for the facial hair.
Here is the link to the KYWG response, all three seniors are chaplains.
https://www.facebook.com/480368975390670/posts/2434275513333330/?sfnsn=mo
Can a waiver be granted for ABU's, I though that if a person could not meet requirements, they had to wear corporate uniforms.
Folks, the three gentlemen on the right of that photo are chaplains, and yes, they have the appropriate religious exemptions FROM THE USAF for wear of the USAF-style uniform.
Its not like there isn't a precendent in the USAF, or a process to be followed.
(https://w3.chabad.org/media/images/998/KTlQ9988522.jpg)
BTW, CAPM 39-1, para 1.5 is the starting point for the request process.
You are correct, Larry, that corporate options are preferred. Para 1.5.1.6 spells that out:
Quote1.5.1.6. CAP does not have waiver authority of this type for USAF-style uniforms.
Members requiring a waiver should consider wearing the Corporate-style uniform. Commanders who
have identified a cadet with a potential requirement for a waiver should contact NHQ/DP for direction.
You will note that there are basically two halves to that paragraph. The first half pertains to seniors, and suggests the corporate uniform. The second half pertains to cadets.
The reasoning being: Cadets under the age of 18, nearly universally, are prohibited from wear of the corporate uniforms. IOW, they have no options other than the USAF-style.
Seniors, OTOH,
do have an option of wearing the corporate uniform which requires no such waiver for grooming (religious or otherwise). Since seniors have the option of the corporate uniform, save the process of requesting religious exemptions for cadets who have no such option.
Para 3.2.2.3, later in CAPM 39-1, further backs this up: "3.2.2.3. Beards. Beards are not authorized. Members requiring wear of a beard for medical or religious reasons will wear the Corporate-style uniform."
Its pretty cut and dried.
ETA: Remember that CAPM 39-1 was written in a way to base a lot of the guidance off the USAF uniform manual. And in 2014, when it was released, the USAF had either not yet, or had only just, authorized their first chaplain with a religious accommodation for grooming standards. Thus, our standards, at the time, did not anticipate this change to USAF uniform wear policy by Big Mother Blue.
Thanks NIN,
I knew that the Air Force grants waivers for religious purposes, but I was not aware that we did so, in regards to Seniors. In fact when you read the afore mentioned para, you see that waivers can only be granted for Corporate uniforms, not Air Force uniforms.
1.5.1.5. Member may request a waiver of Corporate-style uniform wear standards to permit
wear of neat and conservative (defined as, discreet, tidy, and not dissonant or showy in style, size, design,
brightness, or color) religious apparel. Items may not temporarily or permanently be affixed or appended
to any authorized article of the uniform.
1.5.1.6. CAP does not have waiver authority of this type for USAF-style uniforms.
Members requiring a waiver should consider wearing the Corporate-style uniform. Commanders who
have identified a cadet with a potential requirement for a waiver should contact NHQ/DP for direction.
Not only that, but it goes on to state that Wing Commander's do not have waiver authority and that waivers can only be granted by the National Commander.
more to the point of the two quoted paragraphs:
CAP has waiver authority over its own corporate uniform (ie. religious wear that exceeds the existing standards, such as hijab)
CAP does not have waiver authority over the USAF-style on its own, and must request such a waiver from the USAF.
While waivers can be requested for both cadets and seniors, the guidance is clear that seniors should just opt for the readily available (and internally waiveable, if needed) corporate uniform.
And you are correct, Ozzy: the waivers are for grooming (and possibly headgear wear) standards only, not weight.
Quote from: NIN on August 16, 2019, 01:50:46 PM
more to the point of the two quoted paragraphs:
CAP has waiver authority over its own corporate uniform (ie. religious wear that exceeds the existing standards, such as hijab)
CAP does not have waiver authority over the USAF-style on its own, and must request such a waiver from the USAF.
While waivers can be requested for both cadets and seniors, the guidance is clear that seniors should just opt for the readily available (and internally waiveable, if needed) corporate uniform.
And you are correct, Ozzy: the waivers are for grooming (and possibly headgear wear) standards only, not weight.
So, discrimination against the "First Baptist Sumo Church" is OK then?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As a point of fact: When I returned from my retirement, there was an under-18 year old cadet in my wing who wore whites & greys and BBDU.
Due to his religious grooming requirements, it was deemed more appropriate to put him, an under-18 year old cadet, in corporates. I am not sure if a USAF-waiver was requested and denied, or just not attempted.
The odd thing was: the first time you saw a C/TSgt in whites/greys or BBDU, your brain went "Wait, what?" and then you realized what was going on and it was like "Oh, ok, of course. Solid answer."
Nobody even *blinked*.
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on August 16, 2019, 01:53:04 PM
So, discrimination against the "First Baptist Sumo Church" is OK then?
I dunno. You tell me, Bernie.
I haven't seen a sumo wrestler in USAF blue as authorized by the USAF, so my guess is that thus far, nobody from the nascent "First Baptist Sumo Chuch" has requested a waiver.
(http://img.geocaching.com/cache/large/2385d0dd-4f04-4155-b9ea-d3c24a0d7a0f.jpg)
"You go first, Indy."
The waivers, at least the ones I'm award of, are being issued by the National Commander.
Kentucky Wing response:
"There was a positioning issue of some insignia that he was trying to get corrected and was working to do so while the rabbi was with us in Kentucky. This photo must have been taken during that period of time. It was brought to his attention, and immediately tried to correct the issue."
From a Public Affairs standpoint, if there was an issue in the insignia, and a correction was made thereafter, don't post the incorrect uniform photo. Re-take the photo later, or don't put it out there at all.
I've had a number of photos where I'm like "Ugh, I can't share that...and I really wish I could." Perception is reality.
I thought we had a rule on this board about not having "bad uniform" threads.
Is there an exemption for the mods? ???
I think that small uniform matters should be address locally. I raised this one due to the fact it was posted on Facebook by the Wing. Was a little blown back by that. Having said that, I missed that rule somehow about uniform postings.
Quote from: Larry Mangum on August 16, 2019, 04:57:41 PM
...the fact it was posted on Facebook by the Wing. Was a little blown back by that.
It happens every day!
This has actually been a good discussion so far. People found that the regulation/manual does provide an answer for those who want a waiver for religious purposes. It also shows that you can not necessarily judge an action by a picture without context.
Quote from: Larry Mangum on August 16, 2019, 05:21:49 PM
This has actually been a good discussion so far. People found that the regulation/manual does provide an answer for those who want a waiver for religious purposes. It also shows that you can not necessarily judge an action by a picture without context.
Totally agree, Larry.
Everybody has been on the balls. Super discussion.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 16, 2019, 02:00:57 PM
The waivers, at least the ones I'm award of, are being issued by the National Commander.
They go THRU the National Commander. They aren't issued
by the National Commander, at least not for USAF-style.
I have to double-check, but the waiver we got was from the USAF, on USAF letterhead.
Quote from: NIN on August 16, 2019, 07:00:31 PM
Quote from: Larry Mangum on August 16, 2019, 05:21:49 PM
This has actually been a good discussion so far. People found that the regulation/manual does provide an answer for those who want a waiver for religious purposes. It also shows that you can not necessarily judge an action by a picture without context.
Totally agree, Larry.
Everybody has been on the balls. Super discussion.
Stop the love fest. It just tempts those of us who like to have fun. >:D
Quote from: NIN on August 16, 2019, 07:02:23 PM
They go THRU the National Commander.
So do Alpha particles. #RBMK
Quote from: Eclipse on August 16, 2019, 08:37:45 PM
Quote from: NIN on August 16, 2019, 07:02:23 PM
They go THRU the National Commander.
So do Alpha particles. #RBMK
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/2c/db/f6/2cdbf6ea37932f5b02590393788df70e--kellys-heroes-military-army.jpg)
Always with those Negative Waves Eclipse. ;)
Alpha particles are, in fact, positively charged.
I think you meant to say gamma, or neutrinos. Alpha particles are in fact the easiest to shield, as they can be stopped by any thin shielding.
Gamma will zap right through your DNA and make life unfun. Neutrinos are highly penetrating and they're sleeting through you right now, trillions a second. No known charge on neutrinos, although they do have some slight mass.
(Woof woof woof)!
Spam
Quote from: Spam on August 16, 2019, 10:14:37 PM
Alpha particles are in fact the easiest to shield, as they can be stopped by any thin shielding.
Unless they are the product of Ternary fission.
I think it's fair there were some folks confused. The uniform manual doesn't prescribe a method to obtain a waiver to the military-style uniform (in fact it says for seniors you can't), however it's clear that working through the chain of command there is an undocumented process that can be followed.
Quote from: NIN on August 16, 2019, 01:58:06 PM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on August 16, 2019, 01:53:04 PM
So, discrimination against the "First Baptist Sumo Church" is OK then?
I dunno. You tell me, Bernie.
I haven't seen a sumo wrestler in USAF blue as authorized by the USAF, so my guess is that thus far, nobody from the nascent "First Baptist Sumo Chuch" has requested a waiver.
(http://img.geocaching.com/cache/large/2385d0dd-4f04-4155-b9ea-d3c24a0d7a0f.jpg)
"You go first, Indy."
Well, there you have it. First Baptist Sumo Church is desperately in need of a visit from a recruiter.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thread -> toilet.
Done.