Unpublished requirements/unwritten policies

[DoubleSecret]

Do any of your respective regions and wings have unpublished requirements/unwritten policies for processing certain actions, or is everything all aboveboard and set forth in appropriate regulations and supplements?  If your regions and wings impose unpublished requirements, how does it promote any mission objective in CAP?  How does it motivate volunteers?

My Level IV application meets every written requirement for approval, but after an inordinate amount of time in limbo I'm informed that higher headquarters wants a "dossier" on me to support this action.  No one has promulgated any regulation about this, it's just a double secret roadblock to progression.

I'd like to hear from anyone who has dealt with this.  I'd also love it if any commander who imposes such requirements would weigh in and explain their rationale.  If it's a rule, why not be proud of it and publish it for all to see?  Why hide the ball?

[Eclipse]

Everybody has to deal with fifedoms, if you're Level IV eligible, you already know that.

Level IV has nothing subjective, either you can substantiate the requirements completed or you can't.

If someone if being an impediment, file a complaint.

There's no relief for you here, regardless of deserved empathy.

[NIN]

Don't forget, the approving authority for a Lt Col is Region. Unless you're a really vocal dude or from the Region Commander's home wing, chances are you're an unknown.  I don't think its unreasonable for the region commander to want a "package" (ie. "Who is this guy, why should I sign off on him" kind of thing) on a promotion that isn't just a CAPF 2 that appears in the mail one day.

That said, I think it is incumbent upon regions to publish information or a supplement to the promotion procedures so that volunteers are able to "do it right the first time" and aren't frustrated by "tribal knowledge" procedures that, while maybe clear at region, aren't obvious or even understood at any echelon below that.

[a2capt]

Level IV ..  not Lt Col. Though one is required for the other. The Level IV is pretty darn straight forward, on the paper.

If someone wants to hold it up, they have the opportunity at a review board for the grade promotion.

[Eclipse]

Did you send a CAPF 24 as a single sheet of paper and expect it to pass go?

If so, that's on you - the 24 should have included a copy of any and all documentation that substantiates the
request.  Not everything required is in eServices.  No CC worth his salt would forward a 24 like that.

If you sent up a full packet, then they shouldn't need more.  Level IV doesn't call for a narrative.

Second question - which "higher headquarters?"  A 24 for LIV takes 3 2 signatures before a Region Wing CC sees it.
If the Region Wing PDO is being unreasonable, he should have 3 2 loud voices supporting you.

Edit: Corrected.

[NIN]

Level IV ..  not Lt Col. Though one is required for the other. The Level IV is pretty darn straight forward, on the paper.

If someone wants to hold it up, they have the opportunity at a review board for the grade promotion.

Oh, hmmm. Yeah, completion of PD is just ... requirements.

[LSThiker]

Second question - which "higher headquarters?"  A 24 for LIV takes 3 signatures before a Region CC sees it.
If the Region PDO is being unreasonable, he should have 3 loud voices supporting you.

Level IV is not approved by the region.  It is approved by Wing CC and forwarded to NHQ as per CAPR 50-17, 6-4.

Level V is the only one that requires region approval. 

[EMT-83]

There is absolutely no excuse for this. You can't just make up your own rules.

[a2capt]

Unless you've got some CC in the chain that "has to be involved in everything", like one of our previous group commanders, that he was adamant that anything going "up" had to go through him. Even stuff that units send directly to NHQ. Rather than argue, just cc: 'em and let them eventually get tired of it, and realize they don't need everything. Lest they come back to you with "what am I supposed to do with this?" .. "nothing. It's been taken care of. Let me know when you're tired of being bothered."

[Eclipse]

Second question - which "higher headquarters?"  A 24 for LIV takes 3 signatures before a Region CC sees it.
If the Region PDO is being unreasonable, he should have 3 loud voices supporting you.

Level IV is not approved by the region.  It is approved by Wing CC and forwarded to NHQ as per CAPR 50-17, 6-4.

Level V is the only one that requires region approval.

You are, of course, correct - weird that Region approves Lt Col but Wing approves the corresponding PD.
Probably because, as mentioned, it's just supposed to be a ticket punch.

The 24 does indicate that unsubstantiated submissions will be rejected.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Oh, hmmm. Yeah, completion of PD is just ... requirements.

How well I know.

[lordmonar]

This is probable just bureaucratic mish-mash.

Question 1.  What is this Dossier that they want?

If it is just copies of all the certs and stuff.....then I can agree with it.  It is just some staffer being extra anal because he got burned (or his wing king did) for just accepting a bad 24 at face value.

If they are asking for stuff that is outside of the regulations......then that is a no-no and you need to start up-chaining a complaint.

Question 2.  Define "inordinate amount of time"?

30-60 days is where I would think is "normal" for a decision to be made....account for someone being on leave, etc.
By all means you should follow up on any applications after 60 days....and you don't need to go through the chain for it.....go right to the Wing PDO and ask him/her if they have seen it....and then trace it back from there. 

If you think someone is doing something wrong...by all means use your chain of command and/or IG system to get satisfaction.

Good luck.

[Lord of the North]

Second question - which "higher headquarters?"  A 24 for LIV takes 3 signatures before a Region CC sees it.
If the Region PDO is being unreasonable, he should have 3 loud voices supporting you.

Level IV is not approved by the region.  It is approved by Wing CC and forwarded to NHQ as per CAPR 50-17, 6-4.

Level V is the only one that requires region approval.

You are, of course, correct - weird that Region approves Lt Col but Wing approves the corresponding PD.
Probably because, as mentioned, it's just supposed to be a ticket punch.

The 24 does indicate that unsubstantiated submissions will be rejected.

Unless of course you use the recently implemented on-line PD award module which gives you no way to attach any documentation of items not in e-services.

[ColonelJack]

Unless of course you use the recently implemented on-line PD award module which gives you no way to attach any documentation of items not in e-services.

Yet another reason I am forever glad to have finished my PD long before the computer became lord and master of the Admin Office.  You know, back when the SMTLR came on green and white alternate stripe paper with dot-matrix printing?  (Every cadet reading this just wondered, "Huh?  What's he talking about?")

Jack

[AlphaSigOU]

Second question - which "higher headquarters?"  A 24 for LIV takes 3 signatures before a Region CC sees it.
If the Region PDO is being unreasonable, he should have 3 loud voices supporting you.

Level IV is not approved by the region.  It is approved by Wing CC and forwarded to NHQ as per CAPR 50-17, 6-4.

Level V is the only one that requires region approval.

You are, of course, correct - weird that Region approves Lt Col but Wing approves the corresponding PD.
Probably because, as mentioned, it's just supposed to be a ticket punch.

The 24 does indicate that unsubstantiated submissions will be rejected.

Unless of course you use the recently implemented on-line PD award module which gives you no way to attach any documentation of items not in e-services.

Don't even get me started on that Charlie Fox of an eServices module... Absolutely zero documentation and/or tutorials on how to work the module. I had to create an 'unofficial' tutorial to educate the squadron PDOs in Alabama Wing on how to use it. At least ALWG has APATS (Alabama Wing Personnel Action Tracking System) that is a whole hell of a lot better than that kludge!

[DoubleSecret]

Snipped quote:

This is probable just bureaucratic mish-mash.

Question 1.  What is this Dossier that they want?

Question 2.  Define "inordinate amount of time"?

1.  Stuff outside of the regulations and unrelated to the requirements for the award.
2.  Held up after Squadron level for less than 60 days.

If I do something formal, we all know what that would do to my chances of promotion.  Discretion, etc.

Thanks to all for weighing in.

[LSThiker]

1.  Stuff outside of the regulations and unrelated to the requirements for the award.

Need to elaborate.  Otherwise, it sounds as those you are whining.  So what stuff outside of the regulations?

2.  Held up after Squadron level for less than 60 days.

Sounds about par for the course really.  I would not say this is an "inordinate amount of time".  A bit long, but not "inordinate amount".

[DoubleSecret]

1.  Stuff outside of the regulations and unrelated to the requirements for the award.

Need to elaborate.  Otherwise, it sounds as those you are whining.  So what stuff outside of the regulations?

Pass.  If I'm too specific, someone might recognize themselves and connect the dots to me, and use it for reprisal.

[NIN]

1.  Stuff outside of the regulations and unrelated to the requirements for the award.

Need to elaborate.  Otherwise, it sounds as those you are whining.  So what stuff outside of the regulations?

Pass.  If I'm too specific, someone might recognize themselves and connect the dots to me, and use it for reprisal.

OK, but I guess my question is: What are the requirements? A "dossier"? really?  did someone really use that word?

Hard to make an objective answer / cogent arguement with little data.

I'm not saying its right, BTW. I think PD stuff should be pretty black and white, hard and fast requirements from one side of the country to another: You completed course X, requirement Y, and did A, B & C.  Here's your [Loening/Garber/GRW], etc.

[Eclipse]

If I do something formal, we all know what that would do to my chances of promotion.  Discretion, etc.

Increase them?  You're not getting promoted now, anyway.

[PHall]

Attaching a print out from e-Services showing that you have completed all of the requirements should do the job.

[mdickinson]

It's a sad state of affairs, but it's also nothing new.

A few wing commanders ago in NY, the wing promulgated several additional requirements for Major and Lt Col (see attachment).

Someone knew they couldn't get away with issuing a wing supplement to 35-5, so instead of a supplement, there was a "policy letter" giving the additional requirements. (You've been a Major for four years, completed Level IV, and all the Lt Col requirements in 35-5? Great! Now you just need to be appointed as a group commander, or to a position on wing staff. Then you will become eligible for Lt Col... after some unstated period of time in that position... provided you are )

A few years later, a region commander got wind of the policy letter and struck it down. The PL silently disappeared from the wing's web site and list of supplements. It was never officially rescinded.

The next wing commander took a slightly different approach. Promotion paperwork for non-buddies was never approved, denied, or returned - it was simply never seen again. (Didn't get your promotion? Filing an IG complaint can only backfire. Your only option was to wait for a change of command at wing, then reapply.)

At that point, even something as simple as applying for an upgraded set of pilot wings was a battle. (Here is a properly filled out CAPF 2a, proof of active CAP pilot >5 years, and a current log book showing more than 2000 PIC hours. Answer? Silence. Try again three months later, same result. Clearly, we have to safeguard these things - we can't just be handing them out to any Tom Dick or Harry who completes the requirements!)

As egregious as the obstacles thrown up to promotions and other recognitions in those days, I still never heard of anything as ridiculous as holding up a PD award, or requesting anything more than proof that the person completed the requirements.

I think PD stuff should be pretty black and white, hard and fast requirements from one side of the country to another: You completed course X, requirement Y, and did A, B & C.  Here's your [Loening/Garber/GRW], etc.

Exactly. Unlike promotions, which are entirely at commander discretion and occur only with the approval of all the commanders up through group (Capt), wing (Maj), or region (Lt Col), PD awards are supposed to be a matter of completing the required training and submitting the form 24. Period.

[Eclipse]

Attaching a print out from e-Services showing that you have completed all of the requirements should do the job.

At least two of the requirements for Level IV are not tracked in eServices.

"Serve as director or staff member of a CAP course or educational activity or national, region, or wing conference."

"Public presentation to a non-CAP group or an internal or external AE presentation"

There's no way around having to provide substantiation for those.

[Storm Chaser]

Do any of your respective regions and wings have unpublished requirements/unwritten policies for processing certain actions, or is everything all aboveboard and set forth in appropriate regulations and supplements?

Yes. Unfortunately, it happens more often than it should.

If your regions and wings impose unpublished requirements, how does it promote any mission objective in CAP?  How does it motivate volunteers?

If the unwritten rule puts undue burden on the membership or mission, I usually challenge it. I've been effective at having wing through out such rules when challenged with proper regulations and requesting such policies in writing.

On the other hand, many of such policies fall in the operating procedures category. If wing can justify the benefit and they are minor enough that no one would be adversely affected by following them, I choose to comply and move on. The way I see it, you're not going to win every battle, so it's better to choose your battles wisely.

In general terms, I don't like unwritten policies. If there's a good reason to expand on a regulation, it should be put in writing and made available to all.

[a2capt]

PAWG had a similar deal going on, which was visible on their site for a while, too. That's great they want you to do "more", but the organization is not an up or out setup. So this kind of thing can't work universally.

[MSG Mac]

About 25 years ago a friend was several times submitted for promotion to Major, each time Wing claimed they never received it. An IG complaint to NER worked. He got promoted after the IG investigation was completed

[Eclipse]

PAWG had a similar deal going on, which was visible on their site for a while, too. That's great they want you to do "more", but the organization is not an up or out setup. So this kind of thing can't work universally.

It really doesn't work at all, since it defeats its own purpose, and in most cases directly and specific ally violates very clear regulations.

Grade and PD serve as nothing more then indicators of longevity and initiative, all this talk about "raising the bar" and "not being ready", etc.,
is meaningless in the current context, but it does serve to alienate some of our most deserving members.

For the record, I have no issue suppressing the grades down to the company level and putting some teeth into the structure,
what I am opposed to is all this passive-aggressive avoidance of uncomfortable conversations.

I've denied and delayed a few promotions in my time, but I never sat on them. 

The system should have regulatory-based timelines on submission, require a response in all cases, and for the most
part, promotions should be assumed as approved unless denied.

We should also add a few fields to eServices and track the remaining pieces like conferences and outside presentations.
Treat them like OPS Quals - upload the substantiation, submit to staff, click, approve, move on.  PD then becomes automatic.

I've met plenty of members who, in the abstract, aren't "ready for promotion", however there's no one who doesn't deserve the PD
level if they did the work.

If they just warmed a chair at CLC, make them re-do it, if they wrote a check for a wing conference and never showed up,
fine, no credit for you.  But address it at the time, not 3-4 years later when they think they are "done".

[ColonelJack]

About 25 years ago a friend was several times submitted for promotion to Major, each time Wing claimed they never received it. An IG complaint to NER worked. He got promoted after the IG investigation was completed

See, this is why I hate "politics" at higher headquarters.  I cannot complain about anything along those lines; every time I had a promotion request sent up about myself, it came back approved within a very short period of time.  I doubt that I was any "great shakes" as a CAP officer (then or now), but nobody held anything up whenever my name was submitted.  I made Lt. Col. at the age of 33, for crying out loud - exactly ten years after I made 2d Lt. - and I'd never been a cadet.

Jack

[Storm Chaser]

About 25 years ago a friend was several times submitted for promotion to Major, each time Wing claimed they never received it. An IG complaint to NER worked. He got promoted after the IG investigation was completed

See, this is why I hate "politics" at higher headquarters.  I cannot complain about anything along those lines; every time I had a promotion request sent up about myself, it came back approved within a very short period of time.  I doubt that I was any "great shakes" as a CAP officer (then or now), but nobody held anything up whenever my name was submitted.  I made Lt. Col. at the age of 33, for crying out loud - exactly ten years after I made 2d Lt. - and I'd never been a cadet.

Jack

I'm with you on that. I've never had a promotion delayed or denied (I think the longest I've had to wait was a month). I've had issues with other requests, mostly when I was relatively  unknown at the wing. Two of these were due to unwritten policies, which I challenged through the chain of command with positive outcomes. The system is not perfect, but it does work when politics are set aside.

[NIN]

Attaching a print out from e-Services showing that you have completed all of the requirements should do the job.

At least two of the requirements for Level IV are not tracked in eServices.

"Serve as director or staff member of a CAP course or educational activity or national, region, or wing conference."

"Public presentation to a non-CAP group or an internal or external AE presentation"

There's no way around having to provide substantiation for those.

I had a former member of my unit call me up the other day. He said "Dude, how the hell do I track public presentation to a non-CAP group?"

I said "OK, I know for a FACT that you presented at least once, probably twice, when you were in the unit with me."

"Yep, you wrote it right here on my CAPF 45b" (Me: "Whew!")

"OK, so you were a unit commander for several years.  Did you present to the Kiwanis? Rotary?  Local PD? School recruiting? Ever do an AE class?"

"Yeah, lots of times."

"Dig thru your email and figure out when you did those things.  'On January 27th, 2007, I presented to the Podunk, Iowa Rotary a brief presentation about Civil Air Patrol with a request to fund our color guard.  The Rotary gave the unit a check for $500 for color guard supplies as a result of this presentation.'  or 'March 18th, 2009, Internal Aerospace class on flying medical requirements.'  I doubt anybody is going to say 'You were a squadron commander for several years yet you never presented anything to anybody..' Just doesn't happen.."
 

[Eclipse]

You could also use photos of the presentation, or a thank-you note from the group you spoke to, etc.

In my case, I used a mission presentation to a local pilot's group - their newsletter had a photo and
they also presented a certificate of appreciation.  Same goes for the one I did for the local library.

Any wing worth it's charter should be issuing certificates or PA's regarding their conferences.

As a last resort, a memo from a commander should suffice in those cases, though I have been in the
ridiculous position of having to have "discussions" about whether that was enough.

[NIN]

You could also use photos of the presentation, or a thank-you note from the group you spoke to, etc.

In my case, I used a mission presentation to a local pilot's group - their newsletter had a photo and
they also presented a certificate of appreciation.  Same goes for the one I did for the local library.

Any wing worth it's charter should be issuing certificates or PA's regarding their conferences.

As a last resort, a memo from a commander should suffice in those cases, though I have been in the
ridiculous position of having to have "discussions" about whether that was enough.

Yeah, thats a tough one.

My friend was a unit commander in another state.  Did his group commander know about his presentation? Maybe. Did he think to say "Hey, Group Commander, I went and did this presentation. Can I get credit for Level IV?" at the time? Nope

[PHall]

You could also use photos of the presentation, or a thank-you note from the group you spoke to, etc.

In my case, I used a mission presentation to a local pilot's group - their newsletter had a photo and
they also presented a certificate of appreciation.  Same goes for the one I did for the local library.

Any wing worth it's charter should be issuing certificates or PA's regarding their conferences.

As a last resort, a memo from a commander should suffice in those cases, though I have been in the
ridiculous position of having to have "discussions" about whether that was enough.

Yeah, thats a tough one.

My friend was a unit commander in another state.  Did his group commander know about his presentation? Maybe. Did he think to say "Hey, Group Commander, I went and did this presentation. Can I get credit for Level IV?" at the time? Nope

List it on the Form 24 and see if they accept them.  They don't have any more proof then you do.

[Eclipse]

List it on the Form 24 and see if they accept them.  They don't have any more proof then you do.

Disagree.

You never send up anything "incomplete" or "hoping they will accept".

You find out what is expected and provide it.

Sending up incomplete packets are what gets things delayed - instead of just approving it, I
have to now take the time to circle it back and explain to the requester how to do their job.

This is one of the reasons there are multiple echelons - to fix this stuff before it is submitted.
Nothing more frustrating then a lower HQ CC passing on an incomplete request because they don't want to be bothered.

I have no issue doing my job, but when you expect me to do yours, grab a chair.

[MSG Mac]

Many iterations of PD ago, you were required to submit a copy of your presentation with the F24. This was when it was a Level III requirement where you had to either present to a non-CAP group  or submitted an article  for publication.

[lordmonar]

1.  Stuff outside of the regulations and unrelated to the requirements for the award.

Need to elaborate.  Otherwise, it sounds as those you are whining.  So what stuff outside of the regulations?

Pass.  If I'm too specific, someone might recognize themselves and connect the dots to me, and use it for reprisal.

Then I have to say have a good life.

If the system is broken.....you have to take a stand to fix it.
If promotion in a "broken system" is something you desire......I don't understand what your beef is.
If you accept the system is broken and you still want to play....and progress then you accept the game as is.......and loose all rights to gripe about it.

Sorry if that is harsh.....but that is the way it is.   I can't fight for you, only you can do that.

[DoubleSecret]

Then I have to say have a good life.

If the system is broken.....you have to take a stand to fix it.
If promotion in a "broken system" is something you desire......I don't understand what your beef is.
If you accept the system is broken and you still want to play....and progress then you accept the game as is.......and loose all rights to gripe about it.

Sorry if that is harsh.....but that is the way it is.   I can't fight for you, only you can do that.

Nice.  Put the onus on the guy who observes the defect and asked for perspective.  I don't recall asking you or anyone here to fight for me.  Essentially, I asked for perspective.  I asked whether this sort of thing is imposed in your areas, and to what end.

If a system is broken and one can't prove it, one's stand is dead on arrival.

My "beef" is that there is an established written process, then these double-secret roadblocks that present themselves once one has complied with the established written process.  Yes, the word "dossier" was used to my face, including all sorts of data completely unrelated to the requested award.  It should not be that way.  I didn't aid and abet such garbage in two decades in the Air Force, and it stymies me that its unpaid sometimes-auxiliary does this.   Again, to what end?

I'd like to continue to do good things in CAP and aid people in their own progression, and I'd like to achieve a position where I could realistically stop this sort of thing from happening.  I do the first part and I "pay it forward."  As for the second, I'm not in such a position.  If I bite my tongue, bide my time, play the long game and abide by the unwritten requirement, I might be able to get someplace where I can realistically shut it down for others in my area of responsibility.  Painting a big target on my back seems counterproductive.

[JeffDG]

I think you're missing the point.

a)  You're afraid of "reprisals" if someone recognizes
b)  You've claimed (without substantiation) that people are adding requirements to PD that are above and beyond the regulations
c)  You've claimed that these violations of the regulations are clear and obvious

So, I have to ask, what are these reprisals that you fear that exceed your integrity?  Not getting a PD award which has almost no practical value, or not receiving a promotion (which again has approximately zero practical value)?  It's not like they can lock you up in prison for filing an IG complaint.

Just my opinion, but there is nothing within the realm of reprisals available to anyone in CAP, up to and including the National Commander and the BoG, that would cause me to set aside my integrity and not call someone on something that was obviously and clearly inappropriate.

[DoubleSecret]

I think you're missing the point.

a)  You're afraid of "reprisals" if someone recognizes
b)  You've claimed (without substantiation) that people are adding requirements to PD that are above and beyond the regulations
c)  You've claimed that these violations of the regulations are clear and obvious

So, I have to ask, what are these reprisals that you fear that exceed your integrity?  Not getting a PD award which has almost no practical value, or not receiving a promotion (which again has approximately zero practical value)?  It's not like they can lock you up in prison for filing an IG complaint.

Just my opinion, but there is nothing within the realm of reprisals available to anyone in CAP, up to and including the National Commander and the BoG, that would cause me to set aside my integrity and not call someone on something that was obviously and clearly inappropriate.

So you're roasting me as failing to show "integrity."  Got it.  I'm not the one who initiated the practice.  Sorry, the alleged practice.  And therein lies the rub.

You did identify one key problem, but brushed by it.  I claim, without substantiation, that unwritten requirements are being added to PD that are well outside the regulations.  How does one substantiate the existence of unwritten policy in a complaint?  How would that play out?

Me:  Dear IG, [insert office] is refusing to process my PD award until I submit items far outside the scope of the award and not required by CAPR 50-17.  Pinky swear.  Totally.

IG:  You've claimed (without substantiation) that people are adding unwritten requirements to PD that are above and beyond the regulations.  That's a pretty serious allegation.  Do you have any documentation?

Me:  So you'd like a copy of the unwritten requirement? 

IG:  Yeah, that'd be great.

Me:  All I have is an unprocessed application that meets every written requirement.  How am I doing on preponderance of the evidence?

IG:  Not well.  You haven't proved that it's more likely than not (i.e., the "51% rule") that an unwritten policy exists.  At best, you've shown that someone is slow at processing your paperwork.  Thank you for playing.

[JeffDG]

I think you're missing the point.

a)  You're afraid of "reprisals" if someone recognizes
b)  You've claimed (without substantiation) that people are adding requirements to PD that are above and beyond the regulations
c)  You've claimed that these violations of the regulations are clear and obvious

So, I have to ask, what are these reprisals that you fear that exceed your integrity?  Not getting a PD award which has almost no practical value, or not receiving a promotion (which again has approximately zero practical value)?  It's not like they can lock you up in prison for filing an IG complaint.

Just my opinion, but there is nothing within the realm of reprisals available to anyone in CAP, up to and including the National Commander and the BoG, that would cause me to set aside my integrity and not call someone on something that was obviously and clearly inappropriate.

So you're roasting me as failing to show "integrity."  Got it.  I'm not the one who initiated the practice.  Sorry, the alleged practice.  And therein lies the rub.

You did identify one key problem, but brushed by it.  I claim, without substantiation, that unwritten requirements are being added to PD that are well outside the regulations.  How does one substantiate the existence of unwritten policy in a complaint?  How would that play out?

Me:  Dear IG, [insert office] is refusing to process my PD award until I submit items far outside the scope of the award and not required by CAPR 50-17.  Pinky swear.  Totally.

IG:  You've claimed (without substantiation) that people are adding unwritten requirements to PD that are above and beyond the regulations.  That's a pretty serious allegation.  Do you have any documentation?

Me:  So you'd like a copy of the unwritten requirement? 

IG:  Yeah, that'd be great.

Me:  All I have is an unprocessed application that meets every written requirement.  How am I doing on preponderance of the evidence?

IG:  Not well.  You haven't proved that it's more likely than not (i.e., the "51% rule") that an unwritten policy exists.  At best, you've shown that someone is slow at processing your paperwork.  Thank you for playing.

How about this:

Me:  Mr. IG, I have submitted my PD award, which is complete in all respects with respect to the regulations, over 3 months ago and it has not been approved.  Mr. DirPD has told me that I need to submit additional information beyond the regulations to have it approved.
D
IG:  Let me look into it
IG->DirPD:  What's holding this file up?
DPD:  He doesn't have x, y, and z
IG:  Where do the regs say that he needs x, y or z?
DPD:  Doesn't.  It's our own policy
IG:  Do you have an approved supplement?
DPD:  No
IG:  Then he doesn't need to do x, y, or z.

Your  burden is to show that you've met the regs.  Then the burden shifts to the DPD to show why he hasn't approved the PD award IAW the regs.  You don't have to prove anything of the sort.

[THRAWN]

Great gravy...is this your first week in CAP or something? You know how this works, and your notional IG chat just ain't it. My guess is that you're being asked to provide documentation that you meet the requirement for the second highest PD award that CAP gives. There may be something in your jacket that needs clarification, or something that needs to be documented a little better. Best bet, take it to your chain. You've been given some pretty good advice so far and all you seem to be doing is saying "I don't wanna". So that begs the question: why are you reluctant to provide what is being asked for?

[DoubleSecret]

Great gravy...is this your first week in CAP or something? You know how this works, and your notional IG chat just ain't it. My guess is that you're being asked to provide documentation that you meet the requirement for the second highest PD award that CAP gives. There may be something in your jacket that needs clarification, or something that needs to be documented a little better. Best bet, take it to your chain. You've been given some pretty good advice so far and all you seem to be doing is saying "I don't wanna". So that begs the question: why are you reluctant to provide what is being asked for?

Your guess is wrong.  The requested "dossier" requires information completely unrelated to the award or substantiation of any achievements therein.

[THRAWN]

Great gravy...is this your first week in CAP or something? You know how this works, and your notional IG chat just ain't it. My guess is that you're being asked to provide documentation that you meet the requirement for the second highest PD award that CAP gives. There may be something in your jacket that needs clarification, or something that needs to be documented a little better. Best bet, take it to your chain. You've been given some pretty good advice so far and all you seem to be doing is saying "I don't wanna". So that begs the question: why are you reluctant to provide what is being asked for?

Your guess is wrong.  The requested "dossier" requires information completely unrelated to the award or substantiation of any achievements therein.

Then quit crying about it and contact your commander or your IG. Coming here with this sob story, being given sound advice by a whole lot of people with a whole lot of experience, and not doing anything about it is a waste. If you don't want to do anything, fine. But tell your tale while you're walking....

[JeffDG]

Great gravy...is this your first week in CAP or something? You know how this works, and your notional IG chat just ain't it. My guess is that you're being asked to provide documentation that you meet the requirement for the second highest PD award that CAP gives. There may be something in your jacket that needs clarification, or something that needs to be documented a little better. Best bet, take it to your chain. You've been given some pretty good advice so far and all you seem to be doing is saying "I don't wanna". So that begs the question: why are you reluctant to provide what is being asked for?

Your guess is wrong.  The requested "dossier" requires information completely unrelated to the award or substantiation of any achievements therein.

So, you can suck it up and accept something being done not IAW the regs, or you can do something about it.

[DoubleSecret]

How about this:

Me:  Mr. IG, I have submitted my PD award, which is complete in all respects with respect to the regulations, over 3 months ago and it has not been approved.  Mr. DirPD has told me that I need to submit additional information beyond the regulations to have it approved.
D
IG:  Let me look into it
IG->DirPD:  What's holding this file up?
DPD:  He doesn't have x, y, and z
IG:  Where do the regs say that he needs x, y or z?
DPD:  Doesn't.  It's our own policy
IG:  Do you have an approved supplement?
DPD:  No
IG:  Then he doesn't need to do x, y, or z.

Your  burden is to show that you've met the regs.  Then the burden shifts to the DPD to show why he hasn't approved the PD award IAW the regs.  You don't have to prove anything of the sort.

That was actually constructive and it didn't malign me.  Thank you.

[Eclipse]

Me:  All I have is an unprocessed application that meets every written requirement.  How am I doing on preponderance of the evidence?

What.  Exactly, was submitted?

[DoubleSecret]

Me:  All I have is an unprocessed application that meets every written requirement.  How am I doing on preponderance of the evidence?

What.  Exactly, was submitted?

An. Application with attachments for the underlying achievements, plus concurrent action in e-services.

[Eclipse]

Then that's all you should have needed.

Contact the IG and get it done.

There's no value in avoiding the uncomfortable conversations.

[Storm Chaser]

I would suggest you go through your chain of command first, before filing an IG complaint. If your unit commander is not helping you, then you go to your group or wing commander, as appropriate. If you haven't done this, then you haven't really exhausted all venues to resolve your issue. I've used the chain of command to resolve issues related to unwritten policies and have never suffer reprisals.

As long as you follow your chain of command, can provide appropriate references to the regulations and applicable supplements, and are respectful and professional in the way you handle this, then you shouldn't have a problem. If you do, then that's what the IG system is there for.

But you should know this already since you've completed all your Level IV requirements, right?

[DoubleSecret]

I would suggest you go through your chain of command first, before filing an IG complaint. If your unit commander is not helping you, then you go to your group or wing commander, as appropriate. If you haven't done this, then you haven't really exhausted all venues to resolve your issue. I've used the chain of command to resolve issues related to unwritten policies and have never suffer reprisals.

As long as you follow your chain of command, can provide appropriate references to the regulations and applicable supplements, and are respectful and professional in the way you handle this, then you shouldn't have a problem. If you do, then that's what the IG system is there for.

But you should know this already since you've completed all your Level IV requirements, right?

Appreciated.  Chain used.

I know that's the way it's supposed to work.  If things always worked the way they were supposed to, there'd be no need to initiate such a process.  Right?

[Storm Chaser]

Many folks (I'm not saying you) say the used the chain of command when in fact they just talked to their commander and didn't go any further. The unit commander is just the first link in the chain.

[lordmonar]

I think you're missing the point.

a)  You're afraid of "reprisals" if someone recognizes
b)  You've claimed (without substantiation) that people are adding requirements to PD that are above and beyond the regulations
c)  You've claimed that these violations of the regulations are clear and obvious

So, I have to ask, what are these reprisals that you fear that exceed your integrity?  Not getting a PD award which has almost no practical value, or not receiving a promotion (which again has approximately zero practical value)?  It's not like they can lock you up in prison for filing an IG complaint.

Just my opinion, but there is nothing within the realm of reprisals available to anyone in CAP, up to and including the National Commander and the BoG, that would cause me to set aside my integrity and not call someone on something that was obviously and clearly inappropriate.

So you're roasting me as failing to show "integrity."  Got it.  I'm not the one who initiated the practice.  Sorry, the alleged practice.  And therein lies the rub.

You did identify one key problem, but brushed by it.  I claim, without substantiation, that unwritten requirements are being added to PD that are well outside the regulations.  How does one substantiate the existence of unwritten policy in a complaint?  How would that play out?

Me:  Dear IG, [insert office] is refusing to process my PD award until I submit items far outside the scope of the award and not required by CAPR 50-17.  Pinky swear.  Totally.

IG:  You've claimed (without substantiation) that people are adding unwritten requirements to PD that are above and beyond the regulations.  That's a pretty serious allegation.  Do you have any documentation?

Me:  So you'd like a copy of the unwritten requirement? 

IG:  Yeah, that'd be great.

Me:  All I have is an unprocessed application that meets every written requirement.  How am I doing on preponderance of the evidence?

IG:  Not well.  You haven't proved that it's more likely than not (i.e., the "51% rule") that an unwritten policy exists.  At best, you've shown that someone is slow at processing your paperwork.  Thank you for playing.

A.  No sir I don't have any documentation....but my commander Capt X, said that the Maj Y at Wing HQ said I needed it.

It is the IG's job to investigate the allegation.

I know our IG process is not perfect......it too is broken in many ways.   But we have to TRY to use the system if we think our organization is broken.   Give it a good faith effort.....then you can start screaming to the high heavens about how it's all broken.

Again......you got two choices......either fight it.....or live with it.    If you live with it.....well there you go.   If you fight it....well maybe it will be better for the next guy.

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

I think you're missing the point.

a)  You're afraid of "reprisals" if someone recognizes
b)  You've claimed (without substantiation) that people are adding requirements to PD that are above and beyond the regulations
c)  You've claimed that these violations of the regulations are clear and obvious

So, I have to ask, what are these reprisals that you fear that exceed your integrity?  Not getting a PD award which has almost no practical value, or not receiving a promotion (which again has approximately zero practical value)?  It's not like they can lock you up in prison for filing an IG complaint.

Just my opinion, but there is nothing within the realm of reprisals available to anyone in CAP, up to and including the National Commander and the BoG, that would cause me to set aside my integrity and not call someone on something that was obviously and clearly inappropriate.

So you're roasting me as failing to show "integrity."  Got it.  I'm not the one who initiated the practice.  Sorry, the alleged practice.  And therein lies the rub.

You did identify one key problem, but brushed by it.  I claim, without substantiation, that unwritten requirements are being added to PD that are well outside the regulations.  How does one substantiate the existence of unwritten policy in a complaint?  How would that play out?

Me:  Dear IG, [insert office] is refusing to process my PD award until I submit items far outside the scope of the award and not required by CAPR 50-17.  Pinky swear.  Totally.

IG:  You've claimed (without substantiation) that people are adding unwritten requirements to PD that are above and beyond the regulations.  That's a pretty serious allegation.  Do you have any documentation?

Me:  So you'd like a copy of the unwritten requirement? 

IG:  Yeah, that'd be great.

Me:  All I have is an unprocessed application that meets every written requirement.  How am I doing on preponderance of the evidence?

IG:  Not well.  You haven't proved that it's more likely than not (i.e., the "51% rule") that an unwritten policy exists.  At best, you've shown that someone is slow at processing your paperwork.  Thank you for playing.

A.  No sir I don't have any documentation....but my commander Capt X, said that the Maj Y at Wing HQ said I needed it.

It is the IG's job to investigate the allegation.

I know our IG process is not perfect......it too is broken in many ways.   But we have to TRY to use the system if we think our organization is broken.   Give it a good faith effort.....then you can start screaming to the high heavens about how it's all broken.

Again......you got two choices......either fight it.....or live with it.    If you live with it.....well there you go.   If you fight it....well maybe it will be better for the next guy.

Investigations are ideally the last resort as they involve JAs and CCs and loads of paper work. 

The discussion between the DPD and IG below would be considered an assist.

The purpose of assistance is to quickly resolve personal issues and allow the complainant to refocus on the assigned mission.

I like that description. No mess. Lots less paper.   Hopefully everyone is happy at the end.

[Storm Chaser]

The IG system should not be used until all appropriate echelons of the chain of command have been exhausted to resolve the issue. Too often, members file IG complaints on issues that the commander at that or the next echelon would have resolved if only they knew the issue existed. On the other hand, there are members that could legitimately file an IG complaint, but don't do so due to fear of reprisal. That should never be the case. The IG system is there to help, when everything else fails.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I have been told, and sincerely hope it's true, that the IG system has been "cleaned up" from what it was 15 years ago.

I saw good people use both the chain of command and the IG system during that "era" and saw good people either quit in frustration or be on the receiving end of a 2B if the one being investigated and the investigator were part of the Wing GOBN.

[Eclipse]

One thing that has definitely helped is technology.

It's much easier to duck, cover, defer and avoid, when you're still dealing with snail mail and voice calls
as your only means of communication.

Back then it could take  month just to figure out who the IG was, let alone getting any response.

Then you had to dig the regs our of your unit's closet, assuming they were updated, etc., etc.