This question was brought up recently. Can a senior member who has chosen to retain his retired military NCO rank be a squadron commander or must he/she become a CAP Officer?
Yes, no issue.
I've seen SM (WOG) as a Unit CC.
It wouldn't be my first choice. But it may be the only choice at the time.
I'd be shocked if the system was in place to not allow an NCO to do it.
I think the only open question is whether an NCO wearing other-service stripes could be a Wing CC without accepting the eagles,
or for that matter National CC without accepting the stars, otherwise the grade isn't related.
As a CAP NCO......my personal opinion is NO they should not accept command positions.
They should convert to an officer rank.
My reasoning is that as screwed up as the CAP ranks systems is.......it just muddies the water all that more then it already is.
Can they? Yes there is nothing limiting them from assuming command and getting the automatic promotion to 1st Lt.
Wearing the NCO stripes (at least in my case) is an indication that you want to limit your scope of responsibility and the focus of the leadership you want to give to CAP. So accepting the position of command you should also accept the rank that goes with it.
YMMV.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 03, 2013, 07:44:00 PM
I think the only open question is whether an NCO wearing other-service stripes could be a Wing CC without accepting the eagles,
or for that matter National CC without accepting the stars, otherwise the grade isn't related.
I would say, "No, they can't"
Ref CAPR 35-5, 3-2(b)
Quoteb. Wing Commander. Promotion to the temporary grade of colonel is concurrent with
appointment as wing commander. The permanent grade of colonel is contingent upon the
recommendation of the region commander upon the wing commander's satisfactory completion
of assignment as wing commander.
Contrast that with Squadron Commanders:
QuoteWing commanders may advance a senior member to the
grade of first lieutenant concurrent with the member's appointment as squadron commander.
The Wing Commander one doesn't seem to be at all discretionary, but is merely a consequence of the appointment to be with Wing King/Queen. Now, I would say that a NCO could give up the eagles by not asking that the Col grade be made permanent upon completion of the duty if desired.
Quote from: lordmonar on September 03, 2013, 07:49:11 PM
As a CAP NCO......my personal opinion is NO they should not accept command positions.
They should convert to an officer rank.
My reasoning is that as screwed up as the CAP ranks systems is.......it just muddies the water all that more then it already is.
Can they? Yes there is nothing limiting them from assuming command and getting the automatic promotion to 1st Lt.
Wearing the NCO stripes (at least in my case) is an indication that you want to limit your scope of responsibility and the focus of the leadership you want to give to CAP. So accepting the position of command you should also accept the rank that goes with it.
YMMV.
True...you could always accept 1st Lt bars while in command, and revert to stripes after your time is done too. You would still meet the requirements for an NCO grade appointment (unless you did something stupid in the military and had them stripped from you...not likely)
Even if it was made permanent......you can always change again.
I was a Major with a couple of months left for Lt Col when I made the change.
BTW....my Major Grade is still in E-services.....I went to E-service promotions and it told me "Promotion to Lt Col is restricted to wing or higher".
:)
Why wouldn't someone who wanted to be the commander not want to advance to being an officer? Why would they want to revert to NCO afterwards? It makes no sense.
Quote from: lordmonar on September 03, 2013, 07:49:11 PM
Wearing the NCO stripes (at least in my case) is an indication that you want to limit your scope of responsibility and the focus of the leadership you want to give to CAP.
I disagree with this, since there is no such "limit" of the scope within CAP's current paradigm for senior members, and it is also likely
that very few people in CAP would actually understand what you're getting at unless they were cadets, former NCOs, or worked closely with them.
Quote from: lordmonar on September 03, 2013, 07:49:11 PM
So accepting the position of command you should also accept the rank that goes with it.
But I agree with this, so at least universal balance is still in place today.
Also, if you want to "break" CAP's customs and courtesies even worse, imagine a situation where even the most junior Flight Officer is being saluted
by his commander. It's bad enough we have field grade officers in ranks being saluted by company grade commanders of units and activities,
this would just take it to the final level.
You disagree that one of the reasons why I chose to wear NCO stripes vs my Major Leaves is because I want to focus my leadership inward on the tactical level in stead of outward on the stratigic level?
Or you disagree that most CAP NCO's did the same?
Since we are talking about CAP NCOs here.....we are talking about former NCOs so your objection is moot.
And as I said at the beginning of my post....this is MY opinion of how it should be not what the CAP paradigm is.....because as we have discussed before the CAP paradigm has no place for NCOs at all.
Quote from: Grumpy on September 03, 2013, 07:23:53 PM
This question was brought up recently. Can a senior member who has chosen to retain his retired military NCO rank be a squadron commander or must he/she become a CAP Officer?
No PERIOD!
WHY????
In addition to what has already been noted in terms of the regulations, a NCO as a squadron commander defeats the role of what an NCO is supposed to be. NCOs generally are supervisors, not managers. (even though that is was the Top Three essentially do). During my tenure as an Air Force NCO, I saw senior NCOs as section chiefs, flight chiefs and as the senior leadership of geographically separated operating locations -- never as unit commanders.
Quote from: lordmonar on September 03, 2013, 11:15:11 PM
You disagree that one of the reasons why I chose to wear NCO stripes vs my Major Leaves is because I want to focus my leadership inward on the tactical level in stead of outward on the stratigic level?
Correct, since that distinction does not formally exist within CAP. We're all members, all equal corners.
As to the bolded above, I don't even know what that means in a CAP context. It's all just "stuff to do" usually based on what's shiny that day.
You've said it yourself there is no strategic direction in CAP, so with that accepted, you can't just plant a flag and decide that "today you're tactical".
That's nice rhetoric, but not supportable in CAP.
Quote from: flyboy1 on September 03, 2013, 11:37:25 PM
a NCO as a squadron commander defeats the role of what an NCO is supposed to be. NCOs generally are supervisors, not managers.
This is delineated where by CAP Regulation?
I absolutely agree with you as to how the RM does things, but such distinctions are not needed in CAP context, nor should they.
They only Grades that are mandated for Command are for Wing/Region/Nat/CC and Nat CV. and are not mandated to be retained after their tenure.
Its an advantage to be seen wearing airmen or sergeant chevrons when dining at an Air National Guard mess hall as the meal is from to enlisted while officers pay a fee to eat. I saw officers remove their rank insignia prior to going into the mess hall to avoid paying. The men and women serving the food knew these officers were avoiding payment. Wearing chevrons is colourful and looks so cool too! By the way, who'd want to command? I'd rather be Number 2, 3, 4 or below!
Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2013, 12:08:10 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on September 03, 2013, 11:15:11 PM
You disagree that one of the reasons why I chose to wear NCO stripes vs my Major Leaves is because I want to focus my leadership inward on the tactical level in stead of outward on the stratigic level?
Correct, since that distinction does not formally exist within CAP. We're all members, all equal corners.
As to the bolded above, I don't even know what that means in a CAP context. It's all just "stuff to do" usually based on what's shiny that day.
You've said it yourself there is no strategic direction in CAP, so with that accepted, you can't just plant a flag and decide that "today you're tactical".
That's nice rhetoric, but not supportable in CAP.
Eclipse........I want to focus my leadership inward on the tacical level. You cannot disagree with my reasoning....no matter if you think that distction formaly exists or not.
Quote from: lordmonar on September 04, 2013, 12:50:33 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2013, 12:08:10 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on September 03, 2013, 11:15:11 PM
You disagree that one of the reasons why I chose to wear NCO stripes vs my Major Leaves is because I want to focus my leadership inward on the tactical level in stead of outward on the stratigic level?
Correct, since that distinction does not formally exist within CAP. We're all members, all equal corners.
As to the bolded above, I don't even know what that means in a CAP context. It's all just "stuff to do" usually based on what's shiny that day.
You've said it yourself there is no strategic direction in CAP, so with that accepted, you can't just plant a flag and decide that "today you're tactical".
That's nice rhetoric, but not supportable in CAP.
Eclipse........I want to focus my leadership inward on the tacical level. You cannot disagree with my reasoning....no matter if you think that distction formaly exists or not.
How does being an NCO make you more effective than being an officer?
^ This.
Quote from: lordmonar on September 04, 2013, 12:50:33 AM...I want to focus my leadership inward on the tactical level
What does that mean, especially in a CAP context?
Quote from: RogueLeader on September 04, 2013, 01:02:51 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on September 04, 2013, 12:50:33 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2013, 12:08:10 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on September 03, 2013, 11:15:11 PM
You disagree that one of the reasons why I chose to wear NCO stripes vs my Major Leaves is because I want to focus my leadership inward on the tactical level in stead of outward on the stratigic level?
Correct, since that distinction does not formally exist within CAP. We're all members, all equal corners.
As to the bolded above, I don't even know what that means in a CAP context. It's all just "stuff to do" usually based on what's shiny that day.
You've said it yourself there is no strategic direction in CAP, so with that accepted, you can't just plant a flag and decide that "today you're tactical".
That's nice rhetoric, but not supportable in CAP.
Eclipse........I want to focus my leadership inward on the tacical level. You cannot disagree with my reasoning....no matter if you think that distction formaly exists or not.
How does being an NCO make you more effective than being an officer?
a) Never said it did.
b) The leadership role of an NCO has always been (for the most part) in wardly focused. It allows me to focus only on my small slice of the pie with out having to spend too much time on how my cog fits in the big picture. I need to know how I fit in but I don't need to spend any time on trying to shape, manage or change the big picture goals of CAP.
As I have said before.....my vision of what CAP NCOs should be......they are the uniform natzis, Drill masters and C&C gurus. They should be working at their level of responsibilities to keep the military tone of CAP.
Could I do this as a Lt, Capt, major or Lt Col? Sure.....I'm still me. But I feel I am more effective doing it as an NCO.
Quote from: lordmonar on September 04, 2013, 01:19:44 AMIt allows me to focus only on my small slice of the pie with out having to spend too much time on how my cog fits in the big picture. I need to know how I fit in but I don't need to spend any time on trying to shape, manage or change the big picture goals of CAP.
So where's the trade off in privilege and duties for the officers? That >is< part of the equation in the military, yes?
Enlisted and NCOs get to head-down focus on turning the wrenches and making sure they are personally safe, healthy, and ready,
but otherwise not get involved in politics and the high-end management of the organization. How nice for them.
So what's the advantage in a CAP context to accepting the mantle of command? Higher pay? The privilege or rank?
"Not my job, boss..." doesn't fly in a volunteer organization, which is one of the reasons the NCO / Officer relationship won't work, either.
Then there's the fact that you say you "want to focus on tactical leadership", except that's not how it works, right? NCO's obey the
directives of their officers, not self-select what's comfortable. How long do you think that's going to fly in a typical squadron
when a group of members feel free to do self-select out of anything they don't feel like doing because "that's officer territory and I'm an NCO"
I know a squadron commander who happens to be an NCO. The only comment I've heard is that he was an outstanding candidate for the job.
As of today, including all echelons, there are 1396 charters nationwide.
4 are indicated as being commanded by NCOs.
7 are indicated as being commanded by SMWOG
Can an NCO command a squadron? Yep.
Should they command a squadron? Nope.
Am I all that worried about it? Not really, since almost all former NCOs decide to be CAP officers, the small number that choose to be NCOs are sort of like the appendix of the CAP senior member program. They're there, but we don't really need them and if we got rid of them, it wouldn't make much difference just as leaving them in place normally doesn't make any difference either.
I just have one thing to say about this, and CAP NCO's, please forgive me and take note:
You're not in the military anymore. Forget the rank you had/earned/are proud of.
Thank you for your service. I mean that from the bottom of my heart.
The WORST type of CAP member is a former RM member who is living in the past. We don't do it the way you did in the army/air force/whatever.
Welcome to Civil Air Patrol. Now get with the program. Thank you.
Quote from: lordmonar on September 03, 2013, 07:49:11 PM
Wearing the NCO stripes (at least in my case) is an indication that you want to limit your scope of responsibility and the focus of the leadership you want to give to CAP. So accepting the position of command you should also accept the rank that goes with it.
YMMV.
I concur.
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 06:10:39 AM
The WORST type of CAP member is a former RM member who is living in the past. We don't do it the way you did in the army/air force/whatever.
Welcome to Civil Air Patrol. Now get with the program. Thank you.
Now that is a little harsh. Many CAP Units are on military bases. Lots of Squadrons, Groups, Wings and Regions, at their banquets have military personnel give a presentation. CAP has a close relationship with the military.
Being a former IG, you have really have made a mistake on the worst type of CAP member.
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 06:10:39 AM
I just have one thing to say about this, and CAP NCO's, please forgive me and take note:
You're not in the military anymore. Forget the rank you had/earned/are proud of.
Thank you for your service. I mean that from the bottom of my heart.
The WORST type of CAP member is a former RM member who is living in the past. We don't do it the way you did in the army/air force/whatever.
Welcome to Civil Air Patrol. Now get with the program. Thank you.
Not all CAP NCOs are retirees...
but hey, don't let facts get in the way of your inflammatory post.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2013, 02:41:08 AM
As of today, including all echelons, there are 1396 charters nationwide.
4 are indicated as being commanded by NCOs.
7 are indicated as being commanded by SMWOG
I guess if a dragon can command a squadron, an NCO can. >:D >:D >:D
Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2013, 01:26:50 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on September 04, 2013, 01:19:44 AMIt allows me to focus only on my small slice of the pie with out having to spend too much time on how my cog fits in the big picture. I need to know how I fit in but I don't need to spend any time on trying to shape, manage or change the big picture goals of CAP.
So where's the trade off in privilege and duties for the officers? That >is< part of the equation in the military, yes?
Enlisted and NCOs get to head-down focus on turning the wrenches and making sure they are personally safe, healthy, and ready,
but otherwise not get involved in politics and the high-end management of the organization. How nice for them.
So what's the advantage in a CAP context to accepting the mantle of command? Higher pay? The privilege or rank?
"Not my job, boss..." doesn't fly in a volunteer organization, which is one of the reasons the NCO / Officer relationship won't work, either.
Then there's the fact that you say you "want to focus on tactical leadership", except that's not how it works, right? NCO's obey the
directives of their officers, not self-select what's comfortable. How long do you think that's going to fly in a typical squadron
when a group of members feel free to do self-select out of anything they don't feel like doing because "that's officer territory and I'm an NCO"
Then why do we have rank at all? Last time I checked my 2d Lt admin officer gets paid exactly the same as the National Commander.
As for "not my job boss" not flying for a volunteer organization...........I think is 100% WRONG.....in fact it much more important then in a organization. We don't pay them.....so we have to always be careful about adding more work to them.
In my current unit we are in a major re-org.....with the idea to increase the numbers of people so that we can LIMIT the scope of each individual's work load.
As for the officer/NCO relationship not working for CAP......I have to say by empirical evidence.....it is working at the Nellis Composite Squadron just fine.
I am still trying to figure out what all the heartache about NCOs is on this forum. "There is no one for them to supervise in the normal military sense." "They are managers where as officers are supervisors." "Officers have strategic vision and NCOs are more concerned about the tactical." "CAP NCOs are just a nuissance; they should just get with the program and become officers." Yadda, yadda, yadda. What a load of......
Unless you are a professional, full time CAP member, NCOs in CAP are just like anybody else with the exception that they probably have several years of experience in the real military that CAP "officers" may or may not have. They go to the same meetings, read the same regs, participate in the same activities, see the same things, and work the same problems as anybody else.
The person's effectiveness is not determined by the insignia on their arm or their collar, but on the material between their ears.
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 06:10:39 AM
I just have one thing to say about this, and CAP NCO's, please forgive me and take note:
You're not in the military anymore. Forget the rank you had/earned/are proud of.
Thank you for your service. I mean that from the bottom of my heart.
The WORST type of CAP member is a former RM member who is living in the past. We don't do it the way you did in the army/air force/whatever.
Welcome to Civil Air Patrol. Now get with the program. Thank you.
Thanks Woodsy....I feel so loved and appreciated. You just characterized my 11 years of service to CAP as a pipe dream of living the glory days of my misspent youth.
Thank you for your service.
Quote from: lordmonar on September 04, 2013, 02:29:48 PM
Then why do we have rank at all?
I don't know - you tell me, because frankly the grade structure in CAP is about as effective as woodland camo is for ES.
But I can say for sure that the "fix" isn't going to be further fracturing an already dysfunctional system by dividing the membership into
an artificial caste system, and giving some members who "know better" actual license to "not be bothered".
Here's another question. Who are you "tactically leading"? There's no enlisted in CAP, so how does being an NCO in CAP
work when you're "tactically leading" officers?
Quote from: lordmonar on September 04, 2013, 02:29:48 PM
In my current unit we are in a major re-org.....with the idea to increase the numbers of people so that we can LIMIT the scope of each individual's work load.
Excellent, everyone should be working towards that. You're going to need about 75-100 seniors to make that happen. Which, based on 20-1 and
other staffing and duty expectations is about what the current CAP unit model expects, even if that isn't a reasonable position these days (if it ever was).
Quote from: ol'fido on September 04, 2013, 02:31:44 PM
Unless you are a professional, full time CAP member, NCOs in CAP are just like anybody else with the exception that they probably have several years of experience in the real military that CAP "officers" may or may not have. They go to the same meetings, read the same regs, participate in the same activities, see the same things, and work the same problems as anybody else.
But that's the real issue, it's not about insignia, we have that now and some NCOs say that isn't enough. Lordmonar and others are advocating an actual NCO / officer program
with actual separation of duties and function.
Quote from: lordmonar on September 04, 2013, 02:35:45 PM
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 06:10:39 AM
I just have one thing to say about this, and CAP NCO's, please forgive me and take note:
You're not in the military anymore. Forget the rank you had/earned/are proud of.
Thank you for your service. I mean that from the bottom of my heart.
The WORST type of CAP member is a former RM member who is living in the past. We don't do it the way you did in the army/air force/whatever.
Welcome to Civil Air Patrol. Now get with the program. Thank you.
Thanks Woodsy....I feel so loved and appreciated. You just characterized my 11 years of service to CAP as a pipe dream of living the glory days of my misspent youth.
Thank you for your service.
Why do you still wear your old rank? Why not wear what the vast majority of senior members wear? I can think of no reason why someone would join this organization and opt to wear what they wore in the military, instead of what is customary for the majority of members- other than living in the past and just being too darn stubborn to change.
I'm asking this as a serious question, not stirring the pot. I'd really like your thoughts on it. Everything I've heard from other CAP NCO's had "living in the past" written all over it.
Well, to be fair, the same could be said for those who request military equivalence to officer grade and those who wear military badges on their CAP uniform (not my stance, just sayin').
Neither has any real bearing or relevance to CAP.
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 03:36:55 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on September 04, 2013, 02:35:45 PM
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 06:10:39 AM
I just have one thing to say about this, and CAP NCO's, please forgive me and take note:
You're not in the military anymore. Forget the rank you had/earned/are proud of.
Thank you for your service. I mean that from the bottom of my heart.
The WORST type of CAP member is a former RM member who is living in the past. We don't do it the way you did in the army/air force/whatever.
Welcome to Civil Air Patrol. Now get with the program. Thank you.
Thanks Woodsy....I feel so loved and appreciated. You just characterized my 11 years of service to CAP as a pipe dream of living the glory days of my misspent youth.
Thank you for your service.
Why do you still wear your old rank? Why not wear what the vast majority of senior members wear? I can think of no reason why someone would join this organization and opt to wear what they wore in the military, instead of what is customary for the majority of members- other than living in the past and just being too darn stubborn to change.
I'm asking this as a serious question, not stirring the pot. I'd really like your thoughts on it. Everything I've heard from other CAP NCO's had "living in the past" written all over it.
So where does that leave officers who enter the program and wear the same grade they wore while in active duty? Are they living in the past as well?
Quote from: tsrup on September 04, 2013, 03:53:27 PM
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 03:36:55 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on September 04, 2013, 02:35:45 PM
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 06:10:39 AM
I just have one thing to say about this, and CAP NCO's, please forgive me and take note:
You're not in the military anymore. Forget the rank you had/earned/are proud of.
Thank you for your service. I mean that from the bottom of my heart.
The WORST type of CAP member is a former RM member who is living in the past. We don't do it the way you did in the army/air force/whatever.
Welcome to Civil Air Patrol. Now get with the program. Thank you.
Thanks Woodsy....I feel so loved and appreciated. You just characterized my 11 years of service to CAP as a pipe dream of living the glory days of my misspent youth.
Thank you for your service.
Why do you still wear your old rank? Why not wear what the vast majority of senior members wear? I can think of no reason why someone would join this organization and opt to wear what they wore in the military, instead of what is customary for the majority of members- other than living in the past and just being too darn stubborn to change.
I'm asking this as a serious question, not stirring the pot. I'd really like your thoughts on it. Everything I've heard from other CAP NCO's had "living in the past" written all over it.
So where does that leave officers who enter the program and wear the same grade they wore while in active duty? Are they living in the past as well?
The issue of grade advancement is a whole different can of worms itself.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2013, 03:47:55 PM
Well, to be fair, the same could be said for those who request military equivalence to officer grade and those who wear military badges on their CAP uniform (not my stance, just sayin').
Neither has any real bearing or relevance to CAP.
Fair enough.
^ And there are a lot more "issues" with former officers than there ever will be with NCOs.
Quote from: EMT-83 on September 04, 2013, 04:31:17 PM
^ And there are a lot more "issues" with former officers than there ever will be with NCOs.
I'd have to agree, some of the people I've seen struggle the most, especially early-on, are current or former
military officers that just can't get their head around CAP.
I'll go ahead and assert that, arguably, among the worst members of any organization are former members of other organizations who are living in the past. It's the living in the past part that's the problem.
Many of the skills, customs, and courtesies I learned while serving as a Naval Officer are valuable to CAP, but the RM isn't the only place many of those skills can be learned, nor are all of those RM lessons applicable to CAP. Often one person's RM isn't even the same as another person's. But one of the things I learned in my part of the RM was to forgo what I learned when it's not appropriate for my current assignment...
I agree with both Eclipse and Lordmonar that our current grade structure doesn't really reflect anything useful. It's a system that seems to have evolved and inter-bred. It tries to communicate professional development level, assigned responsibility level, pre-CAP accomplishments, and longevity - and achieves none of those objectives.
I'd support a grade structure where prior experience is good through Capt, but Maj and Lt Col are temporary grades assigned to Squadron and Group CCs (and maybe continued based on continued duties assigned). The grade structure could be extended to other staff positions (e.g., CDs are one grade lower than corresponding CC, etc).
That way one could look across a room and tell what level of responsibility has been assigned to which individual. Until we have something like that, it doesn't really matter if the Squadron CC is a MSgt or a Col.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2013, 03:03:59 PM
...because frankly the grade structure in CAP is about as effective as woodland camo is for ES.
For some reason, I love this.
I don't know much about the CG Aux's rank structure, but from what I've heard it sounds pretty effective. Thoughts on that?
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 11:22:00 PM
I don't know much about the CG Aux's rank structure, but from what I've heard it sounds pretty effective. Thoughts on that?
Its better at indicating the highest office you've held in the Aux without the distractions of prior military service rank, advance promotions for professional or mission-based skills. Has the disadvantage of not having any real professional development associated with it.
While simpler to understand, I'm not sure it offers any significant advantage over CAP. You will still have the situation of having people with lower apparent grade in charge of a unit made up of many people with higher apparent grade -- especially since you are still assigned to your flotilla no matter what higher offices you have. For example, you might have the equivalent of a CAP region commander (except they will be wearing 1-star) in your flotilla and coming to your meetings while the flotilla commander has the equivalent of Captain's bars on. (Real situation)
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 11:22:00 PM
I don't know much about the CG Aux's rank structure, but from what I've heard it sounds pretty effective. Thoughts on that?
Not really in my experience... Couple of things:
- While the office insignia is position based, you can still keep it when you leave the office. So there are plenty of people walking around with insignia from a past office.
- Someone can get pretty high up the chain as a staff officer without passing go and checking the boxes. In CAP terms somebody goes from SM to Col because they get appointed to national staff as a brand new member. Whereas the commander types move up the ladder. In CAP terms you have to have been a squadron commander to be either group commander or vice commander and so on.
So to me it is really no better than it was in CAP... I can't refer to myself as LT, USCGAUX as I am a Flotilla Commander... and we don't really do the C&C that CAP does amongst ourselves... and what we do does tend to be a bit odd compared to CAP.
Edited to add:
Quote from: RiverAux on September 04, 2013, 11:31:35 PMYou will still have the situation of having people with lower apparent grade in charge of a unit made up of many people with higher apparent grade -- especially since you are still assigned to your flotilla no matter what higher offices you have. For example, you might have the equivalent of a CAP region commander (except they will be wearing 1-star) in your flotilla and coming to your meetings while the flotilla commander has the equivalent of Captain's bars on. (Real situation)
Have a past District Commodore (region 1 star) in my division (group) commanding a small flotilla (squadron). My flotilla has three times the members, but I wear "rank" "equivalent to an O-3" as FC.
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 03:36:55 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on September 04, 2013, 02:35:45 PM
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 06:10:39 AM
I just have one thing to say about this, and CAP NCO's, please forgive me and take note:
You're not in the military anymore. Forget the rank you had/earned/are proud of.
Thank you for your service. I mean that from the bottom of my heart.
The WORST type of CAP member is a former RM member who is living in the past. We don't do it the way you did in the army/air force/whatever.
Welcome to Civil Air Patrol. Now get with the program. Thank you.
Thanks Woodsy....I feel so loved and appreciated. You just characterized my 11 years of service to CAP as a pipe dream of living the glory days of my misspent youth.
Thank you for your service.
Why do you still wear your old rank? Why not wear what the vast majority of senior members wear? I can think of no reason why someone would join this organization and opt to wear what they wore in the military, instead of what is customary for the majority of members- other than living in the past and just being too darn stubborn to change.
I'm asking this as a serious question, not stirring the pot. I'd really like your thoughts on it. Everything I've heard from other CAP NCO's had "living in the past" written all over it.
Woodsy, does it matter? Every Unit is different. Some Units everyone wears the polo shirt and go by Tom, Dick and Jesus. Other units fall out in USAF blues and it is, Colonel, Major and Captain. What you think is customary is just you being who you want everyone else to be. YMMV & YOLO 8)
Quote from: MIKE on September 04, 2013, 11:59:52 PM
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 11:22:00 PM
I don't know much about the CG Aux's rank structure, but from what I've heard it sounds pretty effective. Thoughts on that?
Not really in my experience... Couple of things:
- While the office insignia is position based, you can still keep it when you leave the office. So there are plenty of people walking around with insignia from a past office.
- Someone can get pretty high up the chain as a staff officer without passing go and checking the boxes. In CAP terms somebody goes from SM to Col because they get appointed to national staff as a brand new member. Whereas the commander types move up the ladder. In CAP terms you have to have been a squadron commander to be either group commander or vice commander and so on.
So to me it is really no better than it was in CAP... I can't refer to myself as LT, USCGAUX as I am a Flotilla Commander... and we don't really do the C&C that CAP does amongst ourselves... and what we do does tend to be a bit odd compared to CAP.
Edited to add:
Quote from: RiverAux on September 04, 2013, 11:31:35 PMYou will still have the situation of having people with lower apparent grade in charge of a unit made up of many people with higher apparent grade -- especially since you are still assigned to your flotilla no matter what higher offices you have. For example, you might have the equivalent of a CAP region commander (except they will be wearing 1-star) in your flotilla and coming to your meetings while the flotilla commander has the equivalent of Captain's bars on. (Real situation)
Have a past District Commodore (region 1 star) in my division (group) commanding a small flotilla (squadron). My flotilla has three times the members, but I wear "rank" "equivalent to an O-3" as FC.
Everyone seems to forget there is no "rank" in the USCGAux... you have elected and appointed offices. You have "Office Insignia" that resembles USCG rank.
Also in any operation in which the USCGAux is directly supporting the USCG (IE augmenting) all those Office Insignia come off and only the Member Device or blank shoulderboards are worn.
Quote from: shuman14 on September 14, 2013, 05:06:45 AM
Quote from: MIKE on September 04, 2013, 11:59:52 PM
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 11:22:00 PM
I don't know much about the CG Aux's rank structure, but from what I've heard it sounds pretty effective. Thoughts on that?
Not really in my experience... Couple of things:
- While the office insignia is position based, you can still keep it when you leave the office. So there are plenty of people walking around with insignia from a past office.
- Someone can get pretty high up the chain as a staff officer without passing go and checking the boxes. In CAP terms somebody goes from SM to Col because they get appointed to national staff as a brand new member. Whereas the commander types move up the ladder. In CAP terms you have to have been a squadron commander to be either group commander or vice commander and so on.
So to me it is really no better than it was in CAP... I can't refer to myself as LT, USCGAUX as I am a Flotilla Commander... and we don't really do the C&C that CAP does amongst ourselves... and what we do does tend to be a bit odd compared to CAP.
Edited to add:
Quote from: RiverAux on September 04, 2013, 11:31:35 PMYou will still have the situation of having people with lower apparent grade in charge of a unit made up of many people with higher apparent grade -- especially since you are still assigned to your flotilla no matter what higher offices you have. For example, you might have the equivalent of a CAP region commander (except they will be wearing 1-star) in your flotilla and coming to your meetings while the flotilla commander has the equivalent of Captain's bars on. (Real situation)
Have a past District Commodore (region 1 star) in my division (group) commanding a small flotilla (squadron). My flotilla has three times the members, but I wear "rank" "equivalent to an O-3" as FC.
Everyone seems to forget there is no "rank" in the USCGAux... you have elected and appointed offices. You have "Office Insignia" that resembles USCG rank.
Also in any operation in which the USCGAux is directly supporting the USCG (IE augmenting) all those Office Insignia come off and only the Member Device or blank shoulderboards are worn.
Comparing CAP with the USCGAux is pointless because of one minor difference between the organizations. The Coast Guard Auxiliary
does not have a cadet program...
The USCGAux pretty much has one "mission", assist the Coast Guard in performing their missions.
CAP has multiple "missions" with ES and the Cadet Program being the two major ones.
Thats right, there is absolutely no way to compare two uniform-wearing paramilitary organizations that support parts of our armed forces that are made up of volunteers of similar average age and with similar motivations. What were we thinking?
I'm also not sure why whether CAP has a cadet program has any relevant bearing on a thread about Senior member NCOs commanding a squadron.
Quote
The USCGAux pretty much has one "mission", assist the Coast Guard in performing their missions.
Well, actually the Auxiliary has many more actual "missions" than CAP does. Big picture there isn't much difference in the number of "missions" of CAP and CG Aux (Big three of CAP and big two of CG Aux -- Recreational boating safety, and Coast Guard support).
But, when you drill down a bit the Auxiliary has dozens of subsidiary missions that are actually pretty unique in their own right. CAP, on the other hand, has the cadet program, a defunct external AE program, and an ES program that is generally made up of about half a dozen types of missions. No matter how you try to slice it, the Aux is called on to do a lot more different types of things to support the CG than CAP does either in its own right or in support of the AF. That isn't a put down on CAP and in some ways, the Aux is probably trying to do to much with what it has and might do well to focus a bit more.
Quote from: RiverAux on September 14, 2013, 02:54:53 PM
Thats right, there is absolutely no way to compare two uniform-wearing paramilitary organizations that support parts of our armed forces that are made up of volunteers of similar average age and with similar motivations. What were we thinking?
Exactly, for example a 14 year old boy is interested in the military and his high school does not have JROTC so I guess he can go to the local USCG Aux floatilla and learn how to march and wear a uniform, correctamundo?
Quote from: Private Investigator on September 14, 2013, 03:06:44 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on September 14, 2013, 02:54:53 PM
Thats right, there is absolutely no way to compare two uniform-wearing paramilitary organizations that support parts of our armed forces that are made up of volunteers of similar average age and with similar motivations. What were we thinking?
Exactly, for example a 14 year old boy is interested in the military and his high school does not have JROTC so I guess he can go to the local USCG Aux floatilla and learn how to march and wear a uniform, correctamundo?
So what? I could just as easily say that a 14 year old boy wants to drive his Dad's motorboat, so I guess he can go to his local CAP squadron and take the boating safety course that they teach?
In fact, there is a good possibility that CG Aux comes close to having just as much direct contact with our nation's youths than CAP through boating safety courses, boating safety events at schools, events at boat shows, etc. Its not sustained contact like CAP. Heck, CG Aux is probably aimed just as much at doing more boating safety education for kids than CAP is in educating youths about AE.
Quote from: RiverAux on September 14, 2013, 03:13:15 PM
So what? I could just as easily say that a 14 year old boy wants to drive his Dad's motorboat, so I guess he can go to his local CAP squadron and take the boating safety course that they teach?
You're really stretching. Taking a boating course from the CGAUX is the equivalent of an EAA pattern ride. Neither is "joining".
As many of us have pointed out in detail, CAP and the CGAux are so different in mission, purpose, membership, and culture that
making any comparisons usually means the person doing so doesn't understand the question.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 14, 2013, 03:17:07 PM
As many of us have pointed out in detail, CAP and the CGAux are so different in mission, purpose, membership, and culture that
making any comparisons usually means the person doing so doesn't understand the question.
The only people making those statements are those that really only have in-depth experience with CAP. Those of us that are part of both see the validity. Frankly, you (and they) just don't know what you're talking about. Sure, they're not exactly the same, but no two fire departments are the same either. But, there are WAY more similarities in terms of the things discussed here, than differences.
With little variation, Fire departments have the same mission, same training, same uniforms, same culture.
There is so little baseline comparison between CAP and the CGAux that about the only thing similar is the word "auxiliary".
You can try to draw macro lines, I mean we both wear the same shirt, right? At the micro, member level, there's nothing there to connect.
Is learning to march and wearing a uniform really why kids join CAP?
Quote from: David Vandenbroeck on September 14, 2013, 03:59:52 PM
Is learning to march and wearing a uniform really why kids join CAP?
In my experience that seems to be the "cool" part of it. Only after they mature a little do they see the Leadership and Community Service benefits. There are exceptions to this of course but that seems to be a big part of it.
I'd have to agree for the most part, though it probably depends on their join age. In the 12 year old range, the "cool" is likely
the attraction, move into 14-15 and life goals are probably a major part.
The CP itself, though, which shares the majority of personnel and resources, is a big chunk of the reason you can't compare CAP to the CGAux.
Quote from: David Vandenbroeck on September 14, 2013, 03:59:52 PM
Is learning to march and wearing a uniform really why kids join CAP?
For some of them, yes. And some join to fly and some join to do ES and some join to learn leadership.
Different cadets have different interests just like seniors have different interests.
Quote from: SARDOC on September 14, 2013, 04:03:05 PM
Quote from: David Vandenbroeck on September 14, 2013, 03:59:52 PM
Is learning to march and wearing a uniform really why kids join CAP?
In my experience that seems to be the "cool" part of it. Only after they mature a little do they see the Leadership and Community Service benefits. There are exceptions to this of course but that seems to be a big part of it.
Marching and wearing a uniform are cool? Now that is funny!
I would think an interest in aviation or aerospace would be the driving force for most. Next would be participating in outdoor activities such as those of a ground team.
Just being a part of a group / membership or the desire to belong would also be very high for kids who might not be with the in-crowd at school. This would even apply to those who want to learn to be a leader and haven't had a chance to develop that skill elsewhere. Even the chance to do community work would rank higher than marching and uniforms for most, in my opinion.
Quote from: David Vandenbroeck on September 14, 2013, 03:59:52 PM
Is learning to march and wearing a uniform really why kids join CAP?
When I was a Squadron Commander in a Composite Squadron we had Cadets who was not interested in flying except maybe jumping out of a plane as a PJ. You ever wonder why after four years as a Cadet they join the Army or the Marines? Every Cadet does not want to be an astronaut when they grow up. 8)
All are true in the abstract, and part of the conversation, but I think you might be overestimating the timbre of the average 12-year old couch rider these days, or underestimating the appeal of a uniform and bling.
Ditto on the flying aspect. To the horror of GA pilots, flying just doesn't excite young people like it did 20-30 years ago. It's a victim of its own success.
Quote from: David Vandenbroeck on September 14, 2013, 03:59:52 PM
Is learning to march and wearing a uniform really why kids join CAP?
Yes.
Quote from: David Vandenbroeck on September 14, 2013, 04:18:16 PM
Quote from: SARDOC on September 14, 2013, 04:03:05 PM
Quote from: David Vandenbroeck on September 14, 2013, 03:59:52 PM
Is learning to march and wearing a uniform really why kids join CAP?
In my experience that seems to be the "cool" part of it. Only after they mature a little do they see the Leadership and Community Service benefits. There are exceptions to this of course but that seems to be a big part of it.
Marching and wearing a uniform are cool? Now that is funny!
I would think an interest in aviation or aerospace would be the driving force for most. Next would be participating in outdoor activities such as those of a ground team.
Just being a part of a group / membership or the desire to belong would also be very high for kids who might not be with the in-crowd at school. This would even apply to those who want to learn to be a leader and haven't had a chance to develop that skill elsewhere. Even the chance to do community work would rank higher than marching and uniforms for most, in my opinion.
Take away the marching and the uniforms an the cadet program dies. As for aviation or aerospace....we have to beg and fight to get our cadets to do O-rides. ES....maybe 30% bother to show up for training and half of that to SAREXs. Give them a choice and they would march all day everyday.
And the love the uniforms....I'm talking service dress in 100 decree weather sort of love them!
Kids join for any number of reasons. When I sit down with a prospective new cadet I ask them the following:
1) How did you hear about us?
2) What do you know about us?
3) What are you looking to get out of the program?
4) What are your aspirations later in life?
These are my feeder questions to see what they are interested in. Most say they want to learn leadership skills, flying, it gives them something to do and they want to use it as a gateway to the military.
Not all of my cadets want to do ES and not all want to fly. Usually when it comes oride time it's the same cadets raising their hands, in fact I have some who are terrified of flying. Our o-ride coordinator scratches his head at times about it and both myself and the cc have said we cannot force cadets to fly if they don't want to do o-rides they don't want to. The same goes with ES, most of our cadets have little to no interest in it.
Quote from: abdsp51 on September 14, 2013, 05:04:59 PMThe same goes with ES, most of our cadets have little to no interest in it.
I think to a certain extent it's that they don't have interest in the front-end work required to get involved. When the SHTF we get all sorts of calls from cadets with their Airsoft vest in-hand who want to come and "help", though they don't have anything they can actually "do.
And as for aviation, let's face it, the average ride at a Six-Flags is more exciting then the average ride in a GA plane, especially if you aren't the pilot.
Quote from: David Vandenbroeck on September 14, 2013, 04:18:16 PM
Quote from: SARDOC on September 14, 2013, 04:03:05 PM
Quote from: David Vandenbroeck on September 14, 2013, 03:59:52 PM
Is learning to march and wearing a uniform really why kids join CAP?
In my experience that seems to be the "cool" part of it. Only after they mature a little do they see the Leadership and Community Service benefits. There are exceptions to this of course but that seems to be a big part of it.
Marching and wearing a uniform are cool? Now that is funny!
I would think an interest in aviation or aerospace would be the driving force for most. Next would be participating in outdoor activities such as those of a ground team.
Just being a part of a group / membership or the desire to belong would also be very high for kids who might not be with the in-crowd at school. This would even apply to those who want to learn to be a leader and haven't had a chance to develop that skill elsewhere. Even the chance to do community work would rank higher than marching and uniforms for most, in my opinion.
As far as the Uniform is concerned, it's obviously a major topic for prospective members and members who've been in for a while, just look at any post in this forum and wait until it turn's into a uniform thread. I very rarely see uniform threads devolve into an Aerospace discussion.
I'm not saying it's right. I wish we had more members pay attention to the other missions of CAP with the gusto in which they try to solve all the uniform problems in the world.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 14, 2013, 05:10:44 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on September 14, 2013, 05:04:59 PMThe same goes with ES, most of our cadets have little to no interest in it.
I think to a certain extent it's that they don't have interest in the front-end work required to get involved.
No it's that there is no interest and FTXs, SAREXs, etc are put out there for them and no one goes.
Quote from: abdsp51 on September 14, 2013, 05:39:14 PM
No it's that there is no interest and FTXs, SAREXs, etc are put out there for them and no one goes.
Sadly, inertia seems to be the thing most abundant in young people these days.
Walking a search line or using a compass doesn't compete well with Call of Duty, especially when it involves
getting off the couch.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 14, 2013, 05:59:50 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on September 14, 2013, 05:39:14 PM
No it's that there is no interest and FTXs, SAREXs, etc are put out there for them and no one goes.
Sadly, inertia seems to be the thing most abundant in young people these days.
Walking a search line or using a compass doesn't compete well with Call of Duty, especially when it involves
getting off the couch.
Many adults don't have an interest in that stuff either. You gonna call them names too?
Personally, as a SM, I would love to do more of the SAREX and FTX and such! I love doing that!! But, I also have 2 cadets airmen and they are quite different! The oldest one wants to fly. He loves being in the air! My youngest one could care less about flying or ES or even advancing his rank! He loves to do drill and wants to get a color guard in our squadron. My daughter will be joining in November and she wants to the Spaatz and will do what it takes to get it. Kids join for so many different reasons. I think our squadron is pretty evenly split between flying and ES right now. :) I do have to agree though with whomever said that it doesn't compete with Call of Duty unfortunately.
Learning to fly or just learning about aviation, learning ES skills and leadership techniques will not only provide skills that cadets can utilize in CAP for use in real missions but also provide skills and knowledge that could further their adult careers later on. Learning to drill does neither unless one's goal is to be a lifelong drill team member. I'd venture to guess there aren't too many opportunities for that. Allowing that to be the focus serves no useful purpose.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 14, 2013, 05:59:50 PM
Sadly, inertia seems to be the thing most abundant in young people these days.
Walking a search line or using a compass doesn't compete well with Call of Duty, especially when it involves
getting off the couch.
Some young people, but careful with the generalities. Not many weekends ago I had 14 cadets from my squadron attend a SAREX where CAP trained jointly with several other SAR organizations. As the SAREX was winding down after a long day walking search lines and using compasses, we were called to help evacuate a hiker who had fallen and broken an ankle. The cadets participated in a 2 mile litter transport over rough terrain, at night, and in the rain, with not a single word of complaint.
At 13 I got excited about joining because I saw cadets marching in BDUs. Eventually the interest shifted to training new cadets. To each his own. Now? I can't wait for GTA V to arrive, bit I won't even touch it until the day after it hots the stores because for me, the CAP meeting still takes priority.
Quote from: David Vandenbroeck on September 14, 2013, 11:58:06 PM
Learning to fly or just learning about aviation, learning ES skills and leadership techniques will not only provide skills that cadets can utilize in CAP for use in real missions but also provide skills and knowledge that could further their adult careers later on. Learning to drill does neither unless one's goal is to be a lifelong drill team member. I'd venture to guess there aren't too many opportunities for that. Allowing that to be the focus serves no useful purpose.
Tell that to DEVGRU, Delat, PJs, CCT, SWAT Etc. Or any group that requires attention to detail, muscle memory and
DRILL being second nature to them. There is plenty that D&C teaches and those aspects are useful as an adult.
Quote from: David Vandenbroeck on September 14, 2013, 11:58:06 PM
Learning to fly or just learning about aviation, learning ES skills and leadership techniques will not only provide skills that cadets can utilize in CAP for use in real missions but also provide skills and knowledge that could further their adult careers later on. Learning to drill does neither unless one's goal is to be a lifelong drill team member. I'd venture to guess there aren't too many opportunities for that. Allowing that to be the focus serves no useful purpose.
Disagree.
Learning to drill....and learning to teach drill are very good training tools for young people.
First they teach attention to detail, following instructions, paying attention.
Drill also teaches esprit de corps, pride in team achievement.
Learning to teach drill.....helps with public speaking, projection of your voice, choosing where you place yourself in relation to your audience. Ect.
Now....it is not the end all beat all of what CAP can teach young people.......but that was not the question.
The question is what do the cadets want to do.
I can't think of any 12 year old who joined to molded into a productive citizen and future leader.....that's what we want at CPOs not what they want to do.
After 13 weeks at MCRD, 4 weeks at Marine Combat Training and 8 weeks at the School of Infantry I'm inclined to believe someone thinks drill is important.
Put a 15 yr old C/SSgt in front of a C/B flight of new cadets and watch that "kid", in the span of a couple weeks turn them into a decently marching flight...... The confidence in that cadet seeps out of every seam of their uniform. Learning and teaching drill develops followers, leaders and instills the most basic mindset of leadership that all other building blocks of command and leadership are built on.
Why did I join CAP as a 12 yr old kid? Uhhhhhh.... For the uniform and the drill team. I really didn't know anything about ES or O-Rides.
Quote from: doodah5 on September 15, 2013, 12:32:38 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on September 14, 2013, 05:59:50 PM
Sadly, inertia seems to be the thing most abundant in young people these days.
Walking a search line or using a compass doesn't compete well with Call of Duty, especially when it involves
getting off the couch.
Some young people, but careful with the generalities. Not many weekends ago I had 14 cadets from my squadron attend a SAREX where CAP trained jointly with several other SAR organizations. As the SAREX was winding down after a long day walking search lines and using compasses, we were called to help evacuate a hiker who had fallen and broken an ankle. The cadets participated in a 2 mile litter transport over rough terrain, at night, and in the rain, with not a single word of complaint.
I did not gather that Eclipse was referring to CAP cadets.... He was referring to the hoards of kids who have no interest in anything beyond Facebook and texting. CAP is a counter culture to today's society. My son goes to a school with 2500 kids and the NJROTC unit has 100 kids. My old H.S. is pushing 3500 and the ROTC unit has trouble making 100 cadets. So cadets who join CAP are definitely a novelty.
Yeah, at 14 I thought the Army (sic) was about marching and uniforms.
Somewhere between 14 and 19, someone slipped some leadership, aerospace, character & ethics and field skills lessons in between the drill & the uniform when I wasn't lookin'.
I grew up watching movies and TV shows about WW2 and Korea. These included movies about the ground war and the air war. While there was a bit of D&C here and there and maybe a few scenes of officers wearing dress uniforms, most of it was about combat and they mostly wore their fatigues. That was my concept of the military from as far back as I can remember.
When I was in the Army, we drilled in basic training but afterwards practically never. I learned more about myself and my fellow soldiers and working as a team during PT, obstacle courses, squad level maneuvers, helping the "slow" guy break down and reassemble his weapon, trusting the guy on belay while rappelling from helicopters, etc. All I learned from learning to march was how to march.
While I do see the need to be able to march in formation in certain cases, I do not see how it can be the main attraction for anyone to join either the military or CAP. I know that when I was a cadet, it was the thing I liked least.
Drill and Ceremonies is just another tool we use to teach leadership and also how to teach.
Quote from: David Vandenbroeck on September 15, 2013, 05:32:32 PM
I grew up watching movies and TV shows about WW2 and Korea. These included movies about the ground war and the air war. While there was a bit of D&C here and there and maybe a few scenes of officers wearing dress uniforms, most of it was about combat and they mostly wore their fatigues. That was my concept of the military from as far back as I can remember.
When I was in the Army, we drilled in basic training but afterwards practically never. I learned more about myself and my fellow soldiers and working as a team during PT, obstacle courses, squad level maneuvers, helping the "slow" guy break down and reassemble his weapon, trusting the guy on belay while rappelling from helicopters, etc. All I learned from learning to march was how to march.
While I do see the need to be able to march in formation in certain cases, I do not see how it can be the main attraction for anyone to join either the military or CAP. I know that when I was a cadet, it was the thing I liked least.
Big difference between 12 and 18.
I don't quite understand it myself.....but there it is....in my squadron given a choice between all that we offer.....the majority of the cadets would pick Drill as their activity of choice.
Does not mean we don't push everything else.....that just seems to be the trend in my neck of the woods.
Quote from: pierson777, Reply #640, It's finally here! in Uniforms & Awards
These paragraphs state that, "Command insignia is worn only by officers."
Can someone tell if there is a regulation that requires commanders to be officers. May a NCO serve as squadron commander or group commander and retain their NCO rank.
This has been answered before; many times. While current regulations allow for certain advanced promotions within the officer grades for commanders at different levels, there's no specific prohibition about NCOs assuming command positions. That said, there are discussions that would suggest that once the new NCO program is fully implemented, that command positions will be restricted to officers. If/when that policy is implemented, the appropriate regulations will have to be updated to reflect that.
For now, NCOs are not only eligible for command positions, unless specific restrictions (i.e. minimum grade requirements) are imposed from higher headquarters, but able to retain their NCO grade. There's also nothing preventing NCOs from taking an officer grade for which they qualify upon assuming command and reverting to their former NCO grade once command assignment has been completed.
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 11:22:00 PM
I don't know much about the CG Aux's rank structure, but from what I've heard it sounds pretty effective. Thoughts on that?
I was an Auxiliarist for several years.
In some ways, their system of "offices" (they do not hold rank titles and do not salute one another, though they are required to salute any and all military commissioned and warrant officers) does work. In other ways it's as confusing as all get out, especially given that some are "appointed" and others are "elected." Someone can go from wearing no insignia except the "member" insignia to wearing the four sleeve rings and eagles of a Captain, though the title is not used (unlikely, but it can happen).
My example: My first job in the Auxiliary was FSO-SR (Flotilla Staff Officer-Secretary of Records, a very rough equivalent to Admin in CAP). I wore one "ensign" sleeve ring and gold bars with a red "A" on them. It was an appointed position.
I then was elected VFC (Vice Flotilla Commander, kind of like a Squadron deputy CC in CAP). I switched to a "lieutenant j.g.'s one-and-a-half sleeve rings and a silver bar with a blue "A".
Even more confusing is when you go from a leadership back to a staff officer's position (example: a Flotilla Commander - who wears "lieutenant" sleeve rings and railway tracks with a blue "A" going to a FSO-CM - Flotilla Staff Officer-Communications), you are permitted to still wear your "highest" office insignia.
If you augment with the CG - and the CGAUX has a
MUCH closer relationship with the CG than CAP does with the AF - then the "office" insignia
may come off and you wear just "member" insignia, at the discretion of the OIC or NCOIC of the vessel, shore facility or aircraft. I used to keep a set of "member" insignia with me just-in-case.
You do not address one another by any rank title or "sir/ma'am." Regardless of the number of sleeve rings, or bars/oak leaves/chickens, you're "Jack," "Henry," "Laura," "Jill," etc.
There is also no chain of command; it's called "the chain of leadership and management."
http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg3/cg3pcx/training/org/flot-officers.asp (http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg3/cg3pcx/training/org/flot-officers.asp)
CyBorg:
Are these two sites more or less accurate?
USCG Aux Collar Insignia (http://www.uniforminsignia.org/?option=com_insigniasearch&Itemid=53&result=1850)
USCG Aux Shoulder Insignia (http://www.uniforminsignia.org/?option=com_insigniasearch&Itemid=53&result=1849)
If they are... geeze. That's pretty confusing.
Quote from: Panache on February 18, 2014, 10:45:04 AM
CyBorg:
Are these two sites more or less accurate?
USCG Aux Collar Insignia (http://www.uniforminsignia.org/?option=com_insigniasearch&Itemid=53&result=1850)
USCG Aux Shoulder Insignia (http://www.uniforminsignia.org/?option=com_insigniasearch&Itemid=53&result=1849)
If they are... geeze. That's pretty confusing.
Yes to both on accuracy and confusion.
The only level of "office" that has a rank title with it is "Commodore" (abbreviated COMO), which neither the Navy or CG use at all anymore (though many other navies do).
I remember meeting our District Commodore for the first time and, seeing the shoulder boards with star, immediately I was ready to snap to, render courtesy, etc. He stuck his hand out, and introduced himself by his first name (nice guy, as it happens).
There was something about that I could not figure out.
Those who want to adopt such a system for CAP should realise that, while it does have its merits, it can be almost Kafka-esque in its complexity.
I have known people who have held office at both the Flotilla and District levels (simultaneously), and are entitled to wear two different kinds of insignia...imagine a First Lieutenant at the Squadron level in CAP simultaneously getting to wear Major insignia because of a Wing staff job.
Quote from: CyBorg on February 18, 2014, 09:03:56 PM
Quote from: Panache on February 18, 2014, 10:45:04 AM
CyBorg:
Are these two sites more or less accurate?
USCG Aux Collar Insignia (http://www.uniforminsignia.org/?option=com_insigniasearch&Itemid=53&result=1850)
USCG Aux Shoulder Insignia (http://www.uniforminsignia.org/?option=com_insigniasearch&Itemid=53&result=1849)
If they are... geeze. That's pretty confusing.
Yes to both on accuracy and confusion.
The only level of "office" that has a rank title with it is "Commodore" (abbreviated COMO), which neither the Navy or CG use at all anymore (though many other navies do).
I remember meeting our District Commodore for the first time and, seeing the shoulder boards with star, immediately I was ready to snap to, render courtesy, etc. He stuck his hand out, and introduced himself by his first name (nice guy, as it happens).
There was something about that I could not figure out.
Those who want to adopt such a system for CAP should realise that, while it does have its merits, it can be almost Kafka-esque in its complexity.
I have known people who have held office at both the Flotilla and District levels (simultaneously), and are entitled to wear two different kinds of insignia...imagine a First Lieutenant at the Squadron level in CAP simultaneously getting to wear Major insignia because of a Wing staff job.
The same site must think we still get to wear blue shoulder marks...if only...
http://www.uniforminsignia.org/?option=com_insigniasearch&Itemid=53&result=1777 (http://www.uniforminsignia.org/?option=com_insigniasearch&Itemid=53&result=1777)
Quote from: CyBorg on February 18, 2014, 09:08:09 PM
The same site must think we still get to wear blue shoulder marks...if only...
http://www.uniforminsignia.org/?option=com_insigniasearch&Itemid=53&result=1777 (http://www.uniforminsignia.org/?option=com_insigniasearch&Itemid=53&result=1777)
Yeah, I saw that. Maybe if you squint and pretend it's a dark slate gray...
The cadet officer stuff is all jacked up. But I actually think it looks better than what we have now.
The CG Aux system is actually less complex and confusing than CAP. In CG Aux you know that the only way to get insignia is to either get elected or appointed to some office and presumably make a contribution to the organization.
The current CAP system makes it entirely possible to wear the highest CAP grade insignia available to most members based on something you did in another organization 30 years ago.
That being said, while I think there are a few things from CG Aux that CAP should adopt, I don't think this is one of them.
That being said, even when done correctly and completely, I'm not sure that the CAP PD program produces leaders that are "better" in any measurable way than what I find in CG Aux, which essentially has no general PD program required of most members beyond 1 test on administrative procedures that elected officers have to have passed. There are some in-residence courses that are available, but are not widely attended.
Sounds like our flying club units need to recharter!
The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.
I don't believe the current CAP system is that confusing when compared to the CGAux. Can it be improved? Absolutely! And it's currently being reviewed for such improvements.
All these comparisons with the CGAux are irrelevant as the missions and scope of both organizations are quite different. Sure, there are similarities. But when it comes to scope, CAP's main missions are quite more comprehensive than those of the CGAux.
The only confusion, no matter which side of the fence you're on, aux, civil, military, is from the outside.
And that confusion can be annoying, but it is irrelevant, and comes up so infrequently, usually from edge
players with no actual involvement, that it should be ignored out of hand.
Quote from: Panache on February 18, 2014, 10:45:04 AM
CyBorg:
Are these two sites more or less accurate?
USCG Aux Collar Insignia (http://www.uniforminsignia.org/?option=com_insigniasearch&Itemid=53&result=1850)
USCG Aux Shoulder Insignia (http://www.uniforminsignia.org/?option=com_insigniasearch&Itemid=53&result=1849)
If they are... geeze. That's pretty confusing.
Actually both of those are obsolete. Division (group) office titles have changed and District Vice Commodores don't even exist anymore.
Quote from: CyBorg on February 18, 2014, 05:26:37 AM
Quote from: Woodsy on September 04, 2013, 11:22:00 PM
I don't know much about the CG Aux's rank structure, but from what I've heard it sounds pretty effective. Thoughts on that?
I was an Auxiliarist for several years.
In some ways, their system of "offices" (they do not hold rank titles and do not salute one another, though they are required to salute any and all military commissioned and warrant officers) does work. In other ways it's as confusing as all get out, especially given that some are "appointed" and others are "elected." Someone can go from wearing no insignia except the "member" insignia to wearing the four sleeve rings and eagles of a Captain, though the title is not used (unlikely, but it can happen).
My example: My first job in the Auxiliary was FSO-SR (Flotilla Staff Officer-Secretary of Records, a very rough equivalent to Admin in CAP). I wore one "ensign" sleeve ring and gold bars with a red "A" on them. It was an appointed position.
I then was elected VFC (Vice Flotilla Commander, kind of like a Squadron deputy CC in CAP). I switched to a "lieutenant j.g.'s one-and-a-half sleeve rings and a silver bar with a blue "A".
Even more confusing is when you go from a leadership back to a staff officer's position (example: a Flotilla Commander - who wears "lieutenant" sleeve rings and railway tracks with a blue "A" going to a FSO-CM - Flotilla Staff Officer-Communications), you are permitted to still wear your "highest" office insignia.
If you augment with the CG - and the CGAUX has a MUCH closer relationship with the CG than CAP does with the AF - then the "office" insignia may come off and you wear just "member" insignia, at the discretion of the OIC or NCOIC of the vessel, shore facility or aircraft. I used to keep a set of "member" insignia with me just-in-case.
You do not address one another by any rank title or "sir/ma'am." Regardless of the number of sleeve rings, or bars/oak leaves/chickens, you're "Jack," "Henry," "Laura," "Jill," etc.
There is also no chain of command; it's called "the chain of leadership and management."
http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg3/cg3pcx/training/org/flot-officers.asp (http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg3/cg3pcx/training/org/flot-officers.asp)
Couple points I'd like to make, the sleeve "rank insignia" is really only permanent when it's sewn onto the sleeves of the Service Dress Blue Uniform (SDB). If that insignia is not the current office that you're holding you wear a badge called a Past Officers' Device.
Any other uniform you can switch out the pin-on "rank" and/or the shoulder boards to fit the office that you hold or go back to wearing blank boards and member devices.
Regardless if you are wearing Flotilla Staff Officer insignia or National Commodore insignia one day and Member Devices the next, no one will get rapped around an axle about it.
Truthfully, by regulation if you're doing any augmentation to the actual USCG... member devices is it.
Again, on the SDB uniform the "rank" is really kinda permanent, so the USCG would make an allowance for that, but anything else, office insignia comes off and Member Devices go on.
Now I know some Stations "bend" that regulation, but most don't.
Quote from: VNY on February 19, 2014, 07:39:47 PM
Actually both of those are obsolete. Division (group) office titles have changed and District Vice Commodores don't even exist anymore.
So noted. I was never able to keep all the abbreviations straight.
Quote from: RiverAux on February 19, 2014, 12:50:22 PM
The CG Aux system is actually less complex and confusing than CAP. In CG Aux you know that the only way to get insignia is to either get elected or appointed to some office and presumably make a contribution to the organization.
The current CAP system makes it entirely possible to wear the highest CAP grade insignia available to most members based on something you did in another organization 30 years ago.
In the senses you mention I give some agreement with, but all the differing permutations of which titles/abbreviations went with which office insignia were something I could never wrap my head around.
I never had to take off my office insignia for CG purposes. Of course, WIWAAUX, the area I lived in was extremely landlocked and the only way to augment was at a now-closed LORAN station and a recruiting office 70 miles away.
The Aux office abbreviations are somewhat complex and are used way more than anything similar in CAP and they can be a challenge for new members.
Quote from: RiverAux on February 20, 2014, 10:52:51 PM
The Aux office abbreviations are somewhat complex and are used way more than anything similar in CAP and they can be a challenge for new members.
To say the least. I was in the Aux for a few years and never learnt all of them, or which abbreviation went with which insignia.
Quote from: CyBorg on February 18, 2014, 09:03:56 PM
The only level of "office" that has a rank title with it is "Commodore" (abbreviated COMO), which neither the Navy or CG use at all anymore (though many other navies do).
The Navy does indeed still use the title Commodore. It's a positional title. It used to be associated with O-7 Now called Rear Admiral (lower half) but now it's an office title that I've seen filled with Commanders, Captains or Rear Admirals depending on the size and nature of the command.
To elaborate, the label associated with O-7 has been contentious for many years.
Commodore originated as a courtesy title reserved for captains in command of a fleet or squadron, around 1775. It remained so until the Civil War, when it was made a flag rank. In 1899, Commodoores were made rear admirals, and because of the potential expense of pay raises for all the former commodores to the level of rear admirals, the lower half was paid at the level of brigadier generals (BG). All rear admirals, upper half or lower half, were considered equal to major generals, and wore two stars. Ultimately, this didn't sit well with BGs from the Army, so Rear Admiral (lower half) was made equal to BG in 1916.
During WWII, commodore was restored as a one star rank, for officers serving in command of a fleet or squadron. This went away around 1950.
Quote from: WikipediaIn the early 1980s, following years of objections and complaints by the U.S. Army, U.S. Air Force, and U.S. Marine Corps, efforts were begun to reinstate commodore as an official rank in the U.S. Navy and U.S. Coast Guard with a pay grade of O-7, replacing "rear admiral (lower half)", which were Navy and Coast Guard flag officers who were paid at the one-star rank of an O-7, but who had previously worn the same two-star rank insignia as a rear admiral (upper half), an O-8. In 1982, the rank of commodore was finally and officially reintroduced in the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Coast Guard as an O-7 rank. This was intended to quell the long-running dissatisfaction by U.S. Army, U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. Air Force officers with the U.S. Navy's and the U.S. Coast Guard's policy of honoring its rear admirals (lower half), who received the pay grade of O-7 while wearing the rank insignia of a two-star admiral, i.e., an O-8. The one-star officer's rank and insignia for Navy and Coast Guard officers was thence re-established with the initial title of commodore admiral.
In 1983, following numerous protests by Navy and Coast Guard officers to the Chief of Naval Operations and the Commandant of the Coast Guard that this new title was unwieldy and confusing, the rank of "commodore admiral" was simplified to "commodore".
This latter did not stem all of the confusion, however, because the Navy had long assigned the title (although not the rank) of commodore to selected captains (pay grade O-6) holding major operational commands. Since at least the 1950s, commodore had also been used a "position title" for senior naval captains who commanded destroyer squadrons, submarine squadrons, amphibious squadrons, patrol boat flotillas, patrol hydrofoil missile ship squadrons, special warfare groups, air groups and air wings (other than those officers commanding carrier air groups/carrier air wings, who were historically known and referred to as "CAGs"), construction regiments, and other large seagoing commands consisting of multiple ships, submarines, aviation squadrons, etc. The U.S. Coast Guard had never previously used the title.
Later in 1983, the one-star U.S. Navy and U.S. Coast Guard admiral rank was changed back to its original O-7 pay grade title of "Rear Admiral (Lower Half)". From then on, commodore has remained a title for Navy captains in command of more than a single unit (other than captains commanding Carrier Air Wings, who retained their traditional title of "CAG") and all Navy and Coast Guard one-star admirals were subsequently referred to as rear admiral (lower half).
In 1985, the U.S. Navy and U.S. Coast Guard again renamed the rank of commodore to rear admiral (lower half), but with the single star for collar insignia and applicable shoulder insignia (i.e., flight suits, jackets, etc.), a single silver star on top of solid gold background shoulder board insignia, and a single broad gold sleeve stripe insignia for dress blue uniforms (service dress blue, full dress blue and dinner dress blue) of all officers in pay grade O-7, and for the dress white uniforms of female officers in pay grade O-7. The term "commodore" again reverted to that of an honorary title versus an actual rank for the limited number of captains in command of multiple units.
So...lemme get this straight.
The Navy and Coast Guard can have a Chief running a boat called "Captain", and somehow not confuse that with the grade of "Captain" (O-6), but they can't resolve the same thing with Commodore
I've always preferred Commodore over Rear Admiral Lower Half. Always sounded like the guy wearing the tail end of a two man horse costume. The change from Como came about because new O-7's felt it was the title wasn't good enough to denote a flag officer. Maybe they would have accepted the title of Commodore, if the alternative was Rear Admiral Junior Grade.
So are RALH's "telephone admirals" in the same way Lt Cols are "telephone colonels"?
Quote from: JeffDG on February 28, 2014, 12:47:10 PM
So...lemme get this straight.
The Navy and Coast Guard can have a Chief running a boat called "Captain", and somehow not confuse that with the grade of "Captain" (O-6), but they can't resolve the same thing with Commodore
Enlisted folks are never "Captains". The guy in charge of a small boat is called the Coxswain.
The Rear Admiral thing is a case of egos and politics that has gone out of control for so long that there's no fix that will satisfy everyone. The current situation seems to be the best compromise.
I don't think a CAP NCO should be a squadron commander.
Would an NCO be able to be a unit commander in the military?
CAP is not the military you argue? Then what are you doing wearing military NCO rank?
Quote from: Stonewall on February 28, 2014, 09:24:46 PM
I don't think a CAP NCO should be a squadron commander.
Would an NCO be able to be a unit commander in the military?
CAP is not the military you argue? Then what are you doing wearing military NCO rank?
Logic will get you appointed to the Vulcan council, but has no place in CAP.
It appears the soon to be "reinvention of spinning wheels" will preclude NCOs from being commanders.
Which will potentially cause issue for a number of unit who have, presumably, good CCs they will lose.
You can see where these things start to break down when filtered by reality.
Then switch over and become CAP officer. I don't understand the dilemma. It is CAP, no one really cares what rank you are or if you WERE a sergeant major or currently a 2d Lt in CAP. Contribute to the program, be a goo leader, don't screw up, and I'll give you a set of stars to wear if it makes you happy. I don't care what you did in the military, I care about what you can do now, in CAP.
Quote from: Stonewall on February 28, 2014, 09:40:35 PM
Then switch over and become CAP officer. I don't understand the dilemma. It is CAP, no one really cares what rank you are or if you WERE a sergeant major or currently a 2d Lt in CAP. Contribute to the program, be a goo leader, don't screw up, and I'll give you a set of stars to wear if it makes you happy. I don't care what you did in the military, I care about what you can do now, in CAP.
Again, your logic is simultaneously flawless and irrelevant. Bear in mind, also, that the
proposal or plan, or whatever, indicates members will become NCOs organically as well, so it's not just prior military.
Personally, I don't think people should be able to hop back and forth at will for the sake of expediency any
more then they could in the military. It basically negates the idea that NCOs are "the backbone of CAP"
for the sake of typical CAP expediency.
If they are important and the backbone, then they stay where they are "needed".
You don't suddenly become a skilled manager in the officer sense "because", and if the assertion
is made that the grade is irrelevant, then...it's irrelevant, in which case, why bother with the distinction,
distraction, and potential negative of creating another way to divide an already divided membership.