SM Rank

[Rachel F]

Hey guys,

I have been in contact with the PD officer for my squadron and had all my questions answered. Sorry about my confusion. I will definitely commit more time to reading CAP regulations!

Have a great Independence Day!

[PHall]

All,

  It was a matter of convenience at an event with well over 200 cadets in attendance, that needed to be resolved immediately.  Eclipse,  I am well aware of the program and how it works.  I take very good care of the people in my unit.  If Miss Fairfield came away confused I accept full responsibility for being expedient in a situation that called for immediate corrective action.  These questions were all addressed after the Airshow with my staff.   Miss Fairfield has been fully briefed on what she needs to do and when by the unit Deputy for Seniors and Professional Development officer.

   Lastly, Camas,  my staff and I are perfectly capable of handling any question Miss Fairfield, or any of my members should have about CAP and if not, we know where to turn in our Wing.  I have no problem referring people to subject matter experts, but I have little tolerance for supposed experts who wander into my unit offering advice to my folks uninvited.

Thank you

"Matter of convenience" doesn't cut it. You're either following the regs or you aren't. Not following the regs at the airshow is probably NOT the lesson you were trying to teach to your cadets.
Remember, integrity is doing what's right, even when nobody is looking.

[jsmcgary]

PHall,

   You speak of integrity yet I see very little in your own post. Major Harbison spoke up, took responsibility for having created a situation where a new member was confused, and even stated that he had already spoken with his staff about the issue while at the air show. Where exactly is the breakdown in his integrity? You where not there and have no firsthand knowledge of the circumstances that Major Harbison found himself in.

   Beyond that Major Harbison (and myself for that matter) sign our posts. We do not hide behind the anonymity offered by the internet to attack people's integrity whom we have never met. Other than you are from California I do not know who you are, what unit you are assigned to, or any way other than this forum to contact you. When he rights something he says who he is and what he does. He ensures that if you want to you can find him to discuss what he has said. He stands behind his words.

  I have had the pleasure of working with Major Harbison closely over the last few years on a number of Cadet Programs activities here in NH. I consider him not only a colleague, but a close personal friend. He served his country for over 22 years in the United States Army, has raised four outstanding children and gives tirelessly to CAP. I have found him to have the highest levels integrity. To make a personal attack on him when you have never met him and to not then have the integrity to sign your post shows your level of integrity in my eyes.

Thank you.

[TCMajor]

Phall,

  I trust you did not set out to actually challenge my integrity.  I take that as a personal afront, from someone who does not know me or my squadron.  I could have just sat in the background and said nothing and no one would have known that I was the cc in question.  However I have never been one to hide from responsibilty. At the moment in question, it was a matter of correcting disrespectful behavior by cadets towards a senior member,and then proceeding with the mission. .  I had no plan to have this SM be something she wasn't.  If you wish to continue to challenge my integrety, my name, unlike yours, is directly below my post. The nature of your response is yet another reason why many people have turned away from this site. 

[Майор Хаткевич]

Perhaps you shouldn't be taking it as an insult and making this something that it is not. As multiple people pointed out, there were a number of ways cadets SHOULD refer to a SM that do not involve using the incorrect title out of convenience. Learn and drive on.

[a2capt]

I have no problem referring people to subject matter experts, but I have little tolerance for supposed experts who wander into my unit offering advice to my folks uninvited.

So, when someone posts a question here, no one answer it because they should have asked somewhere else, and that echelon will not like it.


The question was posted, answered, debated, dissected, and.. well.. sort of agreed on, in this case, in the way it usually happens on an internet forum.


Perhaps then it needs to be extended to members of the unit, "Do not go and post questions on internet forums. Ask us first. Our answer is always right."

[PHall]

Phall,

  I trust you did not set out to actually challenge my integrity.  I take that as a personal afront, from someone who does not know me or my squadron.  I could have just sat in the background and said nothing and no one would have known that I was the cc in question.  However I have never been one to hide from responsibilty. At the moment in question, it was a matter of correcting disrespectful behavior by cadets towards a senior member,and then proceeding with the mission. .  I had no plan to have this SM be something she wasn't.  If you wish to continue to challenge my integrety, my name, unlike yours, is directly below my post. The nature of your response is yet another reason why many people have turned away from this site.

It was a "teachable moment" for the cadets, yet, by your own admission, you took an easy way out.

And yes, I would say what I said to your face sir.

And my screen name is my first initial and last name. I've never tried to hide my identity on this board.

[jsmcgary]

Teachable moment in the middle of processing and screening 30,000 people into and out of an air show? I think not. You fix the issue in as prompt a manner as possible, then teach later. The issue at had was that cadets were not being respectful to the the adult member. Major Harbison addressed that issue and I am sure will follow up back at the squadron. We had a mission at hand that had to get done.

There is still no exscuse for questioning his integrity, and I for one would like to see an apology.

Posted from my cell phone, please forgive spelling or grammer issues.

Thank you.

[TCMajor]

On the contrary, the easy way out would have been to simply watch the disrespec continue to happen and do nothing.  I made a correction.  Regardless, you still have no right or basis to question my integrety as you have.  As I said before, you don't know me, you don't know my unit, and you truly don't know the situation under which this happened. 

[SarDragon]

OK, guys, let's cool off a bit here. This isn't the Great Internet Urinating Competition here.

All y'all have been around CAP for a while, as evidenced by all the bottle caps in the sigs. There are some differences of opinion here, partly based in situational involvement, and partly based on the regs. I think you need to step back and look at both sides of the argument and see that there is some correctness on each side.

The OP should not have been addressed as FO, since she was not one at the time. Saying otherwise just added unneeded confusion to the issue.

On the spot correction was also appropriate. But the execution was faulty.

[Extremepredjudice]

Busy or not, telling someone wrong information is still telling someone wrong information. No ifs ands or buts about it.

[Private Investigator]

Teachable moment in the middle of processing and screening 30,000 people into and out of an air show? I think not.

Is that an excuse?   

[C/Haughey]

Teachable moment in the middle of processing and screening 30,000 people into and out of an air show? I think not.

Is that an excuse?   

Issue has been dealt with, PI. Let's give it a rest lol. 

[abdsp51]

I would like to point out that rarely here is ever the full side of a situation given.  And usually the advice given is based off the facts at hand. I do not see anyone here questioning anyone's integrity or unit here.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

you don't address someone as "Flight Officer Smith".

CAPP151, Page 16 disagrees with you as well.

A warrant officer is a "mister," a "miss" or a "mrs." in the Army, Navy and Marine Corps, and was so in the Air Force and in CAP. The same was said of flight officers in CAP in days gone by. Someone had a hiccup when CAPP 151 was rewritten, but that's no surprise; every once in a while, there's a faux pas written into our regulations. Thanks for pointing that out.

[Eclipse]

you don't address someone as "Flight Officer Smith".

CAPP151, Page 16 disagrees with you as well.

A warrant officer is a "mister," a "miss" or a "mrs." in the Army, Navy and Marine Corps, and was so in the Air Force and in CAP. The same was said of flight officers in CAP in days gone by. Someone had a hiccup when CAPP 151 was rewritten, but that's no surprise; every once in a while, there's a faux pas written into our regulations. Thanks for pointing that out.

Cite Please. This was clearly conscious decision by NHQ to provide a definition which had not previously existed, not a "hiccup".

The previous revision of CAPP151 "Standards, Customs, and Courtesies, dated Aug 1989, does not even mention Warrant Officers or Flight Officers,
and the issue of that absence of definition for the term of address was discussed on this very forum in 2006:
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=574.0

Quoting the Level One Foundations Course "Customs and Courtesies" dated 2007, Page 1:
Grade Insignia, Proper Titles, and Titles of Address
All CAP members and military personnel are addressed properly by their grade or title.   

There is no insinuation of the term "Mister" or its variants in this context in these or any other CAP publications in reference to
Flight Officers.

[Private Investigator]

A warrant officer is a "mister," a "miss" or a "mrs." in the Army, Navy and Marine Corps, and was so in the Air Force and in CAP.

In USN or USCG it is Mister, but in the Army or the Marines; it is Chief Smith, Chief Warrant Officer Smith or in Marine Infantry, Gunner Smith (which will be hard to explain to a non Marine, but it is a cool title, I had a pit bull I named "Gunner" when I was at Camp Lejeune)   

[C/Haughey]

you don't address someone as "Flight Officer Smith".

CAPP151, Page 16 disagrees with you as well.

A warrant officer is a "mister," a "miss" or a "mrs." in the Army, Navy and Marine Corps, and was so in the Air Force and in CAP. The same was said of flight officers in CAP in days gone by. Someone had a hiccup when CAPP 151 was rewritten, but that's no surprise; every once in a while, there's a faux pas written into our regulations. Thanks for pointing that out.

Cite Please. This was clearly conscious decision by NHQ to provide a definition which had not previously existed, not a "hiccup".

The previous revision of CAPP151 "Standards, Customs, and Courtesies, dated Aug 1989, does not even mention Warrant Officers or Flight Officers,
and the issue of that absence of definition for the term of address was discussed on this very forum in 2006:
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=574.0

Quoting the Level One Foundations Course "Customs and Courtesies" dated 2007, Page 1:
Grade Insignia, Proper Titles, and Titles of Address
All CAP members and military personnel are addressed properly by their grade or title.   

There is no insinuation of the term "Mister" or its variants in this context in these or any other CAP publications in reference to
Flight Officers.

CAPP151, 2009

http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/Respect_on_Display_2009__Reduced_2A46F4ACF35F8.pdf

Page 16.

Abbrev.     Grade               Term of Address
"FO           Flight Officer     Flight Officer"

Same goes for TFOs and SFOs. All are addressed as Flight Officer.

Since they are superior ranking to all SMWOG and and all Cadets, they should be addressed as "Sir" or "Ma'am" by the previously mentioned parties.

[Critical AOA]

Sir or Ma'am is never an inappropriate greeting, regardless of grade.

It's simple common courtesy, just like you were taught as a child.

Ah... someone decided to go the simple yet courteous route.   Elegant. 

I personally prefer "Sir" over "Captain Vandenbroeck".  It might even be easier for the cadets.  Of course, I would not fault them if they used "Captain Fantastic" either. 

[Sapper168]

A warrant officer is a "mister," a "miss" or a "mrs." in the Army, Navy and Marine Corps, and was so in the Air Force and in CAP.

In USN or USCG it is Mister, but in the Army or the Marines; it is Chief Smith, Chief Warrant Officer Smith or in Marine Infantry, Gunner Smith (which will be hard to explain to a non Marine, but it is a cool title, I had a pit bull I named "Gunner" when I was at Camp Lejeune)   

Almost, close, not quite.    This is incorrect for the Army.  The official title of adress for all Warrant(w1) and Chief Warrant(w2-w5) officers according to Army Regulation 600-20 is "Mister/Mrs/Miss/Ms."(table 1-1).  The Term 'Chief' is a common informal term used for CWO much like calling a First Sgt. 'Top' and most Chief Warrant Officers don't mind it, some do.  It is also acceptable to call them Sir or Ma'am.