New senior member doesn't get what CAP is truly about

Started by CAPCom, March 31, 2022, 01:49:15 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

CAPCom

Hello.  I have a new senior member who seemed to "get" what CAP is about, what my squadron's purpose and vision is when first attending and wanting to join.  Then within a very short period of time, the resume was presented with education credentials that included a PhD.  The individual has been an academic for several years and hasn't had experience teaching youth for 25 years.  After their very short stint teaching high school, they went on to higher degrees and became a college professor.  For the last several years they have been sitting at a computer doing research for a think tank.  Fast forward to now and the former professor is pretty much demanding the AE specialty track (zero past experience in aerospace, they think reading about it will make them an expert) and they also want immediate promotion to captain because <insert self-centered reason here>.  The new member is an okay presenter, very clinical in their approach, but nothing special.  They have a very bland personality, yet think they will be a cadet recruiter extraordinaire because they hold a PhD and will be a captain.  The new member has plans to be a mission-this and mission-that superstar, they move out of their lane frequently and insert themselves into discussions about how to implement this and that in CAP-related specialty track areas they have no clue about but think they do because they found information about it on the internet.  They even tried instructing cadets not too long ago on how to do a specific PT task when the deputy commander for cadets was gone for a few minutes.  How did the individual learn about the PT task?  They read it on the internet and were doing just that for the cadets as they were looking at him like "Where did this person come from?"

I understand he's enthusiastic.  I understand he's smart.  I understand he can be useful.  I just don't know how to best tell him all this without pissing him off and pushing him out the door.

Anyone experience something similar and have truly helpful advice?

Thanks in advance.

Eclipse

Quote from: CAPCom on March 31, 2022, 01:49:15 PMthe resume was presented with education credentials that included a PhD

Well there's your problem right there.

Sounds like a Form 40 conference is long overdue.
Don't pull punches, if it stings, it stings. From there he'll either "get it",
or cease to be a problem.

"That Others May Zoom"

CAPCom

Are you talking about CAPR 40?  Presenting it to this new member?  Having a discussion about what's in it?

***Update*** Gotcha.  Performance review form 40.  Yes.  Good idea!

TheSkyHornet

Sounds like many of the individuals I come across: "My skills are valid here because I know things." Knowing and practical application are not synonymous.

I would emphasize the importance of patience and really going through the proper steps for progression. If they want to work with cadets, maybe ask that they complete TLC Basic and Intermediate before you are willing to put them through for an advanced grade.

Let's remember here that there are no automatic promotions. They're all earned, to include advanced promotions due to skills.

Anyone who joins CAP and demands advancement out of the gate...that's sketchy in my books. And I'm not sure that it's appropriate messaging as an exemplar for cadets.

CAPCom


Holding Pattern

It sounds to me also like expectations weren't managed very well in the membership committee meeting.

CAPCom

Quote from: Holding Pattern on March 31, 2022, 07:55:00 PMIt sounds to me also like expectations weren't managed very well in the membership committee meeting.

They were managed.  It's just that this added "extra" expectation from the new member wasn't expressed until after the membership committe meeting with them.  That's a failure (and in my opinion, a character issue) on the part of the new member, not the membership committee.

NIN

Let me say this, about that.

In the last couple years, I have developed a little bit of a philosophy on accelerated promotions or other things like badges. Some folks buy it, some folks ... don't.  I've been labeled a heretic at times for even suggesting some of this.

Example: Pilot comes in to CAP. Lady has a long aviation history, 10s of thousands of hours flying, former military, retired airline, etc. CAPR 35-6 says that a waiver can be requested for command pilot wings based on equivalent gov't or military rated service in lieu of CAP service time. One of the officers in her unit latches on to that paragraph and tells her "I can get you command pilot wings!" and proceeds to campaign for them. Literally from about day 1. I get multiple emails requesting this waiver. Unfortunately, the documentation is lacking a little, and I don't have a clear "A to B, B to C" chain that shows "equivalent military or government rated service." 

From the outset of the whole waiver request, it is never exactly clear how granting command pilot wings to this lady will benefit CAP.  Now, don't get me wrong: I want to make sure people get some bling-bling. But I want to make sure that we're rewarding appropriately for contributions made to CAP.  I really want to know that the multiple thousands of hours former military retired airline pilot is using her skills in a way that helps CAP in an aviation context, which makes the "sell" to Region and NHQ for this waiver work.

If the answer is "this lady doesn't even have a Form 5 yet," then chances are region is going to look askance upon a request for this waiver. 

Are we asking for something "because we can" or are we asking for something "because they need to be recognized and rewarded for their excellent contributions to CAP?"  If it's the former, then maybe we really need to see the latter.

Same goes for a request for a promotion for, say, a CFI. And I've seen dozens of those.

"He's a CFI. Give him captain. Now."

Uh, ok, hold up.

Is he even a CAP pilot? ("No").
Is he willing to be an instructor pilot or check airman for CAP? ("No").
Is he even a current CFI? ("No"). 

Well, then, no, I'm not signing off on this promotion to captain. (CAPR 35-5, para 4.1 reads, in part, "...provided they are contributing these skills to the CAP mission.")

"Well, then he's probably going to quit."

Well, sorry about that. You sold that pilot a bill of goods. You promised them something you weren't in a position to promise.  Because advanced promotions and waivers to qualifications are intended to reward people who are using specific skills and experiences to benefit CAP first and foremost.

Unit wants to promote a college professor to Captain. Is she assigned as an AEO and acting in that capacity? Does she want to act in that capacity?  If the answers to all those are no, then there's no need to promote under CAPR 35-5 para 5.42 because the criteria is not met.

If, however, you're using your professional or mission-related skill in a way that benefits CAP, then yes, I want to reward you for doing so with, say, advanced grade. Or if you're providing my wing with expert aviation leadership and mentorship that comes from being a multi-thousand hour former military and commercial aviator, then yeah, I probably want to make sure that you're wearing command pilot wings to put a little weight behind that. 

Speaking as a recruiter: if you're having to dangle badges and promotions in front of prospective members to get them to sign on the dotted, then chances are they're not joining CAP for the right reasons and are not going to be successful, long-term members who are here for the right reasons.

Speaking as a commander: I need people who are going to use their skills and abilities to help CAP grow and accomplish its missions. I need people who are willing to give of themselves, to volunteer their time, talent and treasure, to make CAP a great organization.  Those people are what I call "givers." If all they want is a promotion to Captain, or pad their log book with flying, and aren't willing to use their skills to help CAP, then by and large they're "takers."  I have plenty of them without adding more to the ranks.
Darin Ninness, Col, CAP
I have no responsibilities whatsoever
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2007-2024 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

CAPCom

Bingo, sir.  This individual has no background in AE, thinks they can become an expert in it by reading stuff, wants AE (in my opinion as well as what I'm feeling in my gut) in order to get the promotion.  Yes, when I give them AE later on they will be (hopefully) helping out the primary AEO, but all that has yet to be proven.  So far when I've asked if they can help with xyz or abc and it all is stuff that gets your hands dirty, the answer has been "I'm not available" or no communications requesting their assistance have been returned. 

I don't need brainiacs I need people to jump in and actually volunteer.  I need people that are going to serve CAP and our unit and our Wing, not read about how to do it and then not do anything of worth or that truly fulfills a need. 

I like what SkyHornet suggested.  If you're going to take the time to do the classes that actually show you're interested in the new direction the unit is going (a focus on CP), then I need more than a nod of the head in tacit agreement when I tell you that's the direction we're going.  I need you to volunteer to be an encampment staff member so you can see what the heart of CAP is about and how all those positions you say you are interested in truly function.  I need you to take TLC and start to implement what you were taught.

The individual wanting the bars from the jump start is going to eventually be an asset, I do believe that.  But until they truly understand it's not the bars that cause anyone else in CAP to respect you and take you seriously, rather, it's actually the work and time you put into doing things CAP sees as valuable and needs done, they're going to be more of a problem than an asset. 

I appreciate everyone's input and hope how I'm now planning to tackle this problem will produce the right results.  I don't want this person to go away, I want them to get a clue.

Spam

My advice, if it would be any help, is to avoid at all costs making this a 1v1 issue. Use your unit Membership Committee to document a course of action leading to substantiation of his readiness for advanced grade/ratings.

Your Membership Committee, with the involvement of your Deputies for Cadets/Seniors, the PD Officer and the Commander, can table and discuss the issues involved, research the regs and draft up some options for him in terms of staffing assignments (assistant jobs for example, with an assigned mentor). These assignments, together with a plan for PME (courses, readings, and OJT hands on projects) would then set a documented course of action in place to support a solid Form 2 application for advanced grade based on A, B, C... through n.

If, God forbid, he has a hassle with that, then you've got a written plan backed up by the regs to help him progress, if you need to apply progressive discipline. Hard to argue with that.  You never know, he might take to the structured plan well, and settle down productively as a valued asset. Some folks don't respond well to an apparent vacuum and need structure to know their swim lanes/boundaries.

Good luck!
Spam

CAPCom

#10
Quote from: Spam on April 01, 2022, 04:33:30 AMyou've got a written plan backed up by the regs to help him progress, if you need to apply progressive discipline. Hard to argue with that.  You never know, he might take to the structured plan well, and settle down productively as a valued asset. Some folks don't respond well to an apparent vacuum and need structure to know their swim lanes/boundaries.

Having learned this individual's personality over the last few months, they are the type who needs the structure spelled out for them and in writing.  A form 40 is the way to get there in order to outline not so much how they are doing, but my expectations as commander which include the squadron path and tone I'm setting, which is in line with what the Wing wants, too.  Bottom line, we are a volunteer organization with a specific purpose and missions.  That means we can't indulge every new member's fantasies of playing military dress-up and getting cadets to drop and give 20 on order from a "Captain" because they believe the double bars carry more gravitas and they want to be recognized as cool because they are uber-educated.  In reality, the bling carries no real weight except among those not in CAP who think someone with Captain's insignia has "arrived".  What counts inside CAP is the work done by the person wearing the bling.  If I emphasize the work they are to do in order to get the bling and have that path of expectation lined out for them in writing, then we are both in a position of accountability and the member receiving the form 40 isn't set up for failure or disappointment.  They will also know the boundaries and expectations.  If they follow them, great.  If they don't, oh well.  There are other squadrons within driving distance they can join if they are unhappy, I guess.

Spam

Caution: if you have a member - ANY member - who is dropping cadets for push ups outside of a normally scheduled cadet physical fitness event, you need to immediately put a full stop to that practice, suspend that member from working with cadets, and conduct CPPT immediately with them. Suggest attendance at TLC as well.  What you're describing is clearly abuse.

V/r
Spam

Spam

Quote from: Spam on April 01, 2022, 03:12:33 PMCaution: if you have a member - ANY member - who is dropping cadets for push ups outside of a normally scheduled cadet physical fitness event, you need to immediately put a full stop to that practice, suspend that member from working with cadets, and conduct CPPT immediately with them. Suggest attendance at TLC as well.  What you're describing (the dropping cadets for 20) is clearly abuse and I hope that was a mere hypothetical for instance.

V/r
Spam

CAPCom

#13
Quote from: Spam on April 01, 2022, 03:12:33 PMCaution: if you have a member - ANY member - who is dropping cadets for push ups outside of a normally scheduled cadet physical fitness event, you need to immediately put a full stop to that practice, suspend that member from working with cadets, and conduct CPPT immediately with them. Suggest attendance at TLC as well.  What you're describing is clearly abuse.

V/r
Spam

"...is clearly abuse".  No kidding.

No one is doing that at my unit and it never will happen as long as I'm a member.  It was an extreme example of what can happen if a senior member is allowed to get the wrong idea about what we do in CAP with cadets.  It's what can happen when someone has fantasies about finally getting to wear a uniform and look important IF the red flags are ignored.  I'm not ignoring them, I'm dealing with them.

Don't go off the deep end with my comments, please.

Spam

Quote from: CAPCom on April 01, 2022, 03:55:36 PMDon't go off the deep end with my comments, please.

Didn't think I was, as you brought it up. Ok, you asked but clearly I don't have helpful advice for you.

CAPCom

Quote from: Spam on April 01, 2022, 06:21:46 PM
Quote from: CAPCom on April 01, 2022, 03:55:36 PMDon't go off the deep end with my comments, please.

Didn't think I was, as you brought it up. Ok, you asked but clearly I don't have helpful advice for you.

You did have helpful advice.  It was the original response of you thinking I was serious about anyone in my unit having cadets drop and give 20 for pushups and the "abuse" comment that seemed entirely off-topic as well as out in left field.  Simply because it really was out in left field.  The rest of your commentary and advice was fine.

Blanding

Quote from: Spam on April 01, 2022, 03:12:33 PM... dropping cadets for push ups outside of a normally scheduled cadet physical fitness event...What you're describing is clearly abuse.
On this point I also disagree with you. CAP defines abuse (CAPR 60-2) this way - emphasis mine:
 
Quote from: CAPR 60-21.5.1. Abuse. Federal law (PL 111-320, 42 USC 55101) defines child abuse as, at a minimum:
"Any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker (e.g. CAP adult leader) that results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse, or exploitation, or alternatively, an act or failure to act that presents an imminent risk of serious harm."

1.5.1.1. Actions can violate this regulation without rising to actual abuse under the definition above. See "boundary concerns" in 1.5.6.

1.5.1.2. In CAP's military-style training environment, it is important to distinguish emotional abuse, which by definition inflicts serious harm, from an inappropriately high training intensity, which, though momentarily unpleasant, is not abusive because it does not inflict serious harm. See 2.9 for guidance on training intensity.

2.9.2. Mismatched Goals & Intensities. An inappropriately high level of training intensity does not meet this regulation's definition of abuse or hazing unless it causes serious physical harm or serious emotional harm. Inappropriate yelling, using exercise as punishment, and creating an overly-stressful environment and other conduct listed in CAPP 60-15 are examples of inappropriately high training intensities that will be treated as boundary concerns.

Eclipse

It's abuse in that it is a specifically prohibited activity.

"That Others May Zoom"

Blanding

Quote from: Eclipse on April 01, 2022, 08:21:50 PMIt's abuse in that it is a specifically prohibited activity.

That's like saying the definition of food is bread, in that bread can be eaten.

Exercise as punishment could be abuse, if it results in serious physical or emotional harm, but it is not clearly abuse if all we know is push-ups were used as punishment.

This is not my opinion, it's literally all spelled out in the regulation I quoted.

NovemberWhiskey

Quote from: Eclipse on April 01, 2022, 08:21:50 PMIt's abuse in that it is a specifically prohibited activity.
From the regulatory perspective, it's not abuse (in the context of CAPR 60-2) to use exercise as punishment, unless it gives rise to serious physical, emotional or sexual harm. Otherwise, it's specifically called out as a boundary concern that falls short of actual abuse. ref. CAPR 60-2 2.9.2