What to do: NCO or Officer, need some insight

[lordmonar]

The point is that down the road there may be a difference in roles.   We are taking baby steps here.   Once the NCO is a viable program then we can start differentiating the roles training and requirements. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeffDG]

The point is that down the road there may be a difference in roles.   We are taking baby steps here.   Once the NCO is a viable program then we can start differentiating the roles training and requirements. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And the point is that is back-asswards.  You define the roles, then you build a program to support the roles.  You don't build a program with no roles then expect to figure out the roles later.

Solution in desperate search of a problem.

[kwe1009]

The point is that down the road there may be a difference in roles.   We are taking baby steps here.   Once the NCO is a viable program then we can start differentiating the roles training and requirements. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And the point is that is back-asswards.  You define the roles, then you build a program to support the roles.  You don't build a program with no roles then expect to figure out the roles later.

Solution in desperate search of a problem.

Definitely backwards.  You can't make the program viable unless there is a defined role for it.  There would probably be much more interest in the program if there was a defined goal and mission that separates it from the Officer track.  The way the program is now I just see it as a vehicle for former military NCOs to get additional stripes. 

[Ned]

Definitely backwards.  You can't make the program viable unless there is a defined role for it.  There would probably be much more interest in the program if there was a defined goal and mission that separates it from the Officer track.  The way the program is now I just see it as a vehicle for former military NCOs to get additional stripes.

Do you honestly believe the role of the NCO in a military organization is "undefined?"  Really?

NCOs have been used - without exception - in every single military organization in the world since the Roman Legions.  Even Starfleet had NCOs.

No really, NCOs are literally universal.  We are the rather odd exception given the limited number of NCOs in our ranks.

I'm sorry if you think Spaatz and Curry got it wrong when they included NCOs in our rank structure.

Sure, most units currently struggle along without NCOs, so it is hard to argue that CAP would roll up and die without NCOs.  But given that the key word in that sentence is "struggle," consider how much better CAP would be with a mature and viable NCO corps supporting our people and missions. 


It really isn't that hard to imagine the crucial roles NCOs could serve in supporting our missions.


Heck, just in CP (quoting myself from a couple years back):

Just in the Cadet Program tent, I could put 1200 CAP NCOs to work tomorrow by assigning one or two to each cadet and composite unit to serve as Leadership Officers.  Essentially by definition, NCOs have years of experience mentoring and developing junior leaders in a military environment.  And since every single cadet must develop their followership and  leadership skills initially as an airman and cadet NCO, senior member NCOs could and would provide outstanding and needed support.

Our CP would be measurably better if we had one or two experienced NCOs at each cadet and composite unit.

If  we had a mature CAP senior member enlisted/NCO structure in CP, at the squadron I would expect to see SSgts and Tsgts working more or less directly with the troops; directly monitoring training and mentoring the cadet instructors for things like D & C, and acting as instructors.  I would normally expect senior NCOs (MSgt +) to do things like training schedules, coordinate and rehearse instructors, mentor both the junior NCOs and the cadet staff, conduct CP-related professional development for the senior member side, and also serve in additional duties for the unit as a whole (things like unit First Sergeant, Personnel and Admin NCO, etc.).

At the group, wing, and region level I would expect senior NCOs to work as SMEs in CP.  I would probably see them working on CI and SAV teams, maintaining associated records and providing administrative support, directly coordinating with their counterparts at lower and higher levels, planning CP activities at their level, producing reports and maintaining electronic data, and mentoring and training NCOs at lower echelons.

At things like encampments, NCOs would provide valuable support on the tactical staff, liaisoning with host facilities, as well as serving as  logisticians and administrators. 

And at all levels, NCOs - like all SMs - would be eligible for the dreaded "similar and related duties as required." 

(Remember, this is a vision for a mature and self-generating enlisted structure, NOT what we have today.  Today, our NCOs come to us pre-trained in leadership and organizational skills by Uncle Sam and all we have to add are the CAP-specific skills.  This may well change as we tweak the program to allow non-prior service CAP NCOs).

[lordmonar]

The point is that down the road there may be a difference in roles.   We are taking baby steps here.   Once the NCO is a viable program then we can start differentiating the roles training and requirements. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And the point is that is back-asswards.  You define the roles, then you build a program to support the roles.  You don't build a program with no roles then expect to figure out the roles later.

Solution in desperate search of a problem.

You got to have the people to fill those roles.  You got to have the people to write those roles.   We are very aware of the issues with building this horse and cart.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Do you honestly believe the role of the NCO in a military organization CAP is "undefined?"  Really?

Yes.

NCOs have been used - without exception - in every single military organization in the world since the Roman Legions.  Even Starfleet had NCOs.

As we're often told, CAP is not a military organization.

No really, NCOs are literally universal.  We are the rather odd exception given the limited number of NCOs in our ranks.

Only if compared to a hierarchical military structure, which we are not.

I'm sorry if you think Spaatz and Curry got it wrong when they included NCOs in our rank structure.

The program then, and the duties of NCOs at the time was drastically different. As were the membership numbers, mission, and candidate pool.

Sure, most units currently struggle along without NCOs, so it is hard to argue that CAP would roll up and die without NCOs.  But given that the key word in that sentence is "struggle," consider how much better CAP would be with a mature and viable NCO corps supporting our people and missions. 

How will having most of my members converted to NCOs, or being NCOs help, when we need an officer role filled, and none available?

It really isn't that hard to imagine the crucial roles NCOs could serve in supporting our missions.

Of course not. They've been doing it for decades, without limitations, as CAP Officers.

[lordmonar]

The point is that down the road there may be a difference in roles.   We are taking baby steps here.   Once the NCO is a viable program then we can start differentiating the roles training and requirements. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And the point is that is back-asswards.  You define the roles, then you build a program to support the roles.  You don't build a program with no roles then expect to figure out the roles later.

Solution in desperate search of a problem.

Definitely backwards.  You can't make the program viable unless there is a defined role for it.  There would probably be much more interest in the program if there was a defined goal and mission that separates it from the Officer track.  The way the program is now I just see it as a vehicle for former military NCOs to get additional stripes.

Like I said....baby steps.   Not being able to promote was the biggest disincentive for former NCOs to keep wearing stripes.  So we fixed that problem.    We are building the PME for NCOs now....that will be different then the officer PME.    We are building a recruiting program.  Once those are in place we expand the program to anyone interested in being and NCO.  Once that is in place we will then be positioned to make greater changes to CAP that with strengthen both the NCO and Officer corps.

[JeffDG]

The point is that down the road there may be a difference in roles.   We are taking baby steps here.   Once the NCO is a viable program then we can start differentiating the roles training and requirements. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And the point is that is back-asswards.  You define the roles, then you build a program to support the roles.  You don't build a program with no roles then expect to figure out the roles later.

Solution in desperate search of a problem.

Definitely backwards.  You can't make the program viable unless there is a defined role for it.  There would probably be much more interest in the program if there was a defined goal and mission that separates it from the Officer track.  The way the program is now I just see it as a vehicle for former military NCOs to get additional stripes.

Like I said....baby steps.   Not being able to promote was the biggest disincentive for former NCOs to keep wearing stripes.  So we fixed that problem.    We are building the PME for NCOs now....that will be different then the officer PME.    We are building a recruiting program.  Once those are in place we expand the program to anyone interested in being and NCO.  Once that is in place we will then be positioned to make greater changes to CAP that with strengthen both the NCO and Officer corps.

The program was rushed out half-baked because the national commander's term was about up.

Positions for NCOs were created without duties.

[lordmonar]

Do you honestly believe the role of the NCO in a military organization CAP is "undefined?"  Really?

Yes.

We are working on that actively.

[/size]

NCOs have been used - without exception - in every single military organization in the world since the Roman Legions.  Even Starfleet had NCOs.

As we're often told, CAP is not a military organization.

But we use the military model for leadership....ergo you can have that cake and eat it too.

[/font]

No really, NCOs are literally universal.  We are the rather odd exception given the limited number of NCOs in our ranks.

Only if compared to a hierarchical military structure, which we are not.

Really?  We don't have a national commander?  Or a chain of command?
If you mean we don't have an up or out policy or that a 2d Lt can command a squadron with a Col in it....then yes you are right.  Having an NCO corps may be a remedy for some of that.   

[/font]

I'm sorry if you think Spaatz and Curry got it wrong when they included NCOs in our rank structure.

The program then, and the duties of NCOs at the time was drastically different. As were the membership numbers, mission, and candidate pool.

Yes you are correct.  But today is vastly different then the time that they built the current CAP Officer program.  Membership numbers, missions and candidate pool are different.   We are looking to build new tools to better use our members.

[/font]

Sure, most units currently struggle along without NCOs, so it is hard to argue that CAP would roll up and die without NCOs.  But given that the key word in that sentence is "struggle," consider how much better CAP would be with a mature and viable NCO corps supporting our people and missions. 

How will having most of my members converted to NCOs, or being NCOs help, when we need an officer role filled, and none available?

I guess any future program where most of your members are NCOs would include a program to develop the officers you need to fill those officer roles.

[/font]

It really isn't that hard to imagine the crucial roles NCOs could serve in supporting our missions.

Of course not. They've been doing it for decades, without limitations, as CAP Officers.

So....your argument is basically......It's been this way for a long time....why make changes?   Am I reading that right?

[lordmonar]

The point is that down the road there may be a difference in roles.   We are taking baby steps here.   Once the NCO is a viable program then we can start differentiating the roles training and requirements. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And the point is that is back-asswards.  You define the roles, then you build a program to support the roles.  You don't build a program with no roles then expect to figure out the roles later.

Solution in desperate search of a problem.

Definitely backwards.  You can't make the program viable unless there is a defined role for it.  There would probably be much more interest in the program if there was a defined goal and mission that separates it from the Officer track.  The way the program is now I just see it as a vehicle for former military NCOs to get additional stripes.

Like I said....baby steps.   Not being able to promote was the biggest disincentive for former NCOs to keep wearing stripes.  So we fixed that problem.    We are building the PME for NCOs now....that will be different then the officer PME.    We are building a recruiting program.  Once those are in place we expand the program to anyone interested in being and NCO.  Once that is in place we will then be positioned to make greater changes to CAP that with strengthen both the NCO and Officer corps.

The program was rushed out half-baked because the national commander's term was about up.

Positions for NCOs were created without duties.

And?  If your assessment of the situation is true.......what bearing does that have on my argument?   We need to slowly build up an NCO corps....slowly integrate it into the existing programs......and then we can slowly make changes to that program to make everything better.

In the mean time......we are not killing anyone.  We are not taking away anyone's birthday.  We are not telling anyone to do anything different.    Why all the angst?   If you see something that is going to kill a mission, cost money, cost life or limb, or even put an undue burden on the members at large......let us know. 

[Jester]

Definitely backwards.  You can't make the program viable unless there is a defined role for it.  There would probably be much more interest in the program if there was a defined goal and mission that separates it from the Officer track.  The way the program is now I just see it as a vehicle for former military NCOs to get additional stripes.

Do you honestly believe the role of the NCO in a military organization is "undefined?"  Really?

NCOs have been used - without exception - in every single military organization in the world since the Roman Legions.  Even Starfleet had NCOs.

No really, NCOs are literally universal.  We are the rather odd exception given the limited number of NCOs in our ranks.

I'm sorry if you think Spaatz and Curry got it wrong when they included NCOs in our rank structure.

Sure, most units currently struggle along without NCOs, so it is hard to argue that CAP would roll up and die without NCOs.  But given that the key word in that sentence is "struggle," consider how much better CAP would be with a mature and viable NCO corps supporting our people and missions. 


It really isn't that hard to imagine the crucial roles NCOs could serve in supporting our missions.


Heck, just in CP (quoting myself from a couple years back):

Just in the Cadet Program tent, I could put 1200 CAP NCOs to work tomorrow by assigning one or two to each cadet and composite unit to serve as Leadership Officers.  Essentially by definition, NCOs have years of experience mentoring and developing junior leaders in a military environment.  And since every single cadet must develop their followership and  leadership skills initially as an airman and cadet NCO, senior member NCOs could and would provide outstanding and needed support.

Our CP would be measurably better if we had one or two experienced NCOs at each cadet and composite unit.

If  we had a mature CAP senior member enlisted/NCO structure in CP, at the squadron I would expect to see SSgts and Tsgts working more or less directly with the troops; directly monitoring training and mentoring the cadet instructors for things like D & C, and acting as instructors.  I would normally expect senior NCOs (MSgt +) to do things like training schedules, coordinate and rehearse instructors, mentor both the junior NCOs and the cadet staff, conduct CP-related professional development for the senior member side, and also serve in additional duties for the unit as a whole (things like unit First Sergeant, Personnel and Admin NCO, etc.).

At the group, wing, and region level I would expect senior NCOs to work as SMEs in CP.  I would probably see them working on CI and SAV teams, maintaining associated records and providing administrative support, directly coordinating with their counterparts at lower and higher levels, planning CP activities at their level, producing reports and maintaining electronic data, and mentoring and training NCOs at lower echelons.

At things like encampments, NCOs would provide valuable support on the tactical staff, liaisoning with host facilities, as well as serving as  logisticians and administrators. 

And at all levels, NCOs - like all SMs - would be eligible for the dreaded "similar and related duties as required." 

(Remember, this is a vision for a mature and self-generating enlisted structure, NOT what we have today.  Today, our NCOs come to us pre-trained in leadership and organizational skills by Uncle Sam and all we have to add are the CAP-specific skills.  This may well change as we tweak the program to allow non-prior service CAP NCOs).

This is exactly what I envisioned when I joined, and part of the reason I'm taking the NCO route.

[JeffDG]

The point is that down the road there may be a difference in roles.   We are taking baby steps here.   Once the NCO is a viable program then we can start differentiating the roles training and requirements. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And the point is that is back-asswards.  You define the roles, then you build a program to support the roles.  You don't build a program with no roles then expect to figure out the roles later.

Solution in desperate search of a problem.

Definitely backwards.  You can't make the program viable unless there is a defined role for it.  There would probably be much more interest in the program if there was a defined goal and mission that separates it from the Officer track.  The way the program is now I just see it as a vehicle for former military NCOs to get additional stripes.

Like I said....baby steps.   Not being able to promote was the biggest disincentive for former NCOs to keep wearing stripes.  So we fixed that problem.    We are building the PME for NCOs now....that will be different then the officer PME.    We are building a recruiting program.  Once those are in place we expand the program to anyone interested in being and NCO.  Once that is in place we will then be positioned to make greater changes to CAP that with strengthen both the NCO and Officer corps.

The program was rushed out half-baked because the national commander's term was about up.

Positions for NCOs were created without duties.

And?  If your assessment of the situation is true.......what bearing does that have on my argument?   We need to slowly build up an NCO corps....slowly integrate it into the existing programs......and then we can slowly make changes to that program to make everything better.

In the mean time......we are not killing anyone.  We are not taking away anyone's birthday.  We are not telling anyone to do anything different.    Why all the angst?   If you see something that is going to kill a mission, cost money, cost life or limb, or even put an undue burden on the members at large......let us know.

It was done half-baked.  The program was rolled out before it was ready for prime-time.

We're what, 2-3 years out from when "NCO Advisor" position was created.  It should have been defined when the position was created.  But, instead, you had someone who was on his way out the door, and he signed off on half-a-plan, rather than finishing the plan before rolling it out.

Positions should be defined before they are created.  Thus my comment about being back-asswards.

[lordmonar]

Noted.  Noted as noted.   Moving on.  Duty positions are written and waiting for the OPR to publish.   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeffDG]

Noted.  Noted as noted.   Moving on.  Duty positions are written and waiting for the OPR to publish.   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And you've been saying that for over a year too.

Solution in search of a problem.

[lordmonar]

Complaint for no reason. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kwe1009]

Definitely backwards.  You can't make the program viable unless there is a defined role for it.  There would probably be much more interest in the program if there was a defined goal and mission that separates it from the Officer track.  The way the program is now I just see it as a vehicle for former military NCOs to get additional stripes.

Do you honestly believe the role of the NCO in a military organization is "undefined?"  Really?

NCOs have been used - without exception - in every single military organization in the world since the Roman Legions.  Even Starfleet had NCOs.

No really, NCOs are literally universal.  We are the rather odd exception given the limited number of NCOs in our ranks.

I'm sorry if you think Spaatz and Curry got it wrong when they included NCOs in our rank structure.

Sure, most units currently struggle along without NCOs, so it is hard to argue that CAP would roll up and die without NCOs.  But given that the key word in that sentence is "struggle," consider how much better CAP would be with a mature and viable NCO corps supporting our people and missions. 


It really isn't that hard to imagine the crucial roles NCOs could serve in supporting our missions.


Heck, just in CP (quoting myself from a couple years back):

Just in the Cadet Program tent, I could put 1200 CAP NCOs to work tomorrow by assigning one or two to each cadet and composite unit to serve as Leadership Officers.  Essentially by definition, NCOs have years of experience mentoring and developing junior leaders in a military environment.  And since every single cadet must develop their followership and  leadership skills initially as an airman and cadet NCO, senior member NCOs could and would provide outstanding and needed support.

Our CP would be measurably better if we had one or two experienced NCOs at each cadet and composite unit.

If  we had a mature CAP senior member enlisted/NCO structure in CP, at the squadron I would expect to see SSgts and Tsgts working more or less directly with the troops; directly monitoring training and mentoring the cadet instructors for things like D & C, and acting as instructors.  I would normally expect senior NCOs (MSgt +) to do things like training schedules, coordinate and rehearse instructors, mentor both the junior NCOs and the cadet staff, conduct CP-related professional development for the senior member side, and also serve in additional duties for the unit as a whole (things like unit First Sergeant, Personnel and Admin NCO, etc.).

At the group, wing, and region level I would expect senior NCOs to work as SMEs in CP.  I would probably see them working on CI and SAV teams, maintaining associated records and providing administrative support, directly coordinating with their counterparts at lower and higher levels, planning CP activities at their level, producing reports and maintaining electronic data, and mentoring and training NCOs at lower echelons.

At things like encampments, NCOs would provide valuable support on the tactical staff, liaisoning with host facilities, as well as serving as  logisticians and administrators. 

And at all levels, NCOs - like all SMs - would be eligible for the dreaded "similar and related duties as required." 

(Remember, this is a vision for a mature and self-generating enlisted structure, NOT what we have today.  Today, our NCOs come to us pre-trained in leadership and organizational skills by Uncle Sam and all we have to add are the CAP-specific skills.  This may well change as we tweak the program to allow non-prior service CAP NCOs).

Sir I never said that NCOs do not have a defined role in the military.  I said there is no defined role for them presently in CAP.  The things you suggested that CAP NCOs could be doing, like at encampment, are being done today by CAP officers, correct?  How would these positions be better if they were staffed by NCOs?  A defined role would be something that is mostly unique to that group.  I don't really see what roles would go to the NCOs and taken away from the officers and what benefit it would be to CAP to have it. 

I firmly believe that NCOs are needed in the military but I'm just not buying it in CAP as it presently exists.  As I have said previously, if CAP moves to a rank and promotion system similar to cadets where everyone starts at the bottom and then works their way up the I can see the need for such positions as Command Chiefs and NCO advisers.  Having everyone start at the bottom would actually make more sense than having a 21 year old with zero training (except for finishing a few CBTs) or experience being a 2d Lt. 

In the military an NCO is someone how has spent years within the organization and knows it very well and is a trained leader responsible for the training and mentoring of the junior enlisted mainly among other duties.  A new CAP NCO will likely have the leadership skills but will have little to no knowledge of CAP and will have not junior enlisted to train or mentor. 

While I am all for an "enlisted" track in CAP, the current program needs a great deal of work before it even makes sense to have it.  At the end of the day that is what really matters is does it benefit CAP and as of right now I don't see any benefit or a path to become a benefit to the organization.  Simply being able to get promoted isn't a benefit at all to CAP and probably won't get many people to join. 

[MSG Mac]

The NCO program was announced and established without any guidelines or structure. At the last two National Conferences, we've been told "everything should be in place within the next three or four months". Maryland Wing has told me that they won't appoint a Command Chief until they can assess the program at the Wing and Region levels. Of course the announcement that every reg would be rewritten didn't help either.

[FW]

The point is that down the road there may be a difference in roles.   We are taking baby steps here.   Once the NCO is a viable program then we can start differentiating the roles training and requirements. 

IMHO, this "program" is a major distraction from solving some real issues facing CAP.  I would rather have our leadership tackle such problems as the development of better leaders, improved morale, higher retention, stronger contributor base, and wider opportunities for the membership (adult and cadet).  After almost 40 years, I see no reason to relabel or reclassify member grade levels.  There is absolutely no proof, nor evidence a CAP NCO corps will improve anything other than Vanguard's profits...

[Flying Pig]

Ranks in CAP have never meant anything related to authority or responsibility.  they are simply a visual indication of a members PD level... or their military rank that was transferred to CAP membership.  Yet, the NCO program will be different? 

[grunt82abn]

I am reading a ton of reasons listed why there is no need for NCO's, the same reasons Lordmonar has brought to the this discussion of why an NCO Corps is needed!!! He stated that many of us former NCO's have mentored and trained both Enlisted and Officers in the military, which in my case is true. Developing professional Soldiers, Airman, Marines, and Seamen is what we do. This is why I have chosen Cadet Programs as a specialty, so that I can mentor and pass down the things I learned to the next generation that will take up where I left off. I know this isn't the military, but it is an Auxiliary of the Air Force, that uses the USAF chain of command, and unit structure, something most NCO's that are in CAP should know all to well. For someone like me, an NCO Corps will help me fit in with CAP, IMHO. I loved being an NCO during my 21 years, I am sure I would love being an NCO in CAP also!!! My biggest hang-up with it is being able to be a pilot. If I could get a definite answer, or find it in a regulation that states I can fly as a TSgt, I would put my paperwork in today to put on my stripes back on today. The only other issue is; that I could see myself a permanent TSgt because it seems like there isn't a ton of knowledge on how to actually promote an NCO. I feel that if I complete all the same training to gain higher rank as an officer, I should at least gain the a little rank as an NCO without leaving my squadron.