What to do: NCO or Officer, need some insight

[THRAWN]

Well that's not fair.  Only officers should be able to be pilots.... because we are smarter.

Just like the military. But we're not the military. Which puts the whole NCO [redacted] into perspective...

edited to remove inappropriate content -Pace

[Storm Chaser]

I think standards can and should be increased for CAP officers, but not necessarily to the extent of the military. If we ever become an enlisted-centric organization, where most of our senior members are Airmen and NCOs, then increasing the standards and requirements for CAP officers would make sense. Then we would use those fewer officers to fill command and leadership positions. To accomplish that, we would have to start revamping our membership structure now and it would still take more than a decade to get there.

Unfortunately, the current program is not addressing that. NCO promotions were addressed, a few NCO duty position descriptions are in the works, and I understand the NCO Committee is working on a PD program. But the most important part, the role of the NCO, hasn't been fully defined. Furthermore, the NCO program hasn't been opened to non-prior service. And there are no current plans, that I'm aware of, to restructure our membership, so that new members have to join as Airmen and work their way up the ranks. I understand we need to take "baby steps", but at this rate it would take more than two decades to get such program fully implemented, if we get there at all.

[lordmonar]

Once.....the PD is in place....we are going to open the NCO corps to everyone one.
Once that is in place.
Then we can see about a general restructuring of the general membership and a "toughening" of the officer corps standards.
All of this is in the white paper.   Not in so many words.  But that is in fact the long long long term goal of the NCO program.
And yep  It may take us 20 years to do it.....it took us 70 years to get us to where we are now....and CAP is slower then Christmas.
But it should take us a while....we want to go slow to make sure we don't break something along the way.

[NCRblues]

Then we can see about a general restructuring of the general membership and a "toughening" of the officer corps standards.

Why?

No one has articulated any real need for "toughening".

Extend the TIG? Sure, all for that! Make being a volunteer more strenuous? Nope.

Does anyone really think the masses are going to mob us to join because we (may, one day) will make them start at airman basic? No way.

We have a hard enough time recruiting and retaining people right now, let alone making someone be the proverbial and literal lowest of the low.

By design, these new members we will (and already do) need will be the low grunt work workers.

(Someone on here will inevitably argue that we won't make the new airman be our uh... Big B word... But the simple known fact is a caste military structure with enlisted and officer means the lowest airman is the one who sweeps/cleans and grunts around.)

No one is going to stay in an organization FOR FREE and PAY to come, to be forced to be a grunt.

Is our system perfect? No. I have my complaints about people wearing oak leaves who do not even know who the region commander is, let alone how to lead a group of testy volunteers.

I would be all for supporting of a revision of the system, something like extending the TIG to make sure those that hit field grade are very dedicated and well CAP EDUCATED. I would also support tying in some positions with certain grades. (I.E. CoS for a Wing would be promoted to LT. Col, so forth and so on).

[PHall]

Then we can see about a general restructuring of the general membership and a "toughening" of the officer corps standards.

Why?

No one has articulated any real need for "toughening".

Extend the TIG? Sure, all for that! Make being a volunteer more strenuous? Nope.

Does anyone really think the masses are going to mob us to join because we (may, one day) will make them start at airman basic? No way.

We have a hard enough time recruiting and retaining people right now, let alone making someone be the proverbial and literal lowest of the low.

By design, these new members we will (and already do) need will be the low grunt work workers.

(Someone on here will inevitably argue that we won't make the new airman be our uh... Big B word... But the simple known fact is a caste military structure with enlisted and officer means the lowest airman is the one who sweeps/cleans and grunts around.)

No one is going to stay in an organization FOR FREE and PAY to come, to be forced to be a grunt.

Is our system perfect? No. I have my complaints about people wearing oak leaves who do not even know who the region commander is, let alone how to lead a group of testy volunteers.

I would be all for supporting of a revision of the system, something like extending the TIG to make sure those that hit field grade are very dedicated and well CAP EDUCATED. I would also support tying in some positions with certain grades. (I.E. CoS for a Wing would be promoted to LT. Col, so forth and so on).

Say it with me.   This is a solution in search of a problem...

[Storm Chaser]

While I've been a critic of the way this NCO program has been implemented, why does every member (or most for that matter) have to be an officer? That's not true in the military and it's not true in any other organization. Officers manage and lead. Not every CAP volunteer does that. Yet every single CAP volunteer has the opportunity to become an officer after six months. Why? Because it's always been that way it's not a good answer. Because members would not join unless they can become officers is not a good answer either. Being an officer (commissioned or not) means something. It does in the military and in does in every other organization. Why should being an officer mean something different in CAP?

[DakRadz]

Naval Sea Cadet Corps is all officer-of-some-variety adults.

Army Cadet Alliance is much the same as CAP.

[Storm Chaser]

Naval Sea Cadet Corps is all officer-of-some-variety adults.

Army Cadet Alliance is much the same as CAP.

In those organizations, all the adults are in leadership positions leading the cadets. That's not the case in CAP, where not every officer is involved with the Cadet Programs.

[etodd]

Some....but not all.....are former NCO's who drive by CAP take one look at the officers and keep on driving.
The all officer structure turns them off.   Or they see the quality of some of those officers and are turned off.

^^^ IOW .... The same things that also turn off some civilians who visit.  Yes. I'm the civilian still trying to figure all this out.

Implementing the proposal will enhance recruitment and retention of current and former enlisted members.

^^^ Yes, I get that and see how that could be a good thing for those people specifically. So the main goal here is recruitment?

But are we creating more of a division between the members? The laid back civilians who just want to volunteer and help ... trying to work along side the NCOs who may be a little more 'formal'?

I really enjoy my squadron. We work hard, successful missions, have fun helping Cadets and much more ....  and I never seem to realize what rank/grade anyone is.

[NCRblues]

While I've been a critic of the way this NCO program has been implemented, why does every member (or most for that matter) have to be an officer? That's not true in the military and it's not true in any other organization. Officers manage and lead. Not every CAP volunteer does that. Yet every single CAP volunteer has the opportunity to become an officer after six months. Why? Because it's always been that way it's not a good answer. Because members would not join unless they can become officers is not a good answer either. Being an officer (commissioned or not) means something. It does in the military and in does in every other organization. Why should being an officer mean something different in CAP?

That's not an answer or an articulated reason to change.

Why should it mean something different in CAP? Why not? It means something different in EVERY organization. PD, FD, DOD it all means something different.

So, tell me, what would an Airman Basic do in CAP? Or even an A1C?

Like PHALL said, answer in very desperate search of a problem.

[RiverAux]

No one is going to stay in an organization FOR FREE and PAY to come, to be forced to be a grunt.

Actually, that isn't entirely true.  There are State Defense Forces that are essentially using that model.  Of course, most of them struggle mightily to recruit folks too. 

[Storm Chaser]

We still haven't answer the question of why every CAP member has to be an officer. If CAP was all about the Cadet Programs, then it would make sense for all adults to be officers. But CAP is not all about the Cadet Programs. There are thousands of adult members in CAP that don't work with cadets and have no interest in doing so.

To the outside world, rank (yes, that's what it's called) have a specific meaning and it's not professional development progression (which by the way, it's not supposed to be the case in CAP either if we read CAPR 35-5 carefully). It has to do with authority and responsibility. In CAP, we've separated rank/grade from duty position, when in most organizations these two are related. The result is that we have an officer-centric membership where the majority of members are officers even though they don't manage or lead anything. And worst, there are no expectations that they ever do either.

In CAP, it's possible (or at least it was, since the requirements were increased slightly) to become a Lt Col in 10 years or less without ever leaving the squadron and without ever having a primary duty assignment. That's correct. There were many specialty tracks that didn't require a member to do anything beyond the squadron level or to even hold a primary duty position in order to achieve senior and master ratings. It's slowly changing, but there are still a few.

There are members in CAP that have no business being officers. They just can't perform at the grade they have been promoted. And in many cases, there are no expectations that they do either. This situation affects the credibility of our officer corps. And frankly, it's unnecessary. We don't need every member in CAP to be an officer in order for this organization to function properly.

Let me make one thing clear. I'm not proposing or advocating for an "enlisted membership", but merely questioning why every member in this organization has to be an officer. As far as I'm concerned, some members should just be that, members. But that's a different discussion for a different time and thread.

[THRAWN]

It just struck me. Didn't all of this nonsense begin right around the time that Senior Members started being referred to as "officers"? It's been said before, drop all the titles except for commanders and key staff and be done with it.

[DakRadz]

While I've been a critic of the way this NCO program has been implemented, why does every member (or most for that matter) have to be an officer? That's not true in the military and it's not true in any other organization.

Emphasis mine

Naval Sea Cadet Corps is all officer-of-some-variety adults.

Army Cadet Alliance is much the same as CAP.

In those organizations, all the adults are in leadership positions leading the cadets. That's not the case in CAP, where not every officer is involved with the Cadet Programs.

I don't disagree with you, my above was a response to an absolute. If done properly, with clearer goals, reasoning, and assignment of authority than we currently have, then an enlisted corp could be done well.

[Storm Chaser]

I stand corrected on the absolute. I should've said "most" or "many". That said, I think my overall point still stands.

[kwe1009]

Implementing the proposal will enhance recruitment and retention of current and former enlisted members.

I would love to see some sort of study that backs up the claim that the new NCO program will enhance recruiting of former/current military enlisted.  I really don't think that data exists.  Just how many more people have joined as CAP NCOs since the program was announced?  Of those how many specifically joined because they could get promoted in CAP?

As as been stated by many here, a solution in search of a problem.  I think we have beat this dead horse enough.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Implementing the proposal will enhance recruitment and retention of current and former enlisted members.

I would love to see some sort of study that backs up the claim that the new NCO program will enhance recruiting of former/current military enlisted.  I really don't think that data exists.  Just how many more people have joined as CAP NCOs since the program was announced?  Of those how many specifically joined because they could get promoted in CAP?

As as been stated by many here, a solution in search of a problem.  I think we have beat this dead horse enough.

How many of those NCOs who see the mostly officer units of dubious quality (as stated by Lordmonar) are interested in being NCOs under said officers?

[kwe1009]

How many of those NCOs who see the mostly officer units of dubious quality (as stated by Lordmonar) are interested in being NCOs under said officers?

That factored into my decision to NOT go the NCO route.  I joined just before this new program but the ability to promote or not did not influence my decision in any way.

[Flying Pig]

Implementing the proposal will enhance recruitment and retention of current and former enlisted members.

I would love to see some sort of study that backs up the claim that the new NCO program will enhance recruiting of former/current military enlisted.  I really don't think that data exists.  Just how many more people have joined as CAP NCOs since the program was announced?  Of those how many specifically joined because they could get promoted in CAP?

As as been stated by many here, a solution in search of a problem.  I think we have beat this dead horse enough.

The idea that the option of a patch vs an epaulet is a means to increase recruiting is sad.

[FW]

The idea that the option of a patch vs an epaulet is a means to increase recruiting is sad.

Very sad, indeed, however recruiting is never really a major issue in CAP. The increased retention of good, well trained and motivated members is, and until it is addressed, we will continue to discuss this and "multiforms" on CT forever!