PAWG shuts down

[RiverAux]

Please explain the logic of threatening to shut down units for failure to comply with a punishment being imposed on the Wing when these individual units may not have had anything to do with the safety issues that brought on this crisis? 

While such threats should be directed at the applicable commanders and staff officers, the majority of individual members had nothing to do with it, and I suspect, the majority of units did what they were supposed to do.  Now, because of something that somebody else did their very existence is being threatened if they don't scramble to meet this requirement. 

No logic to any of that.

[DNall]

A commander is responsible for all his command does or fails to do, period.

Wings are the basic management unit of CAP. That's the lowest level corporate officer. That's the level that gets inspected. That's the level that gets alerted to deploy assets for a mission. Whatever happens or doesn't happen is going to occur at the Wing level.

If you wanted to go up & down the chain targeting individuals responsible for problems & determining their degree of responsibility then you'd have a hundred year witch hunt on your hands. Don't fix the blame, fix the problem.

This is an institutional issue within the Wing. If a unit is already on the ball, then they have very little to do now but wait for the rest of the Wg to catch up. If not, then they have the opportunity now to get up to speed.

This whole thing isn't a big deal. I know it seems like it is, and I certainly hope the message is taken seriously for deep and long-term change. But, getting back on track is not something that's going to take a really long time or significantly harm the organization. They just need to get it done & move on.

[Alpha]

Point well said and taken! You are correct in many ways, however there is the old "cutting off ones nose to spite their face" addage.  I believe we have a little of that happening here where PA WING Shut down is concerned. There certainly more productive and far less disruptive methods of going about this mandate.

I'm sure that is the case at the member level, but I can assure you this kind of thing is not done lightly. It is a measured response. If the wing could have been forced to comply by a lesser means then that would have been taken. However, if operations continue as normal then leadership can shuffle some paper around & you're back in business as before w/o significant oversight. That doesn't fix the problem.

While I understand you don't like the situation, and may even feel the AF/NHQ is overreacting. I can assure you there is another very reasonable logical point of view on the other end of that decision. I would respectfully ask you to work within the system to fix the situation as expeditiously as possible, then move out & carry on with the mission as hopefully a new & better wing.

Now you are starting to sound like a bureaucrat or politician.  You see there really was no "problem" only a perceived one. Due to the paperwork oversight. If there had been accidents and plane mishaps and injuries all over the place...then fine...this action is appropriate. But that couldn't be farther from the truth. PA WING has a very good safety record, even taking the national award for safety twice in the last 8 years.

No...you can not convince me this "OVER REACTION " was warrented.  It has become an unjustified, punitive action that will cost the hard working members in PA , time, money, morale, and members.

There were many options available to National short of an operational shut down. It is frankly preposterous!

[FW]

Gentlemen, the goal here is "culture change".  Every member needs to understand this concept.  The requirement for every member of PAWG to respond to the "10 second ORM" article is not a hardship.  However, it is a start.  It gets our attention.  It forces us to think.  No one is forced to comply but, there is a consequence to inaction.  And, there is a recourse to the action.  It's fair, it's simple and it's right.  

This, IMHO, is not about who or why anymore.  It's about coming together as a team.  I truly hope the members of PAWG will succeed in this endeavour.  

Monday, we will know the results.

[mikeylikey]

Alpha i don't know who you are, but lets refrain from talking smack while throwing out names.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me you are itching for a fight.

You would be surprised "who I am". That's why I must remain annonymous.

But I have been in CAP more than half the time you have been on the planet.

So I am sure you know much more about "Smack" than I ever will.

As for your statement...

I would welcome a "fight" with these two... but the time and place has yet to present itself.

Easy Alpha. 

[RiverAux]

You've got to remember that with any additional requirement that you put on people. no matter how minor or easy to accomplish, you're going to lose some people for whom it is just the last straw.  Therefore, whenever you put a requirement on a CAP volunteer you've got to make sure that the benefits of having most people accomplish it outweight the costs of losing some members over it and then link that to your justification for doing it in the first place.  

If you wanted to go up & down the chain targeting individuals responsible for problems & determining their degree of responsibility then you'd have a hundred year witch hunt on your hands. Don't fix the blame, fix the problem

Nope, not hard at all.  The CI would have identified specific problems caused by a lack of performance by particular staff officers or commanders (Squadron X didn't turn in their safety survey, so the safety officer and commander of Squadron X are responsible).  

Don't get me wrong -- if we assume that this ORM has some value, perhaps it should be required of all members.  However, the proper thing to do would be to phase it in over a reasonable period of time rather than preventing the Wing from doing anything until it was compliant.  

[FW]

You've got to remember that with any additional requirement that you put on people. no matter how minor or easy to accomplish, you're going to lose some people for whom it is just the last straw.  Therefore, whenever you put a requirement on a CAP volunteer you've got to make sure that the benefits of having most people accomplish it outweight the costs of losing some members over it and then link that to your justification for doing it in the first place.  

These comments are very true.  But what's the point?  We lose members every day for many reasons.  The requirement is on the wing membership; true.  But, so is proper uniform wear, etc.  It's not a "burden",  it's a responsibility.   I would go so far as to say every member of CAP has the same responsibility as in PAWG.   I'm not going to wait for the "command",  I've made the commitment and I would hope all would do the same.

As I've said before, this is not just PAWG's problem.  I would suggest we all be proactive and start taking things just a little more responsibly.  

[DNall]

A lack of accidents doesn't mean you're operating safely. It can mean a lot of things.

The accident rate in General Aviation isn't all that high. If your members are following the FAA but not the additional CAP rules then you'd expect the accident rate to be in line with that - which means you could operate for years without an accident.

Our safety rules aren't just about safety. We use the taxpayers resources to perform missions for the govt. That means we're entrusted with the public trust. Protecting those assets (including people - or rather preventing the financial risk of harming people) is a big part of why we do this additional safety work.

And then there's one more item, and this is pure speculation on my part. What if safety isn't the only issue. What if it's the one thing they can shut you down over, but a broader attitude of non-compliance exists institutionally. Maybe that's orange hats, and maybe that's what orange hats represent, which is willful disregard of rules. That's not the cause, and it may not have entered the thought process, but it's possible it was a contributing factor in the severity of the restriction to ensure compliance by a Wing with frankly a bad record of doing what it's told & playing as part of the team.

In the big picture, it doesn't matter what you or I think. What matters is this is the restriction & conditions to lift it. You can complain about the sanity of the decision, but that won't change anything. What will change it is compliance, and the quicker the better. The best way to ensure rapid compliance is not to encourage complaints that may lead to slow or protest non-compliance & the morale problems you mention, but rather to accept the situation, salute & execute with a smile & optimistic attitude about how this will make the wing better. Even if it's BS, it sells to the people around you & that gets you back in business faster.

[DNall]

You've got to remember that with any additional requirement that you put on people. no matter how minor or easy to accomplish, you're going to lose some people for whom it is just the last straw.  Therefore, whenever you put a requirement on a CAP volunteer you've got to make sure that the benefits of having most people accomplish it outweight the costs of losing some members over it and then link that to your justification for doing it in the first place.

I absolutely reject that logic, and I'll tell you why. The pure cold math is we have a horrible turnover rate. No matter what you do you're going to lose most members within 1-3 years, and they'll be replaced by someone new just as quickly.

You can look at that as glass is half-empty... CAP can abuse the crap out of membership with few consequences; hence regular uniform changes, etc.

Or, you can look at that glass is half-full... I can completely disregard retention as I make positive program changes, cause most will leave & be replaced anyway.

Both cases are true to some extent. Honestly, I think CAP leadership too much abuses the half-empty aspect of that w/o taking full advantage of the half-full aspect. That's a leadership failure on their part.

If you wanted to go up & down the chain targeting individuals responsible for problems & determining their degree of responsibility then you'd have a hundred year witch hunt on your hands. Don't fix the blame, fix the problem

Nope, not hard at all.  The CI would have identified specific problems caused by a lack of performance by particular staff officers or commanders (Squadron X didn't turn in their safety survey, so the safety officer and commander of Squadron X are responsible). 

Don't get me wrong -- if we assume that this ORM has some value, perhaps it should be required of all members.  However, the proper thing to do would be to phase it in over a reasonable period of time rather than preventing the Wing from doing anything until it was compliant. 

[/quote]

Again, it's always wrong to fix the blame while the problem persists. People make mistakes, that doesn't meant they aren't the best leader/staffer to fix the problem. It's a command judgment if you have the right team for the current mission or not. If they feel changes need to be made in order to accomplish this, then by all means they need the right people for the job sitting in the appropriate chairs. Any fault for what happen has to be assessed after the fact, and in proportion to the mistake.

If you're directly complaining about the nature of the requirements to get off this restriction, that's really out of your lane. They placed them on restriction, they set conditions to get off restriction. All that matters right now is salute & execute with enthusiasm. After this is over with then those issues can be addressed more thoughtfully. I don't personally know what the situation on the ground is, so I can't comment on ORM being the right corrective training response or not. I don't think most people within the wing are in a position to make that judgment.

[RiverAux]

Oh, I believe I surely can say that this punishment imposed by national and that Wing has threatened to disband squadrons over it is way out of proportion to the offense.

Now, I am just fine with stopping PA Wing activities over these offenses.  However, the proper way to get out of the mess is to fix the specific problems that were identified, not impose a new requirement for which there is no way on earth for the Wing to get compliant with in a reasonable period of time and not let them do something until they comply.     

[Alpha]

Alpha i don't know who you are, but lets refrain from talking smack while throwing out names.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me you are itching for a fight.

You would be surprised "who I am". That's why I must remain annonymous.

But I have been in CAP more than half the time you have been on the planet.

So I am sure you know much more about "Smack" than I ever will.

As for your statement...

I would welcome a "fight" with these two... but the time and place has yet to present itself.

Easy Alpha. 

Oh Mikey....your so Kind..... almost full of Kindness;)

[Capt Rivera]

Well said.  For those who still don't understand this concept.  Take the ORM course.  For those "youngsters" among us who feel that "gung ho" urge to climb that hill during an ice storm or get into that Cessna to find an ELT during a thunderstorm, or take those 16 cadets in a 15 pass. van to the airshow.  I say, "Welcome to the Darwin Awards". 
Tunnel vision; no.  Thoughtfulness and common sense; yes.  Safety; always. 
This and proper documentation will keep your wing from PAWG's predicament. 

Darwin Awards of/for Aviation....

http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/publications/callback.html

[SARMedTech]

THE TOP PRIORITY, THE ONLY THING ON YOUR CAP AGENDA MUST BE...ORM COMPLIANCE OF EVERY MEMBER!


Do these remedies seem drastic and harsh? Absolutely!

Is National giving PA Wing any choice but to comply? NO!

Do the group commanders and Wing staff understand what this will do to the squadrons in the wing, to their membership, to the morale of the cadets and new members? ..Oh yes! we understand completely. But PA WING is in a box and there is only one way out.
COMPLIANCE! WE MUST ACHIEVE IT by any means necessary. There is no choice but to act, and act decisively.

We have been sending emails out for two weeks marked "URGENT!" and "PRIORITY!" and yes some have responded , that is why we have 870 compliant members. But we must concentrate on the remaining 1330.

The wing Staff has shifted blame for thier failure in safety to the wing membership.  Shame on them!
[/quote]

They have NOT shifted the blame! ....there is no "blame" here to shift.  There is a directive from National that we all must comply with the ORM directive. What Wing Command has an obligation to do is get the ban lifted on on PA WNG ASAP. SO all the events, missions, cadet activities and most importantly ACTUAL MISSIONS that come up.

It is not punitive to move inactive or unresponsive members to squadron 000 it is just prudent to get the ban lifted. They fully understand there are members away on vacations, honymoons, job assignments, college, deployments , in the hospital...dozens of valid reasons for non compliance. But as long as National is playing "hard ball" and insists on 100% compliance....Wing is absolutely right to do what ever is necessary to get us up and running again. Those members can get back out of SQ 000 by simply doing the required ORM training when they can.

Why does every one think they are being punished when they are simply being asked to comply with a safety course??? 
[/quote]

They are not moving members to Triple Zeros to obtain compliance, they are doing it so that they have fewer active members that they have to get into compliance by tonight. Its like any company having a mandatory safety training that is taking them too long...they just adjust their time frame and compliance requirements by firing people. But you're right...they aren't giving the members the shaft because they couldnt keep air frames and trucks in working order. 

[CadetProgramGuy]

PAWG CC said:

Remedies!

We have until Midnight Sunday the 27th of April. or some or all of these remedies will be   
implemented. There is no other way!

1.  Contact every non-compliant member by phone and tell them how to accomplish the orm.
  (we have tried email for almost 2 weeks, it did get 35% response, but we need the other 65%.)

2.  Failing to complete by Sunday night, non compliant members can be transferred out of their   
     squadron or group into squadron 000.

3.  Non compliant squadrons can have their charter revoked.

4.  Some squadrons who lose enough members by their being sent to Sq.000, could fall below the
     15 member minimum and be reduced to a flight or closed.

Do these remedies seem drastic and harsh? Absolutely!

We said:

It is not punitive to move inactive or unresponsive members to squadron 000 it is just prudent to get the ban lifted.

But as long as National is playing "hard ball" and insists on 100% compliance....Wing is absolutely right to do what ever is necessary to get us up and running again. Those members can get back out of SQ 000 by simply doing the required ORM training when they can.

They are not moving members to Triple Zeros to obtain compliance, they are doing it so that they have fewer active members that they have to get into compliance by tonight.

I chopped and swapped quotes from a few people, not meant to single anyone out.....

My Opinion:

Moving un cooperative members to the 000 Squadron is exactly seeking compliance through transfer.

Utilize this line of thinking....."out of sight out of mind"

[SARMedTech]

Wing deficiencies are Wing Command's problems. The fish stinks from the head down...or in this case from the orange ball cap down.

[Alpha]

PAWG CC said:

Remedies!

We have until Midnight Sunday the 27th of April. or some or all of these remedies will be   
implemented. There is no other way!

1.  Contact every non-compliant member by phone and tell them how to accomplish the orm.
  (we have tried email for almost 2 weeks, it did get 35% response, but we need the other 65%.)

2.  Failing to complete by Sunday night, non compliant members can be transferred out of their  
    squadron or group into squadron 000.

3.  Non compliant squadrons can have their charter revoked.

4.  Some squadrons who lose enough members by their being sent to Sq.000, could fall below the
     15 member minimum and be reduced to a flight or closed.

Do these remedies seem drastic and harsh? Absolutely!

We said:

It is not punitive to move inactive or unresponsive members to squadron 000 it is just prudent to get the ban lifted.

But as long as National is playing "hard ball" and insists on 100% compliance....Wing is absolutely right to do what ever is necessary to get us up and running again. Those members can get back out of SQ 000 by simply doing the required ORM training when they can.

They are not moving members to Triple Zeros to obtain compliance, they are doing it so that they have fewer active members that they have to get into compliance by tonight.

I chopped and swapped quotes from a few people, not meant to single anyone out.....

My Opinion:

Moving un cooperative members to the 000 Squadron is exactly seeking compliance through transfer.

Utilize this line of thinking....."out of sight out of mind"

No Not "out of sight out of mind" .... Out of compliance, out of squadron.

They ( National ) have mandated 100% compliance. What is PA WING supposed to do with several hundred members who for what ever reason can not be reached quickly or who have been reached and do not bother to take serious the need to comply?

Are they supposed to Sit back and let the whole PA WING idle while these few keep the rest of the Wing frozen? How long should they wait ? Two more weeks? A Month? Two Months?....No, this is the only viable solution. BRAVO Commander Lee....do what you have to. That is what a good leader does.

[Alpha]

Wing deficiencies are Wing Command's problems. The fish stinks from the head down...or in this case from the orange ball cap down.

And it's Wings job to resolve them. By what ever means necessary.

From my Ranger rollled orange ball cap, to my chrome whistle, I support the Wing commanders decision to get us up to speed again ASAP.

[SAR-EMT1]

Wing deficiencies are Wing Command's problems. The fish stinks from the head down...or in this case from the orange ball cap down.

And it's Wings job to resolve them. By what ever means necessary.

From my Ranger rollled orange ball cap, to my chrome whistle, I support the Wing commanders decision to get us up to speed again ASAP.

Folks out there Ranger Roll a BALLCAP?

[Alpha]

Yep! Something they do at Hawk Mountain. Not every unit but some.

[SARMedTech]

Wing deficiencies are Wing Command's problems. The fish stinks from the head down...or in this case from the orange ball cap down.

And it's Wings job to resolve them. By what ever means necessary.

From my Ranger rollled orange ball cap, to my chrome whistle, I support the Wing commanders decision to get us up to speed again ASAP.

Folks out there Ranger Roll a BALLCAP?

Shocking and horrific, isnt it?