Benefits and Allowances for a Better Brighter Air Force Auxiliary

[fyrfitrmedic]

I see no reason for job security while on missions.  It is a volunteer organization.  If you do not have the time to volunteer while simultaneously holding a job, then change to a job where you can, or don't volunteer.  You must pick and choose your battles.

Obviously you've never been involved in the volunteer fire service or volunteer emergency medical services. There are reasons and for laws protecting the employment of such volunteers and ample precedents justifying same.

Now, tell me again why you see no reason for job security while responding as volunteers.

[O-Rex]

CAP428

If you look at the Coast Guard Auxiliary they are seen as part of the total force. Their IDs are better, they get more on-base privileges etc...and its because they are USED MORE by the USCG. (Heck, I know many Aux Officers who routinely are OOD or Comms Officer at CG stations.)
MY main goal is to get CAP up to that same level in regard to our relationship with the Air Force.

I hear a lot of "let's be more like the CG Aux" and it seems that a lot of folks don't understand the relationships and histories behind them. CAP and CGAUX might be "cousins," but culturally speaking, they are two different animals entirely.

The Coast Guard has a long history of being over-tasked and under-manned. Moreover, the lighthouse and rescue boat crews were pretty much volunteer (until they were integrated with the Revenue Cutter Service to form the Coast Guard) Revenue Cutter Service personnel would visit these boat units much like CAPRAP's do today. In fact, in the 19th Century, the RCS lacked the retirement benefits that the other services enjoyed, and many who were too old to continue active service became volunteers. As a result, differentiation between USCG and its volunteer components was not that pronounced, and the close relationship continues to this day. While it does perform some semi-independent CAP-like functions, the "Aux" also serves as augmentees, standing watches, serving on vessels, etc. because the Coast Guard is a very small service with a very big mission.

Yes, during WWII, CAP, like the CG Aux, also served as "augmentees," performing some of the more day-to-day tasks on the home-front to free up manpower for deployment. But since then, there hasn't been the need for civilians to man USAF billets (save for some Chaplains, but theirs is a special circumstance...)

Is the Air Force currently undermanned? Thousands of former Airmen and Officers who were "force-shaped" or "blue to greened" in the past couple of years would probably tell you "no."

CAP, Inc. grew out of the uncertainty of the massive post-WWII military drawdown. Remember that the services were all taking a big hit, and there was even nonsense-talk of disbanding the Marine Corps (no kidding!) Civil Defense, a close "sister" to CAP, was all but disbanded, but would re-emerge with the advent of the Nuclear Arms Race a few years later. Incorporation ensured that the organization would continue, in one form or another. It did, and was adopted by the newly-formed USAF.

Those I know who are concurrent CAP/USCGAUX members respect the distinctive "flavors" and differences between the two organizations, and I never heard them say that one should be more like the other, any more than a military service member would say that the Navy should be more like the Army. It's just different.

In my wing, we have a great relationship with the AUX, much if it promoted by these 'dual' members. Our biannual water-survival/water egress training is combined.

(Note: former CAP dirt-bags who get 2-B'd and then go to the CG Aux usually get 'found-out' there too!)

Can we enjoy a more 'GC Aux-type relationship' with USAF if we behave ourselves, shine our boots and eat all our vegetables? No: USAF doesn't need it, and CAP leadership doesn't want it.

Can we (CAP) nurture our relationship with USAF if we clearly understand the nature of our respective roles & missions, and can articulate them somewhat intelligently? Just maybe........

Also, USAF or any service "Total Force" means Regulars, Reservists, and ANG members who can take up arms and deploy. Use that vernacular to describe a CAP member-in the wrong company, and you'll get some real dirty looks.

[CAP428]

I see no reason for job security while on missions.  It is a volunteer organization.  If you do not have the time to volunteer while simultaneously holding a job, then change to a job where you can, or don't volunteer.  You must pick and choose your battles.

Obviously you've never been involved in the volunteer fire service or volunteer emergency medical services. There are reasons and for laws protecting the employment of such volunteers and ample precedents justifying same.

Now, tell me again why you see no reason for job security while responding as volunteers.

Because I see volunteer firefighting as a whole different thing.  Why?  Because generally volunteer firefighters are needed in smaller towns where there are not full-time firefighters and stations available.  CAP is not needed.  I know it hurts us to hear that, but it's true.  Are we helpful?  Definitely.  Do we serve a great purpose that would be more of a hassle to do/cost more without us?  Sure.  But it's kind of like driving a car with automatic transmission.  Is it needed in order to operate a car?  No, you can drive a stick.  But it sure as heck helps.

In other words, if CAP did not exist, there are plenty of government-related and privately owned SAR/ES type organizations that would do the job instead.  So, there is no need for job security when away on missions b/c you are not needed, you are merely an asset.

[DNall]

CAP428

If you look at the Coast Guard Auxiliary they are seen as part of the total force. Their IDs are better, they get more on-base privileges etc...and its because they are USED MORE by the USCG. (Heck, I know many Aux Officers who routinely are OOD or Comms Officer at CG stations.)
MY main goal is to get CAP up to that same level in regard to our relationship with the Air Force.

Never.  Going.  To.  Happen.  (Period, STOP, check please)

Why?  Several reasons - the biggest being that the AF does not have as much use for us as the CG has for their AUX.  We can do a few missions the AF likes us to do, but almost none of the are AF Core missions.  We can't put angry iron on target, nor can we do anything in the overseas zones in which the AF works.

OTOH, CGAUX can work on almost any job the CG has.  Most of their AUX are in the same locations the CG is working - waterways and coastlines.  The AF may base B-2's in MO, but that's not because they expect to exercise sovereign options in the Mississippi River Valley.  Most of the CG work their AUX does is neither military nor armed.  They are an _operational_ force multiplier that we will never be.

Can we be closer to the AF?  Sure.  Can we be more useful to the AF?  Sure.  Will we ever get to the CGAUX level of connectedness with Big Blue?  No.

You know... yes & no. I aso get annoyed when people talk about the CGAux w/o understanding teh dramatic differences that cannot be changed. There are some parallels that are interesting, even instructive, but then there are otheres where they are totally meaningless for comparison. For instance, the size of AF & scope of their mission is massive comapred to CG, which makes CAP a tiny blip at best.

The main point I'd make though is not to lock CAP down into such a small box. I'd go beyond "more useful" on up as far as critical to national security useful. CAP isn't going to have 500k members, and it isn't going to stand duty stations in Kuwait, however, we could easily step up to some prime time missions critically important to the country & deserving of respect for more than the fact that we do them out of charity. If those missions require high standards for membership & progression, if we're also taking lead roles in muli-agency ICS command & general staff levels... I think that's a reasonable route we'd all like to be part of & that would cause AF to see CAP in a whole different light. They have some legitimate complaints about us that need to be addressed & we need to step up to a whole new serious level of business or quit wasting the taxpayer's money.

[fyrfitrmedic]

I see no reason for job security while on missions.  It is a volunteer organization.  If you do not have the time to volunteer while simultaneously holding a job, then change to a job where you can, or don't volunteer.  You must pick and choose your battles.

Obviously you've never been involved in the volunteer fire service or volunteer emergency medical services. There are reasons and for laws protecting the employment of such volunteers and ample precedents justifying same.

Now, tell me again why you see no reason for job security while responding as volunteers.

Because I see volunteer firefighting as a whole different thing.  Why?  Because generally volunteer firefighters are needed in smaller towns where there are not full-time firefighters and stations available.  CAP is not needed.  I know it hurts us to hear that, but it's true.  Are we helpful?  Definitely.  Do we serve a great purpose that would be more of a hassle to do/cost more without us?  Sure.  But it's kind of like driving a car with automatic transmission.  Is it needed in order to operate a car?  No, you can drive a stick.  But it sure as heck helps.

In other words, if CAP did not exist, there are plenty of government-related and privately owned SAR/ES type organizations that would do the job instead.  So, there is no need for job security when away on missions b/c you are not needed, you are merely an asset.

  Such governmental and private entities don't exist everywhere, just like career fire and EMS departments don't exist everywhere. Unless and until such coverage is universal, CAP still retains a role in SAR activities and as such some form of job protection is warranted.

If I was to follow your train of thought, my volunteer EMS activities don't warrant any sort of protection either; after all, there are always hospital-based and private third-service entities to handle the workload - I'm sure their current state of overload can be added to a bit more, right? After all, my volunteer EMS squad is 'just an asset', it's not 'needed'. Tell that to my stakeholders.

[DNall]

If I can just help you out with that one right quick... The SaR standards we currently train to are okay, the ones it looks like FEMA is going to demand of us are pretty dang high. CAP isn't a very big organization. You're talking about maybe 12k active adults, maybe 8-10k on the way outside are even current much less active in ES, and that's for 52 wings & several million square miles. If you're busy at work & can't volunteer your time, exactly who is going to fill in behind you? Maybe if you're talking about a van load of cadets on a Saturday afternoon UDFing their way thru the local airport ramp, but when you need high trained & experienced operators to deploy for days at a time and/or across the country, getting fired is not an option. And switching jobs? Are you in junior high right now?

[SAR-EMT1]

I totally agree with fyrfitrmedic on this, and not just because I have the same job but because in my area the local ESDA/FEMA types are not the folks Id want to rely on if I was hurt in the woods; good as their intentions may be.

As far as CAP having a true support / augmentation role to the Air Force... Why not? 
Does anyone have any idea how many MILLIONS the DoD spends on civilian contractors every year?  I can think of hundreds of things CAP types can do on base. Remember this: The letter of the regs say that we may be tasked for ANY AND ALL non-combat duties as tasked by SECAF.
   ..This is pure dream here...but lets just say we can convince the AF to get rid of many of its contractors and bring in CAP members at a per diem. On base we could staff the AF Inn desks, assist at the gates (the CAP unit at Scott AFB have done this routinely in the past)  assist with admin/personnel flights. Assist with met officers, IT,  Chaplains, medical personnel, even with some of the less important / unclassified  comm work.  Even something as simple as cutting the grass.

Literally anything a contractor stateside can do, we could do. Its just a matter of seeing the forest for the trees.

[Dragoon]

b]Literally anything a contractor stateside can do, we could do.[/b] Its just a matter of seeing the forest for the trees.

I'm not sure it's that simple.  CAP isn't all that good at handling long term tasks, because most of our members have jobs.  We are better at "surging" for a few weeks at a time, or a day or so a week.

The volunteer fire departments of the country have largely admitted that getting a steady stream of trained volunteers to man the station during the day doesn't happen.  So the volunteers do nights and weekends, and paid guys are there during the work week.

Also remember the DoD has turned entire areas of operation over to contractors, things like network management, designing aircraft, writing doctrine.  I don't think CAP is the right answer to those kind of issues.  Unless they paid us.  And if they did that, we'd BE a contractor.

Sure they're are things we can do, but for example, how many CAP members would sign up to manning the AF Inn help desk for a few months?  It's not exactly a "fun" task like flying search missions.  Can we really generate enough dependable, trained manpower to make it worth anyone's while?

[RiverAux]

If you look at the Coast Guard Auxiliary they are seen as part of the total force. Their IDs are better,

This is extremely untrue.  The CG Aux id is a photo pasted on a card and laminated in some office somewhere.  It is no better than the old CAP photo id.  At least the current CAP credit card no photo id looks fairly professional. 

[MIKE]

If you look at the Coast Guard Auxiliary they are seen as part of the total force. Their IDs are better,

This is extremely untrue.  The CG Aux id is a photo pasted on a card and laminated in some office somewhere.  It is no better than the old CAP photo id.  At least the current CAP credit card no photo id looks fairly professional. 

Mine is printed right on the plastic card.  It's one of the new ones.

[RiverAux]

I haven't heard a thing about new cards.  Mine is only about 2 1/2 years old. 

[afgeo4]

Speaking of... can anyone scan in or give us a pic of the current (new) USCG Aux ID card so we know what y'all are talking about?

[MIKE]

No thanks, PERSEC. 

[afgeo4]

No thanks, PERSEC. 

lol I meant with blacked out picture and personal info

[fyrfitrmedic]

b]Literally anything a contractor stateside can do, we could do.[/b] Its just a matter of seeing the forest for the trees.

I'm not sure it's that simple.  CAP isn't all that good at handling long term tasks, because most of our members have jobs.  We are better at "surging" for a few weeks at a time, or a day or so a week.

The volunteer fire departments of the country have largely admitted that getting a steady stream of trained volunteers to man the station during the day doesn't happen.  So the volunteers do nights and weekends, and paid guys are there during the work week.

You're painting the volunteer fire service with an awfully wide brush. I can name far more 'pure volunteer' departments than 'combination' departments. you probably want to do a little bit more reasearch before making such statements in the future.

[Dragoon]

I'll stand by it until confronted with facts to the contrary (as I'm sure you'll stand by your assertion).

So we'll agree to disagree.

But to follow up - in your neck of the woods, how do the "pure" volunteer fire departments handle the 9-5 weekday workload?  Where do they get a crew full of firemen to hang around the station and not work for a living?

[ddelaney103]

I'll stand by it until confronted with facts to the contrary (as I'm sure you'll stand by your assertion).

So we'll agree to disagree.

But to follow up - in your neck of the woods, how do the "pure" volunteer fire departments handle the 9-5 weekday workload?  Where do they get a crew full of firemen to hang around the station and not work for a living?

Often they would accept degraded mission readiness.  When I was young the VFD in the town where I spent my summers would only have a couple of people in the station and an air raid siren.  When there was an event the siren went off and people ran out of their workplaces went to the fire.  That does mean the whole crew won't be there when the engine gets there.

It's a classic problem - having people sit "strip alert" means faster response time but is a real time waster.

[Dragoon]

I'll stand by it until confronted with facts to the contrary (as I'm sure you'll stand by your assertion).

So we'll agree to disagree.

But to follow up - in your neck of the woods, how do the "pure" volunteer fire departments handle the 9-5 weekday workload?  Where do they get a crew full of firemen to hang around the station and not work for a living?

Often they would accept degraded mission readiness.  When I was young the VFD in the town where I spent my summers would only have a couple of people in the station and an air raid siren.  When there was an event the siren went off and people ran out of their workplaces went to the fire.  That does mean the whole crew won't be there when the engine gets there.

It's a classic problem - having people sit "strip alert" means faster response time but is a real time waster.

Right - they couldn't get folks to actually do volunteer WORK from 9-5, so they just called them up when something happened.

As stated originally, CAP can do that.  We can "surge" for emergencies.  But I doubt we can provide a steady stream of qualified individuals willing to work 9-5 for no pay.

It takes a contractor to fill that job.

[mikeylikey]

Just tell the member that they can eat at the BX, but still can't shop there while they are sweating away for AF.  That should get CAP members to sign up!

[fyrfitrmedic]

I'll stand by it until confronted with facts to the contrary (as I'm sure you'll stand by your assertion).

So we'll agree to disagree.

But to follow up - in your neck of the woods, how do the "pure" volunteer fire departments handle the 9-5 weekday workload?  Where do they get a crew full of firemen to hang around the station and not work for a living?

The National Volunteer Fire Council [http://www.nvfc.org] and the US Fire Administration [http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/] both have oodles of stats to back up my assertion. See also the IAFC, Firehouse magazine, etc...

In my own neck of the woods, there are enough people who work varying hours at paying jobs in most local departments to adequately staff apparatus responding to emergencies. There are a few houses here and there that have been hit harder than others by the overall decline in volunteerism; that's currently the exception rather than the rule.

A mutual-aid system exists in both volunteer and career fire departments to provide coverage in events that require larger responses or in those infrequent instances that a company is out-of-service or short-staffed.

The initial response to any emergent incident is a 'surge' - that's the nature of the beast. Any responder agency, no matter the type or composition, has to 'shift gears' once the response extends beyond an initial operational period. Human and equipment assets all have their own needs.