initial term limit for squadron commanders?

[NCRblues]

BTW, the average term for a Wing/Region Commander is 23 months. What does that tell you?   

Cite please.

[a2capt]

I've heard statistics like that during various general sessions at conferences. That the average term was about half of the 4 year period.

[Private Investigator]

Exactly. I heard that at RSC and various sessions at conferences too. I remember a time my Wing had four Wing Commanders in four years.

[Patterson]

It seems that from my varied view most Wings have no policy for transitions.  That includes command selections and staff appointment policies/ procedures at all levels in the wing.  Where I am, if you are not "part of the club", the possibility of commanding anything above the Squadron level is very low.

I have recently watched a very successful Squadron Commander "transitioned" to group at the four year mark, replaced by a person who seemed to be the ideal officer that would continue the Squadron successes.  After 2 months of literally doing nothing at the group level, the former squadron commander decided to leave the organization.  She missed the weekly interactions, the personal contact and the fun that being in a squadron provided.  At the six month mark the squadron has lost 16 total members, is non-compliant in multiple areas and wing just fired the new commander.

So, for every person that says "term limits are good, they work great locally", there is another person that can counter that opinion!

[FlyTiger77]

I am trying to get a formal transition program implemented in my group:

T-4 months: announce an impending vacancy with application requirements (Goals, Resume of CAP Service Career) and change of command date
T-3 months: empanel a board to review the applications and make a recommendation
T-2 months: receive the board's recommendation
T-6 weeks: request wing commander's concurrence and announce incoming commander

This gives the new commander time to transition with the outgoing commander (the old transitinon of the incoming and outgoing commanders exchanging high-5s at the office door never worked too well) and let's everyone know what is going on.

Of the 3 changes of command I have presided over, we have been able to do it once and it worked pretty well.

[Eclipse]

It seems that from my varied view most Wings have no policy for transitions.  That includes command selections and staff appointment policies/ procedures at all levels in the wing.  Where I am, if you are not "part of the club", the possibility of commanding anything above the Squadron level is very low.

I have recently watched a very successful Squadron Commander "transitioned" to group at the four year mark, replaced by a person who seemed to be the ideal officer that would continue the Squadron successes.  After 2 months of literally doing nothing at the group level, the former squadron commander decided to leave the organization.  She missed the weekly interactions, the personal contact and the fun that being in a squadron provided.  At the six month mark the squadron has lost 16 total members, is non-compliant in multiple areas and wing just fired the new commander.

So, for every person that says "term limits are good, they work great locally", there is another person that can counter that opinion!

The same goes for the inverse.

Who told the former commander to quit attending meetings?  Holding a staff position at a higher HQ doesn't equal "no squadron meetings or other the fun activities."

[lordmonar]

Why you did when you said he/she can't be a commander anymore.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Why you did when you said he/she can't be a commander anymore.

Group commanders can't come to meetings? I should let mine know.

[Eclipse]

Why you did when you said he/she can't be a commander anymore.

Not even a little bit.

If anything, she should be more active and engaged with other units on a regular basis doing her new staff job,
and/or simply going to the same unit meeting every week, participating as a member, and mentoring when the opportunity
presents itself.  That would also allow her time to get all that PD done that some people say is impossible
when you're a CC, concentrate on ES ratings, participate in larger-scale activities with all the free time, etc., etc.

Or just sit home and be mad you can't be the playground king anymore. 

If you want to take your ball and go home, so be it, but don't put that on the program. By definition, senior members
are adults.  Adults who are there to serve a greater good as part of something larger then themselves.
This isn't the local Horticultural Society and your ego is supposed to be checked at the door.

And while we're here, I'd like to address the inappropriate feelings of "ownership" engendered when people go
"above and beyond" especially without being asked.

Obviously we need people who feel personal responsibility and "own" their commitments, but that's not the same as
investing inappropriate time, money, or efforts into situations like CAP staff appointments or activities.

We see it all the time in the statements here and elsewhere "I spent eleventy-twelveeen dollars on sending all those cadets to
encampment, bought the unit 4 L-pers, spent thousands on fuel driving to activities, and worked 60 hours a week on paperwork because
there was no one else to do it."   Not only is the fail clear in that sentence, but if the only reason you're doing these things is to
perpetuate your own existence (which sadly happens all too frequently), then you missed the point of the uniform and
are defeating your own purpose and that of the organization.

And further to that point, anyone with several decades of membership, let alone staff appointment to a single job, should know
how CAP works and have the capability to read the landscape when things change, meaning they know what's coming and should
not read it as a personal affront just because things evolved.  And if they can't do that, then they were wrong for the job to start.

[lordmonar]

Why you did when you said he/she can't be a commander anymore.

Group commanders can't come to meetings? I should let mine know.

Actually No they shouldn't......IN A PERFECT WORLD.
a) Conflict of interest.
b) Chain of Command
c) Undue Command Influence
d) Back Seat Driver Syndrome

Of course the Group Commander is free to attend meeting/visit the unit AS THE GROUP COMMANDER.  He should not be there as just another squadron member....because he is not.

Now....I know that it happens and I don't have a problem with it.   Just as I don't have a major problem with term limits.   But a sitting commander who is told to step down should be moved out of the squadron for a time.....it is what happens in the real world (including the military)....See Band of Brothers....when Dick Winters moved up to Battalion...he had trouble of letting go of Easy Company.....that can be a problem in a small unit where the old commander can't resist the temptation to "Just help out the new commander"....which is counter to the whole idea of term limits in the first place!

So....if you tell me my time is done.....I'm walking away from the squadron....at least for a year.....just to make that separation.  If Wing/Group is not supporting my needs for activity.....the I may just walk from CAP too.

[FlyTiger77]

...my time is done.....I'm walking away from the squadron....at least for a year.....just to make that separation.

I agree wholeheartedly!

[Eclipse]

^ I agree 100% with everything said above, and this is how I approached my transitions and how I encouraged others to do
it as well.  But I'm an adult, and viewed the moves as the natural order of the organization, I didn't view it as being "run out of town".

I wanted to give the new people their time to succeed or fail on their own.  Others in the same position were not as mature and it causes issues.

The main point is that if you view term limits as a personal affront, then you're probably cooked from the start anyway.  I'll admit that we've done a disservice to
many units by letting this continue as long as it did - units with CC's for 20-30+ years who now find themselves at the end of that road.  By definition
these are going to be older members who likely haven't dealt with change in CAP overall very well (still USPS things into wing, email is an "activity", wing banker
will take my money, WIWAC, etc., etc.), have a lot of ego wrapped up in the job, and are at an age where they won't be much inclined for "new challenges".

That doesn't mean we don't make good decisions that involve them, or that the organization builds a "somebody else's problem field" around the unit to avoid the
uncomfortable conversation.

Interestingly, no one seems to have issues with Group, Wing, Region, or National limits, only the unit?  Why, because that affects them personally.

[Майор Хаткевич]

But I'm an adult, and viewed the moves as the natural order of the organization, I didn't view it as being "run out of town".

Unit meeting location, one week after Eclipse went to Group. 

[Eclipse]

NICE!

[AirAux]

Let me go back top my original post; "And then it's out the door whether there is a satisfactory replacement or not, with threats to close the squadron, and not even a thank you to the exiting commander..  Another bright idea from those above that don't even know the program or how it works.."

In retrospect, I didn't take the commander change personally.  I took the fact that no one offered thanks for a job well done rather personal.  We are in a volunteer field and we preach passing out praise as much as possible to keep morale up and people motivated.  Unfortunately we were a small squadron and did not have a ready replacement at hand.  This came about rather quickly and I thought after reading the Reg's we could get another year from command to locate or transistion a good candidate for command.  I didn't think the rush, abruptness, or the rudeness was at all necessary just to follow a new regulation.  I do know that change in command is necessary, but there should be a method to it and in this situation it was all madness.  I have been in many positions in CAP since I began.  Of all of them, I enjoy working with Squadron level best.  I will continue to work with and support the squadron and try not to step on the new commanders toes.   

In some areas you will find a small squadron that does not have anyone that wants to take over the responsibility of leadership.  There is an additional time element alond with numerous other requirements.  In a large squadron, you may have members chomping at the bit to become commanders. 

Not all situations are the same. 

As far as a "failing squadron", let's get real.  I would dare say that at least 50% of all CAP squadrons are failing if you look at the current expectations of CAP.   How many squadrons have a perfect flying program?  or Areospace program?  or Cadet program?  And I am talking about everything done by the book, all members up to date on their training and every one moving through the program and ranks as National wants?  As a Corps, we have done an outstanding job over the years.  For a volunteer outfit we are exceptional.  Compared to a corporation where people are paid to do what we do, we probably would come up lacking.  National is now attempting to require units and members to be as accountable as paid personnel would be.   I know very few that have taken on CAP as an occupation.  We do it because we enjoy it.  We enjoy it because we think we are part of something bigger and that we are doing something good.  This becomes a problem when one tries to require more and more out of people with less and less motivation.   

I am concerned that if the way I was treated is the current attitude of National that we will soon lose a lot of good people.  I hate to see this happen to CAP.  I felt hurt by what hppened to me, but I am prior military and have been in CAP for a lonmg time and I am over it, but I am concerned and I feel that I have earned the right to be concerned by my years of contribution to CAP. 

If some of the wiseguys on the Board want to continue to take pot shots at me, have at it.  I know who I am and what I have contributed.  You don't..

[Eclipse]

Pot shots?  Where?

[AirAux]

Such as: "A unit with no replacement CC after 4 years is, by design, failing."

In effect calling me a failure as a commander.  Very cheap pot shot at that.. 

Until you walk a mile in one's shoes, ...

[Eclipse]

Such as: "A unit with no replacement CC after 4 years is, by design, failing."

In effect calling me a failure as a commander.  Very cheap pot shot at that.. 

Until you walk a mile in one's shoes, ...

I stand by that statement, however you are taking macro statements and applying them personally.

If the bell tolls for thee, so be it, but no one was called you out personally or even knows enough about your situation to do so.  Frankly, I had no idea
you were referring about yourself.  I thought you were talking about a situation you knew of.

I also agree that probably 50+% of units aren't meeting their mandates, though I'd say it's more like 25-35% are "failing" in the sense
of having too few real members or being 1-man bands with no transition plan.

Saying that doesn't change anything, otherwise it never gets fixed, and then soon enough it's 60%, then 75%, and then you
have plenty of free time.

If you were treated poorly, that not cricket, but you can't honestly say it caught you off guard, especially if you're active here.
My region has had them in place for more then a decade, unevenly enforced, likewise other wings, don't know about other regions.
It's been discussed here for years and was slowly adopted until it became a reg.  The clock was ticking, it was just a matter of when.

[lordmonar]

Mandates?

I'd like to see those mandates.

[Storm Chaser]

I have recently watched a very successful Squadron Commander "transitioned" to group at the four year mark, replaced by a person who seemed to be the ideal officer that would continue the Squadron successes.  After 2 months of literally doing nothing at the group level, the former squadron commander decided to leave the organization.  She missed the weekly interactions, the personal contact and the fun that being in a squadron provided.  At the six month mark the squadron has lost 16 total members, is non-compliant in multiple areas and wing just fired the new commander.

So, for every person that says "term limits are good, they work great locally", there is another person that can counter that opinion!

Is a squadron really successful when its success is mostly dependent on one person, the commander? My opinion, based on years of experience with different organizations, is 'no'. What Eclipse and others are saying, and I agree, is that a truly successful unit is developing leaders to take over the many functions in that unit. That's not just applicable to the commander, but to all staff officers as well.

In my current unit, for example, we had a very experienced, qualified and talented Emergency Services Officer before I joined. When he left the unit to become the Group Operations Officer, there was no succession plan in place and the unit struggled for months to get its ES program back up and running. I took over as ES Officer about six month later and now, after a year on the job, I have people in place that can take over the position with minimum impact to the unit. I've made every effort so that all we've accomplished doesn't end when it's time for me to step aside. I've done the same thing with other positions (Cadet Programs, Safety, etc.).

No one, not even in a volunteer organization, should be so essential that when they leave or move up, the organization is adversely affected by their departure. Potential replacements should always be trained and a succession plan should be in place. A successful unit must have more than one good leader.