CAP-Agency vs CAP-Club - the real issue in Iowa

[bosshawk]

Nick: I have kept some sort of track of this thread and I say "AMEN" to your comments.  We have the usual platoon of guard-house lawyers on this site and it is time to simply set this aside and get on with useful stuff.

[ColonelJack]

Col. Critelli:

Your wisdom here speaks volumes.  All the best to you, a man I've come to respect in these forums.

Jack

[mikeylikey]

Nick: I have kept some sort of track of this thread and I say "AMEN" to your comments.  We have the usual platoon of guard-house lawyers on this site and it is time to simply set this aside and get on with useful stuff.

OK Colonel, lets just stop all discussion on CAPTALK.  Don't want to be thought of as  a "Guard-House-Lawyer".  (I don't even know what that means).  Actually, I think you are right.  Everyone here should watch what they type or they may get  (will get) sued.  It has happened here before, and most likely will happen again.  I am off to delete some posts!  See everyone at the next bash(ing)!

[Eclipse]

Telling us not to discuss something is like telling a 6-year-old to stop laughing when you are punishing them...

[ZigZag911]

I believe Nick is attempting to get the members of Iowa Wing to stand down, support their new wing commander, and try to preserve CAP in their home state.

Stifling our 1st Amendment freedom to pontificate long and loud about whatever we please is no doubt the furthest thing from his mind.

[Major Carrales]

I believe Nick is attempting to get the members of Iowa Wing to stand down, support their new wing commander, and try to preserve CAP in their home state.

Stifling our 1st Amendment freedom to pontificate long and loud about whatever we please is no doubt the furthest thing from his mind.

I agree, he is honorably asking for cooler heads to prevail in favor of the reality that CAP must survive there.

[jersey boy]

I find the concept of "dead weight" rather interesting.

Are the volunteers, who give up their time to serve as squadron admin, personnel, finance, and moral leadreship officers "dead weight" just because they're not interested in or able to perform ES missions?

Are they taking up space that belongs to someone else.  Is their desire to do some small service for their community, state, and nation an imposition?

Does everyone have to do ES?  Has anyone looked at the US military's teeth to tail ratio lately? They too serve, who perform essential tasks, so that those that are willing and able can perform the ES missions.

[ZigZag911]

Speaking only for myself, I define "dead weight" members as follows: a relatively healthy adult, unencumbered by severe fiscal, family, or career problems, who does nothing for his/her unit of membership, fulfills no staff role, neither participates in nor provides training, and, generally, doesn't do a blessed thing!


Hopefully this description makes it clear that the efforts of active members could (and should!) be in any of CAP's three principal missions, or in one of the many areas supporting the execution of those missions (i.e., they also serve well and honorably  who function as admin, logistics, IG, PAO and so on and so forth!)

There are two types of "dead weight" members:

1) those that rarely or never attend; to all intents and purposes they are Patrons, and at least their dues help wing & national

2) those that do attend, don't actually contribute anything, but constantly criticize, belittle and berate those seniors who do!

The first category is infinitely preferable to the second!

[Short Field]

Speaking only for myself, I define "dead weight" members as follows: a relatively healthy adult, unencumbered by severe fiscal, family, or career problems, who does nothing for his/her unit of membership, fulfills no staff role, neither participates in nor provides training, and, generally, doesn't do a blessed thing!

CAP is a volunteer organization.  We do not have a "up or out" policy or a mandatory retirement age like the military.  Members voluntarily contribute their time and money to help perform the mission.  Long term members go through burn-out, just get tired, or just get bored.  After a sabbatical, some become active in the squdron again.  As some members age, it just gets too hard to attend most of the meetings or participate in the activities.  Does that mean we should toss them out?    A lot of them were key players in the squadron at one time - but that was probably years before most of the active members joined.  Being part of CAP has become part of their identity.  To just quit or go to patron status is like a pilot who quits flying due to age being forced to sell his airplane.  Yes, they should probably do it, and they would save money in the process.  But they don't want to close the door forever on that part of their live.  So they don't.  So what if they pay dues and don't participate - it doesn't hurt anyone.  They deserve that much for the times when they did particpate.   Of the ones who show up and complain - if they have a lot of experience in CAP, then maybe they see the current leadership just reinventing the wheel and don't like it.

JMHO

[ZigZag911]

You quoted my post, but was it clear??

I did say "relatively healthy adult". I fully agree that, as our seniors become "seniors" chronologically, we ought to treat them respectfully, honoring the long years of service so many have given to CAP and country.

I also mentioned other legitimate reasons (family, work, school)
that could impede active membership for a time....been there myself.

I understand burnout and the need it brings for a "CAP vacation"....been there, done that, got the T-shirt! Though I probably should have gone to Patron status for several years...

I am not looking to mistreat anyone, or disrespect anyone....but there are those who do more harm than good, who cast a negative pall on the organization in spite of the best efforts of leaders to motivate them to participate and contribute insofar as they are able to do so!

The do-nothings, nay-sayers, rabble rousers we're better off without....not the retirees, not the ones worn to a frazzle by years of CAP service, not even those who have other priorities at the current stage of their lives....my experience, at least, has been that the folks who fit these categories are all too willing to pitch in and do what they can, even if it isn't making every mission or attending every squadron meeting.

[LittleIronPilot]

CAP is a volunteer organization.

.......staffed by proffesionals. Please finish the sentance. At least that is the direction we are pushing in GA Wing, from HQ, through SLS, to the squadrons.

We need to get away from just the first half of that sentence. Look this is NOT the Boy Scouts. Being active, doing your job is IMPORTANT.

Be it training Cadets, and thus shaping young minds, to teaching, to possible finding and saving the life of a downed pilot (perhaps mine someday)....this is not some Sunday volunteer group to pickup trash or clean up the local playground.

I think THAT is what many here are trying to say. Lets get out of the "we are volunteers" only mode....add the qualifier, take this seriously because quite frankly, it is.

Tags - MIKE

[Gunner C]

CAP is a volunteer organization.

.......staffed by proffesionals. Please finish the sentance. At least that is the direction we are pushing in GA Wing, from HQ, through SLS, to the squadrons.

We need to get away from just the first half of that sentence. Look this is NOT the Boy Scouts. Being active, doing your job is IMPORTANT.

Be it training Cadets, and thus shaping young minds, to teaching, to possible finding and saving the life of a downed pilot (perhaps mine someday)....this is not some Sunday volunteer group to pickup trash or clean up the local playground.

I think THAT is what many here are trying to say. Lets get out of the "we are volunteers" only mode....add the qualifier, take this seriously because quite frankly, it is.

Tags - MIKE

Well said!!!!!

[SAR-EMT1]

Col. Critelli, my respects Sir.

I think this is about talked out.

Mods can we get a lock?

[CadetProgramGuy]

Boy everyone's hankerin' for a lock these days

[isuhawkeye]

Lt Col Critelli has not been on this board for some time now. 

[LittleIronPilot]

Tags - MIKE

huh? Who is Mike and what are tags?

Just curious since I did not edit my own post! LOL

[jimmydeanno]

^It means that you messed up the quote tags or something in your post. So he (MIKE) edited it to fix them so your post didn't look like this:

THIS IS HIS POST

THIS IS YOUR POST

[Eclipse]

Lt Col Critelli has not been on this board for some time now. 

He posted 6 days ago on this thread...

[isuhawkeye]

as rapidly as my world has changed 6 days is some time.

[Dragoon]

Numbers of seniors don't mean nuthin'.

We need enough seniors to accomplish our missions.  No more. The rest is bloat.

In most Wings, there are oodles of "empty shirts."  They aren't helping, unless you count their dues.

The question to ask is not "does Iowa Wing have less seniors than it had before the changes?"

The question should be "does Iowa Wing have less (or more) active seniors who are helping the Wing accomplish its missions than it had before the changes."

I'm not sure how you quantify that easily, since CAP doesn't define "active membership."

But if what Iowa Wing is doing results in losing hundreds of dead members and picking up a few dozen ones who actually contribute to the Wing's missions - then it's a very good thing.

On the other hand, if Iowa Wing doesn't have enough people to get the job done - you've got a real problem.



Now cadets are different story - they aren't part of our workforce, they are one of our products.  Less cadets should be a warning indicator that a mission is on the decline.