Do Senior Members without Grade wear epaulets on the corporate aviator shirt?

[JeffDG]

Someone should update the FAQ here:

http://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/how_to_join/adults_faq/

Do I have to wear a uniform?
Senior members may be required to wear a uniform during some activities - such as when flying in CAP aircraft. Senior members may wear the USAF style blue uniform or one of the distinctive CAP uniforms.  However, some members choose to serve quietly without wearing a uniform.  You can purchase uniform items from Vanguard.  www.civilairpatrolstore.com.

Now, perhaps this is simply a distinction without a difference, but it sure lends the impression that one can join CAP as a SM and not wear a uniform, which would then make it follow that one wouldn't need to keep a uniform one would never wear in inventory.

Perhaps the FAQ should be updated?

I was told I could be a member without a uniform, but if I wanted to get in the plane or work with Cadets, I needed to at least get the polo uniform. So I did.  Done deal.

I honestly believe that the MBU section should be amended to permit the polo as an MBU.  It makes zero sense to demand that someone buy a uniform (ie. the blues or whites) that they will never use just to be compliant with an obscure section of the uniform manual.

That said, the obscure section exists, and until changed, it is what it is.

[abdsp51]

It amazes me how members and leaders still thumb their nose at regs and lack of care factor.   Personally if I was a CC I wouldn't be allowing any of my members participate outside of unit activities if they can't follow the simple uni rules.

[JeffDG]

It amazes me how members and leaders still thumb their nose at regs and lack of care factor.   Personally if I was a CC I wouldn't be allowing any of my members participate outside of unit activities if they can't follow the simple uni rules.

It amazes me how members and leaders still have regulations on the books for the sole purpose of having them on the books, with no discernible benefit from having them.  Personally, if I were a CC, I'd be up-channeling a request to have the manual changed.  If regs have no discernible benefit to the members or mission, they should be set aside at the earliest opportunity.

[abdsp51]

It amazes me how members and leaders still thumb their nose at regs and lack of care factor.   Personally if I was a CC I wouldn't be allowing any of my members participate outside of unit activities if they can't follow the simple uni rules.

It amazes me how members and leaders still have regulations on the books for the sole purpose of having them on the books, with no discernible benefit from having them.  Personally, if I were a CC, I'd be up-channeling a request to have the manual changed.  If regs have no discernible benefit to the members or mission, they should be set aside at the earliest opportunity.

Feel free to you know the process if you feel that strongly about it.

[JeffDG]

It amazes me how members and leaders still thumb their nose at regs and lack of care factor.   Personally if I was a CC I wouldn't be allowing any of my members participate outside of unit activities if they can't follow the simple uni rules.

It amazes me how members and leaders still have regulations on the books for the sole purpose of having them on the books, with no discernible benefit from having them.  Personally, if I were a CC, I'd be up-channeling a request to have the manual changed.  If regs have no discernible benefit to the members or mission, they should be set aside at the earliest opportunity.

Feel free to you know the process if you feel that strongly about it.

Just out of curiosity, what is the benefit to the members or mission of the requirement?

[abdsp51]

It amazes me how members and leaders still thumb their nose at regs and lack of care factor.   Personally if I was a CC I wouldn't be allowing any of my members participate outside of unit activities if they can't follow the simple uni rules.

It amazes me how members and leaders still have regulations on the books for the sole purpose of having them on the books, with no discernible benefit from having them.  Personally, if I were a CC, I'd be up-channeling a request to have the manual changed.  If regs have no discernible benefit to the members or mission, they should be set aside at the earliest opportunity.

Feel free to you know the process if you feel that strongly about it.

Just out of curiosity, what is the benefit to the members or mission of the requirement?

I can give you a few things that I see but it's a matter of personal opinion.

[JeffDG]

As an even dumber concequence of the Minimum Basic Uniform rule...say you have tatoos or some unsighly injury on your arm.  You would prefer to wear the long-sleeve version of the Aviator, right?  You may, but you are REQUIRED to have the short-sleeve version in your closet to meet the regulation.

So, for those commanders demanding compliance with this, do you check for that, or do you permit people to just own the long-sleeve version?

[abdsp51]

Have you seen Para 3.2.6 and 3.2.6.1?  This addresses tattoos.  And injuries come into a different realm. 

Commanders and members are required to adhere to and enforce 39-1. 

[JeffDG]

Have you seen Para 3.2.6 and 3.2.6.1?  This addresses tattoos.  And injuries come into a different realm. 

Commanders and members are required to adhere to and enforce 39-1.

Yes, I have...

3.2.6.1. Tattoos/Brands/Body Markings (Inappropriate Contents or Excessive). Excessive
tattoos/brands/body markings will not be exposed or visible (includes visible through the uniform) while
wearing any/all uniform combination(s)

However...if you have tattoos on your forearms, you are REQUIRED by 1.2.1 to own and maintain for wear the short-sleeve blues or aviator, even though 3.2.6.1 forbids you from wearing it.  And you, as a commander, need to enforce that, right?

[Storm Chaser]

The reason the corporate working uniform (polo) has become the default uniform for many senior members and units is because many commanders have been flexing uniform wear norms. If a member can wear the polo to nearly every CAP activity or function, then what's the purpose of buying another uniform?

Many wings still require members to wear the AF-style service uniform or corporate aviator shirt uniform for PD courses (SLS, CLC, TLC, etc.), Wing Conferences, and Commander's Calls. Members participating in these events will see the benefit of owning these minimum basic uniforms. It's up to commanders at every level to not only enforce regulations, but to set the right expectations and standards. No one is going to buy the MBU if they don't see the need for it.

[JeffDG]

No one is going to buy the MBU if they don't see the need for it.

And that's why they should fix the regulation and not declare those who don't buy it out-of-compliance for a regulation that really serves no purpose.

My proposal has been drafted and is in the Wing/CCs inbox.

[RogueLeader]

When I was a Squadron Commander, the Polo shirt was never authorized on the UOD list.  it was either Blues/BDU's and the corporate equivalent.  I'd actually like for the Polo combination to be removed entirely.

[Майор Хаткевич]

The reason the corporate working uniform (polo) has become the default uniform for many senior members and units is because many commanders have been flexing uniform wear norms. If a member can wear the polo to nearly every CAP activity or function, then what's the purpose of buying another uniform?

Many wings still require members to wear the AF-style service uniform or corporate aviator shirt uniform for PD courses (SLS, CLC, TLC, etc.), Wing Conferences, and Commander's Calls. Members participating in these events will see the benefit of owning these minimum basic uniforms. It's up to commanders at every level to not only enforce regulations, but to set the right expectations and standards. No one is going to buy the MBU if they don't see the need for it.

Or it ends up like every other event. Stern warning of "NO POLOS!" And then at least 5-10% of members show up in polos, aren't told a single thing, and then the next day more people say "forget it" and show up in polos.


I've seen it at PD courses. I've seen it at conferences. Nothing like driving 3+ hours to a conference, in G/Ws, only to see the "locals" wearing polos, when they were specifically not mentioned as UOD.

[THRAWN]

If the simple uniform regs are not being followed, what else is being glossed over? We wear uniforms here. Follow those rules or move on.

[SkywalkerRA]

As an even dumber concequence of the Minimum Basic Uniform rule...say you have tatoos or some unsighly injury on your arm.  You would prefer to wear the long-sleeve version of the Aviator, right?  You may, but you are REQUIRED to have the short-sleeve version in your closet to meet the regulation.

So, for those commanders demanding compliance with this, do you check for that, or do you permit people to just own the long-sleeve version?

I've always interpreted the MBU this way-the S/S shirt is listed as the minimum service uniform requirement b/c it's the simplest uniform option; no tie and no coat required. So if someone wanted to own and wear the L/S shirt (and tie) in lieu of the S/S all the time (when this uniform is appropriate), that would be in compliance because it's more than the minimum required. (This is my opinion only.)

Either way, I have a S/S and a L/S USAF-shirt, along with a polo and a flight suit. No BDU's. I like having the choice of alternating what I wear for meetings, always keeping in mind what we're doing for that meeting and adjusting my uniform choices appropriately.

[JeffDG]

If the simple uniform regs are not being followed, what else is being glossed over? We wear uniforms here. Follow those rules or move on.

OK, if it's that simple:

Do you/would you demand that members who have visible tattoos that prohibit them wearing the short-sleeve uniforms buy the short sleeve uniform in order to be in compliance?

A regulation that demands that people buy something that they are forbidden from utilizing needs changing.

[JeffDG]

As an even dumber concequence of the Minimum Basic Uniform rule...say you have tatoos or some unsighly injury on your arm.  You would prefer to wear the long-sleeve version of the Aviator, right?  You may, but you are REQUIRED to have the short-sleeve version in your closet to meet the regulation.

So, for those commanders demanding compliance with this, do you check for that, or do you permit people to just own the long-sleeve version?

I've always interpreted the MBU this way-the S/S shirt is listed as the minimum service uniform requirement b/c it's the simplest uniform option; no tie and no coat required. So if someone wanted to own and wear the L/S shirt (and tie) in lieu of the S/S all the time (when this uniform is appropriate), that would be in compliance because it's more than the minimum required. (This is my opinion only.)

Either way, I have a S/S and a L/S USAF-shirt, along with a polo and a flight suit. No BDU's. I like having the choice of alternating what I wear for meetings, always keeping in mind what we're doing for that meeting and adjusting my uniform choices appropriately.

Unfortunately, the MBU regulation is clear that the long-sleeve is not an acceptable alternative...short sleeve is specified.

1.2.1.1. Minimum USAF-style Uniform: The minimum basic USAF-style uniform is the
Blue Service Uniform (Class B) with short sleeve shirt (male) or blouse (female) as appropriate. Cadets
authorized to wear the USAF-style uniform are required to maintain this uniform.
1.2.1.2. Minimum Corporate-style Uniform: The minimum basic CAP Corporate-style
uniform is the Aviator Shirt Uniform with short sleeve shirt or blouse as appropriate. Cadets aged 18 and
older who meet weight standards for wear of the USAF-style uniform must maintain the USAF-style
Class B uniform as noted in the previous paragraph.

[THRAWN]

If the simple uniform regs are not being followed, what else is being glossed over? We wear uniforms here. Follow those rules or move on.

OK, if it's that simple:

Do you/would you demand that members who have visible tattoos that prohibit them wearing the short-sleeve uniforms buy the short sleeve uniform in order to be in compliance?

A regulation that demands that people buy something that they are forbidden from utilizing needs changing.

According to the KB the ink rules apply to the USAF uni. Wear the aviator. Dont look for problems that dont need solving.

[NC Hokie]

A regulation that demands that people buy something that they are forbidden from utilizing needs changing.

I think you'll find a lot of agreement here, but CAP Talk is cheap.  Write a proposal and send it up the chain.

[SkywalkerRA]

As an even dumber concequence of the Minimum Basic Uniform rule...say you have tatoos or some unsighly injury on your arm.  You would prefer to wear the long-sleeve version of the Aviator, right?  You may, but you are REQUIRED to have the short-sleeve version in your closet to meet the regulation.

So, for those commanders demanding compliance with this, do you check for that, or do you permit people to just own the long-sleeve version?

I've always interpreted the MBU this way-the S/S shirt is listed as the minimum service uniform requirement b/c it's the simplest uniform option; no tie and no coat required. So if someone wanted to own and wear the L/S shirt (and tie) in lieu of the S/S all the time (when this uniform is appropriate), that would be in compliance because it's more than the minimum required. (This is my opinion only.)

Either way, I have a S/S and a L/S USAF-shirt, along with a polo and a flight suit. No BDU's. I like having the choice of alternating what I wear for meetings, always keeping in mind what we're doing for that meeting and adjusting my uniform choices appropriately.

Unfortunately, the MBU regulation is clear that the long-sleeve is not an acceptable alternative...short sleeve is specified.

1.2.1.1. Minimum USAF-style Uniform: The minimum basic USAF-style uniform is the
Blue Service Uniform (Class B) with short sleeve shirt (male) or blouse (female) as appropriate. Cadets
authorized to wear the USAF-style uniform are required to maintain this uniform.
1.2.1.2. Minimum Corporate-style Uniform: The minimum basic CAP Corporate-style
uniform is the Aviator Shirt Uniform with short sleeve shirt or blouse as appropriate. Cadets aged 18 and
older who meet weight standards for wear of the USAF-style uniform must maintain the USAF-style
Class B uniform as noted in the previous paragraph.

I think that's a fair point. But here's what I know, if there was a member who always wore a long-sleeve shirt and tie, followd regulations, and looked sharp every time, if the commander told him that he was out of compliance, and not following regulations, and needed to be disciplined, corrected, or some other corrective action taken, because he never wore his short sleeve shirt, and therefore never proved that he owned the short sleeve shirt uniform. I think that would cause a problem that isn't really a problem.

Again, I think we need to think of the "why" behind the "what" so that the information we provide to members passes the common-sense test.