Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 19, 2018, 07:22:20 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: Power stripped from Commanders???
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Power stripped from Commanders???  (Read 2325 times)
cobra6987
Recruit

Posts: 20

« on: January 17, 2018, 03:42:20 AM »

So, I've been looking more into CAPR 1-2, specifically in regards to directive publications. Right now, only Supplements and OI's can be issued to mandate anything. I've been noticing that most regulations are prohibiting supplements or OI for anything below wing level. Right there, Group and Squadron Commanders no longer have a right to "Establish plans, policies, and procedures necessary to the fulfillment of the CAP mission, which are not in conflict with the directives of higher headquarters." from CAPR 20-1. How can you set policies and procedures without being able to make an OI, Supplement, or Memorandum? This means that any squadrons and groups that have a policy or set procedure have to have the Wing make a supplement saying "members of the XYZ unit will follow these procedures..." and next thing you know, we have 20+ supplements to every regulation. This is exactly what NHQ did NOT want, as they should be kept to an absolute minimum per CAPR 1-2.

Another observation I have is that if everything has to be approved by the NHQ OPR ("All supplements and OIs require NHQ OPR approval prior to issuance." R 1-2), does the Wing/Region actually have power beside "disapprove"? We essentially have Staff Officers confirming that a Command Officer can approve something. So basically, NHQ OPR's are our only people in charge, and our commanders are only liaisons to see if we can do something.

Am I missing something? I've HAVE to be reading this wrong.
Logged
SSgt, USAF (Separated)
Major, CAP
Ham - N5TCL
EMT-83
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,838

« Reply #1 on: January 17, 2018, 08:43:21 AM »

Actually, it's about time. There is no reason for all of the home-grown rules that used to be so common. Follow the program as it exists, or jump through lots of hoops to make your own rules.

Sounds good to me.
Logged
NIN
VIP

Posts: 4,758
Unit: of issue

« Reply #2 on: January 17, 2018, 10:48:37 AM »

Actually, it's about time. There is no reason for all of the home-grown rules that used to be so common. Follow the program as it exists, or jump through lots of hoops to make your own rules.

Sounds good to me.

Or, whats more likely to happen is that people will just do "undocumented things" for their local procedures instead of jumping thru hoops.  They'll rely on the easier "tribal knowledge" rather than the hoops of doing it right.

Example (one that I'm dealing with right now): You have a "Local" award of some sort, specific to your wing, perhaps its a memorial award or something like that. Nobody ever really bothered to document the criteria for the award, what the award represents, who its for, how its awarded, the award elements, etc, in a supplement. So now, you're 10-11 years down the road from the first time the thing was awarded, and nobody is around who can remember the original award, its intent, etc.   Just a bunch of names on a plaque in wing HQ.  And a supplement to 39-3 has to be approved all the way to the top.  Are wings ikely to go thru the trouble? Doubtful.  Instead, people will just rely on the email sent out last year, or the year before, or the year before that.

Another great example is a supplement to the Uniform Manual. Some wings have made wing patches optional or non-mandatory (the 2014 39-1 makes it a little less clear than prior editions as to how thats made "optional" or "non-mandatory".. still digging...), or they've authorized baseball caps for wear by aircrews or something.  But its not documented anywhere, so nobody *quite* knows the *real* answer. 

My wing has an aircrew baseball cap. OK, cool, nice looking hat. Really excellent.  In researching what kind of hat, what the logo looks like, what the hat says, etc, I can't find anything.  Finally, someone says "Oh that was sent out in an email." OK, great. An email that was sent a year before I came back into CAP from being retired?  How the heck can I hold that up as any kind of "authority" when the nice man from another region here for my Wing CI asks where the authorization for that nifty head gear is.  I can't.  When fully half of our membership wasn't a member when the original email was sent out, and nobody can lay their hands on the original email, we're just asking for people to kind of march off and do whatever they want.

The pendulum has swung pretty hard in the opposite direction, and I know that folks are deliberately not documenting things so they don't have to go thru the hassle of bucking a supplement or OI up the chain.



Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,029

« Reply #3 on: January 17, 2018, 11:55:09 AM »

I'm not so sure this is restricting Commanders from local SOPs as perhaps (to my interpretation of the OP) it is being assumed.

You can have documented SOPs for certain protocols of your home unit. For example: What is your meeting cancellation policy in regard to weather? What promotions do you require to have an in-person review board? Do you have a mandated training schedule that has minimum contact hours for certain subjects in addition to those regulated?

Some units have so many SOPs that don't even make sense, and do contradict the regulations. I find, more often than not, people don't actually read the regulations to start with in developing local SOPs. But the problem isn't that units give out local awards (that mean virtually nothing in CAP) or that they have a list of required tasks for certain duty positions (such as a supply form to log inventory). The issue is more inherently the rewrite of CAP manuals as unit guidance that begin to cause a non-compliance with the regulation they're trying to clarify/enhance. What we don't want is an attempt to change radio operating procedures, vehicle inspections, etc.
Logged
cobra6987
Recruit

Posts: 20

« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2018, 04:07:31 AM »

I'm not so sure this is restricting Commanders from local SOPs as perhaps (to my interpretation of the OP) it is being assumed.

That is how I am reading it since Paragraph 8 says "Regulations, supplements and operating instructions are directive publications. They prescribe actions necessary to meet the requirements of law or policy" and is then back up by 8.3.1 saying "The use of any document other than a supplement or OI to direct requirements or procedures at or below the region level is prohibited"

Since SOP's typically say something WILL be done, it becomes directive in nature, and not allowed. This is my main concern. How are local commanders supposed to fulfill their obligations in 20-1 if the very means to do so have been pulled from under them?


Some units have so many SOPs that don't even make sense, and do contradict the regulations.

I have seen this too during some SUI inspections I've done. Typically it is just ignorance of the regulation and not deliberate disregard. I take that time as a learning opportunity to steer them back into the confines of regulation.

Actually, it's about time. There is no reason for all of the home-grown rules that used to be so common. Follow the program as it exists, or jump through lots of hoops to make your own rules.

Sounds good to me.

I understand where you're coming from but I disagree. The regulations coming out of national should essentially say "This is the goal" and then leave the Region/Wing/Group/Squadron commanders to find a way, that best suits them, to meet that goal. This was another item that the re-writes were supposed to accomplish due to us starting to regulate ourselves out of existence. 


Or, whats more likely to happen is that people will just do "undocumented things" for their local procedures instead of jumping thru hoops.  They'll rely on the easier "tribal knowledge" rather than the hoops of doing it right.

This is one of my pet peeves, I hate hearing "it's just the way we've done it" instead of being able to point to something and say "This is why"
Logged
SSgt, USAF (Separated)
Major, CAP
Ham - N5TCL
Slim
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 555

« Reply #5 on: January 18, 2018, 05:20:35 AM »

This is one of my pet peeves, I hate hearing "it's just the way we've done it" instead of being able to point to something and say "This is why"

But, as a squadron commander, I can't print something that says "On this night, we wear blues, on these nights we wear BDUs, We wear BDU/ABU sleeves rolled up from this date to this date, and down from that date to that date, if the weather is X or Y, meeting cancellation is based on Z" because each one of them is a supplement or operating instruction, which is subject to approval from higher headquarters, up to NHQ in some instances.

So the only thing we have is "This is how we've always done it."

And yes, I did get a finding for it in an SUI several years back.
Logged

Slim
cobra6987
Recruit

Posts: 20

« Reply #6 on: January 18, 2018, 06:11:10 AM »

This is one of my pet peeves, I hate hearing "it's just the way we've done it" instead of being able to point to something and say "This is why"

But, as a squadron commander, I can't print something that says "On this night, we wear blues, on these nights we wear BDUs, We wear BDU/ABU sleeves rolled up from this date to this date, and down from that date to that date, if the weather is X or Y, meeting cancellation is based on Z" because each one of them is a supplement or operating instruction, which is subject to approval from higher headquarters, up to NHQ in some instances.

So the only thing we have is "This is how we've always done it."

And yes, I did get a finding for it in an SUI several years back.

This is part of the problem. NHQ should only be concerned that we are accomplishing a goal, not how we accomplish it. That is, as long as it's in a safe, legal, and within some parameter. We can't motivate cadets to run faster by having a tiger chase them after all. I also have a problem that you as a commander can't make that kind of call without NHQ approving a wing supplement. I'm okay with sending a copy of an SOP or memo to the group or wing, but I don't see a reason to do OI/Supps for everything.

I personally would have just said your call to have sleeves up or down is you practicing ORM on that day :-D
Logged
SSgt, USAF (Separated)
Major, CAP
Ham - N5TCL
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,029

« Reply #7 on: January 18, 2018, 08:32:34 AM »

This is one of my pet peeves, I hate hearing "it's just the way we've done it" instead of being able to point to something and say "This is why"

But, as a squadron commander, I can't print something that says "On this night, we wear blues, on these nights we wear BDUs, We wear BDU/ABU sleeves rolled up from this date to this date, and down from that date to that date, if the weather is X or Y, meeting cancellation is based on Z" because each one of them is a supplement or operating instruction, which is subject to approval from higher headquarters, up to NHQ in some instances.

So the only thing we have is "This is how we've always done it."

And yes, I did get a finding for it in an SUI several years back.

That would come from M39-1 under Chapter 2 in determine the appropriate attire for an activity.


Again, I think people aren't understanding where their authorities to make SOPs come from (and they come from various sources at that). I mean, the Cadet Program Management regulation is specific that meetings will be structured to ensure minimum contact hours, and that the meetings are flexible in their design to meet needs (the same with staff assignments, etc.). So your SOPs are a delegated authority from the regulation. What you can't do is start throwing out random processes for conducting inventories or using special tests to promote your members.

I think we're reading way too much into this.
Logged
Nick
Seasoned Member

Posts: 494
Unit: SWR-TX-001

« Reply #8 on: January 18, 2018, 09:28:24 AM »

“SOP” doesn’t really exist in CAP. An SOP is a publication (well, a procedure) that is not authorized by 1-2. So, considering that and the whole thing about supplements and OIs, another option is:

Using uniforms as an example, 39-1 gives unit commanders the authority to “ensure uniform items are consistent and standardized throughout the organization, and designate the appropriate uniform authorized in this manual to be worn at unit activities and events.“ To communicate to members what those designated uniforms are, the commander may issue a memorandum to all unit members titled “prescribed uniform for unit activities and events” with all the parameters mentioned in a previous post, with an effective date and expiration date, citing 39-1 as the authority. That way it’s not a “publication”, but it is a written delivery of the commander’s intent and has the same force and effect that an OI to 39-1 would have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Nicholas McLarty, Lt Col, CAP
Texas Wing Staff Guy
National Cadet Team Guy
Larry Mangum
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 654

« Reply #9 on: January 18, 2018, 10:38:09 AM »

OI and Supplements , have always been restricted as to who could create them and who could not.  A good number of Wings because of the approvals necessary to issue one, started generating Policy letters instead, to get around this and to avoid CI findings. Frankly, I suspect that this is an attempt by NHQ to reign that abuse in.

In regards to SOP's, they are not suppose to be supplements or operating instructions, but rather to address things not covered by the regulations. An example on one could be the procedure for securing the squadron building after the meeting and could cover such items as where the trash gets empties, checking the doors and windows, etc.  Notice not. something that is already covered by a regulation.

NIN's example of the wing hat, is not a good example of an SOP, as that would have been covered under CAPM39-1, where it says a Wing Commander can approve a wing hat. Same for the local award, that should have also been covered in a supplement.

The problem that has been created by this change is the level that it takes to get approval. CAPR 60-3, CAPR60-1 always for example always required going all the way to NHQ for approval. Not sure approving a wing hat, should require the same level of approval.
Logged
Larry Mangum, Lt Col CAP
SWR-LA-966
NIN
VIP

Posts: 4,758
Unit: of issue

« Reply #10 on: January 18, 2018, 01:07:38 PM »

Not sure approving a wing hat, should require the same level of approval.

These are things that are delegated to the Wing Commander under para 2.8.4 (which refs para 9.4) and even 6.2.9 that need to be spelled out as to specification, etc.

Otherwise, some folks go buy the hat from Vanguard and call it good, then these 4 guys like their local hat shop and they get things made.. and its anarchy.
Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
kwe1009
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 797

« Reply #11 on: January 18, 2018, 01:55:48 PM »

Not sure approving a wing hat, should require the same level of approval.

These are things that are delegated to the Wing Commander under para 2.8.4 (which refs para 9.4) and even 6.2.9 that need to be spelled out as to specification, etc.

Otherwise, some folks go buy the hat from Vanguard and call it good, then these 4 guys like their local hat shop and they get things made.. and its anarchy.

Actually that Wing hat that the Wing CC has authority to approve still has to be approved by both Region and Wing.  All supplements have to go through Region and Wing approval so at the end of the day, it is all still up to NHQ.
Logged
UWONGO2
Member

Posts: 84

« Reply #12 on: January 18, 2018, 01:56:31 PM »

That is how I am reading it since Paragraph 8 says "Regulations, supplements and operating instructions are directive publications. They prescribe actions necessary to meet the requirements of law or policy" and is then back up by 8.3.1 saying "The use of any document other than a supplement or OI to direct requirements or procedures at or below the region level is prohibited"

My region apparently playing the semantics game, they just released a "Special Emphasis Item" that's even numbered (18-001). The email warned that non-compliance with the special emphasis would result in Ops Quals being suspended.
Logged
NIN
VIP

Posts: 4,758
Unit: of issue

« Reply #13 on: January 18, 2018, 02:03:02 PM »

Actually that Wing hat that the Wing CC has authority to approve still has to be approved by both Region and Wing.  All supplements have to go through Region and Wing approval so at the end of the day, it is all still up to NHQ.

Yep. But when you don't have a supplement and just have an email from three wing commanders ago.. :)

"VOCO" baby!
Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
Spam
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,000
Unit: GA-001

« Reply #14 on: January 18, 2018, 02:47:43 PM »

That is how I am reading it since Paragraph 8 says "Regulations, supplements and operating instructions are directive publications. They prescribe actions necessary to meet the requirements of law or policy" and is then back up by 8.3.1 saying "The use of any document other than a supplement or OI to direct requirements or procedures at or below the region level is prohibited"

My region apparently playing the semantics game, they just released a "Special Emphasis Item" that's even numbered (18-001). The email warned that non-compliance with the special emphasis would result in Ops Quals being suspended.


Out of curiosity, what Region is that, and what does this format/document cover (if you can say)?


V/r
Spam


Logged
Mitchell 1969
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 714
Unit: PCR-CA-051

« Reply #15 on: January 19, 2018, 04:21:04 AM »

Actually that Wing hat that the Wing CC has authority to approve still has to be approved by both Region and Wing.  All supplements have to go through Region and Wing approval so at the end of the day, it is all still up to NHQ.

Yep. But when you don't have a supplement and just have an email from three wing commanders ago.. :)

"VOCO" baby!

I predict that squadrons will end up using memes as the sole method to provide local instructions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.
kcebnaes
Forum Regular

Posts: 106
Unit: GLR-OH-064

« Reply #16 on: January 19, 2018, 09:22:39 AM »


Quote
I predict that squadrons will end up using memes as the sole method to provide local instructions.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, now you know my strategic strategy for my Group's path forward.


Fixed broken quotes -Pace
« Last Edit: January 19, 2018, 09:30:25 AM by Pace » Logged
Maj Sean Beck
Ohio Wing
Director of Personnel
Group VI Commander
NIN
VIP

Posts: 4,758
Unit: of issue

« Reply #17 on: January 19, 2018, 02:40:28 PM »

I predict that squadrons will end up using memes as the sole method to provide local instructions.

Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,007

« Reply #18 on: January 19, 2018, 03:42:24 PM »




^^^ And I would obey orders as I alway have.  ;)

Logged
MS - MO - AP - MP - FRO
Pages: [1] Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: Power stripped from Commanders???
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.306 seconds with 20 queries.
click here to email me