Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 19, 2018, 07:34:48 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: How does your squadron organize cadets?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: How does your squadron organize cadets?  (Read 1413 times)
jfkspotting
Member

Posts: 98
Unit: NER-NY-328

Instagram Acct:
« on: February 04, 2018, 08:34:54 PM »

2 flights? 3 flights? 4?

We have 4, delta being recruit, alpha being senior NCO's.

Does your squadron allow chiefs to be flight commanders?
Logged
Fester
Member

Posts: 83

« Reply #1 on: February 04, 2018, 08:52:20 PM »

2 flights? 3 flights? 4?

We have 4, delta being recruit, alpha being senior NCO's.

Does your squadron allow chiefs to be flight commanders?

How many cadets do you have?  Each flight should have about 15 cadets.  And, according to the new 60-1, chiefs should not be flight commanders unless you have a shortage of cadet officers.
Logged
"Fester," 1st Lt, CAP
Yeager Award - 18
Eaker Award - 96

TXWG CAC - 96 (Vice Chair), 97 (Chair)
Encampments (CAWG, TXWG, OKWG) - 93, 94, 95, 96 (x2), 97
Jester
Seasoned Member

Posts: 250

« Reply #2 on: February 04, 2018, 10:22:52 PM »

I don’t understand why you wouldn’t have your ranks and experience evenly dispersed. If most or all of the higher ranks are cooped up in alpha flight, and delta flight is your newest (I assume with a little rank in there for nominal leadership positions) then the advanced cadets aren’t getting anything out of it because they’re not leading or mentoring, and the newer cadets aren’t getting anything out of it because they don’t get the exposure to the experienced cadets.

I have 2 flights and a small support staff with right at 40 cadets. I feel like 12-16 is the right size for a CAP flight. Good span of control for learning leaders.

My 1-year goal is 3 full flights and a good support staff.
Logged
kwe1009
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 797

« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2018, 11:31:50 AM »

Dividing flights by rank is not a good idea (except for your training/recruit flight).  The flights should be blended so that the lower ranking can be mentored by the higher ranking.  It also provides the higher ranking flight members with leadership/mentorship opportunities.

Follow CAPP 60-31 for assigning staff positions.  An NCO should never be given a "Commander" duty title.  If you don't have enough qualified officers to be flight commanders then you just have Flight Sergeants.  If you don't have any qualified officers to be cadet commander then your top position is First Sergeant.  CAPP 60-31 has many examples of how to structure your squadron based on the number of NCOs and officers you have.  I would highly recommend that everyone follows those guidelines.
Logged
PA Guy
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 716

« Reply #4 on: February 05, 2018, 02:19:07 PM »

Dividing flights by rank is not a good idea (except for your training/recruit flight).  The flights should be blended so that the lower ranking can be mentored by the higher ranking.  It also provides the higher ranking flight members with leadership/mentorship opportunities.

Follow CAPP 60-31 for assigning staff positions.  An NCO should never be given a "Commander" duty title.  If you don't have enough qualified officers to be flight commanders then you just have Flight Sergeants.  If you don't have any qualified officers to be cadet commander then your top position is First Sergeant.  CAPP 60-31 has many examples of how to structure your squadron based on the number of NCOs and officers you have.  I would highly recommend that everyone follows those guidelines.

   :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Finally, someone who has read the relevant publication instead of relying on  word of mouth or that old standby, "we've always done it that way."
Logged
foo
Forum Regular

Posts: 159

« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2018, 03:32:21 PM »

Dividing flights by rank is not a good idea (except for your training/recruit flight).  The flights should be blended so that the lower ranking can be mentored by the higher ranking.  It also provides the higher ranking flight members with leadership/mentorship opportunities.

Follow CAPP 60-31 for assigning staff positions.  An NCO should never be given a "Commander" duty title.  If you don't have enough qualified officers to be flight commanders then you just have Flight Sergeants.  If you don't have any qualified officers to be cadet commander then your top position is First Sergeant.  CAPP 60-31 has many examples of how to structure your squadron based on the number of NCOs and officers you have.  I would highly recommend that everyone follows those guidelines.

I wholeheartedly agree with you here on how things should be, however, the new Cadet Program Management regulation now formally allows cadets to serve in staff positions that are not commensurate with their progress in the program:

Quote from: CAPR 60-1
4.1.1. Design Considerations. There is no standard organizational structure for a cadet staff. Each unit will design a staff structure that is appropriate for its mix of cadets, consistent with the broad principles set forth in CAPP 60-31. Cadets must meet the grade eligibility requirements shown in Table 4.1 below to serve in cadet staff positions. To afford units flexibility, minimum grades for some positions are set lower than their doctrinally pure levels (e.g., flight commander is an officer position by doctrine, but a C/MSgt may be assigned.)

I don't understand a unit's need for this "flexibility" since cadets are operating in a leadership laboratory and not actually serving in a staff position that is required to be filled for the unit to function. I also dispute the notion that this is simply about "doctrinal purity," as the Cadet Staff Handbook clearly explains the practical reasons for aligning staff positions with the cadets' rank (i.e., progress).
Logged
abdsp51
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,432
Unit: Classified

« Reply #6 on: February 05, 2018, 04:02:32 PM »

Pubs are read however are not adhered too.  Common issue..
Logged
kwe1009
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 797

« Reply #7 on: February 05, 2018, 04:09:51 PM »

Dividing flights by rank is not a good idea (except for your training/recruit flight).  The flights should be blended so that the lower ranking can be mentored by the higher ranking.  It also provides the higher ranking flight members with leadership/mentorship opportunities.

Follow CAPP 60-31 for assigning staff positions.  An NCO should never be given a "Commander" duty title.  If you don't have enough qualified officers to be flight commanders then you just have Flight Sergeants.  If you don't have any qualified officers to be cadet commander then your top position is First Sergeant.  CAPP 60-31 has many examples of how to structure your squadron based on the number of NCOs and officers you have.  I would highly recommend that everyone follows those guidelines.

I wholeheartedly agree with you here on how things should be, however, the new Cadet Program Management regulation now formally allows cadets to serve in staff positions that are not commensurate with their progress in the program:

Quote from: CAPR 60-1
4.1.1. Design Considerations. There is no standard organizational structure for a cadet staff. Each unit will design a staff structure that is appropriate for its mix of cadets, consistent with the broad principles set forth in CAPP 60-31. Cadets must meet the grade eligibility requirements shown in Table 4.1 below to serve in cadet staff positions. To afford units flexibility, minimum grades for some positions are set lower than their doctrinally pure levels (e.g., flight commander is an officer position by doctrine, but a C/MSgt may be assigned.)

I don't understand a unit's need for this "flexibility" since cadets are operating in a leadership laboratory and not actually serving in a staff position that is required to be filled for the unit to function. I also dispute the notion that this is simply about "doctrinal purity," as the Cadet Staff Handbook clearly explains the practical reasons for aligning staff positions with the cadets' rank (i.e., progress).

While the new reg may permit it I do not believe that it is a good idea. 

Example: your highest ranking cadet is a C/MSgt so you make him/her the "cadet commander."  They have now held the highest staff position in the squadron so what do you do with them if you get some cadet officers in over this person?  Do you now make him/her a Flight Sergeant or First Sergeant?  Either are a "step down."

Give a cadet a duty title that fits their grade and experience and go from there.  There is no requirement to have a "cadet commander" or any other staff position.  Give the cadets room to grow in the system.  In my example it would have been better to make that person the First Sergeant and go from there.  I have seen too many squadrons make even a C/TSgt a "cadet commander" and it just doesn't make sense.

If we want to follow the example of the USAF so badly when it comes to uniforms and other things, why can't we do it here as well?  You would never see an enlisted person with the duty title of "commander" so why should we do that?
Logged
sarmed1
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 910

« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2018, 12:18:19 PM »

Back in my previous CAP life as both a DCC and CC, I had around 30-40 cadets on a regular basis.
I had them organized into basics and non basics.  Non basics were split into 3 groups: which I had form up as individual flights:  Cadets assigned to color/honor guard, Cadets assigned to ES and all of the rest.  "All of the rest" were those those that had either graduated out of basic and were working on rank progression but didnt have a specific unit job/moved into an area of interest (ie ES or color guard) and any associated staff positions also fell into this flight.

It gave us a lot of flexibility to assign positions out as far as flight CC/Sgts.  As well as squad leaders within those flights depending on the size.  It worked well from a chain of command aspect, everyone had someone up the chain they reported to there was an easy division of labor as far as the number of people under each of those positions as well.

It looked really good as far as an org chart, I admit that sometimes it looked a little light as far as forming up, and we would occasionally fall one of the smaller flights into the larger.  But from a unit management and organization stand point I likes the way it worked.

MK



Logged
Mark Kleibscheidel
TSgt USAFR
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,029

« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2018, 05:01:48 PM »

We're currently at two flights, but we're looking at consolidating into one flight due to having to use some of our cadets for our upcoming training class. The numbers just won't make sense for two flights if we don't.

Give a cadet a duty title that fits their grade and experience and go from there.  There is no requirement to have a "cadet commander" or any other staff position.  Give the cadets room to grow in the system ... I have seen too many squadrons make even a C/TSgt a "cadet commander" and it just doesn't make sense.

I couldn't agree more with this.

I joined a unit that had a C/TSgt as a Cadet Commander, and I used that as a prime example for discussion when I first took TLC in October 2015. I was greatly chastised by some unit members at that time when I brought up that it was unorthodox and inappropriate to assign cadets to a duty position just because "they're next in line" or "that's the job they didn't hold yet." "That's the way we've always done it." Well, it's a bad way to do it. And there's no way to sugar coat it.

One of the prime exercises conducted during TLC when I took it in 2015 and when I co-taught it in 2017 was to build a squadron cadet command based on a given number of personnel and their grades. It's an exercise I've made my staff do, both cadet and senior, to understand the importance of--not so much assigning the "right person"--but assignment a person to the "right position."

It is an absolute detriment to the cadet to put them into a position that they do not have the experience for. A Flight Commander is an officer-level position. Even though a cadet may have completed the experience portion to prepare for that role, they have not completed the educational aspect. The same goes for Cadet XO, Deputy Commander, and Cadet Commander.

I have said before: Training and experience are complementary. One does not beget the other, but one needs to be paired with the other.
Logged
Fester
Member

Posts: 83

« Reply #10 on: February 07, 2018, 12:18:51 AM »

Dividing flights by rank is not a good idea (except for your training/recruit flight).  The flights should be blended so that the lower ranking can be mentored by the higher ranking.  It also provides the higher ranking flight members with leadership/mentorship opportunities.

Follow CAPP 60-31 for assigning staff positions.  An NCO should never be given a "Commander" duty title.  If you don't have enough qualified officers to be flight commanders then you just have Flight Sergeants.  If you don't have any qualified officers to be cadet commander then your top position is First Sergeant.  CAPP 60-31 has many examples of how to structure your squadron based on the number of NCOs and officers you have.  I would highly recommend that everyone follows those guidelines.

I wholeheartedly agree with you here on how things should be, however, the new Cadet Program Management regulation now formally allows cadets to serve in staff positions that are not commensurate with their progress in the program:

Quote from: CAPR 60-1
4.1.1. Design Considerations. There is no standard organizational structure for a cadet staff. Each unit will design a staff structure that is appropriate for its mix of cadets, consistent with the broad principles set forth in CAPP 60-31. Cadets must meet the grade eligibility requirements shown in Table 4.1 below to serve in cadet staff positions. To afford units flexibility, minimum grades for some positions are set lower than their doctrinally pure levels (e.g., flight commander is an officer position by doctrine, but a C/MSgt may be assigned.)

I don't understand a unit's need for this "flexibility" since cadets are operating in a leadership laboratory and not actually serving in a staff position that is required to be filled for the unit to function. I also dispute the notion that this is simply about "doctrinal purity," as the Cadet Staff Handbook clearly explains the practical reasons for aligning staff positions with the cadets' rank (i.e., progress).

While the new reg may permit it I do not believe that it is a good idea. 

Example: your highest ranking cadet is a C/MSgt so you make him/her the "cadet commander."  They have now held the highest staff position in the squadron so what do you do with them if you get some cadet officers in over this person?  Do you now make him/her a Flight Sergeant or First Sergeant?  Either are a "step down."

Give a cadet a duty title that fits their grade and experience and go from there.  There is no requirement to have a "cadet commander" or any other staff position.  Give the cadets room to grow in the system.  In my example it would have been better to make that person the First Sergeant and go from there.  I have seen too many squadrons make even a C/TSgt a "cadet commander" and it just doesn't make sense.

If we want to follow the example of the USAF so badly when it comes to uniforms and other things, why can't we do it here as well?  You would never see an enlisted person with the duty title of "commander" so why should we do that?

+1.  And I'm glad NHQ is finally putting some of this into writing.  Seems like it's been lacking for quite some time.
Logged
"Fester," 1st Lt, CAP
Yeager Award - 18
Eaker Award - 96

TXWG CAC - 96 (Vice Chair), 97 (Chair)
Encampments (CAWG, TXWG, OKWG) - 93, 94, 95, 96 (x2), 97
abdsp51
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,432
Unit: Classified

« Reply #11 on: February 07, 2018, 07:28:59 AM »

It was always written down.  Units didn't bother doing the reading on it or didn't care.
Logged
GaryVC
Forum Regular

Posts: 140
Unit: PCR-NV-070

« Reply #12 on: February 07, 2018, 01:02:14 PM »

Personally, I think we need some flexibility. We have a large number of cadets 60+. We doubled our number of cadet officers to 4 on Monday. That takes the top 3 positions and the former cadet commander. We have chiefs as two flight commanders and would like to officially make a C/TSgt the commander of the Training/Curry flight. Couldn't do it on Monday and now the "assign cadet position" application has been taken down. I would like to make a C/SrA a flight sergeant. Couldn't do it. While he will probably make C/SSgt soon, he has 1 1/2 years of JROTC and is well qualified.

One of the problems our unit has is that cadets leave when they finish high school. We have two high school seniors who are planning to go away to college. Last year one of our cadets joined the Air Force. Having college age cadets is a real plus for any squadron.
Logged
Fester
Member

Posts: 83

« Reply #13 on: February 07, 2018, 02:47:03 PM »

Personally, I think we need some flexibility. We have a large number of cadets 60+. We doubled our number of cadet officers to 4 on Monday. That takes the top 3 positions and the former cadet commander. We have chiefs as two flight commanders and would like to officially make a C/TSgt the commander of the Training/Curry flight. Couldn't do it on Monday and now the "assign cadet position" application has been taken down. I would like to make a C/SrA a flight sergeant. Couldn't do it. While he will probably make C/SSgt soon, he has 1 1/2 years of JROTC and is well qualified.

One of the problems our unit has is that cadets leave when they finish high school. We have two high school seniors who are planning to go away to college. Last year one of our cadets joined the Air Force. Having college age cadets is a real plus for any squadron.

Commanders should be officers.  Make the NCO's Flight Sergeants until they get their Mitchell.  Reporting directly to the next cadet up the chain.
Logged
"Fester," 1st Lt, CAP
Yeager Award - 18
Eaker Award - 96

TXWG CAC - 96 (Vice Chair), 97 (Chair)
Encampments (CAWG, TXWG, OKWG) - 93, 94, 95, 96 (x2), 97
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,029

« Reply #14 on: February 07, 2018, 02:49:53 PM »

Personally, I think we need some flexibility. We have a large number of cadets 60+. We doubled our number of cadet officers to 4 on Monday. That takes the top 3 positions and the former cadet commander. We have chiefs as two flight commanders and would like to officially make a C/TSgt the commander of the Training/Curry flight. Couldn't do it on Monday and now the "assign cadet position" application has been taken down. I would like to make a C/SrA a flight sergeant. Couldn't do it. While he will probably make C/SSgt soon, he has 1 1/2 years of JROTC and is well qualified.

One of the problems our unit has is that cadets leave when they finish high school. We have two high school seniors who are planning to go away to college. Last year one of our cadets joined the Air Force. Having college age cadets is a real plus for any squadron.


Flight Commander: C/TSgt
Flight Sergeant: C/SrA

That's a terrible idea.


What does your former Cadet Commander do?
Logged
foo
Forum Regular

Posts: 159

« Reply #15 on: February 07, 2018, 03:20:09 PM »

Personally, I think we need some flexibility. We have a large number of cadets 60+. We doubled our number of cadet officers to 4 on Monday. That takes the top 3 positions and the former cadet commander. We have chiefs as two flight commanders and would like to officially make a C/TSgt the commander of the Training/Curry flight. Couldn't do it on Monday and now the "assign cadet position" application has been taken down. I would like to make a C/SrA a flight sergeant. Couldn't do it. While he will probably make C/SSgt soon, he has 1 1/2 years of JROTC and is well qualified.

One of the problems our unit has is that cadets leave when they finish high school. We have two high school seniors who are planning to go away to college. Last year one of our cadets joined the Air Force. Having college age cadets is a real plus for any squadron.

Thankfully, the new regulation does not permit a C/TSgt to be a flight commander, nor a C/SrA to be a flight sergeant.

Again, I don't understand the need for this flexibility. The goal is to advance cadets through the program, not to fill cadet staff positions. It's great that you have a mature cadet who wants to do it. Let that be a carrot that motivates them -- and others -- to advance quickly.

Quote from: CAPP 60-31
By keeping high positions vacant until cadets achieve rank commensurate with the positions, we give the ranking cadet(s) additional challenges to strive towards and a reason to pursue promotions.
Logged
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,166
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #16 on: February 07, 2018, 07:20:04 PM »

A big part of advancing cadets through the program is having them fill appropriate positions on the way. There are leadership lessons in each phase that benefit from holding staff positions in the phase. Skipping from Flight Sergeant to Cadet Commander denies the opportunity to participate in the intermediate lessons.
Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
CAPLTC
Member

Posts: 93
Unit: MER

« Reply #17 on: February 07, 2018, 09:29:50 PM »

Dividing flights by rank is not a good idea (except for your training/recruit flight).  The flights should be blended so that the lower ranking can be mentored by the higher ranking.  It also provides the higher ranking flight members with leadership/mentorship opportunities.
Follow CAPP 60-31 for assigning staff positions.  An NCO should never be given a "Commander" duty title.  If you don't have enough qualified officers to be flight commanders then you just have Flight Sergeants.  If you don't have any qualified officers to be cadet commander then your top position is First Sergeant.  CAPP 60-31 has many examples of how to structure your squadron based on the number of NCOs and officers you have.  I would highly recommend that everyone follows those guidelines.

This is good guidance.


A big part of advancing cadets through the program is having them fill appropriate positions on the way. There are leadership lessons in each phase that benefit from holding staff positions in the phase. Skipping from Flight Sergeant to Cadet Commander denies the opportunity to participate in the intermediate lessons.

And yes. Absolutely true.
Doing that is a disservice to everyone.
Logged
"Find the enemy that wants to end this experiment (in American democracy) and kill every one of them until they’re so sick of the killing that they leave us and our freedoms intact." -- SECDEF Mattis
Pages: [1] Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: How does your squadron organize cadets?
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.143 seconds with 21 queries.
click here to email me