CSAG Agenda

[arajca]

Folks, I found an interesting item on the CSAG Agenda for this weekend.

Item 6: Proposed Changes to CAP Promotion Eligibility Requirements
Quick summaries:
Duty assignment promotions (grade - current PD/Proposed PD - Proposed TIG)
2d Lt - Level I/Level I - 6 mos as senior member
1st Lt - Tech rating/Level II - 18 mos as 2d Lt/TFO
Capt - Level II/Level III - 30 mos as 1st Lt/SFO
Maj - Level III/Level IV - 5 years as Capt
Lt Col - Level V - 6 years as Maj

Remove advanced officer grade for reg/reserve NCOs

Mission Related skills:
Drops Capt for ATP, all Maintenance, all Instructors.

Professional Appointments:
Removes advanced grade for financial professionals unless serving at wing or region AND are licensed CPA.

There are several comments for and against and requesting clarification.

Also, Hawk Mountain is asking for money for a new pole building. There is quite a bit of information included.

Lots of background papers.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Eclipse]

Works for me, where do I sign?   I am doubtful it will pass.

As to Hawk, I'm personally tired of supporting an NCSA with a limited participant scope which doesn't even
train to CAP mission standards and causes all sorts of unintended problems and consequences
downrange to zero demonstrable increase in capabilities or readiness.

If members want to go, good on them, but it needs to rise or fall on its own, especially in
this era of cutting costs and programs all over the place.  If they get the money, the NCC
people should be seriously hacked.

They are already getting a wad from Vanguard, and also Pennsylvania?  Right?

[A.Member]

Also, Hawk Mountain is asking for money for a new pole building. There is quite a bit of information included.

Not only "no", but heck (in lieu of a stronger word) no!

Is National going to start funding some additional needs for our encampment?!  How about flight academy? 

Dangerous and unwarranted precedent at a time when everyone's budgets are tight. 

If PAWG wants a new pole barn, build it themselves.  Simple as that. 

[LSThiker]

An interesting statement under "Associate" member:

Could wear a CAP polo shirt because it is not a uniform

I do not think I agree with this unless all commissioned officers also do not get advanced grade.  Why only USPHS?  What about NOAA?  They all have federal commissions.

Deletes advanced officer grade promotions for members of the Public Health Service Commissioned Corps.

[Eclipse]

Item 4: Establish the Director of Training position and Standardization of the
Operations Organization Structure
About time.  Something I have been espousing for a long time.


Item 5: Proposed Changes to CAP Membership Categories
It's kind of funny they are still stuck on the term "senior".
"member" doesn't work, "officer" doesn't work, "adult" doesn't work.

There's a lot of time spent on membership categories for people who don't actually >do<
anything but write a check.  Why do these people have to be members at all?

If people aren't active, drop them off the rolls and say "thank you" for their annual check.
When they get active again, put them back in (which is just a check box, anyway).
eliminates all the overhead of extra categories and allows for simple manpower reporting.

"Associates" also need to be dropped from all reporting for things like safety, AGH, etc.,
it should even be an available option, nor should they show up in the regular member reports.


Item 6: Proposed Changes to CAP Promotion Eligibility Requirements
A strong step in the right direction, but again this should not be done piecemeal.
Raising the TIG without a full revamp of the structure is just going to hack off people "close" with no real value.
An empty-shirt or uninformed 6-year Lt Col isn't any better then a 4-year one.

The NCO non-promotion is understandable, but THERE IS NO REASON FOR TEMPORARY GRADE WHATSOEVER.
So now instead of a slick-sleeve or butter-bar Wing Dir of Finance with 6 months in, we'll have a Lt Col with 6 months
in?  This is a good idea, why?  This breaks the grade model even further.

Eliminating USPHS makes no sense, and the one guy it affects is going to be hacked.

And if you're going to eliminate "some" special skills promotions, you should just eliminate all of them.

B. May 2013 CSAG Agenda: Item 5 Internet Ops
Yes, please - everyone should be under a cap.gov domain, and can use a subdomain for special events.

This is not 1996, if you're "advertising" through a domain name you're doing it wrong - yeah, I know, businesses
do it all the time, that doesn't make it a good idea or worth the effort for CAP, especially for stuff which is
internal only like NCSAs.  And that "gocivialairpatrol" needs to "GO".  Putting "go" in front of everything
ended as a "thing" about ten years ago.

D. Nov 2013 CSAG Agenda: Item 1 Hawk Mountain Pole Building
They should be able to come up with the $15k from either a 1-time assessment of participants, or raising
activity fees, not going to NHQ.

INFORMATION PAPER  ON CAP FLYING OPERATIONS
More evidence that the program is shrinking and significantly - 1-time events like Sandy, which
tend to help the overall flight numbers, cannot be the core of operations.

Less members, less mission = less hours and eventually less planes, rinse repeat.

INFORMATION PAPER ON SURROGATE PREDATOR (SP) PROGRAM
We need to stop calling it this.  It's an advanced sensor package, not a Predator.  ASP?


More importantly, during a time of demonstrable program and membership shrinkage, coupled
with CAP's typically poor membership churn, the word "recruiting" is only in the document twice,
and neither time is it in relation to any recruiting initiatives, guidance, or resources, and only one is even
concerning external recruiting at all, and only in a peripheral way.

If we don't start refilling the candy jar, this only gets worse until the tipping point.
Saying things like "this is how it's always been", doesn't address the issue and it ignores
the fact that while CAP may have "always been this way", the world situation, technology,
and the Feds financial situation hasn't "always been like this".

[Eclipse]

An interesting statement under "Associate" member:

Could wear a CAP polo shirt because it is not a uniform

Frankly they can wear whatever they want AFAIC, since they can't come to meetings or missions, though
I suppose it has to be written somewhere.

Why are they allowed to wear a uniform at all?

[GroundHawg]

Cutting out the USPHS is disrespectful. There are 7 uniformed services in the United States and to single out on in particular and say their service does not warrant consideration is awful. I served in Iraq and Afghanistan and saw USPHS and NOAA officers deployed to both. I guess whoever wrote this does not think that they warrant their earned rank in the CAP? Seriously?

[AlphaSigOU]

Big increases for time-in-grade requirements... I'm eligible for Lt Col in less than three months... I just hope that they don't enact it immediately if it's approved!

[Storm Chaser]

The increase in promotion requirements will affect many of us, but I agree it's a step in the right direction. I also agree with the comments regarding the USPHS Commissioned Corps. If they eliminate their advanced promotion, they would have to do the same with NOAA Commissioned Corps.

As far as military advanced promotions go, I don't have a problem with it as long as members receiving the promotion are performing a duty commensurable with their grade. While an active, reserve or retired Lt Col, for example, earned their grade in the military, I don't see why they should be promoted to that grade in CAP if they're going to be assigned as unit "snack" officer. In addition, there should be some mechanism in place for those members who receive advanced promotions to go back and do appropriate CAP PD. As it stands now, there's not much incentive for a Lt Col promoted this way to go beyond Level 1.

[lordmonar]

INFORMATION PAPER ON SURROGATE PREDATOR (SP) PROGRAM
We need to stop calling it this.  It's an advanced sensor package, not a Predator.  ASP?

You are right it is not a "Predator" it is a Surrogate Predator.

If you were part of the program you would understand.

[lordmonar]

As far as military advanced promotions go, I don't have a problem with it as long as members receiving the promotion are performing a duty commensurable with their grade. While an active, reserve or retired Lt Col, for example, earned their grade in the military, I don't see why they should be promoted to that grade in CAP if they're going to be assigned as unit "snack" officer. In addition, there should be some mechanism in place for those members who receive advanced promotions to go back and do appropriate CAP PD. As it stands now, there's not much incentive for a Lt Col promoted this way to go beyond Level 1.

I would agree with this stance IF......IF we required CAP Lt Cols to pefrom a duty commensurate with their grade as well.   (Which we could argue about else where).   

But I agree, increasing the TIG across the board is a good thing.

[AlphaSigOU]

Agree on the increase on PD time-in-grade for duty performance promotions. The special appointment promotions need to be backed up with more stringent PD requirements; you got the grade for your skill, but we expect you to have all professional development requirements completed for your grade within a certain amount of time or you bust back down to 2d Lt. (Why 2d Lt and not SMWOG? At least they'll have Level I and at least 6 months time-in-grade - if the minimum wasn't the minimum, it wouldn't be the minimum!)

[Brit_in_CAP]

Also, Hawk Mountain is asking for money for a new pole building. There is quite a bit of information included.

Not only "no", but heck (in lieu of a stronger word) no!

Is National going to start funding some additional needs for our encampment?!  How about flight academy? 

Dangerous and unwarranted precedent at a time when everyone's budgets are tight. 

If PAWG wants a new pole barn, build it themselves.  Simple as that.

+1, at least

[Garibaldi]

Also, Hawk Mountain is asking for money for a new pole building. There is quite a bit of information included.

Not only "no", but heck (in lieu of a stronger word) no!

Is National going to start funding some additional needs for our encampment?!  How about flight academy? 

Dangerous and unwarranted precedent at a time when everyone's budgets are tight. 

If PAWG wants a new pole barn, build it themselves.  Simple as that.

+1, at least

Well, they COULD ask the Amish...they are good at raising barns...and it IS Pennsylvania...

[Brit_in_CAP]

Also, Hawk Mountain is asking for money for a new pole building. There is quite a bit of information included.

Not only "no", but heck (in lieu of a stronger word) no!

Is National going to start funding some additional needs for our encampment?!  How about flight academy? 

Dangerous and unwarranted precedent at a time when everyone's budgets are tight. 

If PAWG wants a new pole barn, build it themselves.  Simple as that.

+1, at least

Well, they COULD ask the Amish...they are good at raising barns...and it IS Pennsylvania...

Never saw that coming.... :clap: :clap:

[Eclipse]

INFORMATION PAPER ON SURROGATE PREDATOR (SP) PROGRAM
We need to stop calling it this.  It's an advanced sensor package, not a Predator.  ASP?

You are right it is not a "Predator" it is a Surrogate Predator.

If you were part of the program you would understand.

Well perhaps if it wasn't restricted to a small group of handpicked members, we'd all understand it better,
sadly we can't all be a part of Area 51 Composite.

Judging by the details it's a CAP program in name only anyway.

[Eclipse]

Well, they COULD ask the Amish...they are good at raising barns...and it IS Pennsylvania...

Awesome.

[abdsp51]

Big increases for time-in-grade requirements... I'm eligible for Lt Col in less than three months... I just hope that they don't enact it immediately if it's approved!

Everyone going for LtCol will be grandfathered and the rest will  suck it up.

[Eclipse]

Big increases for time-in-grade requirements... I'm eligible for Lt Col in less than three months... I just hope that they don't enact it immediately if it's approved!

Everyone going for LtCol will be grandfathered and the rest will  suck it up.

Which shows you who is writing the proposal...

The goose and gander should be equal.

[lordmonar]

INFORMATION PAPER ON SURROGATE PREDATOR (SP) PROGRAM
We need to stop calling it this.  It's an advanced sensor package, not a Predator.  ASP?

You are right it is not a "Predator" it is a Surrogate Predator.

If you were part of the program you would understand.

Well perhaps if it wasn't restricted to a small group of handpicked members, we'd all understand it better,
sadly we can't all be a part of Area 51 Composite.

Judging by the details it's a CAP program in name only anyway.

A) It is not a composite squadron.....it is a group and two senior squadrons.
b)  The program is open to anyone who wants to join and has the required skill set. 
c)  Anyone can come and visit and see what we do.   We have had several articles in the Volunteer.  You should have told me you were coming to Vegas I could have arranged a tour.
d)  I don't know how you can say a program manned and run entirely by CAP personnel is not  a CAP program.  Supporting the USAF in its non-combat operations is the whole reason for CAP to exist.

[Eclipse]

Target designation in COMBAT training isn't exactly a traditional
CAP mission.

How many times have the ASPs been used for real CAP
missions like SAR/DR?

[PHall]

Target designation in COMBAT training isn't exactly a traditional
CAP mission.

We did target towing in WWII.

How many times have the ASPs been used for real CAP
missions like SAR/DR?

How many times have they been requested?

[Eclipse]

Yeah we bombed subs, too. So?

[lordmonar]

Target designation in COMBAT training isn't exactly a traditional
CAP mission.

How many times have the ASPs been used for real CAP
missions like SAR/DR?

I personally have flown the SP aircraft on a SAR mission.  We have used them on DR exercises, and real-world DR missions.  We were alerted to possibly deploying to support Haiti Earthquake a few years back.

As for "traditional".....so what?   Sure it is not "traditional" but neither was the Deep Well Horizon, Katrina, Shuttle recovery, the air defense exercises on the east coast (Vigilant Falcon?).

The point is we are the USAF's Axillary.   They had a need that we could fill....and we filled it.  That's our job.

[Alaric]

Oh yay!, we can expect more begging letters from National, I haven't noticed anyway to opt out of these letters.  Also so nice to see how they see members, as a donor base.

May 2014 CSAG
46
INFORMATION PAPER
ON
CAP DEVELOPMENT PLAN


....

3) To create a sustainable line of communications with the membership/donor base;
• Quarterly Estate Planning newsletter (effective May 2014)
• Quarterly direct mail solicitations
• Civil Air Patrol publications and branding efforts
• Provide CFC documentation to units

[JeffDG]

Well, they COULD ask the Amish...they are good at raising barns...and it IS Pennsylvania...

Someone needs to get on the bloody phone and ask them then!

[SunDog]

I don't think advanced grade (or lack if it) will matter to most of the pilots. Skills, ratings, and experience are probably more important.  LtCol, SEL, 100 hours is  "junior" to the 1Lt CFII, MP, MCP, etc., in the areas that most concern pilots.

One of the areas where we do kinda line up with USAF; I saw a lot of Majors and LtCols in the co-pilot seat, with a Capt (even, rarely, a 1Lt) as the Aircraft Commander. In CAP, where rank is more decorative than significant, it'd probably matter even less. Or not matter enough to get up in arms about. I think for some us, it matters not at all.

Still, if we're gonna do advanced grade, I'd do it where it might help recruiting some, where we're short of bodies. If it's pilots, sure. Accountants? O.K, too.  Subjectively, I don't get the feeling it would matter all that much in recruiting. . .

[MSG Mac]

I would have expected the new 35-5 to be released with NCO promotion requirements. Or maybe they're writing a NCO manual that will include it.

[sarmed1]

Regarding money to HMRS.....if there are other activities out there in a national scope that want money to fund projects they should ask?  The worst they can say is no......

MK

[FW]

^Last I looked, any regional training center can apply for money earmarked from Vangard funds.  NESA has used the cash before; as did HMRS.  There are quite a few types of facilities which may apply for the money.  All one has to do is ask...

[RiverAux]

While I have a known bias in favor of eliminating all advanced promotions, even for prior military, I am especially fine with eliminating it for public health service folks as well as for NOAA (even though that isn't being proposed). 

These advanced promotions are supposed to help recruit people with relevant military skills to CAP.  While public health and NOAA are uniformed, they are not military.  One might argue that those commissioned public health and NOAA officers may have some skills relevant to CAP, but if that is the case why not give advanced promotions to those not in those organizations that possess the same skills?  If some NOAA fisheries scientist gets advanced promotion, why not some fisheries scientist from the US Fish and Wildlife Service.

While I don't favor advanced promotions for prior or current military, I can at least understand the logic behind them and that there are some potential direct benefits to CAP. 

[Spaceman3750]

Ugh, better ask the CC about putting me in for Captain... I'm eligible but have been dragging my feet.

[Panache]

Item 6: Proposed Changes to CAP Promotion Eligibility Requirements

As Eclipse said, all this is going to do is torque off people close to the cut-off point who find they now have extra TIG before promotion.  The entire system needs to be re-vamped completely.  This does nothing to eliminate the problem with our organization being top-heaving with field-grade officers who don't do anything.

Also, Hawk Mountain is asking for money for a new pole building. There is quite a bit of information included.

As a member of PAWG, even I feel that we (PAWG) should be funding this or it should be passed along in the form of a tuition increase.  Hitting up the general CAP membership for money really isn't fair.

[JeffDG]

OK, so some people think that promotions should be about responsibility, right?

Well, look at one they're removing...no more Capt for squadron commanders after a year of service.  If there's a better example of grade following responsibility in the current system, that's it.

[Eclipse]

Well, look at one they're removing...no more Capt for squadron commanders after a year of service.  If there's a better example of grade following responsibility in the current system, that's it.

And believe it or not I think this is a mistake, as Capt for Unit and Major for Group are probably the only place where grade alighns to
the actual duties, the key being it shoudl be conferred >after< at least a year, not concurrent with assignment.

By the time you've made it a year as a unit or group CC, that's your trial by fire.

To make it further coherent, though, I would also put in there that no one can be appointed to Group CC unless they have been a unit CC,
and no Unit CC until you have at least a year in CAP.

[sarmed1]

......
As a member of PAWG, even I feel that we (PAWG) should be funding this or it should be passed along in the form of a tuition increase.  Hitting up the general CAP membership for money really isn't fair.

I can only speculate about the budget process...but I can't believe this is one of those "Dave" sort of moments where they shave off other programs "excess" and then give it to Hawk ( or anyone else for that matter)  my guess there is a line item for capital improvement to facilities/ regional training activities or some other such "pot" of money that is available to those that apply for it.

MK

PS they did do a student fee increase 2 years ago at NHQ's request

[a2capt]

Any data on how what actions were taken on the agenda items?

[PHall]

Any data on how what actions were taken on the agenda items?

The meeting ended less then 8 hours ago...

[SunDog]

Item 6: Proposed Changes to CAP Promotion Eligibility Requirements

As Eclipse said, all this is going to do is torque off people close to the cut-off point who find they now have extra TIG before promotion.  The entire system needs to be re-vamped completely.  This does nothing to eliminate the problem with our organization being top-heaving with field-grade officers who don't do anything.

Also, Hawk Mountain is asking for money for a new pole building. There is quite a bit of information included.

IRT "the problem with our organization being top-heavy. . ." -  how big a problem is it, actually? What's the pain point? Are they filling slots that blocks other folk's promotions? It's not like they get paid more, either. . .

If a Major ot Lt Col went through the hoops and the SAS to get there a long time back, filled CC and some staff-walloper jobs, then decided to wind it down a decade later, having been there, done that, where's the harm? 

I have no dog in the fight - just a lowly Captain headed for the exit - but truly, where's the harm? If the presumption is the field grade weenie did what it took to get the bottle caps, it's not a zero sum game, right? 

If the main issue is that you consider it too easy to get there, then I see you' point - it cheapens your work and effort, and that's cool., I can understand that.


As a member of PAWG, even I feel that we (PAWG) should be funding this or it should be passed along in the form of a tuition increase.  Hitting up the general CAP membership for money really isn't fair.

[SunDog]

Sorry, fat-fingered it. . .what the Cptain MEANT to say. . .

IRT "the problem with our organization being top-heavy. . ." -  how big a problem is it, actually? What's the pain point? Are they filling slots that blocks other folk's promotions? It's not like they get paid more, either. . .

If a Major ot Lt Col went through the hoops and the SAS to get there a long time back, filled CC and some staff-walloper jobs, then decided to wind it down a decade later, having been there, done that, where's the harm? 

I have no dog in the fight - just a lowly Captain headed for the exit - but truly, where's the harm? If the presumption is the field grade weenie did what it took to get the bottle caps, it's not a zero sum game, right? 

If the main issue is that you consider it too easy to get there, then I see you' point - it cheapens your work and effort, and that's cool., I can understand that.

[Eclipse]

One of the "harms" is the credibility gap caused when dealing with other agencies, especially the military.

#1 CAP problem?  No.  But it's on the list, and has caused more then a few people to ask the "second question",
which then tends to expose other foibles.

When you can't get something as important and yet basic as your grade structure correct, it tends to
color people's opinions about other issues as well - whether the vector is an organization unable to
get the simple details right, or one which is constantly distracted by trivialities which should be
a simply baseline of operations.

This is where the uniform, grade, and similar problems hurt us most, and in ways not readily
apparent sometimes until you have a chance to have a personal conversation and find out
why "so and so never calls", etc.

[SunDog]

Ahhh, yes. . .point taken. Hard to keep them away from strangers/guests when necessary; they look and smell like senior management until they start to speak. . .

[RiverAux]

One of the "harms" is the credibility gap caused when dealing with other agencies, especially the military.

#1 CAP problem?  No.  But it's on the list, and has caused more then a few people to ask the "second question",
which then tends to expose other foibles.

Half the problem is that many CAP members incorrectly believe the hype that we're actually top heavy when in fact data shows that its nowhere near as bad as people think ("everybody's a Lt. Col.")

[Eclipse]

One of the "harms" is the credibility gap caused when dealing with other agencies, especially the military.

#1 CAP problem?  No.  But it's on the list, and has caused more then a few people to ask the "second question",
which then tends to expose other foibles.

Half the problem is that many CAP members incorrectly believe the hype that we're actually top heavy when in fact data shows that its nowhere near as bad as people think ("everybody's a Lt. Col.")

To a certain extent we are, perhaps not numerically, but certainly operationally - this is the corner members pile up into
and then stay for 20-30 years sometimes, not necessarily doing much of anything.

[a2capt]

The meeting ended less then 8 hours ago...

Yup, plenty of time if someone was taking notes.. to post something.

[Alaric]

The meeting ended less then 8 hours ago...

Yup, plenty of time if someone was taking notes.. to post something.

Why would they want to do that, its much more fun to burden the membership without warning 

[JeffDG]

The meeting ended less then 8 hours ago...

Yup, plenty of time if someone was taking notes.. to post something.

Why would they want to do that, its much more fun to burden the membership without warning 

Well, considering that the CSAG doesn't have the authority as a body to direct members to the men's room, it's not really an issue. 

The only "authority" remaining with CSAG is appointment of CAP representatives on the BOG, and maybe some awards.  Everything else they do is purely advisory.

Now, don't get me wrong, the individual members of CSAG still exercise command authority, what I'm saying is that a vote of the CSAG is advisory in nature, not directive.

[LGM30GMCC]

Regarding some of the proposed changes to the rank structure:

The National Promotions Review Working Group actually recommended eliminating the advanced promotions for pilots too. Apparently there is push-back that will cause us to have a harder time recruiting pilots. You can make your own assessment of that view.

The retention of temporary promotions for Lt Cols serving as Wing Legislative Officers was for external political purposes. People listen to Lt Cols...they don't listen to 2d Lts. This happens in the RM too. Sometimes there is a bit of game playing to appease the masses. While there are plenty of folks who do not like that type of game, sometimes its worth biting the bullet to get ahead. The compensation though, and mitigation to 'Oh! I'll promote my buddy to this position so he can be a Lt Col forever!' group (which I have seen executed) is to make the requirements for Lt Col immediately come into effect if that person leaves the job. If they get fired, or weren't doing it, and their political buddy leaves Wg/CC, they do not get to remain a Lt Col.

There was discussion about removing advanced promotion for RM officers as well. However, until CAP cleans out its ranks of bad officers there is a problem that can make it very difficult to recruit military officers. (Current or retired) If you have someone with years of military training and experience (preferably one who is good at it) that then meets up with a crappy CAP officer trying to throw their CAP rank around (Again...it happens) it can give a very sour note. One which can then damage CAP's relationship with the RM. (RM officers talk with each other, and among a lot of company grade officers CAP does not have the best reputation.) A good RM officer who comes across a good CAP officer generally will have no problem respecting that rank, they're kinda trained to that.

Just eliminating RM 'advanced promotions' for military officers would very likely just not pass muster with the USAF. Some may think this is unreasonable, but that's the simple truth of the matter. I don't foresee that changing for many years though making more stringent requirements for CAP officers is a good start.

As for the NOAA/USPHS/etc...yes they are commissioned officers, but there is a different breed feeling between the 7 uniformed services and the 5 armed forces. Heck the armed forces have hard enough getting along with each other and getting along with the total force! (Though that has been steadily changing as the active-force has been drawn down. We have all been learning to work together. I actually had a ANG Capt/FBI Agent in my in-residence SOS class, it was pretty cool!)

[Майор Хаткевич]

Interesting note...there are 3000 SMs in 000. That's 10% of our SMs who are effectively not there. What I'm really baffled by are the almost 1000 cadets...You are either a cadet or your not. Why is that even an option?

[arajca]

Interesting note...there are 3000 SMs in 000. That's 10% of our SMs who are effectively not there. What I'm really baffled by are the almost 1000 cadets...You are either a cadet or your not. Why is that even an option?

Because there are many not-yet-former cadets who joined and decided CAP was not right for them or had conflicts with school/sports/life after joining and are not going to formally quit and are not worth the 2B process headaches, but are not going to do anything CAP related. They get transferred to the 000 units to remove them non-safety compliance problem from the units until their membership lapses.

[Cliff_Chambliss]

I guess I am one of the 3000 hanging around in 000 just waiting for my membership year to finish.  When AL Sqdn 34 folded several months back I had already made the decision to terminate CAP.  With that thought in mind I could not/would not go to another unit and "ghost" til end-date, nor would I be much good going into a unit and performing a job knowing I was at best temporary.  So over the past few months while in 000, Captalk has been my one remaining link to CAP. 

[Tim Day]

Regarding some of the proposed changes to the rank structure:

The National Promotions Review Working Group actually recommended eliminating the advanced promotions for pilots too. Apparently there is push-back that will cause us to have a harder time recruiting pilots. You can make your own assessment of that view.

The retention of temporary promotions for Lt Cols serving as Wing Legislative Officers was for external political purposes. People listen to Lt Cols...they don't listen to 2d Lts. This happens in the RM too.

...

My opinion on this has yet to be swayed. If you treat (and task) every Lt Col like a Lt Col, you'll soon weed out those who should not be wearing Lt Col. In other words, expect O5s to demonstrate O5-level responsibility. The respect for grade from other organizations won't come from increasing TIG. It'll come from our ability to hold those of us with senior grade to the standards for that grade.

We already have a leadership expectations chart for cadets. Why not create one for senior members? If a RM O5 prospective SM knows that as a CAP O5 he'll be expected to not only pursue his professional development but contribute xx hours per year to Wing and higher activities, but as an O1-O3 he'll be left alone to hang with his squadron buddies, he'll be able to make an informed decision about whether he wants to request his special promotion.   

[Eclipse]

I'd like to see anything but anecdotal evidence that CAP grade is a significant factor in recruiting from the military.
I would put forth that anyone from the military community who is "too excited" about CAP grade probably doesn't
understand CAP and needs to be educated.

We don't really have a recruiting problem, we have a retention problem, and much of that retention problem
stems directly from the way we implement our grade and authority structure.

So conferring commensurate grade to a military Lt Col and then making him SnackO to a 2d Lt Unit CC is
somehow "better" then just having that Lt Col join as a 2d Lt himself and being the SnackO?

In the former, it exposes the weakness and brokeness of our structure from Day 1, the latter at least
presents that all new members are created equal in regards to CAP, and they will rise or fall based on
their contribution(s), not mostly irrelevant outside qualifications.

[LGM30GMCC]

Take a look at the CSAG Minutes from November 2013 Starting on Page 32. That's what the NPRWG recommended.

[LSThiker]

My opinion on this has yet to be swayed. If you treat (and task) every Lt Col like a Lt Col, you'll soon weed out those who should not be wearing Lt Col. In other words, expect O5s to demonstrate O5-level responsibility. The respect for grade from other organizations won't come from increasing TIG. It'll come from our ability to hold those of us with senior grade to the standards for that grade.

We already have a leadership expectations chart for cadets. Why not create one for senior members? If a RM O5 prospective SM knows that as a CAP O5 he'll be expected to not only pursue his professional development but contribute xx hours per year to Wing and higher activities, but as an O1-O3 he'll be left alone to hang with his squadron buddies, he'll be able to make an informed decision about whether he wants to request his special promotion.   

We have expectations for cadet leadership positions, true, but not requirements.  So, while I may not agree with a C/Col having never been a cadet commander, it is entirely possible that said cadet has never held a leadership position in CAP.

The only problem is that even in the military, O-5s are not the same.  In the USAF, an O-5 could be a squadron commander.  However, in the Army, an O-5 could be a battalion commander.  Or that USAF O-5 may have never been in a line leadership position.  Same grade, but vastly different responsibilities.

Even not mentioning the real military, what happens if that CAP Lt Col no longer contributes XX hours per year to wing but still remains active at the squadron due to work or family health related issues? 

[Eclipse]

I'd be totally on board with participation and performance expectations for grades.

As I've said before, it doesn't matter >why< you aren't there, you're either carrying a corner or you are not.

That doesn't mean not being compassionate about people's personal circumstances, but
whether you are too sick (long term), too busy, or too disinterested to be involved at a meaningful level
there is still work to be done and duties to perform, work generally dumped back on those "compassionate"
commanders who wind up allowing for everyone's circumstances, and then burning out and quitting.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Interestingly...the Eaker award writeup from national states that to earn it a cadet MUST have served as a Cadet Commander. I'd argue the SDA program doesn't quite work it that way, but here you have it.

[Tim Day]

Even not mentioning the real military, what happens if that CAP Lt Col no longer contributes XX hours per year to wing but still remains active at the squadron due to work or family health related issues?

They retain their grade and eventually either retire or recover, just like we do with Wing CCs and in the RM. It doesn't hurt us to have Lt Cols around who have contributed, it hurts us to have members around who never contribute.

[LSThiker]

They retain their grade and eventually either retire or recover, just like we do with Wing CCs and in the RM. It doesn't hurt us to have Lt Cols around who have contributed, it hurts us to have members around who never contribute.

Okay, so it is not XX hours to wing, but rather XX hours to CAP.  Who actually certifies these senior members are performing to the standard?

If we have members around who "never contribute", then why not transfer them to the 000 squadrons?

[LSThiker]

I'd be totally on board with participation and performance expectations for grades.

As I've said before, it doesn't matter >why< you aren't there, you're either carrying a corner or you are not.

That doesn't mean not being compassionate about people's personal circumstances, but
whether you are too sick (long term), too busy, or too disinterested to be involved at a meaningful level
there is still work to be done and duties to perform, work generally dumped back on those "compassionate"
commanders who wind up allowing for everyone's circumstances, and then burning out and quitting.

How is this any different than the work generally dumped back on those commanders that have members simply quit? 

[Майор Хаткевич]

They retain their grade and eventually either retire or recover, just like we do with Wing CCs and in the RM. It doesn't hurt us to have Lt Cols around who have contributed, it hurts us to have members around who never contribute.

Okay, so it is not XX hours to wing, but rather XX hours to CAP.  Who actually certifies these senior members are performing to the standard?

If we have members around who "never contribute", then why not transfer them to the 000 squadrons?

Padding numbers. Looking better than you really are. It happens all the time on the cadet side especially. Typical "dead weight" gets dropped after SoM/QUA are counted .

[LSThiker]

Padding numbers. Looking better than you really are. It happens all the time on the cadet side especially. Typical "dead weight" gets dropped after SoM/QUA are counted .

Again, who actually certifies these people are "dead weight"?  If a commander is purposefully using them to pad numbers, what makes you think that commander is not going to continue to pencil whip to pad the numbers, especially if he/she is "on the line" for charter numbers?

I am all for SM grade expectations, but without a system to enforce, those expectations simply                     .

[Eclipse]

Padding numbers. Looking better than you really are. It happens all the time on the cadet side especially. Typical "dead weight" gets dropped after SoM/QUA are counted .

Again, who actually certifies these people are "dead weight"?  If a commander is purposefully using them to pad numbers, what makes you think that commander is not going to continue to pencil whip to pad the numbers, especially if he/she is "on the line" for charter numbers?     

Generally it's the unit CC, but we need metrics, and I would also propose that the next echelon review the "active" roster of a given charter.

Right off the bat, anyone 000, Patron, or not safety current for "x" number of months could be eligible for Empty Shirt status.
Attendance records, which really should be kept, posted, and tracked somewhere for all members would be another way.

Can't make the meetings, but are running the website, and tracking personnel records? No harm, no foul, stay safety current
and all the CC has to do is justify your staying on the roster.

[Eclipse]

If we have members around who "never contribute", then why not transfer them to the 000 squadrons?

Many Regions no longer allow this - in far too many wings the 000 units were rapidly becoming the biggest unit in a given
wing. I know in my wing we can no longer push people to 000 without a legit reason such as a charter dissolving.

Otherwise they go patron and stay on the local unit's books.

Now, if someone can explain to me why there are Region 000 units, that would be interesting.

Frankly, I don't see why every wing needs 000 - this is a holdover from days of the reserve squadrons where
naysayers and members who can't work and play well would go and still be allowed to participate in
activities and progress at the whim of the Wing CC.  These "ad hoc" members tended to float around
wherever they felt like it with no actual commander to keep an eye on them.

There should be one national 000 - if someone needs to go in there, scan their file, upload it to eServices
and hit the transfer button.

[Eclipse]

I'd be totally on board with participation and performance expectations for grades.

As I've said before, it doesn't matter >why< you aren't there, you're either carrying a corner or you are not.

That doesn't mean not being compassionate about people's personal circumstances, but
whether you are too sick (long term), too busy, or too disinterested to be involved at a meaningful level
there is still work to be done and duties to perform, work generally dumped back on those "compassionate"
commanders who wind up allowing for everyone's circumstances, and then burning out and quitting.

How is this any different than the work generally dumped back on those commanders that have members simply quit?

Because when you leave an empty shirt posted to a given job, they still clock their TIG towards PD, etc., your roster
looks full, but no actual work is being done.

[SunDog]

Hold your fire! My hands are up! No intent to start a fight, but. . .

The thread leads me (subjectivly, I know) to think we should just dump rank for seniors.  I don't know how many other former military we have, but it would be kinda weird to be a 2Lt in CAP and a LtCol in one of the services. . .

When I walked in, as a pilot, I didn't know CAP had a rank structure, and didn't much care, etiher. Though it became a little awakwrd being the oldest 1Lt on the planet (at least I thought I was, at the time. I was wrong!)  Solved that ego issue by seldom wearing a CAP unifrom that included rank insignia.

But, back to the main event; why don't we drop the rank?  If we have to interface, with credibility, with other orgs, then just use our titles - Wing Comander, Wing DO, etc.?  Keep the Air Force uniforms, if you lke them, substitute another bling of some kind for the rank insignia?  Maybe go with something similiar to the Coast Guard Aux, where the "office" is indicated, instead of a rank?

[Eclipse]

INFORMATION PAPER ON SURROGATE PREDATOR (SP) PROGRAM
We need to stop calling it this.  It's an advanced sensor package, not a Predator.  ASP?

You are right it is not a "Predator" it is a Surrogate Predator.

If you were part of the program you would understand.

Perhaps if those who are part of the program, not to mention those drafting potential changes, actually
read their own documentation, they would understand.

The official name of the program, per 60-1 as well as the application instructions is:
Surrogate Remotely Piloted Aircraft (SRPA) not the "Surrogate Predator".

http://capmembers.com/media/cms/R060_001_132EEB0197465.pdf
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/SRPA_Application_Instructions_80E31B01407A7.pdf

[lordmonar]

My rating still say SPMC and SPSO.

The guys at CSAG (the Group Commander BTW) were briefing on the Surrogate Predator Program.

And when we are at the hangar we call it the "SP" aircraft.

What they wrote in 60-1 and on that info sheet.....no one really cares about. 

Either way.....what YOU think about what we should be called has ZERO relevance.   Thanks for playing.

[Eclipse]

Hardkewl wins over common sense again.

[lordmonar]

Hardkewl wins over common sense again.

Again....you got no idea what you are talking about.  It's got nothing to do with "hardkewl" at all.  It is just what we call it.  I'm in the SP program.  No one....calls it the SUAV program.  Sure...that may be the official name.   No one calls it that.   Kind of like calling the BBDU....the BBDU....I don't know what the official name is....but we all call it the BBDU. 

[Eclipse]

Hardkewl wins over common sense again.

Again....you got no idea what you are talking about.  It's got nothing to do with "hardkewl" at all.  It is just what we call it.  I'm in the SP program.  No one....calls it the SUAV program.  Sure...that may be the official name.   No one calls it that.   Kind of like calling the BBDU....the BBDU....I don't know what the official name is....but we all call it the BBDU.

The official name of the BBDU is the "Blue Field Uniform".

Apparently attention to detail is not something "important" at Area 51 Composite.  It's one thing to not know, it's another to
hold onto incorrect terminology when you know the correct terms.

My rating still say SPMC and SPSO.

Really? Because that's not a "thing".  Might be time to reprint that 101 card.

All I see is GFMC, GFMP, & GFSO as SQTRs. And in OPS Quals it's a "Surrogate Unmanned Aerial System" this P-Word is
no where to be found. 

[lordmonar]

Okay....you caught me...yep it seems once again the Almighty Eclipse knows more about everything.

Yep....60-1 changed the terminology(sort of).  E-services has changed the terminology(sort of).

Yep that's telling to our level of attention to detail.

We are just so caught up in being cooler then you we don't care about that sort of thing.

Bottom line Eclipse.....is I'm in the program.....and you aren't you don't have a right to an opinion.

Thank you.   

[LSThiker]

Generally it's the unit CC, but we need metrics, and I would also propose that the next echelon review the "active" roster of a given charter.

Yup, and the reason for requiring Region to approve Lt Col was to prevent Wing from pencil whipping people.  We have seen how well that has worked.  Chances are, a majority of commanders below region are also going to be more worried about the number of people on the books.  Granted not all as in maybe TX, CA, FL but the smaller wings probably.

Right off the bat, anyone 000, Patron, or not safety current for "x" number of months could be eligible for Empty Shirt status.

Patrons are by definition empty shirts.  They are people willing to give money to CAP but cannot support it as a full member.  They cannot participate in any CAP except conferences, cannot complete PD, cannot ride in vehicles/airplanes, etc.  That would make zero sense dropping a person willing to pay money. 

I would agree that a person not current in safety for "X" number of months would be eligible for Empty Shirt status.  That provision is essentially already in CAPR 39-2.

Can't make the meetings, but are running the website, and tracking personnel records? No harm, no foul, stay safety current and all the CC has to do is justify your staying on the roster.

So again, what prevents the commander from pencil whipping the records again?  All that commander has to do is say, well Member X helps track the roster or helps with X, Y, and Z. 

Many Regions no longer allow this - in far too many wings the 000 units were rapidly becoming the biggest unit in a given
wing. I know in my wing we can no longer push people to 000 without a legit reason such as a charter dissolving.

I would like to see a region's or wing's written guidance mandating commanders not transfer to a 000 squadron?  In fact, I would actually like to see how many "many" really is.  To me, this sounds like a failed wing leadership.

Because when you leave an empty shirt posted to a given job, they still clock their TIG towards PD, etc., your roster
looks full, but no actual work is being done.

Other than the TIG, which can be taken care by transferring a person to Patron, are again non-issues in this sense.  The roster will only look full if you add them to your organizational chart.  No actual work being done is true regardless of whether or not they are on the books. 

So far, I see no real system of enforcement.

[SunDog]

Geez, guys, paint it pink and call it Mary; a mildly interesting niche, good for helping big blue and some good PR for CAP. Mostly irrelevant to CAP as a whole, like us east guys acting as clay pigeons.  We aren't gonna make a living on either mission. . .CAP is likely in the aer-i-al photo-graph business for earning its keep, going forward.

[lordmonar]

Geez, guys, paint it pink and call it Mary; a mildly interesting niche, good for helping big blue and some good PR for CAP. Mostly irrelevant to CAP as a whole, like us east guys acting as clay pigeons.  We aren't gonna make a living on either mission. . .CAP is likely in the aer-i-al photo-graph business for earning its keep, going forward.

You are right....I took this too far and too personally.

Eclipse...I apologize.  You do have a right to your opinion.   The Green Flag program is something I am very passionate about.  I have dedicated four years of my CAP time to it.   I get a little unreasonable about defending it.  Sorry.

[Eclipse]

Great, now you tell me.  Now I have to go out to the curb and get all my opinions back!

I hope the junk guys haven't come by already...

[Panache]

If we have members around who "never contribute", then why not transfer them to the 000 squadrons?

Many Regions no longer allow this - in far too many wings the 000 units were rapidly becoming the biggest unit in a given wing. I know in my wing we can no longer push people to 000 without a legit reason such as a charter dissolving.

We've been flat-out told that we can not transfer empty shirt members to 000 without a signed and certified order from the Almighty Himself.

But, back to the main event; why don't we drop the rank?  If we have to interface, with credibility, with other orgs, then just use our titles - Wing Comander, Wing DO, etc.?  Keep the Air Force uniforms, if you lke them, substitute another bling of some kind for the rank insignia?  Maybe go with something similiar to the Coast Guard Aux, where the "office" is indicated, instead of a rank?

I'm made that suggestion already.  Personally, I think all members should hold duel grades: a permanent grade that represents your progress in the PD program (starting at WO1 and ending at CWO5) and if you're currently holding a staff or command position, you'll temporarily hold the appropriate grade for that position (O2 for Deputy Squadron CC, O3 for Squadron CC, O4 for Group CC, etc.)  Once you are no longer serving in that staff or command position, you no longer have the "O" grade.  But the "WO" grade is yours forever, and is what you'll you'll use when not actively serving in a command or staff position.

Want to give up the rat-race and serve coffee at the local squadron meeting?  Sure thing.  Just trade in your silver bottlecaps for whatever WO insignia is appropriate.

[a2capt]

There's noting wrong with rank system the way it is. It's CAP grade. Not USAF, not USA, not USMC .. not anything else.

We're not the only organization that uses a similar system outside of the armed forces.

The moment you realize that it's CAP grade and nothing else, the confusion is over. Deal with the violators, not the whole system.

[Panache]

The moment you realize that it's CAP grade and nothing else, the confusion is over. Deal with the violators, not the whole system.

Sure, we can tell the CAP membership to "deal with it", but what about everybody else we interact with?

When they see a certain grade insignia, they have certain expectations from that person.  That's a fact.

And while we're not the only organization outside the armed forces which uses a similar system, I can't think of any which allows you to keep the grade title when you're not actually doing a job or function which would be normal for that grade title.

Scenario:  Podunk Composite Squadron invites a Army LTC who's the uncle of the cadets to come in and give a lecture or presentation.  He arrives and the Squadron's CC, 1st Lt. Goodguy, greets him.

Eventually, the good LTC notices the CAP Lt. Col. in the background, making the coffee and handing out slices of cake.  "Oh, is that the.... what do you guys call it, the Wing Commander?" the LTC asks.  No, that's Lt. Colonel Silverhair.  He's a member of our squadron.  "What does he do?" asks the LTC.  Oh, nothing much, just helps out here and there...

...what sort of impression do you think that leaves?

[SarDragon]

A five minute chat usually clears everything up. I've never seen any problem with situations that you speak of. We show up, do our jobs, go home. Rinse, repeat.

[Brit_in_CAP]

Interesting note...there are 3000 SMs in 000. That's 10% of our SMs who are effectively not there. What I'm really baffled by are the almost 1000 cadets...You are either a cadet or your not. Why is that even an option?

Because there are many not-yet-former cadets who joined and decided CAP was not right for them or had conflicts with school/sports/life after joining and are not going to formally quit and are not worth the 2B process headaches, but are not going to do anything CAP related. They get transferred to the 000 units to remove them non-safety compliance problem from the units until their membership lapses.

Check on all points.  Nice and easy.  Save the 2B for the problem cases where you need something on the record.  At that time I use it without regret....

[GroundHawg]

The moment you realize that it's CAP grade and nothing else, the confusion is over. Deal with the violators, not the whole system.

Sure, we can tell the CAP membership to "deal with it", but what about everybody else we interact with?

When they see a certain grade insignia, they have certain expectations from that person.  That's a fact.

And while we're not the only organization outside the armed forces which uses a similar system, I can't think of any which allows you to keep the grade title when you're not actually doing a job or function which would be normal for that grade title.

Scenario:  Podunk Composite Squadron invites a Army LTC who's the uncle of the cadets to come in and give a lecture or presentation.  He arrives and the Squadron's CC, 1st Lt. Goodguy, greets him.

Eventually, the good LTC notices the CAP Lt. Col. in the background, making the coffee and handing out slices of cake.  "Oh, is that the.... what do you guys call it, the Wing Commander?" the LTC asks.  No, that's Lt. Colonel Silverhair.  He's a member of our squadron.  "What does he do?" asks the LTC.  Oh, nothing much, just helps out here and there...

...what sort of impression do you think that leaves?

This happens in the active, reserve and guard of the military all the time. The ADA officer (a LTC whom we called colonel cake) of the aviation group I was in, in the National Guard had exactly ZERO function. We did not have any ADA equipment or weaponry of any sort, and only one other ADA slot (E5). He came in on drill weekends and signed in, went to his little cubby hole, and stayed in there for the entire weekend. The only thing we ever saw him do (and he joked with us about this btw) was pass out cake at retirement ceremonies. He wanted to retire, but he was making like $1500 a month to do literally nothing.  He hated when we had to do range quals as he then actually had to salute people and "play Army". He never went with us annually to Foal Eagle either come to think of it.

[Fubar]

Interesting note...there are 3000 SMs in 000. That's 10% of our SMs who are effectively not there. What I'm really baffled by are the almost 1000 cadets...You are either a cadet or your not. Why is that even an option?

Because there are many not-yet-former cadets who joined and decided CAP was not right for them or had conflicts with school/sports/life after joining and are not going to formally quit and are not worth the 2B process headaches, but are not going to do anything CAP related. They get transferred to the 000 units to remove them non-safety compliance problem from the units until their membership lapses.

Check on all points.  Nice and easy.  Save the 2B for the problem cases where you need something on the record.  At that time I use it without regret....

Why are you so afraid of CAPF 2B? It's not punitive, it simply says person X will no longer be a member. There's no reason to wait until a membership lapse nor move them to some phantom squadron that pads our numbers and provides zero return.

[SarDragon]

A 2b is considered an adverse administrative action, and is subject to appeal. If someone wants to make trouble, they can do this, and waste a lot of time and energy.

[Fubar]

A 2b is considered an adverse administrative action, and is subject to appeal. If someone wants to make trouble, they can do this, and waste a lot of time and energy.

CAPR 35-3 6a reads to me that if you are separating someone from the organizations for reasons other than "cause" (read: misbehavior), then it's a simple matter of sending off copies to the appropriate places.

CAPR 35-3 6b says "Cadets being terminated for misconduct and senior members being terminated for cause are entitled to the appeal procedures set out in section D hereafter."

A quick email/voicemail to the member you haven't seen in two months (hopefully you've been trying to reach them for awhile) that says, "Hey, are you coming back? If we don't hear from you in a week, we'll go ahead and file the paperwork to remove you from the roster. If you want to come back at a later date, feel free to stop by and we'll look at your options at returning to the organization. Have a nice day." Nothing heard a week later? File the non-punative 2b as described in CAPF 35-3 6a. The fact that 6a talks about sending a copy to "the last known address" reinforces that we will occasionally need this procedure for folks we can't get ahold of anymore.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not out to kick people out at the drop of a hat, but we do have non-adverse options to remove people from the roster who don't want to be there anymore anyway.

[lordmonar]

The point should be.....why are we under pressure to move or kick out people who's only "crime" is not showing up?

The whole push to get 100% safety compliant is a waste of time.

Yes.....everyone needs to be safety compliant to play......but if you only play once a quarter...you only need to be safety complaint once a quarter.

[a2capt]

The whole push to get 100% safety compliant is a waste of time.

When you've got your wing commander sending out harping emails bordering on "this is not acceptable" and encouraging groups to "compete" for who has the most.. that sure seems like time wasted that could be put to better use actually directing/managing the organization.

If the goal is to have compliance for participants, then audit activities for compliance.

The whole thing really is an administrative hack anyway. A reactionary knee-jerking hack.

[JeffDG]

You know what should happen?

The Wing Recruiting and Retention Officer should become the Commander of the -000 unit...and work on retention of members who have drifted away from active service and encourage them to get back to being active!

[MacGruff]

We had a guy show up at last night's meeting for the first time in six months. After letting him know that we were glad to see him, I asked him why he did not show up for the past few months? his answer was that his job duties had him travelling every Tuesday for the past six months so he could not attend the meetings. He was unhappy that he was unable to attend the meeting and contribute to the squadron and expressed that unhappiness.

I want him to progress in the program and contribute and it turns out that he is in the IT business. So, as of yesterday, we have a new IT officer who can manage our network and server remotely and he is happy he can start contributing again.

[Eclipse]

You know what should happen?

The Wing Recruiting and Retention Officer should become the Commander of the -000 unit...and work on retention of members who have drifted away from active service and encourage them to get back to being active!

That is an outstanding idea.

[Eclipse]

The point should be.....why are we under pressure to move or kick out people who's only "crime" is not showing up?

The whole push to get 100% safety compliant is a waste of time.

Yes.....everyone needs to be safety compliant to play......but if you only play once a quarter...you only need to be safety complaint once a quarter.

The safety compliance thing is nonsense - "Safety Theater", it results in zero "safer" however it must fulfill some actuarie's needs.

The reason it is important to properly categorize, or terminate the empty shirts, is that CAP does not
properly report manpower in its collateral, but worse, those empty shirts give a lot of Commanders, including
wing CCs false security.

We'd all be a lot better off if we started using actual data to frame the actual problems instead of
dancing around the numbers and ignoring the attrition and shrinkage.

I was discussing this very issue the other day with leaders who should already be aware - they were shocked
at how bad it has gotten, the problem being when all you do is pay attention to raw member numbers, with no
filters, it's easy to ignore the realities - then you start counting units, filter empty shirts, and realize your
biggest units in some wings are 000 and it's a different story.

[CAP_truth]

We should just change patron members to inactive.