CAP Rank structure

[ddelaney103]

  The Code of Conduct says "if I am senior, I will take command," CAP says, "if I am in command, only then will I take command."

Now I need an explanation, doesn't the Code of Conduct speak here of a POW situation?

CAP is a lot of things, not all pleasant, but it certainly isn't an enemy prison camp.

That was just to illustrate the point.  I could have used the example of the troops getting rowdy on an aircraft and a Chaplain not associated with them told them to settle down.  In a CAP situation, you have to hope their Wing King is riding the same aircraft because you can't just tell them, "settle down Captain, I'm a Major" and expect anything other than laughter.

[sandman]

That was just to illustrate the point.  I could have used the example of the troops getting rowdy on an aircraft and a Chaplain not associated with them told them to settle down.  In a CAP situation, you have to hope their Wing King is riding the same aircraft because you can't just tell them, "settle down Captain, I'm a Major" and expect anything other than laughter.

That's a sad but true picture of how things would go. Unfortunately, most commanders and officers within CAP do not know (or rather, do not want to know) how to use the regulations already in place.

The captain in your example should be met with a stern warning about insubordination, conduct unbecoming, or insanity (perhaps charged with all). Your major in said example should make every effort to file a complaint with the commander of said captain. The commander of that captain should immediatly follow through with an investigation and submit a 2b to terminate the captain (depending on the severity of the misconduct).

The tools are already there to use but you're afraid to use them to maintain good order and dicipline. Sure the captain may appeal and keep his/her job, but the effect would be outstanding. Of course, if the captain's unit commander is impotent in dealing with even minor actions of misconduct or insubordination, then you bring it up the chain of command.

Don't be afraid to use the rules and regulations that are already there. If you're a commander of a unit or higher, then do your job, even if it means letting a few bad apples go. You don't want to spoil all the apples with one rotton one.

Believe me, I would rather have one or two good officers in my unit than a bunch of insubordinate curmudgeons.

...and I will 2b a member for insubordination....very quickly.

[Sgt. Savage]

With no real consensus, what do we know at this point. The pole would suggest that the status quo is the way to go but, if the choices were to remain the same or change, it looks like the current system would not have a majority vote.

I think the organization, its goals, and its expectations need to be restated or clarified to better determine our future.

Some believe we are a civilian organization and wish to be civilians. Others believe we are a quasi-military entity and should act as such.

Who are we?

As a side note, I was active then reserve Army at the time when at first, guard / reservists were considered substandard and not worthy. They then, and now, are considered consumate professionals and respected for their sacrifice. Are we what the guard used to be and can we ever come to the point where we are respected as an organization for our sacrifices for our country?

[Ricochet13]

It would be interesting to compare attitudes among Cadets to "rank structure" and that of Senior Members/Officers. 

Also note expectations of Senior Members/Officers to how cadets treat the adult rank structure.  Don't think cadets view it as recognizing only professional development.

[Hawk200]

Some believe we are a civilian organization and wish to be civilians. Others believe we are a quasi-military entity and should act as such.

Who are we?

As a side note, I was active then reserve Army at the time when at first, guard / reservists were considered substandard and not worthy. They then, and now, are considered consumate professionals and respected for their sacrifice. Are we what the guard used to be and can we ever come to the point where we are respected as an organization for our sacrifices for our country?

I'm really not sure how "quasi" would apply. By the MW definition, we are certainly a "paramilitary" organization.

Unfortunately, there are a number of people the want to be "paramilitary" if they outrank someone, but want to be civilians when they are outranked. I've seen it happen far to many times.

The rank structure was described on this board one time as position has the authority, outside of the unit, rank should be followed. As a caveat, if you order someone outside you unit, it had be what most rational people would consider "lawful". I mean that in the manner of it being a legimate order. You don't order someone to go scrub toilets with a toothbrush because you can.

[SAR-EMT1]

Was there a time (aside from maybe WWII) when rank wasn't tied in with PD as much as it is now? A time when it actually meant more in regards to authority and position, within CAP then it does now...  ??

[SarDragon]

Was there a time (aside from maybe WWII) when rank wasn't tied in with PD as much as it is now? A time when it actually meant more in regards to authority and position, within CAP then it does now...  ??

Not for a long time. Somewhere in another thread (or maybe this one, or on CS), there was discussion of the olde billet-based promotion system. That went away a long time ago, because it was impractical, based on the number of members available. Even then, there were instances of officers working for others junior to them.

In the grand scheme of things, it's really no big deal. If someone isn't willing to work for someone junior if the circumstances dictate, then I don't think they are a very good officer. If the mission is getting done, then nothing's broke.

[gistek]

Personally, I think I made 2Lt too fast. I also feel sorry for those 18 yr olds who join then have to wait 3 years to become 2Lt.

I would like to see the FO ranks expanded and have every new SM go through them.

SM to FO1 would require Level 1
FO1 to FO2 would require time in grade, duty position, participation, and demonstrate knowledge of insignia, customs, & courtesies
FO2 to FO3 would require time in grade, time in duty position, participation, tech level in at least 1 specialty track
FO3 to 2Lt would require time in grade, time in duty position, participation - including assisting to teach at least 1 class, tech level in 2 or more specialty tracks, senior level in at least 1 specialty track

TIG could be set so that an 18-yo could not make 2Lt before their 21st birthday, but could be reduced for SM's over 21. I always felt awkward having a TO with 2+ years saluting me just because I'd reached my 6 mo point.

Based on my outline, I'd be a FO3 or 2Lt now rather than a 1Lt. Fine. I really don't feel I've earned 1Lt yet.

---

I don't know how to handle the rank for being a pilot, doctor, lawyer, or time in position for unit commanders.

One thing I really dislike about CAP rank is the way "Captains" think they can ignore standing orders. As a 1Lt, I was Project Officer for an event where our squadron did parking and crowd control. One standing order had to do with clearing the road for the AvFuel tanker truck. I saw the truck approaching and ordered the road cleared. A captain from another unit "pulled rank" on me and said the road didn't have to be cleared. I had to get the commander of my unit to "pull rank" back at him. I'm just glad she was there. Her usual duty position for that event was the other side of the event from me.

Perhaps we need to add a brevet rank structure for event commanders and rank given due to duty position.

[jimmydeanno]

I also feel sorry for those 18 yr olds who join then have to wait 3 years to become 2Lt.

An 18 year old doesn't need to wait 3 years to become a 2d Lt.  If they complete their PD requirements, when they turn 21 they can be a 1st Lt.  A prior cadet can get to Capt on their 21st B-Day if they earned the Earhart...

18 YR OLD           21 YR OLD
SM                       SM
FO                       2d Lt
TFO                     1st Lt
SFO                     Capt

[MIKE]

^ Senior Flight Officer comes after Technical Flight Officer

[jimmydeanno]

^ooops 

[trekkindave]

Prior cadets who have achieved the Earhart Award can be promoted to 1st LT... Cadet who have achieved thier Eaker (or is it Spatz) can be promoted to Captain.   

Prior to turning 21 cadets who have earned those grades and are older then 18 can be promoted to he appropriate level of flight officer.

[jimmydeanno]

Ok here's the deal with the Flight Officers, and maybe a little clarification on my last post.

Cadets that earn their Mitchell and transfer their membership (under 21) can be advanced in grade to FO. If over 21, 2d Lt.

Cadets that earn their Earhart or Eaker and transfer their membership (under 21) can be advanced in grade to TFO. If over 21, 1st Lt.

Cadets that earn their Spaatz and transfer their membership (under 21) can be advanced in grade to SFO.  If over 21, Capt.

Now my point about the Earhart Cadet making Captain at 21 was because of the advanced promotion to TFO + 3 years TIG as TFO to get SFO, which transfers to Capt.

So if an 18 year old joins with no prior cadet experience or a former cadet who earned below the Earhart, the highest grade they will have upon their 21st birthday is 1st Lt, soley because of TIG restrictions.

Sorry about the re-direct...

[SarDragon]

And to finish it all off, with due diligence, the 18 yo non-cadet can become a Capt at 21 + 3 months. 

[jimmydeanno]

^I botched that... *stupid* *stupid* *stupid*

Suppose I should've checked the regs again before opening my BFM. (R 35-5, page 11 section b.)

Looks like they can get SFO in 21 months...

FO = 3 months TIG as SM
TFO = 6 months TIG as FO
SFO = 12 months TIG as TFO

so age 19 3/4 is when you can complete the FO grades...sorry guys

On another note, anyone ever read this?

3) Leadership qualities. Individuals recommended for promotion to flight officer grade must be occupying positions of supervision or leadership within the unit.

However, there is no such stipulation for officers, only...

5) Be performing in an exemplary manner meriting promotion to the grade recommended.

[0]

^I botched that... *stupid* *stupid* *stupid*

Suppose I should've checked the regs again before opening my BFM. (R 35-5, page 11 section b.)

Looks like they can get SFO in 21 months...

FO = 3 months TIG as SM
TFO = 6 months TIG as FO
SFO = 12 months TIG as TFO

so age 19 3/4 is when you can complete the FO grades...sorry guys

On another note, anyone ever read this?

3) Leadership qualities. Individuals recommended for promotion to flight officer grade must be occupying positions of supervision or leadership within the unit.

However, there is no such stipulation for officers, only...

5) Be performing in an exemplary manner meriting promotion to the grade recommended.

I thought time in grade for Flight Officer Positions was the same as the Officer's Equivlent

[MIKE]

Don't trust anything you read on the forums unless it's a direct ciatation... Usually provide by me. 

[MIKE]

I thought time in grade for Flight Officer Positions was the same as the Officer's Equivlent

Negative Ghostrider. RTFR.

[Dragoon]

You know, the fact that most members don't want to change the current system is no big surprise. 

It's also irrelevant.

Of COURSE the members want as many rewards as possible while doing as little as possible - that's just human nature.

In fact, if you gave a poll to all members of the Air Force and asked if promotions should only be tied to education and time in service, not responsibility, most airmen would vote yes.  Wouldn't YOU like Lt Col pay and priviledges while doing 2d Lt's work?  I know I would.   :-)

But the purpose of a grade system isn't to make members happy.  It's to make an organization run better.  And I'm not sure our current system is really helping CAP run better.

I know several Wing Commanders who can't fill critical staff billets.  The reasons for this seem to boil down to:

1.  These jobs are tough.

2.  Why should a do a tough job when I can do a fun job in a squadron and still get promoted?


I submit that a system that ties grade to responsibility might not make every member happy, but WOULD make the organization better by providing incentives to take the tough jobs and do well at them.

And every one of us would prefer a well run, professional Wing and Group HQ, full of the highly motiviated qualtiy people that supports the squadrons better than they are supported today.

Instead, today's system rewards individual study and tenure, rather than performance.  Not good if you want high performing leaders, staffers and units.  Imagine if a real military promoted and utilized its officers the way we do.

I've worked at Wing in some pretty high level jobs and, I think, have "earned" my grade.  But I'm not there anymore.  I'm back in a squadron.  If it were the law of the land, I'd have no problem giving back my oak leaves and pinning on silver bars.  Because that's the right grade for the job I have now.  If I felt the need for bragging rights, I'd just trot out the ribbon rack.  That's should be enough for any man.

[Dragoon]

In answer to the question"Do you think any kind of radical change stands a snowball's chance of happening."

And the answer is no, of course not.  Not today.

But things change. CAP's whole structure could change.  For example, the BOG may decide down the road to appoint various corporate officers, rather than allow the current "self licking ice cream cone" election system to continue.

Or USAF could decide they need us to do more, and start pressuring us to clean up our corporate act.

If someone in a position of power ever decided to take a long, hard look at CAP, I think he'd determine that our use of military grade could be used to make us a more effective organization.  And if that guy had enough power...things could change.

Until then, it's a pipe dream.  But that's no reason not to flesh out the concept. Because one day, someone may be in a position to make a change.  And perhaps, just perhaps, he may remember some stuff bandied around on these boards.....