HAircuts at encampment

[mynetdude]

I have a very simple solution for cadets who do not wish to comply with 39-1. 

Those cadets are not issued uniform items. 

Had the experience today with a cadet with very shaggy out of reg hair (notorious)  who wanted to issue himself new boots because he "couldn't get his to shine anymore" (another issue entirely).  The conversation ended with my statement of "I'll believe you care about the appearance of your uniform when you get your hair in regs"

Yep and if a cadet can't be in uniform which is part of the CP then they get 2B'd right?

Can't or Wont?

Well if someone won't issue him a uniform I guess he can't be in uniform but then again he won't be in uniform because of that so technically speaking he will not be in uniform either way until he meets the 39-1 grooming standards so I would think he would be 2B'd for not being in uniform as I would presume this is required as part of being a cadet?

[Al Sayre]

^^Please show me the regulation that allows you to 2b a cadet for not being in uniform.

[davidsinn]

^^Please show me the regulation that allows you to 2b a cadet for not being in uniform.

They must have a complete uniform to earn Curry. If they do not promote at a "satisfactory" rate then they may be 2b'd.

[NIN]

^^Please show me the regulation that allows you to 2b a cadet for not being in uniform.

They must have a complete uniform to earn Curry. If they do not promote at a "satisfactory" rate then they may be 2b'd.

Thats a bit of a stretch/guardhouse lawyering there, but I take your point.

More directly, a cadet who refuses to get his/her hair cut but still wears the uniform should be informally counseled by his/her first line supervisor for compliance (with a memorandum).  Following non-compliance, the cadet should be counseled in writing by a cadet officer (flight commander, cadet commander, either way).  When the cadet does not comply, the cadet staff can hand off the cadet and their record of counseling to the leadership officer/deputy commander for cadets for action.  The LO/DCC should also counsel for compliance.  If the cadet again refuses to comply, you have three counselings: one informal and two formal.  the DCC or LO can turn around to the commander and say "Here ya go, Boss.  Three counselings on the same subject and non-compliance."

At that point, the commander can elect to counsel again (waste of time, IMHO, but maybe if the previous counselings were ineffective/poorly done), demote, suspend or terminate.

And you have the paperwork/documentation to back it up, which helps make it stick.

But 2Bing a cadet for non-progression, because you refused to promote him/her due to non-compliance, well, thats just like beating around the bush.

[raivo]

Do these cadets even want to be in CAP?

We had a cadet who showed up for meetings every week with the sides of his head shaved, but long enough on top that it reached down to his neck. He was basically only in CAP because his parents made him (presumably for the discipline, but... there's only so much you can do with someone who doesn't want to be there.) Eventually he just stopped showing up; I assume he just eventually fought it out with his parents and "won."

[NIN]

BTW, in my previous reply, what I neglected to say was:

Sometimes, the best way to handle something is the direct way.  Counseling, membership action, termination, whatever.

But terminating a cadet for non-progression after you refused to promote him due to non-compliance with the uniform rules is not addressing the root cause of the problem.

If I'm being a gigantic dick to people, should my commander say "Uh, hey, Darin, you're being a gigantic dick, did you know that?"  or should he say "No, Major Ninness, we're not going to make you the deputy commander for cadets because... we think your tie is crooked... and you're a gigantic dick to everybody, too..."

Or worse yet, issuing some kind of a blanket memo or directive to address a single instance of behavior.

For example, say you had a cadet who was in the Air Guard, and he had a nasty tendency to show up in his Air Guard uniform instead of his CAP cadet uniform.  Do you: a) Say "Hey, Smith, you need to start showing up in your cadet uniform, not your guard uniform.." ; or b) Issue a memorandum to the unit that says "Effective immediately, all personnel must wear a full and complete CAP uniform."? 

Its far more effective to address the root behavior rather than hide behind a directive that paints everybody with a broad brush.  Maybe there is a mitigating factor (ie. the cadet just came from his/her ANG unit's drill) or you have others who might have a legitimate need to show up out of uniform.  Why eliminate their flexibility because you did not address the behavior of one individual?

Many years ago, I had a commander who issued a "no boonie hats" order.  We weren't supposed to be wearing boonies anyway, but when we'd do unit bivouacs and find ourselves way out in the bush, we'd wear them when it was "just us."  However, one guy was a dork about it and wore his boonie into the mission base at a SAREX, etc.  But instead of the CO saying "hey, Jones, stop wearing the boonie when you're not supposed to or you'll wear it where the sun don't shine.."  the boss body slammed everybody for one dude's actions.

[mynetdude]

I am not saying I would 2B a cadet because he refuses to wear the uniform itself, the grooming standards are in fact policy and anyone non-compliant COULD be 2B'd (and I am not referring to just cadets) also I keep hearing that cadets are supposed to promote at a MINIMUM of 2 achievements a year (however MANY promote more than that in a year easily) so a cadet who refuses to cut their hair whom cannot be in uniform because of such cannot also promote or pass any achievements because they cannot promote and if they do not do 2 achievements in a year the squadron CC does have the option of 2Bing that cadet.

Heck, I would do whatever means to properly educate and counsel a cadet in proper uniform wear and behavior before turning it over to the squadron commander for adverse action for cause.

[JoeTomasone]

I am not saying I would 2B a cadet because he refuses to wear the uniform itself

It's got nothing to do with a uniform (or a boonie hat) and everything to do with failure to adhere to published regulations.

I'm getting really tired of those who see fit to ignore regulations being coddled.    When you join CAP, you voluntarily agree to abide by the rules and regulations.   If you don't, you should EXPECT to be disciplined up to and including termination.    However, I see entirely too much of this politically correct nonsense whereby commanders do not enforce regulations because they are afraid it will affect retention.   Well, I'm sorry, but I am from the other school of thought - if you aren't going to obey the regulations, then we've no place for you in the organization.   Once you start accepting that some things (and this usually comes down to uniforms and customs/courtesies) are "optional", where does it end?    Ah, c'mon, who needs to be qualified to be on a mission?  Let's go!   Form 5?  Not "really" required...  Etcetera... 

If I am the Encampment Commander, and you show up without a proper uniform or grooming, you will be given the chance to rectify it (if it's possible to do so on-site).   If it cannot be done on-site, you will be sent home (S/M) or your parents will be called to come get you (Cadet), and you will not return until it is rectified.   If that is not possible, then you will be excluded from the Encampment's activities and will not be credited with completing the Encampment. 

If that sounds too extreme for you, then perhaps you should consider if you are part of the culture of "over permissiveness" that I have seen far too much of in CAP.

[Rotorhead]

  When you join CAP, you voluntarily agree to abide by the rules and regulations.   If you don't, you should EXPECT to be disciplined up to and including termination.    However, I see entirely too much of this politically correct nonsense whereby commanders do not enforce regulations because they are afraid it will affect retention.   Well, I'm sorry, but I am from the other school of thought - if you aren't going to obey the regulations, then we've no place for you in the organization.   Once you start accepting that some things (and this usually comes down to uniforms and customs/courtesies) are "optional", where does it end?    Ah, c'mon, who needs to be qualified to be on a mission?  Let's go!   Form 5?  Not "really" required...  Etcetera... 

If I am the Encampment Commander, and you show up without a proper uniform or grooming, you will be given the chance to rectify it (if it's possible to do so on-site).   If it cannot be done on-site, you will be sent home (S/M) or your parents will be called to come get you (Cadet), and you will not return until it is rectified.   If that is not possible, then you will be excluded from the Encampment's activities and will not be credited with completing the Encampment. 

If that sounds too extreme for you, then perhaps you should consider if you are part of the culture of "over permissiveness" that I have seen far too much of in CAP.

Bravo!

[NIN]

Y'know, this just popped in my head:

Cadets have an oath (which senior really don't, or at least, did not for many years).

"I pledge that I will serve faithfully in the Civil Air Patrol cadet program, that I will attend meetings regularly, participate actively in unit activities, wear my uniform properly, and advance my education and training rapidly to prepare myself to be of service to my community, state and nation."  [emphasis mine]

Its right there.  The cadet oath is a really, really basic part of the CAP cadet program.

So this is one of those things you address directly.  I'm amazed that there is still this undercurrent of "Well, you wouldn't promote a cadet who doesn't wear their uniform properly, so then you can 2B them for non-progression" in this discussion.

Why am I amazed? Because:

a) the problem is with uniform wear & grooming standards, not progression.  Address the issue, not the side-effects;
b) nobody really enforces the "non-progression clause" in 52-16 anyway, and especially not for legitimate cases of "non-progression," let alone contrived situations of "non-progression."  Do you think you could easily make a non-progression 2B stick?   Let me put it this way:  If you attempt to terminate C/Amn Smith because he hasn't been promoted to C/A1C in six months, you better darn well be sure that you've also terminated EVERY OTHER CADET WHO HASN'T BEEN PROMOTED IN SIX MONTHS.  Otherwise, now you're playing favorites. 

See why you should address the problem directly instead of beating around the bush??

This is why CAP has problems: folks, the regs are in black and white, and in general are written in fairly plain English that your average 9th grader should be able to read.

So if you do this right, it looks like this:

At inspection, Inspecting officer/NCO: "Cadet Smith, your haircut is not per CAPM 39-1's standards. Fix yourself."
After inspection, Flt Sgt or Element Leader: "Smith, get your haircut. You know the drill."
and
A week later, Flt Sergeant: "Smith, I told you last week your hair was out of regs.  You need to fix it. Now"
A week after that, Flt Sergeant: "Nice haircut, Smith. Thanks for getting that taken care of."

Not

3 weeks later, Promotion Board chair:  "Cadet Smith, we're not promoting you to C/A1C because of your lack of haircut."

and then

4 months later: "Cadet Smith, I am proposing to terminate your membership due to non-progression."

That's just .... dumb.

[Side note: I'm a firm believer that 90+% of serious problems in CAP are caused by people just simply not reading the regs and following them.  And I'm talking people from cadets all the way to the National Commander. Although, I will say that knowing General Courter as I do, I'm pretty sure she does a much better job than her predecessor in that area...<GRIN>  I once was approached by a good friend of mine who had a cadet who had been demoted by the wing commander.  But sadly, the wing commander did not follow the provisions of CAPR 52-16.  Nor did the wing commander do what is suggested at the charm school and have the unit commander do the demoting.  Nope, this demotion, which was totally outside the scope of a CAPR 52-16 demotion, came on a letter straight from wing over the wing commander's signature.  Did you know that the appellate authority for a wing-initiated cadet demotion is the region? Yeah, I don't think that wing commander or that wing DCP knew that, either.  And the cadet's well-written letter to the region commander appealing the demotion action laid out 3-4 points as to why the demotion action was against the regulations and completely improper.  Which then led to a region IG investigation of the circumstances that the demotion purportedly stemmed from, which subsequently resulted in the reinstatement of the cadet's grade, the disappearance of the wing DCP and yet another straw on that camel's back for that wing commander. Sad really. Some day I'll have to redact the pertinent information on that demotion appeal letter and post it here. Its a real doozie.  Moral of the story? Read the darn regs.]

[mynetdude]

Firstly, NIN you imply that I am not following/adhering to regulation as to how I would deal with an issue a cadet presents.

No one is perfect and we ALL would like to see everyone stay and participate in CAP nobody likes to kick somebody out even if they are Mr Nice yet they are not following the regulations.

I agree with you, deal with the issue at hand right away tactfully and properly.  I realize that some things are not enforced and isn't that just the problem? 52-16 IS something we are supposed to follow if we are involved in CP and cadet progression is one of those IMHO.

I am not suggesting a cadet who doesn't promote to c/A1C from c/Amn in 6 months be terminated you need to have a minimum of TWO progressions in 1 year per 52-16 a cadet can promote in the last 4 months of the year so you really cannot go by the 6 month rule. (a cadet can only promote every 2 months between achievements until they reach c/CMsgt IIRC) so all they need is 4 months out of their membership year to complete 2 achievements/promotions whether it is at the beginning of the year or at the end of the year.

You are right I would not use the underlying reasons to correct/2B a cadet because that is not the issue at hand.  A cadet who fails to comply with grooming standards cannot be in uniform as part of CP that should be in uniform under EXTREME situations I would then 2B and MOST cadets don't seem to have an issue with grooming really.