Wear of military service uniforms by retired officers while on CAP duty

[RiverAux]

In order to keep a structural thead from going to far off topic....

One option to deal with retired military officers is allowing them to wear the uniform of their service while on CAP duty, possibly while wearing some sort of CAP badge on the uniform. 

Federal law does allow retired officers to wear their uniforms so what we would be looking at would be a change in CAP regs to make this a separate series of alternative uniforms (since they would have to wear the uniform of their service). 

I brought up the height/weight issue for retired officers.  I don't think the services too much about retirees in their uniforms in Veterans Day parades or funerals,which is where they usually show up.  But we are talking about having the retired person wear the uniform as a CAP member representing the AF.  I have a hard time believing the AF will allow seriously overweight people to wear an AF (or Marines, etc.) uniform while on CAP duty at the same time they make non-prior service people meet height/weight standards to wear a AF-style CAP uniform.  This would be a big double standard.

The other issue is that the federal law allows the retired to wear the uniform only with their former rank.  So, a former AF 1st Lt. would only be able to wear 1st Lt. on his AF uniform while on CAP duty even though he could potentially be given a much higher CAP rank.  The only way he could wear the CAP rank would be to wear one of the other uniforms.   This would be a problem for folks under the current system and under any of the various proposals floating around to switch CAP adults from almost all Officers to mostly enlisted/WO with Officers only as needed. 

[Dragoon]

If I'm wearing my Army suit while working in CAP, the public will think I'm working for the Army.  (Makes sense, since the thing says U.S. Army right over the pocket).

CAP folks should wear CAP suits.

Now, if we value the training, we can give former military folks a break on certain elements of CAP training (as we do now).  But honestly, if a Lt Col joins CAP and doesn't do Lt Col level work, why give him the oak leaves?

If an Army Captain joins a volunteer fire department, they don't give him Captain's bars. Because that rank has meaning, and unless that Army Captain becomes a Fire Captain.....he's not doing VFD "captain's work."

Not a bad model for CAP.

[JohnKachenmeister]

I don't think its a good idea, either, but I'd tolerate it until the retirees CAP rank was approved.  No sense taking a bust from say, Major to Airman Basic.

[Dragoon]

As long as it's considered a "bust", I'd agree.

One way out is to create CAP distinctive grade, so that it's clear you aren't getting "busted" - you're taking a new position in a different organzation.

The use of flight officer bars, for example. Since USAF doesn't even have flight officers, it's hard to claim you're being demoted by pinning them on (back to the VFD analogy).

But as long as we hold onto this idea of CAP-USAF grade equivalence, we'll keep having this problem.


As an aside, this also points out the problem with an enlisted system that mirrors USAF.  Virtually everyone knows that an E-1 is an untrained newbie at the absolute bottom of the food chain.  Doesn't know squat.  Normally straight out of high school.

It's not just former NCOs and officers that will have a problem with being E-1s.  My guess is that the 50 year old successful businessman with a chain of hardware stores won't be so thrilled about being "busted" to E-1.  (I wasn't around, but I wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't why we dumped enlisted ranks in the first place.)

[jayleswo]

I think we need to get past E-1 being "beneath" people when they join as new members of CAP. You start at the bottom and, for CAP, that would be E-1.

You mught check out the post I mande on the other thread about the idea for retired oficers/NCO's to join CAP in a new membership cateogry of "Advisor" where they would retain their last grade held adn wear their services uniform. Not too unusual for Army/Navy personnel to be in USAF units on exchange or joint assignments. Each service would have to approve of course, but avoids the issue of awarding advanced officer grade in CAP to officers from the service so we can keep the CAP officer grades for sitting commanders and some professional appointees (chaplain, legal). The originalpost was...

Just to add a few thoughts to the discussion:

1. We need to get away from everyone is an officer. Officer grade above 1st Lt  should be reserved for sitting unit commanders. Commanders would receive temporary promotions to Capt (Squadron), Major (Group), Lt Col (Wing), Colonel (Region), MGen (National) with their deputy/vice one grade below. They revert to their permanent grade after their command tour (3-4 years) is completed. This avoids the confusion over who is in charge we create by awarding grade based primarily on completion of training and TIG.  I think an organization where,  for all practical purposes, 2d Lt is the entry level grade isn't taken very seriously, even by our own membership, much less other agencies. Everyone would join as an E-1 and only after training and time (TIG) would be advanced in grade. Maybe a better organization to compare ourselves to is LE. Would you expect to be promoted to lieutenant in the Highway Patrol after completing basic training and doing your job for six months? No, of course not. Perfectly ok  for you to start off as a Patrolman, or whatever they may be called. It could be 20 years and many tests and lots of training before you get to lieutenant and those positions are competitive and come with command responsibilities.

2. Exceptions to the above for members receiving professional appointments: a) only for those specialties that are recognized by USAF for officer grade, AND b) have a significant role to play in CAP AND c) are actively assigned to and performing that role. The only one's I can think of relevent to CAP are Chaplain and Legal. Educators, CPA's, etc don't meet all of the above criteria (namely commissions in USAF for being a teacher, CPA, etc.). Regardless of training, experience and education, all professional appointments start as 2d Lt and are promoted once TIG is reached and satisfactory performance up to Captain and stops there. If they step down from their position, they revert to a permanent grade of E-1 unless they are otherwise eligible for advanced grade by completing promotion requirements appropriate to that grade (see #3 and #4)..

3. Reinstate Warrant Officer grade for other mission related skills that we need to recruit and retain people to do, such as pilot. Everyone would start as WO-1 regardless of level of certificate and would then be advanced based on time in grade and mission participation. Certificate level (CFI, for example) could waive some training/experience, but not TIG. An A&P could be advanced, for example, to an advanced enlisted grade after appropriate TIG, without completing any other training as long as they are performing a job requiring that skill in CAP.

4. Everyone else starts as enlisted. Again, specific skills could waive training requirements, but not TIG so everyone promotes at a reasonable rate. Top enlisted grade would be E-7 (to avoid aggravating any Air Force chief's out there in the top two grades).

5. Not sure what training program to use, but existing Level 1-5 could be adapted as well as AF PME courses, in addition to other ongoing discussions on this board which have been proposed.

6. Lastly, Officer of Armed Forces promotion: how to address issue where someone was a General in USAF and joins CAP as an E-1... Well, two ways. 1) Point out grade structure looks like USAF, but is NOT the same thing. Or 2) allow former officers to continue wearing their last grade held BUT get approval from USAF to have them wear their USAF uniform while serving in CAP. They would be placed in a special membership category like Advisor. They could hold any/all CAP positions, but senior officers would be assigned to HQ units. Distinguish them from active duty by having them wear a badge, similar to what AF JROTC/ROTC Officers/NCO's wear. CAP-USAF (liaison regions) would have to approve assignments of former USAF Officers/enlisted joining CAP in this capacity. That should take care of that, except not sure what to do with Army, Navy, Marine etc officers/senior enlisted.

7. Phase-in period of 2-3 years during which existing members can retain current grade in CAP and complete training as appropriate to the new structure. New members, or those transitioning sooner, would wear new grade insignia. Maybe we can get different colored epaulets to denote members holding grade under the new program, then phase out the gray?

John Aylesworth
Commander, PCR-CA-151

[mikeylikey]

No!  No need to reinvent the system.  CAP tried it and the membership got rid of it.  The old days are gone.  I say take off all rank insignia.  Use titles only.  EXAMPLE;  John E Doe, Commander.  Jane Doe, Recruting officer, Bob Snuffy, Assistant Recruiting Officer.  Why is everyone so caught up on the bling. 

[RiverAux]

And I think we've seen that this change wasn't a great idea.

This was suggested as part of an overall program to cut down the number of CAP Officers to those actually functioning in leadership roles.  The retirees in service uniforms would be the only real exceptions.  With a drastically reduced number of officers we would be more likely to be taken seriously.  

[shorning]

With a drastically reduced number of officers we would be more likely to be taken seriously.  

Sorry, but that's just a jump in logic that doesn't ring true. 

[RiverAux]

So, you're saying that our current all-officer force in which Lts can command units made up primarily of people that outrank them helps us be taken seriously by anybody, much less the AF? 

[shorning]

So, you're saying that our current all-officer force in which Lts can command units made up primarily of people that outrank them helps us be taken seriously by anybody, much less the AF? 

No, I'm saying your logic in that statement is flawed. 

I don't think the Air Force looks at our unit structure nearly as close as we think they do.  If fact, I'd bet that they don't care about the rank structure in our units nearly as much as they care about performance.

[DNall]

I don't think its a good idea, either, but I'd tolerate it until the retirees CAP rank was approved.  No sense taking a bust from say, Major to Airman Basic.

Agreed

Dragoon, my friend, you move from the Army to the AF you're keeping your grade. You move from Cav to Aviation you're keeping your grade. You move from the military to CAP you're keeping your grade. Your having the grade has ZERO to do with your MOS/AFSC & EVERYTHING to do with you as having attained a level of military leadership. The federal govt certifies to you that this person meets level X, they get level X, and don't think for a second you have the right to believe CAP is better than them & they don't deserve it. That's what it is & always will be, period.

As for a distinctive grade system, why? We are part of the AF family & need to act like it. We do work for them on a regular basis, and now that our mission is evolving I believe we'll be working directly with them on AF tasks much more regularly. They're negotiating right now to put CAP medical personnel, in uniform, in AF hospitals, maybe even deployed in uniform on paid contracts or w/ special reserve commissions (that's a question w/ Chaplains also).


I don't think anyone is looknig at the strength roster breakdown of who's in what grade to decide if we should be taken seriously. It looks a little wierd when an all officer GT rolls up on someone, but otherwise they don't know the difference. It's meeting the professional standards of the military at varrious grade levels... you get taken seriously when you deserve to be, when you are serious. If I could lean in on LtCol Horning for second... I think the point of meeting those standards is about effecting performance to the greatest extent, but to a degree also being taken seriously creates the situation where you can be handed some bigger missions & more complex gear to do them with. The most efficent dog catcher in the world doesn't get promoted to governor, you have to change your image & qualifications along the way.

[ZigZag911]

So, you're saying that our current all-officer force in which Lts can command units made up primarily of people that outrank them helps us be taken seriously by anybody, much less the AF? 

No, I'm saying your logic in that statement is flawed. 

I don't think the Air Force looks at our unit structure nearly as close as we think they do.  If fact, I'd bet that they don't care about the rank structure in our units nearly as much as they care about performance.

I think Shorning is right....USAF may be amused (bemused?) by our multitude of field grade officers, but they are really much more interested in how well we get the job done.

[mikeylikey]

Thats news to me.  Perhaps I am way out of the loop here, but the AF is actually considering using CAP med's in thier hospitals.  Reserve Commissions?  Serious laws will need to be changed for that happen.  Doesn't the AF already have "too many" officers (reference the latest round of cuts last year).  Please share your sources, I truely am interested. 

[DNall]

You can go find ther links, but the current HSO track development is slow in coming cause they're working w/ AF to allow them to augment exactly like Chaplains do now. Not much more to it then that.

No laws need be changed to grant someone a commission. Yes AF has RIF'd officers. I didn't say everyone gets a commission. There is discussion of sending a few Chaplains overseas to like Bosnia or Kuwait versus Iraq. The original idea called for that to be on civilian contract, but chaplains were deemed to be a target they'd want protected by generva conventions (as if that mattered) so they wanted them in uniform (CAP uniform is fine, need not be AF), but then there was concern if this person is formally a civilian then there may be problems w/ how someone interprets the convention, so maybe we should send them to RCOT, waive PT/Age, & grant them a 12-18mo commission. None of this is out of the discussion phase, but there's source floating on it. If it goes thru then there's interest in pulling up medical personnel under similiar conditions. They get a lot of very experienced Docs wanting to serve short terms - better than going to Africa or Hatti like my brother does. River was sayin some SDF just sent a medical unit to Bosnia w/ their national guard. Same kind of capacity can be used for our people.

I don't personally think any of this requires a reserve commission, I think you can do everything under a contract & by being in uniform in that situation (which the ocntract would state) you'd be bound by UCMJ, with precedent.

[lordmonar]

So, you're saying that our current all-officer force in which Lts can command units made up primarily of people that outrank them helps us be taken seriously by anybody, much less the AF? 

No, I'm saying your logic in that statement is flawed. 

I don't think the Air Force looks at our unit structure nearly as close as we think they do.  If fact, I'd bet that they don't care about the rank structure in our units nearly as much as they care about performance.

I think Shorning is right....USAF may be amused (bemused?) by our multitude of field grade officers, but they are really much more interested in how well we get the job done.

bingo!  They would not care if we all called ourselves Col...if we got the job done and did not bring discreet to us.  And a Lt bossing a squadron with a bunch of retired Lt Cols in no way shape or form makes us look bad in their eyes...so long at that Lt is competent.

[JohnKachenmeister]

You can go find ther links, but the current HSO track development is slow in coming cause they're working w/ AF to allow them to augment exactly like Chaplains do now. Not much more to it then that.

No laws need be changed to grant someone a commission. Yes AF has RIF'd officers. I didn't say everyone gets a commission. There is discussion of sending a few Chaplains overseas to like Bosnia or Kuwait versus Iraq. The original idea called for that to be on civilian contract, but chaplains were deemed to be a target they'd want protected by generva conventions (as if that mattered) so they wanted them in uniform (CAP uniform is fine, need not be AF), but then there was concern if this person is formally a civilian then there may be problems w/ how someone interprets the convention, so maybe we should send them to RCOT, waive PT/Age, & grant them a 12-18mo commission. None of this is out of the discussion phase, but there's source floating on it. If it goes thru then there's interest in pulling up medical personnel under similiar conditions. They get a lot of very experienced Docs wanting to serve short terms - better than going to Africa or Hatti like my brother does. River was sayin some SDF just sent a medical unit to Bosnia w/ their national guard. Same kind of capacity can be used for our people.

I don't personally think any of this requires a reserve commission, I think you can do everything under a contract & by being in uniform in that situation (which the ocntract would state) you'd be bound by UCMJ, with precedent.

Dennis:

Chaplains who fall into the enemy's hands are "Retained Persons" under the Geneva Convention.  So are medics.  The enemy we are fighting doesn't give a fart in a windstorm about the Geneva Convention, so I wonder why it would be an issue.

Any person accompanying a US force in the field overseas is subject to the UCMJ.  By law.

 

[bosshawk]

I usually stay out of these discussions about uniform wear and rank things, but I do believe that the active duty AF guys who have spoken have it right on the money: the AF generally doesn't care about our rank structure, as long as we keep it to ourselves and don't try to emulate AF officers.  I have been around quite a number of the CAP-USAF liaison officers and the only negative comment that I have ever heard was  a CAP-USAF Liaison Region CC state that if he had to deal with the plethora of regulations that CAP deals with, he would openly rebel.  The Commemorative Air Force deals with this whole thing very neatly: everyone is a Colonel.

We sometimes fall into the trap of trying to define how many versions of the Star Spangled Banner we can put on the head of a pin.

[shorning]

We sometimes fall into the trap of trying to define how many versions of the Star Spangled Banner we can put on the head of a pin.

[Rangersigo]

This is an interesting conversation.  For those who feel that former miltary officers should start at E-1, my guess never served in the Armed Forces as an Officer.  If CAP is an AF Auxiliary, you would have to honor the prior service.  If you transfer between services, for that matter a CEO of one Company does not enter as a entry level job - there is a recognition of their service and accomplishments.  Rank is a measure of experience and leadership - but mostly leadership.  If we are not going to model the AF, I aggree we should simply go to titles rather than rank.  And in cases of ES service, the position outweighs the ranks anyway.  For those that say CPTs do not command COLs in the service, technically that is not true as most are assigned to a headquarters element of some sort, that are administratively commanded by a junior officer. 

I agree that someone walking off the street should not be appointed to an advanced grade unless they have the professional skill that warrants it (Med, Chap, MD, etc.) which is very similar to the Armed Services.

[Monty]

Rank is a measure of experience and leadership - but mostly leadership. 

Not so sure about that.  Within the CAP adult context, rank/grade are indications of experience and TRAINING.  It's a safe bet that a Lt Col in CAP likely has at least RSC to his/her credit (or some equivalent, excluding the military officers that come into CAP) whereas a 2d Lt may (and generally has) not.

Pilots that are granted 1st Lt aren't granted said grade by their leadership abilities; their pilot training seals the deal (whether we like it or not.)  Leadership has a very minor - if any - role in promotions (arguably sad, if you ask me, but c'est la vie.)

CAP has plenty of Lt Cols that haven't a bit of leadership ability what so ever. 

In its present form, grade derives from experience and training; no question about it.