Squadron CC assigned to other duty positions.

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

Then the rest of the model changes a little, too.  If you want to operate on Geographical boundaries, areas like RIWG, become a group under a Wing that might comprise RI, CT, and MA. 

Using RI as a unit of measure again!?

"RIWG, if we weren't a state, we'd be a group." If it would fit on a wing patch...

[RiverAux]

I don't think I'm on board with the idea of having squadrons provide administrative oversight for "flights" in other areas.  I just haven't seen that work well in practice with in CAP or the equivalent situation in CG Aux.  A free-standing squadron's incentives are to be taking care of their own folks and members scattered hundreds of miles away are going to be a low priority. 

I think that whatever administrative functions can be pushed up to Group or Wing level should be pushed up that high whether your squadron has 15 members or 50, but with there being an option for squadrons to do some of them IF they have the members willing to do it.  However, that would be the exception, not the rule. 

Heck, this might even be a great job for the "ghost" squadrons, officially known as "Headquarters Squadrons" in many Wings.  Actually staff them up with real people whose only purpose is to provide administrative support for undermanned squadrons. 

[lordmonar]

Why can't you earn a specialty track while you're a CC?

If anything, PD is important as an example - if the unit CC doesn't care about PD, why should the members?

If you are not assigned to the duty position you don't get credit for doing your staff duty time.    Erego.....if you buy into the OP's suggestion that CC's should not be assigned to any other duty positions the only PD track you can progress in is the Command Track.

[lordmonar]

Just to clarify my position on the matter -

My opinion is that a unit CC should not be officially assigned to a another duty position within the same unit. That doesn't preclude him form serving in the position if it is vacant.

As commander they would be responsible for the duties of the open position and serve as the acting *insert duty position* officer without being actually assigned to that position.

Another (extreme) example - Deputy Commander for Cadets steps down and no senior member is willing or able to take over.
Can the Squadron Commander be his own Deputy?  No, but he can certainly step up and take on the responsibilities until one can be found.

So.....they can do the job.....in fact they have to do the job......just can't get credit for it.   Also he can't use E-services to track who in-fact is doing what job in his squadron.....just a bunch of holes.

This is really a solution looking for a problem.

If a commander can't be his own deputy.....then he needs to up his schizophrenia meds. 
If there is anyone willing/able to take the job.....I don't see any CC who would not jump at the chance to take off another hat.
Renaming squadrons.....as flights will do nothing.....the job still needs to be done.
Maybe....removing the "need" to do the job would be helpful......but CAP empire builders won't let that happen.

[jimmydeanno]

Then the rest of the model changes a little, too.  If you want to operate on Geographical boundaries, areas like RIWG, become a group under a Wing that might comprise RI, CT, and MA. 

Using RI as a unit of measure again!?

"RIWG, if we weren't a state, we'd be a group." If it would fit on a wing patch...

No disrespect intended.  I only use it because I was born there. 

[SarDragon]

Just to clarify my position on the matter -

My opinion is that a unit CC should not be officially assigned to a another duty position within the same unit. That doesn't preclude him form serving in the position if it is vacant.

As stated above:

C.  Practical consideration, E-service releases restricted application by duty position.....and interestingly some of those applications are not released to the CC.   So the only way to get access to them is to be assigned to the duty position.

If someone is doing the job, they need to be able to access the tools.

[AirDX]

Maybe it's changed since I used the feature, but can't you just find a WSA and have them assign you the appropriate modules?  WIWACC, I had to enter some data here and there when a particular officer was on vacation or something, so I had the WSA assign the module.  I didn't need to sign myself up for 20 different specialty tracks when I was just using the module sporadically for some inputs or to get some of the reporting functions.

That's how it should work but it doesn't.  Within the last week or so, the wing commander assigned me every last permission he could give in e-services.  Still, to get to one function I and a couple of others need in ORMS, the only way we could get it to light up is assigning us as assistance directors of logistics.  Same thing seems to happen in WMIRS, which is why I'm also an assistant director of operations, as least as in e-services.

[AirDX]

I don't think I'm on board with the idea of having squadrons provide administrative oversight for "flights" in other areas.  I just haven't seen that work well in practice with in CAP or the equivalent situation in CG Aux.  A free-standing squadron's incentives are to be taking care of their own folks and members scattered hundreds of miles away are going to be a low priority. 

I think that whatever administrative functions can be pushed up to Group or Wing level should be pushed up that high whether your squadron has 15 members or 50, but with there being an option for squadrons to do some of them IF they have the members willing to do it.  However, that would be the exception, not the rule. 

Heck, this might even be a great job for the "ghost" squadrons, officially known as "Headquarters Squadrons" in many Wings.  Actually staff them up with real people whose only purpose is to provide administrative support for undermanned squadrons.

You're assuming the wing is laden with people sitting on their thumbs with nothing to do.  I'm groping to fill positions at wing level with qualified people.  We have empty billets and people wearing multiple hats here too.  Some of them hold wing staff positions, and are unit commanders, besides.  That's just wrong.  That's one of the first things I'm working on, cutting unit CCs loose to just be CCs.

The problem becomes, where do you get good people from to fill wing positions?  Answer: steal them from squadrons.  But that sucks from the squadron perspective.  So what do we do?  Recruit and bring more people in from the bottom is the only answer.     

[Al Sayre]

If you're the Squadron CC AND doing all the functions of another staff position you should put yourself in the specialty track and get credit for the work you do.  As others have said, ideally you wouldn't need to take on multiple functions, but you should get the credit where credit is due. 

You also may find that as a commander it's advantageous to assign yourself as assistant x,y,z officer so you can do things in eServices, OpsQuals, and ORMS that only have dynamically assigned permissions, or else you may find yourself scrambling when nobody else is around to enter the van usage report, issue or accept a radio etc.

Hey Al! Long time no (virtually) see ....  er chat....  How are things down South?

Doesn't the CC get the needed eServices permissions when they are appointed as commander?
Unless things have changed, in the last year or two I thought CC got OpsQuals, and ORMS,  Safety, etc. in eServices?

Hi Paul, all is going pretty well - looks like we dodged a bullet with TS Karen.  Mal is the WG/CC now, keeping us all busy...

As CC, you get a lot of permissions, but some permissions are only dynamically assigned, ie. you have to be in a specific duty assignment to get them, I'm a Wing CS & WSA, and even I can't assign those permissions to anyone (including myself).  Off the top of my head, there are some in Ops Quals, ORMS, WIMRS, and the new Certificates module.  See the news brief on the certificates module in eServices.

[RiverAux]

I don't think I'm on board with the idea of having squadrons provide administrative oversight for "flights" in other areas.  I just haven't seen that work well in practice with in CAP or the equivalent situation in CG Aux.  A free-standing squadron's incentives are to be taking care of their own folks and members scattered hundreds of miles away are going to be a low priority. 

I think that whatever administrative functions can be pushed up to Group or Wing level should be pushed up that high whether your squadron has 15 members or 50, but with there being an option for squadrons to do some of them IF they have the members willing to do it.  However, that would be the exception, not the rule. 

Heck, this might even be a great job for the "ghost" squadrons, officially known as "Headquarters Squadrons" in many Wings.  Actually staff them up with real people whose only purpose is to provide administrative support for undermanned squadrons.

You're assuming the wing is laden with people sitting on their thumbs with nothing to do.  I'm groping to fill positions at wing level with qualified people.  We have empty billets and people wearing multiple hats here too.  Some of them hold wing staff positions, and are unit commanders, besides.  That's just wrong.  That's one of the first things I'm working on, cutting unit CCs loose to just be CCs.

The problem becomes, where do you get good people from to fill wing positions?  Answer: steal them from squadrons.  But that sucks from the squadron perspective.  So what do we do?  Recruit and bring more people in from the bottom is the only answer.     

You've got a much better chance of finding someone to do it if your talent pool consists of the entire wing than you do if it is your 15-person squadron that has most likely already failed to find someone to do it. 

Depending on exactly which positions were "up-sourced" (TM pending) to Group or Wing, we might only be talking about finding 5-10 people.  That seems do-able. 

[ol'fido]

3. Where it is feasible, change the charter from composite to cadet squadron. Less staff positions to fill and less that is inspected. Our wing commander made this suggestion at the last commander's call.

That's essentially admitting defeat and giving up.

How about instead of allowing a failed squadron to continue to fail, make changes and fix the manning?

See #2.

[Eclipse]

See #2.

2. I have also seen units where although there may be several seniors on the rolls, there are one or two who show up to do the work. We can say that there needs to be recruitment or there needs to be conversations with the inactive seniors. WELL, DUH! That's all well and good but until you can convince the inactives to become active or get the recruits up to speed and trained, those one or two will be doing all the work. "Hey, I am the commander and you, you're the other 25 staff officers we need." I don't see that happening unless instead of two or three, you just want to have a one man band command staff.

The you do an ALL STOP and concentrate on recruiting and basic CAP training until you have the number to accomplish the mission.
6 months of nothing but recruiting every weekend, and processing and training the FNGs.  The entire unit is focused, no one is over worked,
and when you're done, you have the ability to get real work done.

Also, "convincing the inactives" is a waste of time.  If they were truly interested they'd already be around.  Sure, send them a
note, but the ROI on that is going to be close to zero.  If anything, you're better off waiting until your 6 month Kaizon is done
and then you can sell the inactives a new situation from the one they had where the quit in the first place.

[lordmonar]

You don't stop the mission to recruit and train.

You do the mission to the best of your abilities AND recruit and train.

[Майор Хаткевич]

You don't stop the mission to recruit and train.

You do the mission to the best of your abilities AND recruit and train.

What mission? Some of these units struggle to open a meeting.

[Eclipse]

You don't stop the mission to recruit and train.

Of course you do, happens all the time in business and the military.  Commands routinely
stand down because of safety issues, and companies reorganize and retool.

You do the mission to the best of your abilities AND recruit and train.

Sounds good on paper, doesn't work in reality.  The above is what most failing, undermanned units are doing today,
and accomplishing neither.

Also this.

What mission? Some of these units struggle to open a meeting.

[Private Investigator]

Thoughts?  Other opinions? Has anyone else run across this?  Am I silly to think this is an issue, and it's not really that big of deal?

Look at this. A new person been in the Squadron a year and has earned a Tech rating in Logistics as the Squadron Supply Officer. He ends up the Squadron Commander for four years. So for the next four years he can not advance in the Logistics or any other speciality track? (the Command track is rather new)

Or how about going from Squadron Commander to Group Deputy Commander to Group Commander, 12 years in Command and just a working knowledge of the other speciality tracks? Looks great on the resume for Wing Commander   

As a former Squadron Commander the "working knowledge" i gained was of great benefit to making a better leader. Having to review the requirements of each specialty track and making sure all the members meet the qualifications definitely gave me a level of knowledge and experience I would have never gotten without being a commander.

During the time I was a Squadron commander I did not have anyone for Personnel Officer. The position was vacant for nearly two years, but as CC I assumed the responsibilities. During an SUI the inspector (who was also the Wing Commander) suggested I enroll in the Personnel specialty track. By the time I resigned and moved up to wing staff I had met the requirement for a tech rating.  I served as personnel officer, but was never assigned to the position. It was officially labeled as "OPEN" on our org chart.

In addition, a person who moves from Squadron Commander to Group Deputy Commander, to Group Commander would still be able to advance in grade via a Special Appointment promotion - whether they advanced in a specialty track or not.

That is true. But then you might be stuck at Major forever. Since you need a Master rating in something for Lt Col.

[ol'fido]

See #2.

2. I have also seen units where although there may be several seniors on the rolls, there are one or two who show up to do the work. We can say that there needs to be recruitment or there needs to be conversations with the inactive seniors. WELL, DUH! That's all well and good but until you can convince the inactives to become active or get the recruits up to speed and trained, those one or two will be doing all the work. "Hey, I am the commander and you, you're the other 25 staff officers we need." I don't see that happening unless instead of two or three, you just want to have a one man band command staff.

The you do an ALL STOP and concentrate on recruiting and basic CAP training until you have the number to accomplish the mission.
6 months of nothing but recruiting every weekend, and processing and training the FNGs.  The entire unit is focused, no one is over worked,
and when you're done, you have the ability to get real work done.

Also, "convincing the inactives" is a waste of time.  If they were truly interested they'd already be around.  Sure, send them a
note, but the ROI on that is going to be close to zero.  If anything, you're better off waiting until your 6 month Kaizon is done
and then you can sell the inactives a new situation from the one they had where the quit in the first place.

While this sometimes happens at units in or contiguous to large metropolitan areas, it is the everyday reality in units in rural areas. If chartering as a cadet squadron until you can build a cadre to the point where you can recharter as a composite squadron is an option, why is that bad? How is that giving up? You're using the tools in the tool box to your advantage. The units that do this aren't giving up. They are using  a mechanism that the regulations provide in order to avoid having the regulatory requirements of a composite squadron overwhelm them when they are low in personnel who are active and trained. Stopping and doing nothing else for six months or longer just to put "composite" in your unit title isn't an answer for many units.

[lordmonar]

You don't stop the mission to recruit and train.

Of course you do, happens all the time in business and the military.  Commands routinely
stand down because of safety issues, and companies reorganize and retool.

No.....they don't.  22 years active services and six years working for them as a contractor.......been many "Safety Down Days" or "Sexual Harassment down days"....the mission still got done.  Someone was still doing their job.

You do the mission to the best of your abilities AND recruit and train.

Sounds good on paper, doesn't work in reality.  The above is what most failing, undermanned units are doing today,
and accomplishing neither.

Okay.....then we should just quit.   If you close down a unit to "rebuild" it will not be rebuilt it will just close.

Also this.

What mission? Some of these units struggle to open a meeting.

Yep.....they are doing the mission as best as they can.   That's my point.   Unit struggling?  Where is group/wing?   Answer me that, Batman.

[Private Investigator]

Why can't you earn a specialty track while you're a CC?

If anything, PD is important as an example - if the unit CC doesn't care about PD, why should the members?

I know Squadron Commanders who have awarded themselves speciality tracks they did not earn. (as an IG sometimes you want to ask one less question) Actually some Units have quite a laissez-faire approach to awarding ratings. Like a CC after a SUI gave himself a IG - Tech as well as a FM - Tech for being on the Finance Committee and SE - Tech because 'we' are all safety officers.

Actually I have seen that too. PD is considered a roadblock to promotions. Some people are very creative instead of just following the Regs and common sense.     

[Private Investigator]

You don't stop the mission to recruit and train.

You do the mission to the best of your abilities AND recruit and train.

Exactly the way it should be and no excuses.   :clap: