Should senior members within squadrons be organized into Flights?

[Sgt. Savage]

Absolutely!!

When General Pineda comes to your house and begs you to join, then you have some leverage when it comes to the way YOU want things done. Until then, the organization has standards.

Regarding participation; we all recognize the difference between giving what you can and taking when you can. I can think of two pilots right off the top of my head that never attend meetings but are ALWAYS available when it's time to fly. One of them is making it his full time job of acquiring enough hours to get a pilot job, and is using the CAP as his personal FBO. He's not the same as another individual who works 60 hours a week and still makes most meetings.

As this relates to the topic at hand, a flight commander and his/her NCO's should be able to identify these things and bring them to the attention of the CC. That way, each of these individuals gets the "RECOGNITION" he deserves.

[mikeylikey]

When General Pineda comes to your house and begs you to join, then you have some leverage when it comes to the way YOU want things done. Until then, the organization has standards.

If Pineda ever comes to your house I can assure you, that you may be in world of hurt.  Perhaps you will hear the black van coming, and may have a chance to run, but when he rings your bell you should just accept you will be moving on to the "promised land".

[RiverAux]

now what's the function this new unit is supposed to perform? You can't just create structure with no mission, and you REALLY can't tack on extra management structure when you're talking about 3-8 people.

Please re-read my initial post for the function of such flights.  (Do our cadet flights serve any operational function?  Not really.)
If you're in a squadron with only 3-8 people the flight idea is not necessary, which is why my initial post specified composite squadrons with large senior membership or senior squadrons.  I am thinking that this structure would be useful in squadrons with 20+ senior members. 

Tags - MIKE

[DNall]

I read you post, span of control, accountability, staff officers having a clear reporting like & suspense dates... yeah absolutely all that stuff should be going on right now. The titles are symantics. However, they job you are talking about is DCS & that's their only job.

And yes cadet flights do have a finction. They are a training unit, and in a well developed Sq you'll havea  couple flights focused on dif stages & areas of training. On their side, they are organized as flights reporting to a cadre led by a DCC, which is the person with functional command authority, not the C/CC who is executing it under supervision.

[Eagle400]

I wholeheartedly agree with DNall that span of control, accountability, and suspenses should all be going on right now.  There really is no excuse for them not going on.  Because they are not, CAP is having to deal with a widespread problem of lack of professionalism. 

For those of you that don't know, a suspense is the military term for something that is due.  Things like AAR's and Staff Study Reports are examples of suspenses.  "Hot" suspenses are due immediately, whereas all others are due later.     

[Eagle400]

And yes cadet flights do have a finction. They are a training unit, and in a well developed Sq you'll havea  couple flights focused on dif stages & areas of training. On their side, they are organized as flights reporting to a cadre led by a DCC, which is the person with functional command authority, not the C/CC who is executing it under supervision.

Yes.  And I'd just like to point out that the concept for senior flights is different than the concept of cadet flights.  Cadets are placed in flights mainly because of either skill level or random selection.  There are squadrons that have cadet training flights and cadet advanced flights whereas others just have flights with everyone being mixed in despite their level of advancement in the Cadet Program. 

Under RiverAux's plan, senior flights would be separated based on the jobs of personnel.  Pilots would go into one flight, the admin officer would go into another.  I think it's a good idea.       

[mikeylikey]

For those of you that don't know, a suspense is the military term for something that is due.  Things like AAR's and Staff Study Reports are examples of suspenses.  "Hot" suspenses are due immediately, whereas all others are due later.     

?  Suspense date and time is one thing, but what is a "hot" suspense.  Never heard of that one in my 10 years in the military.  Why have a "hot" suspense when you can just say "its due now". 

Also,  after reading your posts you type very similar to a person who used to post on the portal named Smitty.  Is this you?  If not, sorry!

[Eagle400]

?  Suspense date and time is one thing, but what is a "hot" suspense.  Never heard of that one in my 10 years in the military.  Why have a "hot" suspense when you can just say "its due now".

When I was in AFROTC, my det. used the term "Hot" suspense.  Not sure if it was just a det. thing or not.    

Anyway, I think that suspenses in CAP should come from commanders, not the IG, and that more accountability should be required.  Commanders should be the ones who make sure that suspenses are completed when they are due and take appropriate action when they are not.  It should be the IG who holds the commanders accountable. 

Also,  after reading your posts you type very similar to a person who used to post on the portal named Smitty.  Is this you?  If not, sorry!

Please see PM, sir. 

[MIKE]

I don't know of many units who could form more than one respectable Flight of SMs... Elements maybe.  I do think that the different positions should be grouped into functional areas though.

[DNall]

IG is a dif & special function outside the command chain. The Next Echelon commander is the one that should hold the Sq CC accountable.

The word suspense gets over-used. Technically speaking, there are goals & due dates, both of which can be missed & the world doesn't end, but then there is an absolute drop dead date where if it isn't done then the operation has to come ot a halt & the mission can't proceed any further... suspense. Now like I said, it does get way over-used.

Anyway, yes I agree there should be sub-depts with 3-5 officers reporting to a single dept head & from there on to the DCS. That's how it's supposed to work now. It has nothing to do with a flight structure, which would lump everyone together. Either way though very few Sqs in all of CAP have more than 25 adults actively participating, which is about the minimum range at which you could make all this work, but frankly it's not really needed till you get closer to a hundred man outfit.

As far as those comments on the lack of professionalism, I don't think that's true at all. I just think no one is trained ot be an effective officer. Most people after a few years OJT can figure out how to do their own job, but mid-upper level mgmt, staffing, strategic planning, etc is on a much higher order that we just don't prepare people for.

[RiverAux]

I read you post, span of control, accountability, staff officers having a clear reporting like & suspense dates... yeah absolutely all that stuff should be going on right now. The titles are symantics. However, they job you are talking about is DCS & that's their only job.

Actually you are mixing me up with someone else to some extent.  Again, this thread has NOTHING TO DO WITH STAFF OFFICERS.  There have been other threads on that, so lets keep focused.

Although I didn't say the words, "span of control" that is what I'm talking about in regards to each individual member of the squadron.  As it stands now, the Deputy Commander for Seniors is directly responisble for every senior member in the squadron except for those working the cadet side of the house in a composite squadron.  In a larger unit, which is what I'm talking about, this means that the DCS could be overseeing 20-30 or more senior members.  That is way beyond his span of control. 

Imagine trying to run the cadet side that way.  And besides being responsible for the general well-being of almost every senior, the DCS is responsible for overseeing the work of a squadron staff of over 20 people.  These are two very different jobs that one person can't really do. 

I have been a DCS in a squadron with 40-50 seniors on the roster and with 20-25 people attending meetings and it was barely possible for me to say a word to every one of them during a typical meeting much less give them the individualized attention that they really deserved. 

My proposal to assign every senior member to a flight, irregardless of a squadron staff position will ensure that there is a flight commander with a reasonable span of control making sure they're taken care of. 

[O-Rex]

First off, there's CAPR 20-1 (with diagrams) The wheel has been invented: it's a circle, which according to Aristotle, is devine....

Second: if you have that many ACTIVE Seniors in your Squadron, Thank your lucky stars, and don't worry so much where they line up in formation.

When I was a Squadron Commander, I worried more about keeping the ship on course, rather than arranging the deck-chairs.  I knew who was doing what, and who wasn't. 

In a Cadet Squadron, your Seniors should have enough to keep them gainfully employed.

In a Composite Sqdn, Appoint a Deputy for Seniors, one for Cadets, and keep them on track.

Senior Squadrons-appoint someone to make the coffee, and appoint a moderator so that members don't interrupt each other's "there I was" stories.  A resident check-pilot is a plus.

[SarDragon]

I say divide the squadron into three flights: the Operations Flight, the Mission Support Flight, and the Maintenance Flight.

Operations Flight

10 bodies

Maintenance Flight 

8 bodies

Mission Support Flight

19 bodies

In addition, I would put Safety and STAN/EVAL Officers directly under the IG.  I would also put the Activities and AE Officers under the Plans and Programs Officer.

You mention 41 positions. Show me a squadron that has enough members to have a separate person in each billet. Show me a squadron that has all the billets filled with no member wearing less than three hats. You must be smoking some really good stuff. Who's your source? I've seen starry-eyed idealism, but this one takes the cake.

[RiverAux]

First off, there's CAPR 20-1 (with diagrams) The wheel has been invented: it's a circle, which according to Aristotle, is devine....

All this does is organize squadron staff members, which is not what I'm trying to talk about here. 

Second: if you have that many ACTIVE Seniors in your Squadron, Thank your lucky stars, and don't worry so much where they line up in formation.

I think that you're missing the fact that having more people under 1 person (the DCS) makes it more and more difficult to ensure that each is being properly cared for. 

In a Composite Sqdn, Appoint a Deputy for Seniors, one for Cadets, and keep them on track.

Again, 1 person cannot realistically take proper care and general oversight of 20-30 or more people. 

[Eagle400]

You mention 41 positions. Show me a squadron that has enough members to have a separate person in each billet.

I didn't say all billets have to be filled.  This is just a setup that shows where folks would go.       

Show me a squadron that has all the billets filled with no member wearing less than three hats.

I can't, sir.  But like I said, not all the billets have to be filled. 

You must be smoking some really good stuff.

Actually, I drink.  Jack Daniels, anyone?   

Who's your source?

AFROTC Cadet Wing Organizational Chart

I've seen starry-eyed idealism, but this one takes the cake.

Why thank you, sir.  I'm honored. 

[DNall]

this thread has NOTHING TO DO WITH STAFF OFFICERS.

Okay, but that's the primary function of adults in a CAP unit, and their secondary functions (pers, PD, ES trng, etc) are dealt with by specific officers.

As it stands now, the Deputy Commander for Seniors is directly responisble for every senior member in the squadron except for those working the cadet side of the house in a composite squadron.  In a larger unit, which is what I'm talking about, this means that the DCS could be overseeing 20-30 or more senior members.  That is way beyond his span of control. 

A Sq CC is responsible for everyone in the unit, and a Wg CC everyone in the Wg, but none of that messes with the span of control. You know why? Cause it'd delegated to depts. The DCS is NOT supposed to give everyone constant individual attention, that's rediculous. They manage dept heads, who manage their depts.

I think you may be refering more to something like the PDO, who is responsible for keeping track of & assisting in everyone's professional development. Well, that's not a sspan of control issue either. It's completely unreasonable to think you need one person to service every five customers, or that you need to talk to each of those customers every day. In the military you'd have personnel section of a couple people to oversee a hundred, which much more serious implications. In a corporations you'd have an HR dept that may manage thousands upon thousands.

Your PDO needs to help each person establish a progression plan in concert with the command element giving them a duty assignment, and then check in with them 2-4 times a year to make sure that's on track - not every night. They also may offer some training a couple times a quarter on generalized officership type topics.

The personal attention you're talking about is supposed to come from an OJT supervisor, who is a one-to-one mentor (may or may not be in your unit) in your specialty field & guiding you thru CAP in general. Everyone regardless of level or experience in the org should have a mentor & should be mentoring someone else coming up behind them.

My proposal to assign every senior member to a flight, irregardless of a squadron staff position will ensure that there is a flight commander with a reasonable span of control making sure they're taken care of. 

You want them to have one boss to report to on their staff position & another one as flight commander, but you the flight won't have any function on which they can be supervised - which precludes it being an complex enough purpose to require supervision. You're gonna be telling me about TPS reports soon.

I think you're just misunderstanding how a unit is supposed to work on paper & what the responsibilities of those officers are at each level, or even that there are levels. That's an understandable problem in CAP, unforntunately. Fact is we're undermanned & overtasked to crippling levels & I've never even heard of much less seen any unit anywhere that's been able to function correctly for any period of time. A team concept involves members focusing ing so hard on their job that they can't entirely support themselves, and backing up those deficiencies with other teammates that take care of those issues for everyone. It's supposed to be like a precision machine with all the parts working together, but if Bob doesn't show up for 8 months or you can't fill 12 slots with halfway competent people then it cannot work.

That's always been CAP's problem is trying to do too much with too little. It would be better if we focused units to more reasonable expectations & banned several together to create a complete team that inter-supports each other, cause we just can't do it with 8 adults & 15 kids trying to do the management that in the military is assigned to 100 man units, and do it win no internal training to prepare them for those kinds of challneges.

[jimmydeanno]

You mention 41 positions. Show me a squadron that has enough members to have a separate person in each billet.

Here...

[RiverAux]

Sq CC is responsible for everyone in the unit, and a Wg CC everyone in the Wg, but none of that messes with the span of control. You know why? Cause it'd delegated to depts. The DCS is NOT supposed to give everyone constant individual attention, that's rediculous. They manage dept heads, who manage their depts.

You're making a big assumption that every senior member in a unit is assigned some sort of squadron staff job.  I don't know if you've been in one of these large units, but that is far from the case in my experience.

In the military you'd have personnel section of a couple people to oversee a hundred, which much more serious implications. In a corporations you'd have an HR dept that may manage thousands upon thousands.

Yes, but you're forgetting that every one of those folks in the corporation has a direct supervisor responsible for them. 

Your PDO needs to help each person establish a progression plan in concert with the command element giving them a duty assignment, and then check in with them 2-4 times a year to make sure that's on track - not every night. They also may offer some training a couple times a quarter on generalized officership type topics.

Again, you are assuming that every staff position, including the PDO is filled and that someone is doing the job as it should be done.  That is rarely the case.  However, if each member is assigned to a flight, the flight commander will be able to help fill in these gaps as well as provide 1 on 1 mentoring.

You know, CAP has a pretty good leadership development program on the cadet side but for some reason we don't use many of these same techniques on the senior side.  Having 2-4 LEADERS on the senior side other than the DCS and CC is MUCH MUCH better than having all STAFF officer positions filled, both for individual members and CAP as a whole. 

[DNall]

Okay, well first of all, ALL officers are supposed to be assigned duties. It may be as second assistant supply officer for broom maint, but everyone gets a job. Then they ALL have a supervising dept head, who reports to the DCS & so forth.

Even if they didn't have a staff job (which I couldn't imagine) then they'd still be assigned to a training team to be trained by someone in something & that would be their sub-dept supervisor.

Yes in a company the HR dept would take care of you individually while your boss supervises your work... kind of like the PDO/pers/ES officer will take care of those aspects for everyone & your supervisor will be your boss. It's okay for one person to be responsible for everyone's progression, that's how it's supposed to be & doesn't have anythign to do with span of control.

Again, your issue seems to be a backup plan for the PDO not doing their job, which to me should be get a new PDO. If you got 40-odd people then it shouldn't be that hard, and give them an asst too. Then have that PDO hook each person up with a career field mentor (in or out of the unit).

Having a flight ocmmander with overlapping responsibilities just divides the command & makes things worse, plus that would be back to one person responsible for checking in on everyone, just like you were complaining about.

The system we got now is set up very well, it may not be well understood by everyone since it's never executed, but the theoretical plan you're looking for is already made & tested very effectively in the real world.

[RiverAux]

I'm sorry but you're in a dream world if you think that every CAP member is, or will ever be, assigned a job on a squadron staff in CAP and there is no requirement that this be done and there is no need for it either.  And where is this "training team" of which you speak? 

There are fairly regular proposals on this board that new CAP members be assigned "mentors" to guide them through the complex world of CAP.  Flight commanders would serve that purpose and would be able to serve as a backup to staff officers, which may or may not exist in any given unit, to help members with professional development, ES training, uniform issues, etc., etc., etc. 

I am very confused by your opposition to this idea DNALL as you very consistently advocate for a more military CAP as well as a CAP in which most staff jobs would be pushed up and out of the squadrons.   My proposal would actually meets both those objectives.  The military would not dream of having 20-30 or more people answering directly to one person as we do now.  And, say we did push a lot of the staff jobs out of the squadron, the individual CAP member would still need someone to help them navigate the system even if the paperwork was being done somewhere else.  A flight commander would be able to give that member 1 on 1 guidance on all of these issues.