Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 24, 2017, 01:34:30 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Cadet Programs  |  Cadet Programs Management & Activities  |  Topic: Cadet Disciplinary Process in a Squadron
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print
Author Topic: Cadet Disciplinary Process in a Squadron  (Read 2810 times)
abdsp51
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,317
Unit: Classified

« Reply #20 on: November 05, 2017, 04:43:45 PM »

And yet my former defender brethren wonder why they never got comps in the cars.  Of course they totaled 2 sedans during my tenure as the Vehicle NCOIC for stupid reasons. 
Logged
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,061
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #21 on: November 05, 2017, 06:37:35 PM »

Topic...
Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
kwe1009
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 740

« Reply #22 on: November 05, 2017, 08:11:30 PM »

Thanks for the information and opinions provided.
I am thinking the following.  The cadet lied and there should be a consequence to him.  The consequence should promote a learning opportunity and strengthen the squadrons core by not "punishing" cadets by isolation.

Before deciding what action, if any, to take against this cadet, look at it from their point of view.  He/she accidentally broke someone's personal property and basically was placed in front of a firing squad tribunal and was likely extremely nervous and fearing the end of their CAP career. 

I would recommend that you base your response to the cadet with that in mind. 
Logged
abdsp51
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,317
Unit: Classified

« Reply #23 on: November 05, 2017, 09:32:20 PM »

Persobally, the cadet in question has been through enough.  Any further action is liable to do more harm than good and not generate the desired outcome. 

Let the matter drop...
Logged
Mitchell 1969
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 689
Unit: PCR-CA-051

« Reply #24 on: November 08, 2017, 03:12:04 AM »

Reading this for the first time....and I am wondering:  What in the blue blazes did I just read????   A tribunal is called for an accident????   If the cadet maliciously took the wifi/router and smashed it to pieces in a fit of anger or act of vandalism...then something should be said.   Prior to my recent retirement, I was an IT guy with a law enforcement agency with hundreds of personnel - 24/7 - and thousands of dollars worth of computer equipment: workstations, monitors, printers, scanners, laptops, mobile data computers (in-car systems), wifi routers, etc.   Things were always getting broken (nothing beats a shotgun that was being unlocked by the deputy riding "shotgun" making impact with the $3000 touchscreen monitor in the unit when the deputy driving in pursuit slammed on the brakes causing resulting in...well, you get the picture -- "can we fix this with Gorilla Glue????).  Chalked it up to a training matter.  Accidents happen....things get broken...repair or replace it...move on.    As for a "Core Value" issue....eventually the mystery of the broken router was solved.   I see this as a teaching/training moment.

True story. In 2009 we completely replaced our fleet of patrol assigned vehicles. Within 6 months 80% of the Coban MDTs did not work.

At my PD we had a drill with new equipment that was being considered. We’d obtain prototypes and submit them to officers who were hard-chargers who knew how to get max utility from equipment.

If those guys, “The Breakers,” couldn’t break it, we’d generally buy it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.
Red 6
Recruit

Posts: 6
Unit: PCR-OR-055

« Reply #25 on: November 08, 2017, 08:03:20 PM »

Mitchell, I was present with a medium-sized SWAT team several years ago when an operator propped his HK416 against the side of a Bearcat. The driver, not knowing that the rifle was leaning on the vehicle, started to drive off, knocking the $1800 rifle with another thousand bucks worth of optics, laser thinggys and assorted doodads under the rear wheels. All of the thinggys were trashed. We figured the rifle was toast, but I called HK and they said to send it down to their repair facility.

Their lead armorer called us back a week or so later and said the only thing really wrecked was the rail, plus some cosmetic damage. He offered to fix it free of charge if we were okay with taking pictures for the engineer guys in Oberndorf. I'm sure they got a good laugh out of the dumb Americans, LOL.

Seriously though, I doubt the OP is reading this thread anymore, but I've been following with interest. As a former cadet in the 70s, and a relatively new SM, it occurred to me that we want cadets to come back. If a cadet gets grilled like a suspect, they will likely be finished with CAP, especially after their parents find out what happened. (An inquest? wow...) Also, something like that would send an incredibly negative signal to the rest of the cadets and SMs in the squadron. The phrase 'negative command climate' comes to mind.

Fun is one of the traits of cadet life. Treating somebody like the OP described would surely not fit into that shoe box. And that doesn't even begin to touch the core values that an inquest would impact.

-Mark-
Logged
kwaaikat
Newbie

Posts: 4

« Reply #26 on: November 10, 2017, 06:23:37 AM »

Well the SAGA continues.  The Cadet in question has been informed that he is removed from his staff position and will not be eligible for promoting for 60 days.

I requested to speak to the Deputy Commander of Cadets in person, who informed me that on matters of cadet discipline she does not speak to other senior members personally but I am welcome to discusss the matter with her and the squadon commander. I did request the meeting to go ahead. During the meeting I raised my opinion that I believe the process is not supporting the CAP process of cadet education, but rather instilling a fear in the cadets for making mistakes. Both assured me that in this case there is no better resolution. I even shared my opinion on how it should be handled.  I was lectured on our CAP Values Integrity and Respect.

I do not mind cadets being disciplined when malice or intent is the drive behind negative actions. I just find it hypocritical almost reprehensible that these two individuals was part of the color guard of the squadron that took cadets to a national cadet competition sometime back. Obviously the cadets worked hard and won the qualifying rounds in their group, region and wing  The group were accommodated in a college dorm. The cadets, being bored one evening became rambunctious and by accident broke a door lock or something. In the fear of not being allowed to continue in the competition the senior members attempted to fix the broken door to a point where it was not noticeable and did not report the mishap.  The cadets won one of the top three places in the national competition. This was shared with me in confidence when three of the senior members was present and they still remarked how scared they were of being kicked out. Now I am wondering how they can make statements about integrity when they themselves make these mistakes and was not willing to face the consequences.

I am disappointed, but also proud of the cadet. The cadet indicated that he will take his punishment like a man, ensure that his behaviour will not let his integrity be questioned again and will not quit nor will he give up on CAP. But he will force them through resolve to try deny him his future promotions and then he will point out their behavior as provided for in the CAP regulations.

I am still evaluating how to handle the situation since I also learned tonight that the Deputy Commander of Cadets will at some point in future will be taking over as Squadron Commander.
Logged
abdsp51
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,317
Unit: Classified

« Reply #27 on: November 10, 2017, 09:35:25 AM »

Was a CAPF50 accomplished?  Also time for you to step away from the keyboard and if everything you have said is true goto the Gp CC.
Logged
Spam
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 949
Unit: GA-001

« Reply #28 on: November 10, 2017, 02:17:52 PM »

Second that - need to document all progressive disciplinary actions beyond verbal prompts for on the spot correction (on the order of "cover, cadet" when outdoors, not "you're reprimanded and wont promote").

The documentation of suspension or freezes or other action should be given to the cadet (Form 50 and/or written letter). If he wishes to protest to the Group/CC, that's his right.

I would not air any more details or allegations here.

R/s,
Spam


Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,996

« Reply #29 on: November 10, 2017, 02:32:01 PM »

+3 on the "not for air", assuming the details are correct, you've already provided way
more then enough to know exactly who this is and what unit, etc.

The whole thing is ridiculous, reads like a made up story designed to troll this board and
there should be seniors getting CAPF 40's with red pen if it's true.

Don't keep adding more detail here to make your case, we get it, this unit has serious
leadership issues, and is clearly pretty clueless on how to deal with adolescents, let alone cadets.

For those of you scoring at home, this is why parents should be more then "slow down enough to leap
from the car" involved with their cadets.
Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,061
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #30 on: November 10, 2017, 05:17:45 PM »

And I think that about covers the fly-by.

Click.
Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
kwaaikat
Newbie

Posts: 4

« Reply #31 on: November 12, 2017, 04:50:41 PM »

APOLOGY FOR INCORRECT INFORMATION AND PURPOSE OF POSTS
Dear CAPTalk readers, the posts by myself in my personal capacity, initially started out to gain an understanding of others experience or thoughts on Cadet Discipline Procedures based on an incident that I described.  I deliberately changed some of the scenario details in order to keep the post as anonymous as possible.
In the follow-on posts, my descriptions of events became more personal and less anonymous.  Especially in the last post I mentioned details that were not necessary as well as not as anonymous as I should have kept it.  In the last post I also referred to an incident in an inaccurate way which I interpreted incorrectly not based on the true events that ensued.
I should not have posted the 2nd or 3rd posts as these were no longer themed to inform but to insult and get even.
I apologize unconditional to the Squadron, their cadets (especially the Color Guard Cadets) as well as leadership that was involved in the incident.  After looking at these posts again I realize that I have damaged reputations and did not have the Core Values of CAP at heart when posting.
The matter has been resolved by all concerned in a manner becoming of CAP leadership.
This was more of a lesson to me about how not to use a forum like this, I hope we can all learn from my mistakes
« Last Edit: November 12, 2017, 05:13:55 PM by kwaaikat » Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print 
CAP Talk  |  Cadet Programs  |  Cadet Programs Management & Activities  |  Topic: Cadet Disciplinary Process in a Squadron
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.397 seconds with 20 queries.