Strange...

[RiverAux]

Haven't heard about any such thing.

Now, it would be interesting to learn about what exactlly these boards are expecting a CFI off the street to know to be "worthy" of the special appointment. 

[ZigZag911]

The promotion reg specifies that those receiving mission related or professional appointment promotions are to be serving in a post in which the individual's skill is contributed to CAP.

"WIWAGC" documentation was required justifying the promotion.
This was partly for quality control, partly because some of these matters are interpretative (e.g., a case I had once where a promotion was sought for a British-trained nurse in which we could not establish licensure, which is required by the regs....this person had never practiced nursing in the US).

There were also many instances in which the new member did not want to contribute their skill...this was most common with teachers who had no desire to serve as aerospace education officers. In this instance the Group took the heat off the squadron CC, who, after all, had to deal with these people on a weekly basis! We could be the 'bad guy bureaucrats' enforcing the unreasonable rules!

Perhaps the USMC major has been unwilling, or unable, to accept a staff position in the unit, which would be a valid reason not to promote him in CAP. It is not a question of lack of respect for his military service, but rather an issue of whether or not he is actively contributing that wealth of experience to CAP.

[riffraff]

It would be very interesting if someone challenged such a process. Professional appointments I can somewhat understand. A lawyer or doctor who comes in but doesn't contribute in that capacity is certainly open to debate. It would be similar to a doctor or lawyer entering the military and then expecting to carry their initial grade into aviation and/or naval line officer position.

The CFI would be tough since CAP regs clearly stipulate if you have this rating, you move into this grade. Also, the CFI falls into Mission Related Skill, not Special Appointment, so even less room to decline such a promotion.

The only caveat is the line in CAPR 35-5 which stipulates promotions are neither mandatory nor automatic. I would guess subject to interpretation but spring loaded to approve unless a valid reason exists not to promote.

Military officers would be even more difficult since their grades typically carry training levels in excess of what CAP requires for similar grades -- i.e. most field grade officers have compeleted training at the War College level.

I don't believe a Region/Wing can supercede CAP Regs in going either more strict or more lax. An extreme example would be a military unit implementing policy of only allowing their personnel 15 days annual leave instead of 30 days as given by the DoD.

"We have too many Majors" would likely not be sufficient reason to prevent a participating military major from attaining that grade. I didn't read anything stating the person needed to be performing at the level commensurate with the rank in order to get the promotion. It would fly in the face of existing practice whereby squadrons are populated with O-4s and O-5s who have never held command and participate at the Mission Pilot level.

[ZigZag911]

CAPR 35-5, Section C, Paragraph 15 --  Regular and Reserve Officers of the Armed Forces:  "...Such promotions are neither automatic or mandatory, but are at the discretion of the promoting authority outlined in paragraph 5."

[riffraff]

To bring us back to the actual topic, an off-handed conversation regarding promotions in general revealed to me that, at least my region, is now formally boarding all Lt. Cols, >and< all professional / special / prior military appointments (i.e. cfi=capt, etc.).

From what I understand, the idea is to try and lesson the number of walk-ins who get all spun up, receive advanced grade and then do not participate.

I know in the past year or so, there has been a lot of talk about demoting professional appointments who do not serve in the role for which they received the grade.

As this is happening at the region level, my assumption is that this is not exclusive to my region, but likeky happening all over.

Certainly a valid concept but at what point are you boarding? Something similar to the 90-day probationary policies used by large corporations? I can attest to many (corporate) folks on their best behavior for the first few months and then a rapid decline once they're past the 90-day point.

CAP does have a mechanism for dealing with non-performance. Demotion. I might suggest the better option might be to grant the requested grade and reduce later, if necessary. It's far easier to document non-performance than it is to guesstimate future performance via short-term performance.

Other than squadron member(s) that might sit on the board, what real information would a regional board possess for someone serving at the squadron level?

IMO an overcomplication of existing process and a perception that there is a lack of faith in the decision/assessment abilities of the Squadron CC.

[riffraff]

CAPR 35-5, Section C, Paragraph 15 --  Regular and Reserve Officers of the Armed Forces:  "...Such promotions are neither automatic or mandatory, but are at the discretion of the promoting authority outlined in paragraph 5."

Would you support a decision that went something like this??:
I'm the Wing CC and I think we have too many O-4s and O-5s. Let's not promote any more.

I would if the current O-4's and O-5's were contributing at that level. However, I suspect this probably isn't always the case.

Do you really take a retired O-6 and tell him he's now a 1LT (assuming not a CFI but does have a Commerical ticket) because there are too many majors and LTCs around?

What about transfers into a squadron. Say I'm an O-5 (former military) with a few years in CAP. I want to transfer to your Wing to one of the local squadrons. Am I demoted because the Wing CC feels there are too many LTCs? What would the basis be?

Again, all hypothetical examples and all lead back to the disconnect between rank and position discussed in other threads. Sorry for the drift

[RiverAux]

Since CAP doesn't have any sort of system to really evaluate qualitative aspects of individual senior member's performance any decision to try to interject them into the promotion system (either for regular members promoting up or for special appointments) can only ensure that you will make a bunch of people mad in return for no real benefit to CAP. 

[arajca]

As for advanced promotions for military personnel, I would look at participating as serving in a staff role. If you have retired Col who is willing to come in and serve as your ae officer, why not promote him to Lt Col? Now, if that same Col wants to join and just show up when he feels like it and not otherwise help the organization, why promote him? I have had experience with both types. Unfortunetely, too many commanders feel they have to submit military personnel for advanced grade, regardless of their participation in the unit.

[isuhawkeye]

We have had this problem in Iowa.  I would point you to the field grade officer transition program.  Very Very controversial, but so far very affective here

[RiverAux]

Say you do get that former Lt. Col., nothing he is likely to do in his first few years is likely to be "appropriate" to his former rank whether he is serving as a squadron staff officer or just attending meetings and diligently working on his ES or pilot qualifications.  Therefore, it makes no sense to expect him to do more than other members to get promoted.

Keep in mind that this is under our current system.

If you want people to actually be peforming specific duties to get the special appointments, then that needs to be in the national regulations.  Otherwise you're just going to end up with a good old boy system that keeps new members down for no legitimate reason. 

[mikeylikey]

We have had this problem in Iowa.  I would point you to the field grade officer transition program.  Very Very controversial, but so far very affective here

What is that?

[MIKE]

^ Search feature.

[isuhawkeye]

Thanks Mike, your such a good moderator

[Major Carrales]

Y'all could have at least described it before flipantly sending someone to a search feature.  Or at least annotated a bit.

C'mon, what good are you guys if you can't answer the question.

[arajca]

Say you do get that former Lt. Col., nothing he is likely to do in his first few years is likely to be "appropriate" to his former rank whether he is serving as a squadron staff officer or just attending meetings and diligently working on his ES or pilot qualifications.  Therefore, it makes no sense to expect him to do more than other members to get promoted.

Keep in mind that this is under our current system.

If you want people to actually be peforming specific duties to get the special appointments, then that needs to be in the national regulations.  Otherwise you're just going to end up with a good old boy system that keeps new members down for no legitimate reason. 

I presume you were referring to my post. I did not say, nor did I intend to imply, that the Lt Col needs to serve in a Lt Col level role. Just that they need to be actively particpating in the unit and not padding a resume (yes, it happens). Serving in a staff position (and actually performing the functions) counts as actively participating.

[mikeylikey]

^ Search feature.

Thanks Mike, your such a good moderator

Thanks guys!  I did search, there are 2 threads, one has 14 pages of posts, the other 12.  The letters that were linked from the threads were taken down from the site hosting them. 

A simple 1 sentence reply was all that was needed.  something like "in Iowa we transition all of our Lt Col's back to Major....blah blah blah".

You guys were jerks.

[MIKE]

A simple 1 sentence reply was all that was needed.  something like "in Iowa we transition all of our Lt Col's back to Major....blah blah blah".

You guys were jerks.

That's how thread drifts start... IIRC all FGOs were transfered out of squadrons and moved to wing.

[riffraff]

That's how thread drifts start... IIRC all FGOs were transfered out of squadrons and moved to wing.

Heck if we did that here there'd be nobody left at the squadrons except the 1LT CC's and a few SMWOGs!

[mikeylikey]

A simple 1 sentence reply was all that was needed.  something like "in Iowa we transition all of our Lt Col's back to Major....blah blah blah".

You guys were jerks.

That's how thread drifts start... IIRC all FGOs were transfered out of squadrons and moved to wing.

Thank you.  You are not a jerk!   

[isuhawkeye]

^^ As I said, very controversial.  If you want specifics about the transition I will happily discuses them individually.  It has been hashed out many many times, and I really don't feel like going over it again. 

And Ive been called much worse than a jerk before. 

Mabye I wont add input to these threads