2012 civil air patrol national conference

[KirkF22]

Does anyone know if the 2012 civil air patrol national conference in baltimore will be online? and if it is where can i watch it?

[MSG Mac]

There is no mention of it on the National website. Usually there is a broadcast e-mail to all members reminding them of the livestream If there is one.

[SarDragon]

Since the actual audience figures have been low, and there have been transmission difficulties, I think the further attempts at live streaming the meetings have been canceled.

[Big_Ed]

I actually liked the streaming (when it worked) 

[NCRblues]

So according to NHQ's listed schedule, the NB is in session right now...

https://events.capnhq.gov/OnlineStore/2012AnnualConferenceandNationalBoard/Schedule.aspx

Anyone able to give us an update?

[CAPSGT]

Just administrative updates, state of the organization and whatnot so far.  Governance coming up.

[Eclipse]

Word is the governance discussion is happening now.

[Ned]

True.

Full press release to follow on NHQ website, FB, and Twitter shortly.

[Eclipse]

So far so good, and nothing shocking.

[Eeyore]

http://www.capvolunteernow.com/todays-features/?caps_board_of_governors_announces_new_governance_structure&show=news&newsID=14230

[Larry Mangum]

If I am reading the release correctly, and the devil will be in the details (once they are released), the old national board is renamed and basically only becomes an advisor to the CEO. The old NEC is also renamed and become an advisor to the BOG. Interesting and a dramatic  change.

[Pylon]

Wow, I'm impressed.  Good stuff.  It looks like we'll be starting to work a little more like a major non-profit organization.  And maybe with the National Commander acting as a CEO, we'll be able to make the more routine changes like reg updates, changes to policies to keep up with the times, etc. in a more timely fashion rather than needed them every change, no matter how minute, to wait for NB meetings and go through NB votes.  I think this may also help better align the volunteer and national paid staff structures.

I'm excited to see how this pans out as far as implementation. 

[lordmonar]

If I am reading the release correctly, and the devil will be in the details (once they are released), the old national board is renamed and basically only becomes an advisor to the CEO. The old NEC is also renamed and become an advisor to the BOG. Interesting and a dramatic  change.

That's the way I read it....no more self licking ice cream cone......Chain of Command is from the BoG down to the CC to region, to wing, to group, to unit to member.

No more CC having to do political deals to run the organisation....he/she now only has to please 2/3 of the BoG to keep his job.

Now...all we have to do is take care of Wing Level politics and we will be cooking with GAS! 

[keystone102]

I just reread Maj General Carr's bio on the website http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/Carr_Bio__Aug_2011_2_2E33A173E39BC.pdf. It appears he does not have a Bachelors degree which would mean he may not be eligible to remain as National Commander. Could someone at the National Board meeting tell us if this was addressed at the meeting? I am not hoping/wishing for his removal just wondering what is coming down the pike.

[Dragoon]

This is good news.  While I doubt CAP will ever adopt a true "military" mindset, at least a top-down authority chain will keep us focused on core missions.   There's probably a lot of old guard Wing CCs (some  with national aspirations) who are realllllllly torqued about this.

The only self licking part of the new plan is the 4 at large CAP members.  Effectively, they could become the National CC's voting block.  I wonder how they'll avoid this.

[bosshawk]

Ref: the CCs voting block: that could work both ways and it would likely negate somethiing that the CC wanted to do.

This whole decision effectively removes most of the politics from the national level, as I see it.  I can imagine a number of Region and Wing CCs who now have had their fangs pulled and that isn't all bad.

IMHO, this is the best thing that has happened to CAP in the 20 years that I have known about CAP.

Now, if you can figure out a way to quality-control the people who occupy the Wing positions, I might consider returning.

[ColonelJack]

I too think this new governance is a good idea.  Too many times over the past few years we've been hearing about the "back-room" deals made between the lord-high-muckeymucks in CAP.  This should put a screeching halt to all of that nonsense.

At least, we can all hope so.

Jack

[rugger1869]

So... when's the new uniform going to be announced?

[lordmonar]

Hopefully later on today. 

[ZigZag911]

If this works as described, it's a wonderful shift in CAP's approach to leadership and management, both...hopefully it will reduce internal politics to a minimum.

[arajca]

Any updates on anything? Besides governance, that is.

[rugger1869]

What were the uniform recommendations?

[Critical AOA]

What were the uniform recommendations?

Don't know but I am hoping for tiger stripe golf shirt with khaki shorts and a boonie hat.

[AngelWings]

What were the uniform recommendations?

Don't know but I am hoping for tiger stripe golf shirt with khaki shorts and a boonie hat.

You know what, that'd actually be a pretty [darn] awesome uniform combo!!!

[rugger1869]

Does anyone have any information about the uniform study? I'm really interested in the outcome from this.

[BrannG]

I am also eager for any more news, on any part of the conference... *waiting not so patiently*

[AngelWings]

I am also eager for any more news, on any part of the conference... *waiting not so patiently*

+1

"Y THEY NO UPDATE FREQUENTLY?"

[Critical AOA]

What were the uniform recommendations?

Don't know but I am hoping for tiger stripe golf shirt with khaki shorts and a boonie hat.

You know what, that'd actually be a pretty [darn] awesome uniform combo!!!

I know!!  Now we just need to agree on foot wear. 

[AngelWings]

What were the uniform recommendations?

Don't know but I am hoping for tiger stripe golf shirt with khaki shorts and a boonie hat.

You know what, that'd actually be a pretty [darn] awesome uniform combo!!!

I know!!  Now we just need to agree on foot wear.

Sewage System Green roughout dress shoes with green ankle socks!

[Critical AOA]

What were the uniform recommendations?

Don't know but I am hoping for tiger stripe golf shirt with khaki shorts and a boonie hat.

You know what, that'd actually be a pretty [darn] awesome uniform combo!!!

I know!!  Now we just need to agree on foot wear.

Sewage System Green roughout dress shoes with green ankle socks!

Well I was thinking more along the lines of tan colored hiking shoes although....

[FW]

This is good news.  While I doubt CAP will ever adopt a true "military" mindset, at least a top-down authority chain will keep us focused on core missions.   There's probably a lot of old guard Wing CCs (some  with national aspirations) who are realllllllly torqued about this.

The only self licking part of the new plan is the 4 at large CAP members.  Effectively, they could become the National CC's voting block.  I wonder how they'll avoid this.

The 4 at large CAP members will be selected by some means not yet specified. However,  it was implied that only the BoG will have the authority to remove them. No self licking icecream cone here. 

There may be a few region commanders who are upset about the new requirements for National Commander selection. Level V and a 4 year degree is a new bar which some don't meet. Gen Carr has been "grandfathered" in. I'm pretty sure he will serve his full term.  I would bet most of the "old gaurd" is upset about the new "status quo".  I can only say; Karma is a B***H! If they didn't just blindly follow. If they only understood what "fiduciary responsibility" was and, if only they acted as true leaders, there might have been a different outcome.

[Garibaldi]

On another, unrelated, but related note, I'm guessing that any other business conducted today will be posted on Monday or Tuesday. I am anxiously awaiting developments on a front that I am (self-imposed) forbidden to bring up for fear of smacking the deceased equine mammal with an iron stick.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I am cautiously optimistic about what I have read so far, or should I say, slightly less sceptical.

I really wouldn't expect much earth-shattering about uniforms.  In fact, I wouldn't expect anything except to maybe close some of the loopholes in 39-1 and standardise on a set of grey trousers (it'll still be a colourless, drab uniform but at least it'll be a UNIFORM colourless, drab uniform).  I wouldn't expect any changes to the AF uniforms...and that includes the ABU.  Maybe the BBDU's will be adopted for all members.  Don't expect headgear for the grey/white and expect the blazer to be retained but maybe standardised (yech).  In other words, very, very minimalist changes if any at all.

As far as changes to governance...Sir Winston Churchill once said that the best battle plans rarely survive contact with the enemy, and the "enemy" in this case is the entrenched GOB network who hand out promotions, staff positions and CommComms to their "favoured" ones.  It sounds really good on paper but when the rubber hits the road it's going to take people with a spine to make it happen.

[arajca]

So I take it, aside from the governance issue, nothing happened at the NB meeting.

[a2capt]

..that they want you to know about

...the bit about the lack of use of the streaming could have been a rouse to shut it down ...

Oh conspiracies are fun.

Seriously, that was a plateful as it was. I'd also fathom that any other real changes at a meeting where that kind of structural change was on on the agenda.. 

Okay, one might argue that they should have cleared up any outstanding old business. Perhaps yes, perhaps no. If you're going to make a sweeping change to the system that makes changes, it's probably a good idea to let it solve the rest of the stuff afterwards.

[Eclipse]

Hopefully the more nimble approval paradigm will move some of the other things forward more quickly.

Between the CAP changes and the CAP-USAF restructuring, it's going to take a quarter or two just to get the boat turned and back up to
speed.  Budget and CR issues in there won't make it easier.

I would hope that by 2QFY13 things are moving at a steady state with all the "new".

[BrannG]

Why is it there is NOTHING about the NB being shared? I CRAVE THE KNOWLEDGE!! 

[Ned]

As we have done with the last several NB and NEC meetings, you will see an Executive Summary posted on the NHQ website within a few days.  They have previously also put edited video up as well for things like the staff briefings, but for this meeting the NB did not have the staff actually brief.

The NB meeting itself was one of the shortest on record.  They essentially finished their agenda items in about 3-4 hours of work on Thursday.  I don't have my agenda handy here at work, but some of the more contraversial measures were referred to committee for further analysis (the best example being the "non-renewal" proposal).  Otherwise, there was nothing very dramatic on for discussion during the NB business meeting, just the quiet work of our senior volunteer leaders doing the more-or-less routine work of governing the corporation.

The NUC did deliver their brief, but there are no immediate changes to share.  NHQ is working up a package to go forward to the Office of the Secretary of Defense to receive a waiver / authorization to wear ABUs.  My personal guess is that such a request will be granted, but we are talking about a lengthy beaurocratic journey either way.

In any event, watch for the Executive Summary on the NHQ website.  Should be out soon.

Ned Lee

[Extremepredjudice]

So we are getting the tigerstripe uniform? Wow. Honestly, did not expect that...

[RiverAux]

Why would we expect anything to come from this now that we've learned that this particular part of CAP is essentially a bunch of lame ducks?  Sure they still technically have some authority since the bylaws haven't been changed yet but I doubt any other significant change to happen until those bylaws are changed and the BOG takes away authority from everyone else to which it had been previously delegated. 

[BigShu]

I always thought Clausewitz said that, but the interwebs suggest Von Moltke, Prussian Chief of Staff for Bismark.

[Eclipse]

So we are getting the tigerstripe uniform? Wow. Honestly, did not expect that...

Not going to happen.

The USAF will be out of them well before we would ever get a waiver.

[PHall]

So we are getting the tigerstripe uniform? Wow. Honestly, did not expect that...

No, we are asking for permission to wear the uniform.  How fast the approval comes, if it comes, is another question.
You can probably count on this not being a quick decision...

[PHall]

So we are getting the tigerstripe uniform? Wow. Honestly, did not expect that...

Not going to happen.

The USAF will be out of them well before we would ever get a waiver.

What, you have a direct line to the CSAF or something?

[BrannG]

Thank you Ned for the update. Eager to read the executive summary.

About the ABUs, I am sure they will be authorized also, as I know some of the CAP-USAF personnel who already knew they were granted pending "unique" changes that would separate us from AD. So.. my guess is that SoD will either like the "unique" factors or request further changes.. so yeah, very lengthy process indeed.

My guess : Late 2013 approval with a 2015 phase in date. By that time...

[Garibaldi]

Thank you Ned for the update. Eager to read the executive summary.

About the ABUs, I am sure they will be authorized also, as I know some of the CAP-USAF personnel who already knew they were granted pending "unique" changes that would separate us from AD. So.. my guess is that SoD will either like the "unique" factors or request further changes.. so yeah, very lengthy process indeed.

My guess : Late 2013 approval with a 2015 phase in date. By that time...

Considering the length of time it took to get BDUs authorized, I am inclined to agree.

[MSG Mac]

So we are getting the tigerstripe uniform? Wow. Honestly, did not expect that...

That's not what Ned said.

"NHQ is working up a package to go forward to the Office of the Secretary of Defense to receive a waiver / authorization to wear ABUs.  My personal guess is that such a request will be granted, but we are talking about a lengthy beaurocratic journey either way."

Since it's going to SECDEF, there will be a lot of stops along the way Air Staff, CSAF, SECAF, than a bunch of Asst and Deputy Defense Secretaries, before hitting the SECDEF's agenda. The ride down would be  faster
to include determining cost to the Air Force, current supplies, and availability. 

There is also a push to get a common "utility" uniform for all the services due to the budget requirements that require the DofD to drastically cut their budget requirements.

[abdsp51]

Again unless something has come down from CSAF or CMSAF the ABU is here for a long time.  Anything else is rumor.

[Eclipse]

So we are getting the tigerstripe uniform? Wow. Honestly, did not expect that...

Not going to happen.

The USAF will be out of them well before we would ever get a waiver.

What, you have a direct line to the CSAF or something?

The same line everyone else has - common sense, reason, the ability to read not only the writing on the wall, but also the
writing between the lines.

My guess : Late 2013 approval with a 2015 phase in date. By that time...

Not a chance, unless you're referring to a full transition to the blue field uniform while the USAF's uniforms are in their own transition.
I don't see CAP being in the same field uniform as the USAF again (assuming they ever are), until around 2020.

[AngelWings]

I am positive we will get them, and I am positive we'll get them within a year or two.

So we are getting the tigerstripe uniform? Wow. Honestly, did not expect that...

Not going to happen.

The USAF will be out of them well before we would ever get a waiver.

What, you have a direct line to the CSAF or something?

The same line everyone else has - common sense, reason, the ability to read not only the writing on the wall, but also the
writing between the lines.

Common sense is yelling in my ear right now that money is too tight for the Air Force to screw around with a new uniform.

[Eclipse]

Common sense is yelling in my ear right now that money is too tight for the Air Force to screw around with a new uniform.

This doesn't even jive with recent reality, where in certain areas USAF personnel have moved to a different uniform.

It's just a matter of time.

[abdsp51]

Common sense is yelling in my ear right now that money is too tight for the Air Force to screw around with a new uniform.

This doesn't even jive with recent reality, where in certain areas USAF personnel have moved to a different uniform.

It's just a matter of time.

That is out of operational necessity and is not authorized outside of that area.  A change for a mission does not mean a change across the board.

[Eclipse]

That is out of operational necessity and is not authorized outside of that area.  A change for a mission does not mean a change across the board.

Correct - the across the broad change will be fueled by the perceived failure of the ABU pattern, and moves to cut military spending by
re-consolidating the field uniforms.  My guess is the Marines and Navy fight to stay "different", but that the NWU is retired and the
ABU / ACU will be combined into an "other" single uniform.  I'd say its even money the Marines stay "unique".

Regardless, the simple fact that the uniform is in flux at all, even if only conversationally, with the fact that CAP has no mission-based need for
it, will combine to insure we never see the ACU in it's current form.

Good on all of us for turning a conference thread into a uniform thread, despite the fact that nothing was even mentioned publicly about uniforms
at the conference itself.

[Garibaldi]

Common sense is yelling in my ear right now that money is too tight for the Air Force to screw around with a new uniform.

This doesn't even jive with recent reality, where in certain areas USAF personnel have moved to a different uniform.

It's just a matter of time.

That is out of operational necessity and is not authorized outside of that area.  A change for a mission does not mean a change across the board.

Just like the chocolate chips.

[AngelWings]

Common sense is yelling in my ear right now that money is too tight for the Air Force to screw around with a new uniform.

This doesn't even jive with recent reality, where in certain areas USAF personnel have moved to a different uniform.

It's just a matter of time.

So because we can outfit a few people with a different camo uniform means we have enough money to do the same for everyone? THAT doesn't jive with recent reality. It's a deployment uniform you are talking about, the Multicam. More so, it is an outside the wire uniform for most airmen. Did you even consider this?:
There is the ABS: Airman Battle Shirt.
There is the Fire Resistant ABU: Designed to provide resistance to fire for those AFSC's that require the
There is the a complete line (which the above come from) called the ABSG: Airman Battle System- Ground, for those who need it.
There is rip-stop ABU's being made and authorized: Requires a contract that lasts for at least a few years from what I've seen.
There is new ABU gear to match everything: However expensive, I've seen ABU MOLLE gear used be a few SFS's.
There is not one regular joe airman wearing Multicam stateside as a regular uniform: Binford O'Tools hasn't even done that yet.
There is the Army who wants to adopt the Multicam uniform as their uniform: Branches want to look different.

Seems like the USAF wants to waste all of its money. That stuff is not cheap, and the contracts to purchase the equipment would be a disaster to even think of trying to cancel or to let run out. The blue cool-aid is taintable with stupid juice, but I assure you that Ma Blue hasn't spilled that much of the stupid juice into the blue cool-aid.

YMMV depending on how you look at it.

[SarDragon]

That is out of operational necessity and is not authorized outside of that area.  A change for a mission does not mean a change across the board.

Correct - the across the broad change will be fueled by the perceived failure of the ABU pattern, and moves to cut military spending by
re-consolidating the field uniforms.  My guess is the Marines and Navy fight to stay "different", but that the NWU is retired and the
ABU / ACU will be combined into an "other" single uniform.  I'd say its even money the Marines stay "unique".

Regardless, the simple fact that the uniform is in flux at all, even if only conversationally, with the fact that CAP has no mission-based need for
it, will combine to insure we never see the ACU in it's current form.

Good on all of us for turning a conference thread into a uniform thread, despite the fact that nothing was even mentioned publicly about uniforms
at the conference itself.

The Navy will stay different, because they have always been different. They have different requirements for working uniforms than the folks whose primary working environment is in the "dirt". Even back when USA, USMC, and USAF all wore the same working uniform, the Navy's was different.

There are certain parts of the Navy that will have "dirt" related uniforms, because of their nature. Otherwise, their working uniform is designed for serving on a ship.

[arajca]

Good on all of us for turning a conference thread into a uniform thread, despite the fact that nothing was even mentioned publicly about uniforms at the conference itself.

Most of us have no idea, besides the governance issue, what WAS mentioned at the conference. That's what driving this.

[denverpilot]

After thinking about it for a couple of days...

Boards of Directors have shown to be very weak Corporate Governance in the last couple of decades. I see no evidence this makes us stronger, it just makes us the same.

There's short-term benefits in that, but it's not necessarily a path to long-term strategic success. (1)

The education requirements are silly, but also another "way of the world" type thing. No one who grew up having to skip out of college to win the bread, and who got the job done as a self-made personal and business success, without adding to the Country's  massive Student Loan Debt bubble (2), will be in the least surprised at that particular discriminatory practice.

-----

(1) All of the organizations that collapsed the global economy were supposedly "governed" by traditional Boards of Directors. All were warned of the dangers by staff, all willingly chose to ignore the warnings posed. If it weren't for government assistance, they'd be out of business. Not a very rosy picture of the effectiveness of traditional BoD style governance.

(2) http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/04/18/150909686/what-america-owes-in-student-loans

[keystone102]

I think the governance change is good for our organization. Having 11 people overseeing our direction is better than having the >60 people we had on the National Board. Less people means less conflict/drama/opinions on what to do. Hopefully it will also lessen the amount of politics at the Wing/Region/National level. Politics will never be gone but in this case less is best.

[Pylon]

After thinking about it for a couple of days...

Boards of Directors have shown to be very weak Corporate Governance in the last couple of decades. I see no evidence this makes us stronger, it just makes us the same.

There's short-term benefits in that, but it's not necessarily a path to long-term strategic success. (1)

The education requirements are silly, but also another "way of the world" type thing. No one who grew up having to skip out of college to win the bread, and who got the job done as a self-made personal and business success, without adding to the Country's  massive Student Loan Debt bubble (2), will be in the least surprised at that particular discriminatory practice.

-----

(1) All of the organizations that collapsed the global economy were supposedly "governed" by traditional Boards of Directors. All were warned of the dangers by staff, all willingly chose to ignore the warnings posed. If it weren't for government assistance, they'd be out of business. Not a very rosy picture of the effectiveness of traditional BoD style governance.

(2) http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/04/18/150909686/what-america-owes-in-student-loans

We can all find anecdotal evidence of standard non-profit and corporate structure not working well, just like anything else.  You can find an example of anything not working 1% of the time.  "Countries using democracy as their form of government have failed miserably before, therefore democracy is a flawed governance system!"  Well, yeah, everything human-made is flawed.  But it's still better than most of the alternatives.   Correlation does not indicate causation.  Your logic is incredibly flawed.


As for the student loans issue, this doesn't change the fact that in most industries a degree is a standard requirement for pretty much every executive position ever.  CAP is not special.  CAP is joining what's known as "best practices" for hoards of fellow successfully-operating non-profit corporations.  CAP is not special.  If you have an opinion about the whole national collegiate system and the national status quo of job requirements, then take issue with that nationally — not CAP.  CAP is simply doing what thousands of other organizations have found to be a good starting-point standard.  CAP is not special.


Also, nobody said this governance change was a path to strategic success.  Not sure why you thought that.  This is a change to make our day-to-day issues of running the organization smoother, with less conflict, and faster (among other things).  A path to long-term strategic success still and always will come from a strategic plan.  Don't attribute unrelated potential future failures to a new system that's not even designed to directly solve those issues.   Let me use an example to reframe your argument.  "A different board of directors and governance structure is not a solution to our long-term cadet programs growth."   Yeah, well no kidding it's not. But it may make the process of implementing good changes easier.  See the difference now?

[Robb Ottenhoff]

I also do not have a bachelor’s degree at 45 years old, and while having been successful in creating and running several businesses, I do understand, and even agree with, the logic behind the bachelor’s degree requirement for the national commander.  While I don't 'like' it personally, if I think about the larger picture, it does make since.  Here's why:

I understand and agree that many, many people walk out of formal training program with titles like; BA, BS, MBA, PhD, Level V, etc, and still don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.   But, at the end of the day (for me) it comes down to a simple question: Would I want a brand new senior member to be able to put on a pair of major's gold oak leaves without completing their Level III training or spending a minimum of 6 years in service?   It's not to say that just completing a CAP Level III plus 6 years of service will guarantee a strong "Major," but it is a best practice that we have established to give us a base line to know that they are at least ready to be 'trained' in their new "Major" responsibilities.

A bachelor’s degree then just occurs to me as another 'CAP Level' of training, albeit external.  For me it occurs as a challenge -- finish my own bachelor’s degree.  And isn't that one of the reasons to be a member of the Civil Air Patrol, to expand ourselves and what we are capable of achieving?

And finally, for the record, I still don't 'like' it.  Almost as much as I don't like the idea of going back to school at 45 years old. But if I am to be a leader and example for our cadets and others, then I'm going to have to confront and overcome stuff that I don't like from time to time.


ps: Today (8/28/12) is the day that I expect that National HQ will be processing my application for rejoining as a Senior Member (previous SM in 1988), so on this day of my (re)birth as a newly minted SMWOR I already find myself reaching for the 'Stars.'   

With respect and utter enthusiasm for what's next,

Robb

[Rick-DEL]

I wouldn't expect anything regarding the switch to ABU's. I was at the conference this past Saturday with my son for Cadet Day. He told me that one of the lined up guest speakers asked them "who wants to wear the ABU's?". Then, he mentioned to them not expect it to happen, there were some major hurdles for that to happen.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I always thought Clausewitz said that, but the interwebs suggest Von Moltke, Prussian Chief of Staff for Bismark.

It was Helmuth von Moltke the Elder.

My mistake.

And I do not see where people are reading "great, we're getting ABU's!" into Sir Ned's statement.

He said a request has been made, and now it's in the "hurry up and wait" stage.

WRT the baccalaureate requirement...when I joined CAP I was surprised to see that virtually everyone was an officer.  I thought it would be more like the Real Military, where to get a commission you have to have a bachelor's (I think certain WO career fields only require an associate's, but I could be wrong on that).  So I'm really not surprised to see this being made a requirement for NatCC.

[KirkF22]

When the NB minutes are released, how do I find them?

[jhsmith400]

On the CAP eservices page over on the left side.  Sometimes some of the minutes there are a bit of a confusing read, ask me how I know.

[KirkF22]

How do you know?

[jhsmith400]

Had to start a thread on this very page just to ask wth(heck, to be pc).  Due to an odd wording of something relating to white shirts.

[flyboy53]

I also do not have a bachelor's degree at 45 years old, and while having been successful in creating and running several businesses, I do understand, and even agree with, the logic behind the bachelor's degree requirement for the national commander.  While I don't 'like' it personally, if I think about the larger picture, it does make since.  Here's why:

I understand and agree that many, many people walk out of formal training program with titles like; BA, BS, MBA, PhD, Level V, etc, and still don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.   But, at the end of the day (for me) it comes down to a simple question: Would I want a brand new senior member to be able to put on a pair of major's gold oak leaves without completing their Level III training or spending a minimum of 6 years in service?   It's not to say that just completing a CAP Level III plus 6 years of service will guarantee a strong "Major," but it is a best practice that we have established to give us a base line to know that they are at least ready to be 'trained' in their new "Major" responsibilities.

A bachelor's degree then just occurs to me as another 'CAP Level' of training, albeit external.  For me it occurs as a challenge -- finish my own bachelor's degree.  And isn't that one of the reasons to be a member of the Civil Air Patrol, to expand ourselves and what we are capable of achieving?

And finally, for the record, I still don't 'like' it.  Almost as much as I don't like the idea of going back to school at 45 years old. But if I am to be a leader and example for our cadets and others, then I'm going to have to confront and overcome stuff that I don't like from time to time.


ps: Today (8/28/12) is the day that I expect that National HQ will be processing my application for rejoining as a Senior Member (previous SM in 1988), so on this day of my (re)birth as a newly minted SMWOR I already find myself reaching for the 'Stars.'   

With respect and utter enthusiasm for what's next,

Robb

Is it really a bachelor's or will it be a bachelor's equivalency. Either way, I see that education requirement as a good thing and it has nothing to do with student loans, given the number of courses out there that give college credit upon completion.

[SarDragon]

On the CAP eservices page over on the left side.  Sometimes some of the minutes there are a bit of a confusing read, ask me how I know.

How do you know?

Google "rhetorical question".

[denverpilot]

Is it really a bachelor's or will it be a bachelor's equivalency. Either way, I see that education requirement as a good thing and it has nothing to do with student loans, given the number of courses out there that give college credit upon completion.

Why specifically do you see it as a good thing? Have you noted any specific traits of leadership or skillset which are never found in non-degree-holding candidates, which can be gained in no other way?

[flyboy53]

Is it really a bachelor's or will it be a bachelor's equivalency. Either way, I see that education requirement as a good thing and it has nothing to do with student loans, given the number of courses out there that give college credit upon completion.

Why specifically do you see it as a good thing? Have you noted any specific traits of leadership or skillset which are never found in non-degree-holding candidates, which can be gained in no other way?

Agreed, but setting an education requirement ramps up the level of professionalism necessary for someone to command an organization such as this, eliminates a lot of the politics that resulted in a few previous leadership embarassments, and starts us in a different direction.

Establishing a educational criteria for a national commander doesn't mean that sheepskin makes him a better leader, it becomes an indication of that individual's capabilities and experience, and that's why I asked if it was a degree or the equiviant of 120 semester hours.

After all, do we want quality in a leader or more backroom politics.

[Garibaldi]

that's why I asked if it was a degree or the equiviant of 120 semester hours.

I have 125 semester hours but no bachelor's.

[KirkF22]

On the CAP eservices page over on the left side.  Sometimes some of the minutes there are a bit of a confusing read, ask me how I know.

How do you know?

Google "rhetorical question".

Must not have been rhetorical if he answered it. Thank You very much.

[Garibaldi]

On the CAP eservices page over on the left side.  Sometimes some of the minutes there are a bit of a confusing read, ask me how I know.

How do you know?

Google "rhetorical question".

Must not have been rhetorical if he answered it. Thank You very much.

We didn't study those in school.

[KirkF22]

On the CAP eservices page over on the left side.  Sometimes some of the minutes there are a bit of a confusing read, ask me how I know.

How do you know?

Google "rhetorical question".

Must not have been rhetorical if he answered it. Thank You very much.

We didn't study those in school.

Haha I did, but it wasn't retorical if he answered it. SarDragon Google "rhetorical question".

[SarDragon]

Way ahead of you.

I think it was intended as such when he posted it, but was polite enough to respond when asked.

Please review my sig, and keep in mind that you aren't dealing with any kind of n00b here.

[KirkF22]

Way ahead of you.

I think it was intended as such when he posted it, but was polite enough to respond when asked.

Please review my sig, and keep in mind that you aren't dealing with any kind of n00b here.

Maybe that is the case. But when you posted it was after his answer to his so called "rhetorical question". And I "reviewed" your sig.

[SarDragon]

So let it go and drive on.

[Garibaldi]

Looks like they put all the stuff for the NB meeting online:

http://www.capmembers.com/events/cap_annual_conference/2011-learning-labs-louisville-kentucky/

And skimming over the ppt for the NUC...don't hold your breath on ABUs or any major uniform change til winter 2013 at least.

[Eclipse]

Looks like they put all the stuff for the NB meeting online:

http://www.capmembers.com/events/cap_annual_conference/2011-learning-labs-louisville-kentucky/

And skimming over the ppt for the NUC...don't hold your breath on ABUs or any major uniform change til winter 2013 at least.

Despite the text in the link, those are the correct briefings.