C/Command Chief Master Sergeant

[MSG Mac]

 I just visited the TriWing (MD/DE/NATCAP) Encampment and they still persist in appointing a Cadet Command Chief for the Encampment. I asked the cadet if he knew it was not allowed, his response was that it was a tradition and besides that the Encampment Commander had approved it. 
How can they train the cadets, if the leadership cannot follow regs that have been in effect for several years and were explicitly reiterated in a gross violation two years ago?

[Cadetter]

One of my favorite CS articles, on the "tradition" topic... http://archive.cadetstuff.org/archives/000154.html

[lordmonar]

Appointing a cadet to the position of Encampment Command Chief is allowed.

Giving said cadet a special insignia is not allowed.

[a2capt]

Just like the Smokey hat that won't go away.. if they're actually pinning something different on.

[PHall]

MSG Mac, why were you jacking up the cadet, it wasn't their decision.
This was a decision the Encampment Commander made and it was allowed to stand by the three Wing Commanders who sponsor this Encampment.
You need to set your sights a bit higher...

[lordmonar]

MSG Mac, why were you jacking up the cadet, it wasn't their decision.
This was a decision the Encampment Commander made and it was allowed to stand by the three Wing Commanders who sponsor this Encampment.
You need to set your sights a bit higher...

+1

"My Commander Told Me To" IS a valid argument 90% of the time.

[MSG Mac]

Didn't jack him up. Asked if he knew it wasn't allowed, and got the answer that the Commander had authorized it.

[Eclipse]

MSG Mac, why were you jacking up the cadet, it wasn't their decision.
This was a decision the Encampment Commander made and it was allowed to stand by the three Wing Commanders who sponsor this Encampment.
You need to set your sights a bit higher...

I seriously doubt the Wing CCs are even aware, much less care, and if they do, and approved it,
then there's your issue.

[MajorM]

Curious where you think the position is prohibited??  52-18 leaves organizational design to the Encampment Commander and DCP.  If they want a senior NCO position, there is no prohibition against it.

They can't make up a special insignia for it, but a title is a title.  Everything is a made up title at the end of the day.

So if you're going to jack up a cadet it's good to have the regulatory citation correct.

[MSG Mac]

Curious where you think the position is prohibited??  52-18 leaves organizational design to the Encampment Commander and DCP.  If they want a senior NCO position, there is no prohibition against it.

They can't make up a special insignia for it, but a title is a title.  Everything is a made up title at the end of the day.

So if you're going to jack up a cadet it's good to have the regulatory citation correct.

g. Temporary & Discretionary Grades. There are no temporary promotions or demotions, including temporary or "field" promotions or demotions at encampments and other activities. There are no discretionary grades. Cadets will wear their earned grade on their uniform at every CAP activity. The only grades authorized are those shown in CAPVA 52-100.
CAPR 52-16, Chapter 5-2g

Asking a question of a cadet does not equate to "Jacking Up"

I don't care about the title-Object to the wear of the Command Chief chevrons w/star

[MajorM]

it is not a promotion or grade, it is a position.  First Sergeant is not a grade or promotion either, it is a position.

It is like saying being made a Flight Commander is a promotion. 

[Mitchell 1969]

Didn't jack him up. Asked if he knew it wasn't allowed, and got the answer that the Commander had authorized it.

I'm puzzled.

You said you "visited encampment" and questioned a staff cadet about his position, telling him that it was unauthorized. As a former encampment commander, my first reaction to that was to think "Challenging cadet staff? How rude!"

As a visitor, wouldn't it have been better to have addressed your concern through the chain of command? Or am I missing something?

[MSG Mac]

MSG Mac, why were you jacking up the cadet, it wasn't their decision.
This was a decision the Encampment Commander made and it was allowed to stand by the three Wing Commanders who sponsor this Encampment.
You need to set your sights a bit higher...

+1

"My Commander Told Me To" IS a valid argument 90% of the time.

That argument worked so well at the Nuremburg trials.

[Chaplaindon]

Talk about hyperbole. MSG, are you seriously comparing this to the Holocaust? A child using an "arguably" unpermitted position title at a CAP encampment is analogous to the deliberate murder of millions?

Perhaps you'd best stay away from encampments. You'll be happier and CAP will be the better for it.

[Tim Medeiros]

MSG Mac, why were you jacking up the cadet, it wasn't their decision.
This was a decision the Encampment Commander made and it was allowed to stand by the three Wing Commanders who sponsor this Encampment.
You need to set your sights a bit higher...

+1

"My Commander Told Me To" IS a valid argument 90% of the time.

That argument worked so well at the Nuremburg trials.

Hmm, 12 posts to Godwin's Law, not bad for CT.

[Alaric]

MSG Mac, why were you jacking up the cadet, it wasn't their decision.
This was a decision the Encampment Commander made and it was allowed to stand by the three Wing Commanders who sponsor this Encampment.
You need to set your sights a bit higher...

+1

"My Commander Told Me To" IS a valid argument 90% of the time.

That argument worked so well at the Nuremburg trials.

Really comparing a CAP cadet to Nuremburg? Poor form sir, Poor form. Also truly offensive.

[lordmonar]

MSG Mac, why were you jacking up the cadet, it wasn't their decision.
This was a decision the Encampment Commander made and it was allowed to stand by the three Wing Commanders who sponsor this Encampment.
You need to set your sights a bit higher...

+1

"My Commander Told Me To" IS a valid argument 90% of the time.

That argument worked so well at the Nuremburg trials.

So long as the order is "lawful" it is okay.   Lawful and against the regs are two different things.

[Cliff_Chambliss]

MSG Mac, why were you jacking up the cadet, it wasn't their decision.
This was a decision the Encampment Commander made and it was allowed to stand by the three Wing Commanders who sponsor this Encampment.
You need to set your sights a bit higher...

+1

"My Commander Told Me To" IS a valid argument 90% of the time.

That argument worked so well at the Nuremburg trials.

Really comparing a CAP cadet to Nuremburg? Poor form sir, Poor form. Also truly offensive.

And the comparison of the cadet to accused Nazi war criminals was made where?  The comparison was made to the defense many use of "I was just following orders" which was throughly trounced during the trails.
"I was just following orders" is not a legitimate defense.  In fact, we are obligated to refuse an improper/illegal order and if necessary bump it up the chain of command.  Of course if the entire command structure is corrupt this may not result in the desired outcome  (Pfc Jones...Report to the Gallows).

[MSG Mac]

No comparison to Nazi's, the Holocaust, was made or intended. The reply was to the comment that "I was just following Orders" which is widely known as the Nuremburg Defense is not a viable excuse. 

My point: 52-16 specifically states "Cadets will only wear the grade earned" and as shown in CAPVA 52-100"

C/Command Chief Master Sergeant Insignia is not displayed on the CAPVA-52-100

National Headquarters sent out a massive directive to all Wings three years ago that blasted the wear of C/Command Chief insignia and followed it up in two editions of 52-16.

I was told that this practice is a "Tradition" How can a deliberate violation of a regulation  be a tradition?

Lawful and regs are different only if the order is unsafe, immoral, or illegal on the face of it. None of these exceptions apply. 

[lordmonar]

Lawful and regs are different only if the order is unsafe, immoral, or illegal on the face of it. None of these exceptions apply.

To keep things in context......"Here cadet wear this insignia".....is a lawful order.  It violates regulations but it does not violate any laws.

"Here cadet I want you drive the CAP van 90 miles an hour" is an unlawful order.  It violates both the regulations and the law.

No one can order you to violate a law......but they can tell you to violate a regulation.    "why did you wear that insignia?....My commander told me to" is a valid argument.   It was a "lawful" order.