Rank based on ES training

[arajca]

Grade inversion at missions isn't a big deal. Professional response personnel deal with it on a regular basis - see my earlier comments. Just because you're an IC doesn't mean you have to be the highest ranking person there.

So, if we go to ES based grades, what do you do about the SMWOG unit commander in charge of a bunch of officers? Does the Unit/CC not have to demonstrate leadership and apply managerial skills to keep the unit functioning so the ES Gods/Goddesses can play their games to get collar bling? Why shouldn't the Unit/CC be an officer?

[lordmonar]

Then you run the risk of not having an IC available when you need one.  We are a volunteer organisation with other commitments to our time.

How do you figure?  We would still have more or less the same number of ICs as we have now, they would just all be Lt. Cols. 

Yes...but they would not all be doing IC jobs.   So the rank hungery bling seekers...will just focus their efforts on getting IC qualified instead of all that tedious PD training.

You are not fixing anything.  You are just trading one set of promotion rules with another.  You still have the problem of once IC qualified...there is no requirment for the Lt Col to actaully be and IC.

Heck....I can run a couple of SAREX's and get 50% of my squadron IC qualified in under a month.

I've changed my mind....Let's go this route....Here I thought that I would take me years to be a Lt Col....you have just shown me a way that I can be wearing silver oak leaves in a year!

No, I'm saying that most ICs don't tend to ever give up their IC qualifications -- they tend to leave the organizatin first.  This could be due to retiring due to age or other committments. 

Okay. Thanks.  

Sure, I suppose there is some risk of that but I don't see it as a significant concern.  Keep in mind, you need pretty high level approval to become an IC and I think they would be able to spot most of the losers who might try to game the system that way.

I'm not talking about losers...I am talking about your system.

YOU say the problem is that we have officers at various levels who's rank does not match their level of respoinsibillty.  In CAP this "problem" exists because our PD program does not require you to work at any level beyond the squadron.

Now you want to do the same thing...but now the training mechnicam is just going to be the ES ratings.

You are changing nothing.  Major X is going to do his two SAREXs will all good intentions.  The next Two SAREXs will be done by Major Y and the next two by Major Z and so on and so....In fact I forsee a major incrase in exercises with mission numbers.  Group and even squadron level SAREX so that as many people as possible can be promoted to Lt Col.

If it was a significant problem (which it wouldn't be), you could always require a certain amount of time in position before the promotion would become effective.  For example, once you became IC-qualified you might have to serve in that position long enough to renew once before you would be promoted.  This would actually serve to spread out the promotions a little bit and might not be a bad idea.

You are forgetting...that you don't serve as an IC.  Your name goes on the list and they call you and tell you to deploy.  You may or may not ever use your skills.  You do your two SAREX get your rating....never get a call up and 1 year later you get promoted.  You have done nothing to reduce the number of Lt Cols who are doing LT's jobs.  In fact you have made it easier to become a Lt Col.

Otherwise some one could join CAP top out in their first 2 years or so(assuming most won't move beyond aircrew/ground team level) at Captain.    This would also meet the concerns of those worried about giving them a rank that they haven't really proven they can handle.  They would need to demonstrate continued competency at the IC/Lt Col level before actually being promoted to Lt. Col.

You are making a lot of assumptions.  There are a lot of people out there who just love to collect rateings.  And if you follow the progression.  GTM3 to GTL to GTBD to Planning Section Chief to Ops Section Chief to IC-3.

If your wing had a robust ES SAREX schedule you can be go from 2d Lt to LT Col in only 12 months.

[arajca]

You are making a lot of assumptions.  There are a lot of people out there who just love to collect rateings. 

Hey. I resemble that remark! (Senior Admin, CP; Tech Comm, AE; working on ES, PDO). Many folks are like me. We serve in many positions because that's where we are needed. After a while, we check out the pamphlet for the position and find that we have met all the requirements for the rating. So we have our PDO (me in my case) take the appropriate steps to award the rating. We've done (and usually are still doing) the work, why not get the recognition?

And if you follow the progression.  GTM3 to GTL to GTBD to Planning Section Chief to Ops Section Chief to IC-3.

You forgot the air side for Ops section chief.

[ColonelJack]

Quoting lordmonar:  You are making a lot of assumptions.  There are a lot of people out there who just love to collect rateings.

Hey, I resemble that remark!!  Before I left CAP in '96 I had:

Master:  Cadet Program, AE, Admin, Personnel, PAO
Senior:  Safety, Finance

Primarily because, in my [Yogi Bear] Smaller-than-the-average squadron [/Yogi Bear], I had to do most of those jobs at one time or another.  I realize that, under regs, I'm entitled to wear no less than three Level II ribbons, two with three silver stars and one with two bronze stars.  That, to me, smacks of overkill ... so on my rack I have one of the purple-n-whites with three silvers.  That's it.  No sense being a braggart about it.   

Jack

[lordmonar]

And if you follow the progression.  GTM3 to GTL to GTBD to Planning Section Chief to Ops Section Chief to IC-3.

You forgot the air side for Ops section chief.

You are right....a ground guy would have to get MS in there before going to planning.

On The air side...you go from MS, MO, Air Ops, GTM3, Planning, Ops, IC.

so...in fact it is harder to become an IC through the ground track than the air track.  either way.  six or seven ratings.....at one rating every other month (that is one SAREX a month) and boom your a Lt Col!

[RiverAux]

Get real.  That progression is totally possible now and I am 100% confident that it has never been done.   

And, like I said, it wouldn't be very hard to include time-in-positin requirements to provide more "seasoning" as people move through the ES positions. 

I think you're forgetting that very soon it is going to become much more difficult to get any of the Section Chief or higher positions as NIMS is implemented.

You're also forgetting that getting IC-rated is not something you can do on your own.  That requries specific approval by the Wing Commander. 

[lordmonar]

Get real.  That progression is totally possible now and I am 100% confident that it has never been done.

It's never been done...because there was never an incentive to do it.  But you tie it to rank....I can guarantee you that you will see a marked increase in the number of people who are suddenly interested in mission base staff!
 

And, like I said, it wouldn't be very hard to include time-in-positin requirements to provide more "seasoning" as people move through the ES positions. 

So you mess up the ES qualification process as well...just to "give rank more meaning".  Do you see how this is blooming on you.  The idea is to reduce the number of problems not increase them.

I think you're forgetting that very soon it is going to become much more difficult to get any of the Section Chief or higher positions as NIMS is implemented.

How is that?  The qualifications are the same.  You go to a course do your missions and you are in.  The NIMS system dose not make it harder to get the qualificaitons...it only standardizes the training.  It makes sure that the Nevada State Police Ground Ops Branch Director is the same as the NJWG CAP Ground Ops Branch Director.

You're also forgetting that getting IC-rated is not something you can do on your own.  That requires specific approval by the Wing Commander. 

Yes...the same guys who are approving the same Lt Col promotions right now.  The ones for squadron admin officers.

A Wing Commander has no authority to refuse a promotion under your system as he does in our current system.  If you complete the requirements and are actually capable of doing the job....you get promoted and there is nothing you can do about under any "task based system".

Do you see what I mean?  Any system that says...do the following tasks and you are promoted, whether it is ES, PD or outside education...means that you cannot limit the number of people who reach the highest levels.

And you are making another assumption.  You keep assuming that the motivation of an individual directly relates to his competence.  You have often referred to the guys who would do ES training just to get the rank as losers.  That most assuredly is not the case.

[RiverAux]

How is that?  The qualifications are the same.  You go to a course do your missions and you are in.  The NIMS system dose not make it harder to get the qualificaitons...it only standardizes the training.  It makes sure that the Nevada State Police Ground Ops Branch Director is the same as the NJWG CAP Ground Ops Branch Director

And there are very likely going to be quite a few more requirements than we have now so that the CAP positions match the others. 

A Wing Commander has no authority to refuse a promotion under your system as he does in our current system.

\

If a Wing Commander does not want to approve somebody's request to become an IC, even if they have met all other requirements, they do not have to do so.  The same goes for Agency Liason.  This is unlike the other ES specialties where if you have met the training requirements you get the qualification.  A Wing Commander has ultimate discretion on who their ICs are. 

You have often referred to the guys who would do ES training just to get the rank as losers.  That most assuredly is not the case.

That was in the context of your suggestion that people would earn the ES qualifications just to get the rank and would then do nothing at all ever again.  I have no problems calling those people losers as it is obvious that all they cared about was getting the rank.  Rank should be an incentive to people and I've got no problem with people doing what is required to earn it.  But, if they earn the rank and then don't perform the responsibilities associated with that rank -- for example, staying qualified and performing as IC, then they're a loser (unless they have to step down due to age or some other good reason). 

Any system that says...do the following tasks and you are promoted, whether it is ES, PD or outside education...means that you cannot limit the number of people who reach the highest levels.

Except for Lt. Col. which would only be given to ICs, which can be limited by the Wing Commander, that is true.  We have that system now.  Everyone in CAP could be a Lt. Col. if they wanted to.  However, even in our current loose system Lt. Cols are relatively rare (about 15% of seniors in my Wing). 

Even though ICs have a lot of prestige in CAP now, we are very short of them and the upper level base staffs and if my proposal does nothing else but propell more qualified people into those jobs, it will have done a lot of good for CAP. 

The problem as I see it isn't having too many people in the higher ranks, it is that the ranks at all levels are not associated with any real level of responsibility.  That is what my proposal is aimed at. 

If someone does not believe that ranks should be associated with responsibility, I'm not going to try to convince them otherwise.  There are several other methods to address this problem (some I have mentioned) and I wouldn't be horribly upset if we took one of those paths rather than my proposal. 

[arajca]

A Wing Commander has no authority to refuse a promotion under your system as he does in our current system.

\

If a Wing Commander does not want to approve somebody's request to become an IC, even if they have met all other requirements, they do not have to do so.  The same goes for Agency Liason.  This is unlike the other ES specialties where if you have met the training requirements you get the qualification.  A Wing Commander has ultimate discretion on who their ICs are. 

Partially correct. Your unit commander has to sign off on your training before you get qualified. All SQTR's have the last sign off as "Unit Commander or designee". If your unit commander doesn't think you should be a GTL, even if you have completed the training, guess what, you're not a GTL. I have seen this happen.

[RiverAux]

Good point, but what I was referring to was the actual training requirements in 60-3 which specifically list Wing Commander approval for those positions.  In none of the other positions does it specifically say squadron or unit commander approval as one of the requirements.  Obviously they thought it critical to have a final check on these most important jobs. 

 

[lordmonar]

How is that?  The qualifications are the same.  You go to a course do your missions and you are in.  The NIMS system dose not make it harder to get the qualificaitons...it only standardizes the training.  It makes sure that the Nevada State Police Ground Ops Branch Director is the same as the NJWG CAP Ground Ops Branch Director

And there are very likely going to be quite a few more requirements than we have now so that the CAP positions match the others.

So it adds more requirments...but the qualification is still basically the same.  Someone mentors your...you read a few regulations, sit in the hot box for two SAREXs with someone watching over you and your are in.  You may have to know more...but let's face it...it's not rocket sceince it's just resource managment. 

A Wing Commander has no authority to refuse a promotion under your system as he does in our current system.

\

If a Wing Commander does not want to approve somebody's request to become an IC, even if they have met all other requirements, they do not have to do so.  The same goes for Agency Liason.  This is unlike the other ES specialties where if you have met the training requirements you get the qualification.  A Wing Commander has ultimate discretion on who their ICs are. 

The wing commander would not allow you to enter the training in the first place (as per the SQTR) if they did not want you to be and IC.  My point being....once you had the training, the commander could not just say no...I'm not going to promote you.  He must have a "cause"....even if it, "I don't have confidance in your abilities to work at this level."  Wing commanders are supposed to be doing that now.

That was in the context of your suggestion that people would earn the ES qualifications just to get the rank and would then do nothing at all ever again.  I have no problems calling those people losers as it is obvious that all they cared about was getting the rank.  Rank should be an incentive to people and I've got no problem with people doing what is required to earn it.  But, if they earn the rank and then don't perform the responsibilities associated with that rank -- for example, staying qualified and performing as IC, then they're a loser (unless they have to step down due to age or some other good reason).

My point is that your attitude towards people's motivation is detrimental to your abilty to lead.  At no time did anyone ask why I joined CAP....and guess what it's not your buisness.  People should be judged on actions not motivations.  Also how do wing commander's identify the "lossers" who are only in it for the rank and those who are in it for the "right" reasons? 

Any system that says...do the following tasks and you are promoted, whether it is ES, PD or outside education...means that you cannot limit the number of people who reach the highest levels.

Except for Lt. Col. which would only be given to ICs, which can be limited by the Wing Commander, that is true.  We have that system now.  Everyone in CAP could be a Lt. Col. if they wanted to.  However, even in our current loose system Lt. Cols are relatively rare (about 15% of seniors in my Wing).

Then why are you complaining about haveing too many Lt Cols not doing the work at the appropriate level?  One of the reasons why you only have 15% of your wing as Lt Col is because it is reltibly hard to get there.  It takes a 10 years to make Lt Col on the current system.  Even if the member was in it only for the rank....and his commander has not getten tired of him in all that time...I don't think you can say he is a looser.

Hence my orignal statement...is that basing rank on ES rateing is not a good idea.  You would make it easier for the rank hounds and not harder.  

Even though ICs have a lot of prestige in CAP now, we are very short of them and the upper level base staffs and if my proposal does nothing else but propell more qualified people into those jobs, it will have done a lot of good for CAP.

We are short of all Mission Base Staff...because it is hard, boring, thank less work and you don't get to fly or go out into the field.

I think your plan will get more people to do ES....but it will not help your preceived problem of having Lt Cols out there doing LT and Capt jobs.   

The problem as I see it isn't having too many people in the higher ranks, it is that the ranks at all levels are not associated with any real level of responsibility.  That is what my proposal is aimed at. 

So you are saying...that since you are qualified to do a Lt Col's job (as an IC) then it is okay that you wear the rank but never actually perform that job beyond the training period.  And that is different than the PD system in what way?  In theory...haveing spent all that time on staff, and getting a master rateing in some specialty...you are qualified to do the lob of a Lt Col....so wear the rank...even if you just working at the squadron level.

If someone does not believe that ranks should be associated with responsibility, I'm not going to try to convince them otherwise.  There are several other methods to address this problem (some I have mentioned) and I wouldn't be horribly upset if we took one of those paths rather than my proposal. 

Rank should be base on the level of respoinsibilty the individual is qualifed to work at....even if he is not working at that level.  And that is exactly what we have today...and would have if you got ES levels as a means of promotion.

[RiverAux]

lordm, its obvious I'm not going to convince you, and thats fine.  I'll wait till somebody new chimes in....

[lordmonar]

lordm, its obvious I'm not going to convince you, and thats fine.  I'll wait till somebody new chimes in....

No...you have convinced me.  I know exactly what you are talking about.....it is you who does not see that THIS "fix" is not going to fix the problem of rank vs. responsibility.

Once you train the guy to the job.  There is no guarantee that he will actually do the job and no requirement for him to do so.

The only fix that will correct the rank vs responsibility mismatch is temporary rank or an "up or out" sort of system.

So choose your poison.  No one likes temporary rank, no way could we live with an "up or out" rule...so we have to live with the fact that any rank system based on open requirements (as opposed to billets and a merit based selection process) will result in a rank heavy organization.

[Major_Chuck]

Is this really feasable in a world where the GA aviation safety record is way better then it was when we were tasked with THREE main missions.  In addition we live in a world where we tend to be tapped last by local sheriffs or not at all. 

Sometimes I feel that we talk a big game about how important in the SAR world we are when we spend most of our time chasing down ghost ELT's for AFRCC.

Attaching grade to ES qualifications is a nice idea, but what if you don't have any interest in emergency services?  The folks on the Cadet Programs side of the house will make the same arguement for their program while the AE folks lobby for grades associated with their program.

[SJFedor]

And if you follow the progression.  GTM3 to GTL to GTBD to Planning Section Chief to Ops Section Chief to IC-3.

You forgot the air side for Ops section chief.

You are right....a ground guy would have to get MS in there before going to planning.

On The air side...you go from MS, MO, Air Ops, GTM3, Planning, Ops, IC.

so...in fact it is harder to become an IC through the ground track than the air track. either way.  six or seven ratings.....at one rating every other month (that is one SAREX a month) and boom your a Lt Col!

Not to totally backtrack, but I believe you can go UDF-GBD-MS-PSC-OSC-IC. Unless I've misread the 60-3, GBD requires either GTL or UDF.

Just in case you wanted to cut some more corners....


I've read over it, and everyone makes good points. But basing our promotion program based just on one side of the 3 sided house doesn't make it fair to the other 2 sides. Some want to join just to help with CP or AE, some live, breathe, and eat ops (myself).

It couldn't hurt to intertwine all of them, if you really want to make it feasable. You could offer grade incentives towards those that get higher level ES quals, but I wouldn't tread past Major for it. However, you need to give those same incentives to the other houses, so everyone's happy. Otherwise, CAP will need to buy a rather large bottle of asprin.

Grade means nothing in CAP anyway, why's it matter if you get more pretty meaningless bling on your collar, other then a little more stuff to stroke one's ego with.

[ZigZag911]

[so we have to live with the fact that any rank system based on open requirements (as opposed to billets and a merit based selection process) will result in a rank heavy organization.

Which is exactly why I want to reinstate enlisted and warrant/flight officer grades....start people a bit further down the food chain, and space out the steps a bit more

[RiverAux]

My proposal will not make everyone happy.  No proposal will, so I'm not going to worry if a few folks don't like it very much.  For those who really don't care about rank, then my proposal won't bother them anymore than any other system we have. 

The thing is that our current system really ignores all of our actual missions and only rewards achievement outside of CAP or doing some relatively minor level of administrative work associated with running CAP as an organization. 

Lets face facts.  Those involved with the "action" will always be promoted faster than those that are not.  Go in the real military and you will find the same thing.  Is it fair that the fighter pilot will probably promote faster than the guy that runs the fighter pilot training school flight safety program?  No it isn't, but its a fact of life.  In CAP, ES work is the equivalent of the combat arms specialties -- it is what we are most recognized for doing and accounts for the majority of the money spent on CAP. 

Is there were a realistic way to promote folks soley based on their contributions to AE or Cadet programs?  I haven't heard of one.  Is the guy coming up with a great squadron level AE program for the cadets a couple of times a month doing good things?  Sure, but I don't see any way to base a rank system on such contributions that makes sense.  If somebody knows a way to do so, please start a thread and lets see what people think. 

[Pylon]

I've had over a dozen years of CAP experience and am a former cadet. 

Basically you are discriminating against those who choose not to be involoved in ES and limit their climb. In your plan a guy who cant afford ES gear or who actually has a 9 to 5 job and cant spend time to get ES qualified is just out of luck.

How many of you have considered that the current CAP system "discriminates" against those who devote significant time to the ES program?  It is very difficult and time consuming to get and maintain ES qualifications and it is likely to get even more difficult as NIMS is implemented.

Why is it fair that an Incident Commander that may be in charge of running a dozen planes and well over a hundred members on a major mission in which somebody's life hangs in the balance might only be a Lt., while someone who has done nothing other than hold various staff jobs (which they may or may not have actually performed), took a correspondence course, and attended a few classes with no real tests could be a Lt. Col? 

What I am saying here is that our ES system is the one thing that CAP does that actually requires people to really demonstrate skills to get qualified and actually requires you to use those skills on a regular basis to maintain that qualification.   Do those skills apply to everything we do?  Not at all, and I recognize that. 

But, I think it is the fairest way of approaching the problem of matching CAP rank with level of responsibility and training that will most of the time result in higher rank people being in charge of lower rank people during missions. 

If you think you have members that are taking on a huge amount of responsibility with regards to ES training and positions, but they're not getting a rank you this is commensurate to the work they're brining to the table - then put them in for Special Promotion action.

We've done a handful from our squadron for high performers and they go through.  It doesn't require reinventing the whole current system and refocusing the entire organization's structure to accomplish recognizing the ES people from your squadron.

But I would ask this question:  If your people have the time to keep on the, as you say, difficult, time consuming, and sometimes expensive task of staying ES qualified, why don't they have the time to learn about CAP, leadership, the inner workings of CAP, and other important things by following the current professional development track as well?

Being "gung-ho" for ES training shouldn't mean members exclude themselves from other training.

[Major_Chuck]

The thing is that our current system really ignores all of our actual missions and only rewards achievement outside of CAP or doing some relatively minor level of administrative work associated with running CAP as an organization. 

Seven years of my life dealing with multple egos to keep two squadrons running in the black.  Then another nine years holding various wing and region staff positions to ensure that logistics audits were successful;  units had the vehicles they needed;  keeping vehicles maintained in a ready status;  ensuring that peoples promotions and awards got through in a timely manner;  endless safety briefings;  organizing and teaching at untold number of SLC, CLS's and Cadet Encampments. 

Why yes, I do see the relatively minor administrative work I did now.  Gosh, the twenty hours a week plus that I put in to CAP up and beyond a normal meeting night  to keep the organization running must not have counted for anything.  What was I thinking?  And to think that my wife gets mad at me for not spending enough time with her.   I guess maybe I should drop all this since it is "relatively minor" when compared to emergency services.

[RiverAux]

Probably most of the people on this board have worked their way up through every rung of the CAP rank system.  Many of use probably have been those folks putting 20 hours a week of CAP work in, but about 1 out of every 3 or 4 CAP members hasn't done anything like that to earn their rank  and in fact haven't even done the bare minimum to rate their rank (see the CAP field grade officer thread for facts to back this up). 

But, in many of the other threads it seems to be agreed that the current CAP rank system is flawed at its core.    So long as you can look at any given CAP officer and have no real idea of what their capabilities or training are based on their rank, the system won't be fair to anybody.  If folks don't accept that premise they're not going to like any of the proposals to fix it.