Rank based on ES training

[lordmonar]

Not our entire organization. You would be requiring everyone to have skills that they don't need. Like the aforementioned cadet unit that doesn't focus on ES. And what about our legislative units? To be legitimate officers they would have to do it too. And if you require it for general membership, you would have to reasonably require it there too, or else it just shows all the more that they don't earn anything.

Yes...you are right....it would have to be for everyone.  What is wrong with that?  The Legislative unit would be better positioned to make laws that affect all three missions of CAP if they were exposed on a working level to all three missions.

The purely CP units could learn practical applications of leadership to help them teach the theoretical aspects of leadership.

The AE unit members will have exposure to both of the missions as they educate the general public about Aerospace Power and the CAP.

The middle of the road...I'm just a support troop...guys can see how their little slice of the pie fits into the big picture making them more effecitve in their jobs.

There are dozens of units that don't do ES. You would be adding an additional requirement to them. With no real improvement in their missions. Noone is going to say "Oh, I can be a better personnel officer because I took those ES quals." Which is why I refer to it as snobbery.

Well two things....this would not be mandating units to participate just the individual members seeking promotion.  And secondly...maybe if some of the CP only and AE only units (and the ES only units working from the other end) would get exposure to the other missions and decide that they like them.  They would then start up a CP/AE/ES function at their home units.  No one is saying that Podunct Cadet Squadron has to field a full Ground Team or 2-4 air crew...only that the higher ranking members be exposed to all the missions CAP does.

I think that's the wrong attitude, people will treat those that don't do the ES quals as inferior. It will happen, even if we don't want to think about it.

You don't think they do that now?  Why do you think that is?  Because we have built walls between the three missions and we play I'm better than you games.  Remember I am also going to require those Senior ES squadrons to get out into the Cadet Squadrons and working with the AE people too.  Everyone gets to share the pain.  Shared missery builds charater and team work.

I'm working on a scanner rating, but because I chose to get involved in ES. Not because it makes me any better at the jobs I was doing. I don't need ES to do Personnel or Senior Programs, I know that for a fact. And people will look at that the same way. Even if you force them, they know that they don't really need it.

Again this is not about "need" but broading your horizons and the horizons of every high ranking SM.

Those are AE events, not ES. And someone could use that to say that AE is more important. I would not agree, but the argument could be made.

Yes...I belevie that is because the guys who wrote the PD program assumed that ES was a given in both the Senior and Cadet Squadrons....but there has been a drift between the two with only the composite squadrons sticking to the original concept of CAP.

I disagree. Requiring qualifications is not the same as familiarization. Showing people what those programs are about is. I agree that people need to know other things about CAP. Show them what is out there, and you'll find that they will pursue things on their own. But requiring ES qual is telling them that ES is the be-all end-all program for CAP.

I think you have something against ES...but I am also requiring the ES guys to get invovled in the CP and AE programs as well....so they are just as mad at me as you are.  I just think we should use existing programs to accomplish the task of familursation training instead of building some new course that will not be nearly as good as going out and doing some in the field/classroom/drill pad.

Historians catalog stuff all the time without knowing the nuts and bolts of what was happening. What is really going to go on at a mission base procedurally that history needs to record? I'm sorry, but this doesn't seem like a legitimate argument to me.

I think requiring familiarization is a good idea. Forcing people to become ES qual is an example of " My mission is the only one that counts".

And your resistance tofamiliarization training is only showing your "My CP mission is the only one that counts"

I say again...for about the nth time.....Everyone (AE, CP adn ES) guys will have to spend some time doing everyone elses mission.  It is intended to break down the "My mission is the most important" attitude.  If you don't know what and how they do it...you can't appreciate what they do.

[Hawk200]

I think that's the wrong attitude, people will treat those that don't do the ES quals as inferior. It will happen, even if we don't want to think about it.

You don't think they do that now?  Why do you think that is?  Because we have built walls between the three missions and we play I'm better than you games.  Remember I am also going to require those Senior ES squadrons to get out into the Cadet Squadrons and working with the AE people too.  Everyone gets to share the pain.  Shared missery builds charater and team work.

Yeah, it does happen now. Which is why I'm totally against disrciminating against those who don't do it. And not allowing promotion based on lack of ES quals is exactly would that would be doing.

I'm working on a scanner rating, but because I chose to get involved in ES. Not because it makes me any better at the jobs I was doing. I don't need ES to do Personnel or Senior Programs, I know that for a fact. And people will look at that the same way. Even if you force them, they know that they don't really need it.

Again this is not about "need" but broading your horizons and the horizons of every high ranking SM.

Telling someone they can't be promoted if they don't do ES is about need. To get promoted, they would need your mandated ES quals.

Those are AE events, not ES. And someone could use that to say that AE is more important. I would not agree, but the argument could be made.

Yes...I belevie that is because the guys who wrote the PD program assumed that ES was a given in both the Senior and Cadet Squadrons....but there has been a drift between the two with only the composite squadrons sticking to the original concept of CAP.

Since we don't have the guys around that wrote the PD program, we'll never know. But I doubt it.

I disagree. Requiring qualifications is not the same as familiarization. Showing people what those programs are about is. I agree that people need to know other things about CAP. Show them what is out there, and you'll find that they will pursue things on their own. But requiring ES qual is telling them that ES is the be-all end-all program for CAP.

I think you have something against ES...but I am also requiring the ES guys to get invovled in the CP and AE programs as well....so they are just as mad at me as you are.  I just think we should use existing programs to accomplish the task of familursation training instead of building some new course that will not be nearly as good as going out and doing some in the field/classroom/drill pad.

Yeah, of course, I have something against ES. That's why I'm training for mission scanner and eventually observer. I'm totally against ES overall.

If you didn't get it, that was sarcasm. And only because you are apparently not paying attention to what I've posted before. ES is a program that serves the community in much the same manner as serving in the military. But it is not everyone's cup of tea.

Historians catalog stuff all the time without knowing the nuts and bolts of what was happening. What is really going to go on at a mission base procedurally that history needs to record? I'm sorry, but this doesn't seem like a legitimate argument to me.

I think requiring familiarization is a good idea. Forcing people to become ES qual is an example of " My mission is the only one that counts".

And your resistance tofamiliarization training is only showing your "My CP mission is the only one that counts"

My resistance to "familiarization" training? Yet another indicator that you are not paying attention. I advocate familiarization with the other programs. You are advocating mandatory participation in the ES program.

I say again...for about the nth time.....Everyone (AE, CP adn ES) guys will have to spend some time doing everyone elses mission.  It is intended to break down the "My mission is the most important" attitude.  If you don't know what and how they do it...you can't appreciate what they do.

And as I said before, not everyone wants to do everyone elses mission. You are forcing it.

Let me ask you this: When you joined the Air Force, did you choose an AFSC? Did you cross train at all? Did you contribute to the military on your terms? If you say yes, then you cannot, in good conscience, force the same requirements of someone else. Especially volunteers.

[lordmonar]

Hawk you accuse me of not reading your posts...but I am not only mandating ES training...but CP and AE training as well.

You even quoated me saying so!

[Hawk200]

Hawk you accuse me of not reading your posts...but I am not only mandating ES training...but CP and AE training as well.

You even quoated me saying so!

I'll concede that I didn't expand on the subject as the conversation changed. But the same principle applies, it doesn't change anything really. You still force partcipation into areas that people may or may not be interested in.

The fact that I didn't expand to include CP, AE, and ES under one broad brush as you did doesn't provide any support for your arguments.

Another way to look at things. We talk about well rounded officers. At the higher levels, we need them. The wing officer should have an idea of the other CAP missions.

Maybe I should have mentioned this in the first, but when it comes to wing staff positions you perform hiring practices. If someone isn't well rounded, you don't hire for a wing staff position. It's pretty much that simple. And far easier than training everybody into the various programs, be they ES, AE, or CP.

[lordmonar]

Let me ask you this: When you joined the Air Force, did you choose an AFSC? Did you cross train at all? Did you contribute to the military on your terms? If you say yes, then you cannot, in good conscience, force the same requirements of someone else. Especially volunteers.

Thanks for bringing that up.

When I joined the USAF my AFSC was 304X0 Wideband communications systems maintenance.

After a few AFSC mergers I am no a 2E1X1 Satellite/Wideband/Telemetry Systems.

Before you get your 7 level (after you make E-5) you have to go to a couse where every 2E carreer field learns about what every other 23 career feild does.  When you get promoted to E-6 and E-7 you use this information to better coordinate the operations of your AFSC with the other AFSCs in your unit and other units.

When you get promoted to E-8 you change to a new AFSC 2E090 that is supervises all the 2E career fields.  I may be a Satcom-widebander but if/when I make SMSgt I may be incharge of a radio maintenance branch or an airfield maintenance branch.

So...yes...the USAF is making me get familiurisation training on all the comm-electronics maintenance fields as I progress in rank.  It makes me a better leaders.

Yes...I would be mandating participation in the other CAP missions.  If you don't want to participate....don't get promoted.  There is no requirment to advance in the PD system.  Be the best unit level historian, CP, AE or Admin. ES, Pilot, PAO...or whatever type you can be.  Just don't ever become a Capt.  You can be that old crusty 1st Lt who has been doing history forever.

But in an attempt to make CAP officers, better CAP officers, who understand how their little peice of the puzzel in the big picture I would suggest that Familurzation training would be good.

I also suggest that the BEST familurization training is to actually do it.

If you are a CP or AE guy...how do you learn about ES...get a rating.  Do your two missions (which can be done in one day or one weekend) and you now know what goes on in the ES side of the house.

If you are an ES or AE guy....how do you learn about CP?  Hold a cadet ES training course or a model rockety program.

If you are an ES or CP guy how do you learn about the AE program....take an ES test (mini yeager) and participate in an AE presentation.

Like I said...everyone will do a little bit of everyone else's job.

And just to be clear on things....I am a CP guy.  I have everything I need for my SR rating in CP except my SLS.  I was a cadet squadron commander for 2 years and I am the Liason to the Nellis Cadet Squadron right now.  I have only just started my ES training in the last 6 months.

I am also the squadron AE officer...a job I only know about as it applies to the cadet program but I am learning it as I go.

So...I am not asking anyone to get involved into this as nearly as I am....but just asking members to spend some of their time in other areas....it will make you better at what ever you do in your own squadron and will make you 10X, 100X better if you move up to group or wing.

Telling you you can't get promoted with out this is not about need...but to make sure that the ones we do promote are well rounded, capable officers.

[lordmonar]

I'll concede that I didn't expand on the subject as the conversation changed. But the same principle applies, it doesn't change anything really. You still force participation into areas that people may or may not be interested in.

The fact that I didn't expand to include CP, AE, and ES under one broad brush as you did doesn't provide any support for your arguments.

Another way to look at things. We talk about well rounded officers. At the higher levels, we need them. The wing officer should have an idea of the other CAP missions.

Maybe I should have mentioned this in the first, but when it comes to wing staff positions you perform hiring practices. If someone isn't well rounded, you don't hire for a wing staff position. It's pretty much that simple. And far easier than training everybody into the various programs, be they ES, AE, or CP.

Sure.....if you just don't want to do anything but your little bit of the game...I got no problem with that.  Just don't expect to get promoted.

One of the purposes of the PD program is to develop officers who are ready to move up into higher levels of command/staff.  The PD program should be making those well rounded officers for the wing/group commanders to choose from.  If we don't have a process to create these officers we run the risk of not having qualified officers available and having to make do with who ever volunteers for the job (which is that whole desire vs quality thread).

You accept that fact that these are the guys we need at wing and group.....but you don't think that we should tie rank with ability.   Should not all Majors be able to work at the group level and all Lt Cols at the Wing?  I do.  And I thing that the PD system that produces these officers should be making them ready for that responsibility....even if they never actually do it....they should be ready to do so.

So...if you just don't want to do AE/CP/ES (take your choice) want to just be happy at the squadron level doing your job as good as you can....don't try to get promoted.

Any argument that says...but I don't need it for my job...can be extended to about 90% of the PD system as it is.  Does a squadron Personnel Specialist really NEED SLS or course 13 or CLC?  No...of course not...if he is in a one deep slot and just pushes papers all day.  He is happy doing his job plugging away....but the guys who wrote the PD program felt that if you want to be a Capt....you got to have SLS and course 13...no matter what you do.  It makes you a better officer....not necessarily a better Admin Officer or Pilots, or Leadership Officer or MLO or DCC or AEO or PAO....but a better Officer.

[Hawk200]

I don't see a need for every person to be able to work at group or wing. And in many cases, it doesn't happen. You cannot honestly tell me that there will be a group or wing staff slot for everyone that wants one. The reality of the structure doesn't allow it. So why force training for someone that quite likely doesn't need it?

The personnel on higher command staffs need to be well rounded. It's far easier to only put the people there that have done it on their own motivation. You're telling everyone that they should be equally qualified. If everyone becomes equally qualified, or well rounded, then you make hiring practices (which is essentially what it is) much more difficult. Both for yourself, and membership at large. Why make life more difficult?

There are numerous members that have no desire to fill those positions. It should be a desire for them, not an edict.

For the record, I have done a lot in CP. I am also currently working on my mission scanner rating but I chose that because I enjoy flight. I have also taken the Yeager test. Currently, I've done my Level 3, and have about 3/4's of my Level 4 done. I've got a number of the requirements for my Level 5 done, as well.

Based on that simple information, and nothing else, would you consider me to be "well rounded" by your standards? If you were in a position on wing staff to hire me, would I seem to be qualified? Would you consider me based on the fact that I have actively continued my professional development? I'm curious.

And more importantly, would you look at anyone else with similar qualifications? Would these qualifications be compelling?

[lordmonar]

I don't see a need for every person to be able to work at group or wing. And in many cases, it doesn't happen. You cannot honestly tell me that there will be a group or wing staff slot for everyone that wants one. The reality of the structure doesn't allow it. So why force training for someone that quite likely doesn't need it?

I'm not forcing everyone one to get the training.....I am forcing only the ones who want to be a Lt Col to get that training.

The personnel on higher command staffs need to be well rounded. It's far easier to only put the people there that have done it on their own motivation. You're telling everyone that they should be equally qualified. If everyone becomes equally qualified, or well rounded, then you make hiring practices (which is essentially what it is) much more difficult. Both for yourself, and membership at large. Why make life more difficult?

Listen...if my life as a Wing Commander was made difficult because I had too many fully qualified volunteers for the wing admin slot.....I would kiss the feet of the guy who came up with this program!  This has got to be the lamest argument you came up with yet!  "Don't require people to get the training so it makes it easier to choose between them!" 

There are numerous members that have no desire to fill those positions. It should be a desire for them, not an edict.

I did not say they had to fill the slots...but that if they were Lt Col...they should be qualified to fill the slots.

For the record, I have done a lot in CP. I am also currently working on my mission scanner rating but I chose that because I enjoy flight. I have also taken the Yeager test. Currently, I've done my Level 3, and have about 3/4's of my Level 4 done. I've got a number of the requirements for my Level 5 done, as well.

Cool  You are a very well rounded officer...and when you make Lt Col...you will be an asset to your wing. (you are that now...but I'm making a point here).

Now....how would you like to be compared to another Lt Col who is basically simply qualified to be a squadron admin type..because no one ever forced him to broaden his horizons and learn anything other than "his job"? 

Not that focusing solely on your job is necessarily a bad thing....but Lt Cols should be more well rounded.

Based on that simple information, and nothing else, would you consider me to be "well rounded" by your standards? If you were in a position on wing staff to hire me, would I seem to be qualified? Would you consider me based on the fact that I have actively continued my professional development? I'm curious.

Yes, I would.  That is all that I am saying.  I have experienced that as I branched out from CP into ES and AE I have gotten a better understanding of how things work and it makes me a better officer and a better CP officer.  I have had such a good experience with it....I think everyone should experience some of the same....not to the same level as me...but a little taste.

[Hawk200]

The personnel on higher command staffs need to be well rounded. It's far easier to only put the people there that have done it on their own motivation. You're telling everyone that they should be equally qualified. If everyone becomes equally qualified, or well rounded, then you make hiring practices (which is essentially what it is) much more difficult. Both for yourself, and membership at large. Why make life more difficult?

Listen...if my life as a Wing Commander was made difficult because I had too many fully qualified volunteers for the wing admin slot.....I would kiss the feet of the guy who came up with this program!  This has got to be the lamest argument you came up with yet!  "Don't require people to get the training so it makes it easier to choose between them!"

Lamest argument? Really? OK, present system, you've got a position to fill (hypothetically the incumbent died) , and two weeks to fill it. You've got about six or seven good applicants. What do you do?

Your system: You've got a position to fill, two weeks to do it. Since you have forced upper level training, you now have forty five people to select from. What do you do?

Is that really easier? You may think so, but I don't.

There are numerous members that have no desire to fill those positions. It should be a desire for them, not an edict.

I did not say they had to fill the slots...but that if they were Lt Col...they should be qualified to fill the slots.

I'll think about that one. But I must point out that for the most part, most wing staff members are. Yeah, there are a few idiots, but they don't tend to last long.

Now....how would you like to be compared to another Lt Col who is basically simply qualified to be a squadron admin type..because no one ever forced him to broaden his horizons and learn anything other than "his job"? 

Not that focusing solely on your job is necessarily a bad thing....but Lt Cols should be more well rounded.

Wouldn't really be an issue. It sounds snobbish, but a simple "I'm on wing staff" would probably tip that balance rather easily. It won't make any difference to the public anyway, they don't know the inepth stuff.

A LtCol on wing staff should be a little more rounded. The guy that spends thirty years in a backwater squadron doesn't need it. We differ in the military in the regard that if we don't want to be reassigned, we don't have to be.

I'm all for improving our officer corps. I would personally complete any improved program, even if I didn't have to. But I think familiarity should be used, not required qualifications.

Iowa seems to have a good course, but the mandatory ES quals bother me. If you want people familiar with all aspects, then add a weekend that covers all three missions. Two days on the three missions of CAP would be a lot more indepth than the minimal stuff that new officers get now. As I've said before, a couple videos and new clothes does not an officer make.

...I have experienced that as I branched out from CP into ES and AE I have gotten a better understanding of how things work and it makes me a better officer and a better CP officer.  I have had such a good experience with it....I think everyone should experience some of the same....not to the same level as me...but a little taste.

I expressed interest in ES, and my commander appointed me as an ES officer. I'm not fighting, I'm actually delving into it. Even if I don't spend much time in the ES section. But it was personal choice, and not a professional goal. I think it should be a case of choice, not requirement.

Besides, if you were shooting for a wing staff position, wouldn't you like to have that little "well rounded" Ace up your sleeve? If I thought that I was the person for the job, I would. The higher staff positions should go to the people that pursue it, not the ones that don't care and don't improve themselves. Besides, I personally prefer less competition.

One additional question: Under your system, would a person have to maintain ES quals? Or would one time qualification count?

[lordmonar]

Lamest argument? Really? OK, present system, you've got a position to fill (hypothetically the incumbent died) , and two weeks to fill it. You've got about six or seven good applicants. What do you do?

Your system: You've got a position to fill, two weeks to do it. Since you have forced upper level training, you now have forty five people to select from. What do you do?

Is that really easier? You may think so, but I don't.

Too many qualified officers is a bad thing?  I challenge you to find one single commander at any level who would not jump for joy if they were confronted with the problem of how to go through 40 qualified applicants for a wing job.

Lame I said and Lame I meant.

A LtCol on wing staff should be a little more rounded. The guy that spends thirty years in a backwater squadron doesn't need it. We differ in the military in the regard that if we don't want to be reassigned, we don't have to be.

The guy who spends 30 years in a backwater squadron doesn't need to be a Lt Col either.

I'm all for improving our officer corps. I would personally complete any improved program, even if I didn't have to. But I think familiarity should be used, not required qualifications.

Iowa seems to have a good course, but the mandatory ES quals bother me. If you want people familiar with all aspects, then add a weekend that covers all three missions. Two days on the three missions of CAP would be a lot more in depth than the minimal stuff that new officers get now. As I've said before, a couple videos and new clothes does not an officer make.

Everyone knows that the best way to learn something and really learn it is to do it.  Familiarization training that OJT is much more effective in making a well rounded officer than death by power point. 

I expressed interest in ES, and my commander appointed me as an ES officer. I'm not fighting, I'm actually delving into it. Even if I don't spend much time in the ES section. But it was personal choice, and not a professional goal. I think it should be a case of choice, not requirement.

Besides, if you were shooting for a wing staff position, wouldn't you like to have that little "well rounded" Ace up your sleeve? If I thought that I was the person for the job, I would. The higher staff positions should go to the people that pursue it, not the ones that don't care and don't improve themselves. Besides, I personally prefer less competition.

Service Before Self.....That is all I got to say

One additional question: Under your system, would a person have to maintain ES quals? Or would one time qualification count?

No...they just have to get the qual and then they never have to do it ever again (except for the next promotion then they have to get the next level of qualificaiton...so they may have to requal in the lower....or pull on mission every three years to maintain their qual) The only purpose of the qualification is to teach them what ES is all about.

[Hawk200]

You don't realize something, monar. I can see your point, I just don't agree with it. You refuse to see mine. Then again, it doesn't really matter.

I think the Chief was right.