The New CAPM 39-1 Now Available

[Marvin]

Still can't believe that we decided to downplay the importance of uniforms by no longer requiring them to be worn during normal CAP duties.

Forgive my ignorance, but where was that specified in the old version?  I know there were specific times, such as in CAP A/C, working with cadets, etc., but I don't remember requiring uniforms for all CAP duties.  Thanks in advance for helping me.

[cap235629]

what happened to the badges and nametapes being changed to Navy Blue???

[Eclipse]

what happened to the badges and nametapes being changed to Navy Blue???

Scuttle was that was part of the ABU change over and when reality finally broke through (i.e. no ABUs)
the tape change was dropped.

[Eclipse]

Yea....if all the unpaid volunteers would just get off their butts and do their jobs right.

Nice try, not relevent.

If you take a job, you do it right, or find someone who will.

Some of the issues I mentioned were pointed out in the very early drafts, and simply ignored.

This is a huge improvement over the previous, but it is not done, and it should have gone through at least one more
round of public comment for typos and omissions instead of being secreted away for 6 months.

Not to mention the style inconsistencies - once the content was essentially complete, they could have solicited
some members who are professional designers and graphics people to insure the style and format is/was consistent.

Heck, there's 10 people reading this thread right now who could have knocked it off it a weekend.

This is textbook CAP - ignore something for a decade, then one day wake up and decide it's "important", then it's not,
then it is, then it >IS<...then it sits, and sits, and sits, and comes out 7/8th complete, and the people who
were charged with "it" find themselves wishing they'ed done one more walk-through before signing the closing papers.

[abdsp51]

Personally, I like that they have allowed a riggers belt, one color tshirt for the CFU and the BDU, charged the membership with enforcement of the manual for discrepancies, and its for the most part in clear cut plain speak as to what is allowed.

[Eclipse]

Definitely like this:

6.2.8.1. The BDU cap will be composed of a cloth woodland camouflage print either in a
"patrol style" or in a baseball cap style where the back half of the baseball style cap may be plastic mesh. 86 CAPM 39-1 26 JUNE 2014
The BDU cap will rest squarely on the head with the bottom of the cap parallel with the ground. The brim
of the cap will face forward. Cap may not be pushed, rolled, folded or tucked in (e.g. ranger fold).

6.2.9. CAP Baseball Cap. Wing and region commanders may prescribe color, unit designation,
and/or emblem to be on the baseball cap. No rank insignia may be worn on this cap, and no emblems
(clouds, darts, etc.) may be worn on the cap visor.

Not that simple language will change anything.

[Eclipse]

5.2.2.8.1. Men will wear underpants.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYiSxkrqMgM#

[CAP_truth]

New some flight uniforms are allowed cloth grade on them, getting away from plastic grade. Also placement of secondary specialty badges and command badge for former squadron and group commanders

[Eclipse]

New some flight uniforms are allowed cloth grade on them...

Has been allowed since the last rev.

[Panache]

Well.  It's out.

Since I was taught to try to lead off with something positive, I will do so now.

THE GOOD:

• Major Corway and Lt. Col. Perrenot did a bang-up job with the graphic illustrations.  Excellent work, gentlemen.

• The god-awful ugly aircrew wings are optional with the corporate variants.

• The procedure for recommending changes to the uniform policy practically reads like a dare.  It got a laugh out of me.

THE BAD:

• It appears every request from those who wear the corporate variants was ignored, although they made sure those who wear the blue flight suit can't wear a flight cap anymore.  Yes, you can't wear the blue flight cap with the blue flight suit.  It's as stupid as it sounds.

• No real meaningful changes other than to tighten the screws on those who wear the corporate variants.

• As Eclipse and others have pointed out, there are still some discrepancies between the text and the illustrations in some sections.

THE UGLY:

As CAP apparently couldn't care less about how those second-class members who have to wear the G/Ws, I feel that it's only fair to reflect that outlook.  I continue to see my so-called leaders wearing BDUs and AF-style Blues when it's quite clear they're not in compliance.  There was some hope that they would have to be held to the same standards as everybody else with weigh-ins, but that was taken out.

I'm tired of being the only person in my Squadron who wears the G/Ws or BBDUs.  I was hoping that at least this version of 39-1 would attempt to add some dignity to those uniforms.

Since CAP is lacking in integrity, I no longer feel bound by my personal integrity to wear G/Ws or BBDUs.  What's good for the goose is good for the gander.  If challenged (yeah, like that'll happen) I'll simply point out that the burden of proof is on them.  And since they can't force me to weigh in... good luck with that.

[Eclipse]

• Major Corway and Lt. Col. Perrenot did a bang-up job with the graphic illustrations.  Excellent work, gentlemen.

Yes, please do not take my personal whining as negative towards your efforts.  Thank you.

[JoeTomasone]

Maybe I missed it, but ...

In the section on when the uniform should and (specifically) should not be worn, one big thing seems to have been left out:

"When engaged in private employment."

Or did I miss it?

Jack

You missed it. 

1.2.7.4. While furthering political activities, private employment or commercial interest.

As for me, I prefer the brown t-shirts - at least I get to wear them a while longer.   Apparently we all need to move our grade insignias on the BDU caps..   The diagram shows them centered above the seam.  Oh, and no more white socks with BDUs/combat boots?  Who's gonna see them anyway?     


The really interesting part is that while they clarified what SMWOG Adult members without grade wear for insignia on blues and grey/whites (no-insignia CAP slides), they never say which flight cap they wear or which device goes on it - it only covers Officers and NCOs.

[JoeTomasone]

  I continue to see my so-called leaders wearing BDUs and AF-style Blues when it's quite clear they're not in compliance.  There was some hope that they would have to be held to the same standards as everybody else with weigh-ins, but that was taken out.

They didn't specify weigh-ins, but they DID put this in:

1.2.2. Wearing the USAF-style uniform is a privilege extended to CAP members who meet weight
(see Attachment 2) and grooming standards (see paragraph 3.2). Commanders and activity directors are
expected to enforce these standards and ensure that members wearing USAF-style uniforms understand
these requirements, that members wearing USAF-style uniforms accept personal responsibility for
meeting these requirements, and are expected to provide remedial education and counseling if required.

[Panache]

  I continue to see my so-called leaders wearing BDUs and AF-style Blues when it's quite clear they're not in compliance.  There was some hope that they would have to be held to the same standards as everybody else with weigh-ins, but that was taken out.

They didn't specify weigh-ins, but they DID put this in:

1.2.2. Wearing the USAF-style uniform is a privilege extended to CAP members who meet weight
(see Attachment 2) and grooming standards (see paragraph 3.2). Commanders and activity directors are
expected to enforce these standards and ensure that members wearing USAF-style uniforms understand
these requirements, that members wearing USAF-style uniforms accept personal responsibility for
meeting these requirements, and are expected to provide remedial education and counseling if required.

And how will they enforce it, exactly?

"Captain, what is your weight?"
"240 pounds, sir."
"Oh, okay."

[vento]

  I continue to see my so-called leaders wearing BDUs and AF-style Blues when it's quite clear they're not in compliance.  There was some hope that they would have to be held to the same standards as everybody else with weigh-ins, but that was taken out.

They didn't specify weigh-ins, but they DID put this in:

1.2.2. Wearing the USAF-style uniform is a privilege extended to CAP members who meet weight
(see Attachment 2) and grooming standards (see paragraph 3.2). Commanders and activity directors are
expected to enforce these standards and ensure that members wearing USAF-style uniforms understand
these requirements, that members wearing USAF-style uniforms accept personal responsibility for
meeting these requirements, and are expected to provide remedial education and counseling if required.

And how will they enforce it, exactly?

"Captain, what is your weight?"
"260 pounds, sir."
"Oh, okay."

INTEGRITY. But since you've already pointed out that your unit and yourself are ignoring this first core value, I can only feel sorry for your attitude.

[Eclipse]

  I continue to see my so-called leaders wearing BDUs and AF-style Blues when it's quite clear they're not in compliance.  There was some hope that they would have to be held to the same standards as everybody else with weigh-ins, but that was taken out.

They didn't specify weigh-ins, but they DID put this in:

1.2.2. Wearing the USAF-style uniform is a privilege extended to CAP members who meet weight
(see Attachment 2) and grooming standards (see paragraph 3.2). Commanders and activity directors are
expected to enforce these standards and ensure that members wearing USAF-style uniforms understand
these requirements, that members wearing USAF-style uniforms accept personal responsibility for
meeting these requirements, and are expected to provide remedial education and counseling if required.

And how will they enforce it, exactly?

"Captain, what is your weight?"
"240 pounds, sir."
"Oh, okay."

Panache, I understand and feel your pain, but a commander would be well in his rights
to require you to weigh-in if he feels you are out of weight, and restrict your
participation in a uniform he feels you are not authorized to wear.

Your only option would be to comply or not participate.  You certainly couldn't file a sustainable complaint,
since enforcing wear standards is clearly a CC's mandate.

The way to combat people with no integrity is to set the example, not abandon your own.

[Panache]

Panache, I understand and feel your pain, but a commander would be well in his rights
to require you to weigh-in if he feels you are out of weight, and restrict your
participation in a uniform he feels you are not authorized to wear.

The frustration in palatable.

Can you please show me the regulation that authorizes involuntary weight-ins?

You certainly couldn't file a sustainable complaint, since enforcing wear standards is clearly a CC's mandate.

Not implying that is a realistic option.

The way to combat people with no integrity is to set the example, not abandon your own.

And that has gotten us where, exactly?  I'm feeling like I'm being played by CAP, and I don't like it.

INTEGRITY. But since you've already pointed out that your unit and yourself are ignoring this first core value, I can only feel sorry for your attitude.

When CAP itself doesn't practice what they preach and show integrity, why should I show it in return?

I imagine it's easy to get on the "Integrity!" high horse when you're not the one being affected by repressive policies.  And it's not just "my unit", it's through the entire organization.

[Eclipse]

Can you please show me the regulation that authorizes involuntary weight-ins?

39-1, quoted above.

When you say "240" the CC says "I don't believe you, show me".

If you don't, your option is whites or not participating, and I can't see disciplinary action,
up to and including termination, not being sustained, since compliance with 29-1 is mandatory
and substantiation is simple.

I think most of us would prefer mandatory weigh-ins as a matter of course, but
not much has really changed.  This had always been a CC's option.

[Panache]

Can you please show me the regulation that authorizes involuntary weight-ins?

39-1, quoted above.

When you say "240" the CC says "I don't believe you, show me".

If you don't, your option is whites or not participating, and I can't see disciplinary action,
up to and including termination, not being sustained, since compliance with 29-1 is mandatory
and substantiation is simple.

We will see.  I am conducting my own personal experiment.  Let's see what happens first:

a) Nobody says anything to challenge me.
b) Somebody challenges me, but drops it when I refuse the weigh in.
c) I get 2B'd.
d) I get challenged and I drag it out long enough until my CAP membership expires.

Either way, it's going to be interesting.

[abdsp51]

We will see.  I am conducting my own personal experiment.  Let's see what happens first:

a) Nobody says anything to challenge me.
b) Somebody challenges me, but drops it when I refuse the weigh in.
c) I get 2B'd.
d) I get challenged and I drag it out long enough until my CAP membership expires.

Either way, it's going to be interesting.

So play tit for tat and compromise your integrity to stick it to the man?