Corporate vs. Aux

[agriffa]

I am new to this forum and relatively new to CAP, having joined 10 months ago, so let me give you my perspective on why I joined CAP in the light of this discussion: CAP AF vs CAP corporate.
So back to my point: 10 months ago, I decided to join The Civil Air Patrol, United States Air Force Auxiliary (see gocivilairpatrol.com our marketing recruiting piece for the definition, if you want).
And in this wording, it lays my decision.

First, United States. I wanted to join an organization that is undoubtedly recognized as part of this country, unique to this country, with a strong tie to the country, particularly valuable for somebody like me, not born in this country.

Second, Air Force: I did not want to join the Red Cross or the Boy Scout, all fine and outstanding organizations (my son is a cub scout). I wanted to join an organization similar or that resembles a military organization. I would use the word para-military but I am afraid that this will draw a long lash of remarks and harsh comments, so please scratch that, but you got my point. And with this choice, it comes the honor, the privilege and the pride of wearing the uniform of the US Air Force. If you do not like uniforms then go and join the local flying club and wear flip flops and short pants as you wish. But as the choice is, and I am repeating myself, CAP, US Air Force Auxiliary, then the wearing of a military uniform cannot be criticized or put under questioning. Use of a CAP corporate uniform, puzzles me, as it goes against my previous the point; I might accept it only because the need to a accommodate weight requirements. I am absolutely pride to wear the CAP uniform any time I can, to show my allegiance to such as professional organization. When I work for corporate in my daily job I wear corporate dress: slacks and shirts or whatever it is required that day to look and be professional. When at a CAP meeting and CAP  function, I wear CAP uniform. Easy and simple.

Third, Auxiliary: I joined because I wanted to give something back to the community; i did not want to join any other non-profit organization, I wanted CAP because I love anything that has to do with airplanes, aviation and flying. But having joined an auxiliary (read voluntarily) it means also that somehow, somebody has to give us (the organization) some money to perform our duties. So where do we get the money from? Well, the answer is in the wording again: CAP, US Air Force Auxiliary.... That means the Air Force is allocating money (well through congress, DoD and all the chain of command) to us to perform duties as per our charter. This does not mean we cannot get money from other entities such as the state or AF Reserve, but our primary allegiance and obligation is to the Air Force.

Every organization is evolving: our society is evolving, our school system is evolving, the Air Force is evolving and why not CAP?
I hear that CAP is doing less SAR than before, so what else can we do? I believe that under the AF umbrella there are a lot of activities we can do, still keeping CAP tightly connected with the Air Force.  From aerial surveillance to aerial photography, from education of new generation in flying with flight simulators (the future belongs to drones!!) to disaster relief, all in close connection with Air Force.
I really want to see this organization growing as part of AF because the root is closer to the Air Force than any other corporation also sharing the same core values (remember? Integrity, excellence and respect) with the Air Force and not with any other corporation.
Corporate? I  am not sure which kind of strong values they can offer, which kind of leadership  they can provide and which kind of strong allegiance to this beautiful country they can offer when compared to AF values.

So, now, if you are still with me so far, you got my point: future of the CAP is with AF!
Gosh, what a long rambling!!!!

Semper Vigilans

[flyboy53]

That's why I advocate for the corporate not-for-profit side of the organization to be split off.

We're in the era of big business shaping everything and don't think that hasn't happened to CAP as well. Afterall, the big guns in this organization get the corporate attorneys to focus on all the little guys where we used to get our uniform insignias so that one company gets to have a monoply on just about everything but the uniforms themselves. This is done with the guise that CAP gets a rebate of sorts, but the benefits of those funds are things that the average member will NEVER see.

Then dues go through the roof to pay for rent on headquarters, paid staff, and things like vehicles or aircraft....the old slang of CAP = Come And Pay.

This argument is not too unlike what has happened with the Red Cross. The bean counters take over, you have to pay, are billed, or are required to provide reimbursement for services (even military members) to the point where a standard first aid class now costs a student as much as $75 for a volunteer to teach them -- that's $75 for a member to shell out just for certain ES qualifications.

Never think that the corporate side of this organization hasn't significantly influenced were we are now.

And one other thing, I realize we have a constitution and bylaws that specify how the corporate side of this organization goes, but that also means that each one of us is a stakeholder and should be allowed to vote or register our concerns about different issues that go before the NB or the NEC....tell me the last time that occurred. Tell me when it was that my opinion counted for anything.

[Eclipse]

That's why I advocate for the corporate not-for-profit side of the organization to be split off.

And do what?

We're in the era of big business shaping everything and don't think that hasn't happened to CAP as well. Afterall, the big guns in this organization get the corporate attorneys to focus on all the little guys where we used to get our uniform insignias so that one company gets to have a monoply on just about everything but the uniforms themselves. This is done with the guise that CAP gets a rebate of sorts, but the benefits of those funds are things that the average member will NEVER see.

So we should just let anyone who wants to profit off of CAP's insignia and logos, regardless of the law or quality?  No thanks.

This argument is not too unlike what has happened with the Red Cross. The bean counters take over, you have to pay, are billed, or are required to provide reimbursement for services (even military members) to the point where a standard first aid class now costs a student as much as $75 for a volunteer to teach them -- that's $75 for a member to shell out just for certain ES qualifications.

Imagine having to pay for things...you can always choose someone else, there are plenty of options.

Then dues go through the roof to pay for rent on headquarters, paid staff, and things like vehicles or aircraft....the old slang of CAP = Come And Pay.

Exactly, because absent the "corporate baggage", people will just give us gas, buildings, and airplanes, or better still, we can just get free space and resources from the local military base, after all, those are abundant...oh, wait...

[Eclipse]

And one other thing, I realize we have a constitution and bylaws that specify how the corporate side of this organization goes, but that also means that each one of us is a stakeholder and should be allowed to vote or register our concerns about different issues that go before the NB or the NEC....tell me the last time that occurred. Tell me when it was that my opinion counted for anything.

Locally?I feel as though I have a fair amount of influence and input.

Nationally?  Probably at an equal level with your average airman.

[PHall]

And one other thing, I realize we have a constitution and bylaws that specify how the corporate side of this organization goes, but that also means that each one of us is a stakeholder and should be allowed to vote or register our concerns about different issues that go before the NB or the NEC....tell me the last time that occurred. Tell me when it was that my opinion counted for anything.

Locally?I feel as though I have a fair amount of influence and input.

Nationally?  Probably at an equal level with your average airman.

Really Bob? You have influence? Does that mean you're a member of your wing's GOB club?

Because they seem to be the only ones who make any decisions. Everybody else is either ignored or shown the door if they get too nosey.

[Short Field]

Because they seem to be the only ones who make any decisions. Everybody else is either ignored or shown the door if they get too nosey.

I would have swore we were in different wings.... 

[Eclipse]

And one other thing, I realize we have a constitution and bylaws that specify how the corporate side of this organization goes, but that also means that each one of us is a stakeholder and should be allowed to vote or register our concerns about different issues that go before the NB or the NEC....tell me the last time that occurred. Tell me when it was that my opinion counted for anything.

Locally?I feel as though I have a fair amount of influence and input.

Nationally?  Probably at an equal level with your average airman.

Really Bob? You have influence? Does that mean you're a member of your wing's GOB club?

Because they seem to be the only ones who make any decisions. Everybody else is either ignored or shown the door if they get too nosey.

Yes, really.  And surprise! I'm not a pilot.  It comes down to knowledge, experience, staying in your lane, and waiting your turn.
We have far too many people who are sold a bill of goods about influence! and input! on day one, before they even know
where the bathrooms are, and then we wonder why nothing ever gets done.  CAP is no different, better or worse, than any large
organization.  Everybody else is "The Man", until people get their chance, and then they are "working in CAP's best interest".

If you're a commander and not "commanding", it's your fault.

If you're a staffer trying to command, it's your fault.

If you're anyone who has created a shortcut that does an end-run around the real procedure simply to avoid an uncomfortable conversation, it's your fault.

I've done all of these things, they all fail eventually.

The path to success is working the core program, without filter, arming yourself with knowledge and experience, and making sure you speak
in short sentences with regulations as periods.

[COL Land]

Here's a view from the other side...

The U.S. Army Cadet Corps <www.goarmycadets.com> (USAC) has five membership categories (Officers, Noncommissioned Officers, Uniformed Instructors, Civilians and Cadets).   Officers command and manage our units and programs.   NCOs' "make it happen."   Cadets are the sole reason for our program.  Uniformed Instructors are DoD personnel who are insured through USAC, but wear their regular uniforms.  (They may not hold a command slot in that capacity).  Then there are our civilians.   I think this is where we have learned a lot from "Big Army." 

USAC adults who do not wish, or are not qualified, to wear a uniform (this can range from a lack of personal desire towards "stars and bars," grooming standards, weight, etc.) are enrolled as USAC Civilians.   This also applies to those who wish to minimize their participation with USAC (understanding that in our culture, seniority is clearly tied to responsibility...if you are senior, you ARE in charge).   

Our USAC Civilians are an extremely important and valued part of the USAC team and are fully engaged in the day-to-day operation of the program, much like DA Civilians are within the Army culture in garrison.   (I was recently told there are 2.3 civilians for every uniformed warfighter...whether true or not, the civilian force is absolutely essential to the Army's ability to protect America's interests).  A USAC Civilian or USAC Civilian Executive (a senior USAC Civilian with authority equivalent to a Major) can fill any position, except command, at most any level of the organization.   While not saluted (unless they retired as a commissioned officer from DoD or USAC), they are fully empowered as civilians, with authority over uniformed personnel, when appropriate.   

This results in a number of positive benefits for our program:

a.   Maintains the military structure and uniformity of USAC.   Uniformed personnel wear a uniform, civilians wear standardized civilian attire (polo/dockers or coat/tie and slacks).   Military personnel are always in a single prescribed uniform and customs and courtesies are universally adhered to.  In most cases, with the exception of the required modifications to the uniform, our personnel easily fit in with active, Guard and reserve personnel.

b.   Civilians who are in civilian attire are fully engaged with the program, with appropriate authority, responsibility and title, yet are not using a military rank that does not correspond to their dress.

c.   About 80% of what we do can be done by civilians in civilian clothing.  However, those skills that are clearly military in nature (Drill and Ceremonies, Field Training, etc.) are led by uniformed professionals in a military uniform.

d.   We've created a promotion system to fully recognize USAC Civilians for their proficiency and value to the program.   As with DA Civilians, it's important to recognized our civilian professionals just as we those who we pin ribbons and stripes onto.

e.   Provides a valid opportunity for service to individuals who are not really prone towards the regimentation of the program, such as those with no military background, nor interest in learning such skills; military retirees who have had their share of spit and polish, yet still want to serve; and those who offer a level of expertise which is of value to the program, and wish to serve, yet do not want the added responsibility of military rank.

Much like the Army, when a Commander comes into a room, everyone (military and civilian) rises.   The civilians do so out of respect, rather than a regulated response.   Civilians are not required to form up for Retreat, yet many do for the same reasons.   Our USAC Civilians are fully engaged in the USAC program and are essential to our future success.   By putting people where they are most comfortable, yet still maintaining a consistent standard for the program, we are best able to provide our Cadets with a realistic view of the Army...which is our primary mission.

This is not to say we're "right" or "better," by any means...just a point of comparison. 

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

As I told Short Field on another thread, CAP's identity seems to be getting more and more schizoid as time goes by.

We've come a long way from this:




...and not in a good way.

[Short Field]

The path to success is working the core program, without filter, arming yourself with knowledge and experience, and making sure you speak
in short sentences with regulations as periods.

:clap:  :clap:  :clap:

CyBorg:  Our partnership with the USAF is as strong now as it ever was in the past.  We partner daily on missions and activities.  My squadron is routinely called to help AD squadrons when they need assistance.  We are consider part of the base family.   The only problem with CAP's identity are the members who try to ignore the Civil part.

[NCRblues]

CyBorg:  Our partnership with the USAF is as strong now as it ever was in the past.

Maybe, maybe not as well...im no longer sure anyone knows anymore.

We partner daily on missions and activities.

Less missions every day. About the activites, are you talking about CAP or your squadron?

My squadron is routinely called to help AD squadrons when they need assistance.

You must be one of the only squadrons around who do so.

We are consider part of the base family.

Again, very rare.

The only problem with CAP's identity are the members who try to ignore the Civil part.

Disagree, IMO, the problem is with people who demand that we sing the CIVIL part ALL the time.

[Short Field]

Maybe, maybe not as well...im no longer sure anyone knows anymore.

But that doesn't stop people from complaining that it isn't.

Less missions every day. About the activities, are you talking about CAP or your squadron?

CAP  And there is not a lot you can do about there being fewer lost airplanes.

You must be one of the only squadrons around who do so.

That happens when you live on a active duty base, have members in the different squadrons, and don't demand to lead the parade.

The only problem with CAP's identity are the members who try to ignore the Civil part.

Disagree, IMO, the problem is with people who demand that we sing the CIVIL part ALL the time.

I am Civil Air Patrol all the time.  Sometimes I function as an auxiliary to the USAF when I am on a AFAM.  What's so hard to understand.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I agree with NCRblues on most counts.

I really doubt a partnership can be considered "strong" when much of the senior partner doesn't know the junior partner exists, except for rumour and hearsay about overweight, ungroomed oldsters wearing "their" uniform disgracefully and trying to force them to salute when they don't have the right to.

It may well be that Short Field is fortunate enough for his unit to be called upon to partner with the active duty AF.  That, in my experience, is rare and getting more so.  My unit is on an ANG installation with two flying units and we hardly ever interact with them.  I think YMMV applies here.

I also agree that the problem is not with members who "try to ignore the Civil part," it is moreso with members who are steadily trying to push CAP away from its Air Force background.  In 18 years of CAP, serving in four squadrons of all types in two wings, I have never known anyone who has tried to equate us with the Air National Guard or Air Force Reserve, or tried to push the POV that we are something we are not: a military service.  The only remotely related examples would be (few and far between) cadets who think that CAP is "Full Metal Jacket" and they have the right to be Gunny Hartman, and they are straightened out double quick.

I still maintain that our identity is a largely unknown quantity among our members, and if you would get a roomful of CAP members chosen at random and told them to define in one paragraph what CAP is, it would be a venture akin to trying to herd cats.

[SamFranklin]

I'm tired of hearing half-baked, unsupported claims that the Air Force / CAP relationship is "more schizoid" (Cyborg's phrase) as time goes by. A few chronic naysayers here focus on superficial matters like the format of the ID card, NHQ's use of the triangle logo, and the popularity of the polo shirt uniform, and then deduce that the AF hates CAP, or that CAP is deliberately stepping away from its parent service. 

I suggest that those who focus on superficial matters are telling us more about their unmet esteem needs than the AF relationship or CAP identity they are purportedly explaining.

An objective assessment of the AF / CAP partnership will show that the relationship is stronger than it has been in decades.

Improved funding & new missions:
AE:  Funding for ACE program
CP:  Cadet textbook funding, NCSA travel funding
ES:  Surrogate Predator, Noble Eagle missions

General Visibility:  2- and 3-star generals serve on our board of governors


Notable comments on CAP / AF relations:

"The CAP, in its AF Auxiliary role, is being recognized as an 'Air Force Air component' as important to our nation and our mission as the Guard and Reserve components. The AFAux does the majority of the day-to-day USAF DSCA missions; from search and rescue to aerial imagery and Federal Agency support.  Their volunteers are true patriots - immediately available for tasking and providing quick response to our requirements - they have never failed us.  The USAF could not do its DSCA and Homeland Defense missions without the CAP."

Maj Gen Hank Morrow                         
AFNORTH/CC  (former)


"CAP is available to assist federal, state and local authorities in performing various reconnaissance, emergency services, disaster relief and homeland security missions. With ever expanding mission sets, CAP as the AF Auxiliary, plays an integral role in the defense of our country.  From providing support during Operation Noble Eagle training sorties to coordinating with our Federal partners, the AF Aux has direct impact on the safety of our nation's citizens. The AF Auxiliary is a force multiplier and plays a large part in the success of the AFNORTH mission.  I continue to be amazed at the true professionalism and dedication of the CAP volunteers -- from the senior leaders down to the cadets, the service provided to the USAF is outstanding."

Maj Gen Garry Dean
AFNORTH/CC  (former)



Really, truly, it's time to stop this whiny, unsubstantiated line of discussion.

[SamFranklin]

  My unit is on an ANG installation with two flying units and we hardly ever interact with them.

Shame on you for doing such a poor job building a relationship with them.

[coudano]

And there is not a lot you can do about there being fewer lost airplanes.

To be fair, there probably aren't any fewer missing airplanes than there were before.
What there are fewer of is 'false alarm' and non-distress ELT's (which it turns out was the vast majority --high 90%s-- of them in the first place)

[davedove]

You do understand that we are only "an" Auxiliary of the USAF when we are in a USAF mission status?
So the rest of the time we have to be "something else" when we are in some other status.

Again, it's "a" USAF Aux, not "the" USAF Aux.

I've always had a problem when people make this distinction.  Why would we be "an" auxiliary?  Is there ANOTHER AF Aux out there that I don't know about?

I think it would be better to say that we are the official auziliary, but we sometimes do other jobs outside the AF mission.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Shame on you for doing such a poor job building a relationship with them.

There's no reason to insult me.

All our current and past command staff have made the Guard brass aware that we stand ready to assist them.

If they don't have a use for us, they don't have a use for us.  That's a two-way street.

You can quote top brass all you like, but when the rubber meets the road, at the local/squadron level, I see less interaction than any time since I first joined CAP in 1993.  Most of the AF interest I have seen is in the cadet side of things.

And, sir, you are closing your eyes if you haven't seen cultural shifts in the CAP-USAF relationship over the past 20 years.

[Major Lord]

I was not sure who Maj Gen Garry Dean was, so I found his bio: http://www.af.mil/information/bios/bio.asp?bioID=10748

Major Lord

[Ned]

I was not sure who Maj Gen Garry Dean was, so I found his bio: http://www.af.mil/information/bios/bio.asp?bioID=10748

Major Lord

An outstanding officer and true supporter of CAP.  He briefed the BoG using his ATO for AFNORTH which showed CAP as the large majority of his sorties.

The AF thought he was such a good commander that they had to replace him with a three star in the same billet 

He will be missed on the BoG.