Corporate vs. Aux

[wingnut55]

I guess my take on all this is that It is not Corporate that is the problem, it seems we the membership need to stand up and speak out more about the truths that we see in our own ranks. I learned a phrase here that sums up many of our problems and that is "GOB", Good Old Boys". I have often run into brick walls because the GOBs say 'NO", you can't do that. When often if not most of the time they are just plain wrong and obstructive.

The organization has a structure, code of conduct, Federal Mandate, USAF regulations, USAF Auxiliary Regulations, CAP regulations.

The organization as it exists works well when run by the Books and formal guidance best practices. However, there is some fierce personal attacks on people who descent counter to GOB entrenchment

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

The organization as it exists works well when run by the Books and formal guidance best practices. However, there is some fierce personal attacks on people who descent counter to GOB entrenchment

BTDT and learnt a very painful lesson.

In another wing, I filed an IG complaint against another officer for, let's say, behaviour contrary to CAP procedures.  I had my CC's full support behind me and, in fact, the Commander's Commendation I have came out of that incident.  I also had citations out of regs for every action I had taken.

I had verbally warned this person and told him if he persisted I would go up the chain with it.  He didn't know me well enough to know that I have a bad habit of usually doing exactly what I say I am going to do (my dad always told me "never make idle threats...don't threaten to do something, DO it!").  I had many more years of experience in CAP than this person and I knew the regulations...but it didn't matter.

I still have the paperwork relating to that.

However, the bad actor had a lot more friends at Wing than I did...the result was my commander lost command of the unit, I got verbally reprimanded and I resigned from CAP (my own choice) and said I would never serve in that wing again, and I didn't.

Corporate v. Auxiliary didn't even come into that, nor did ranks, nor did regulations, nor did going through proper channels. 

[davidsinn]

the result was my commander lost command of the unit, I got verbally reprimanded and I resigned from CAP (my own choice)

Sounds like another IG complaint at a higher level to me.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Sounds like another IG complaint at a higher level to me.

I thought of that, but by then I was so bloody disgusted, and I knew I was going to be moving out of state anyway.

By then my deep-seated cynicism had kicked in and I thought, if the guy's got friends in high places at Wing, he's probably got them all the way up to the Pentagon.

[Eclipse]

^ A sad state of affairs, to be sure, but we need to separate the reality of human nature and bad actors from the actual
program as written.

There isn't an organization known to the history of man that hasn't been sullied at one time or another by people out for
their own gain, or with hidden agendas, not a one, but that's an indictment of human failings, not the systems we inhabit.

[Hardshell Clam]

In another wing, I filed an IG complaint against another officer for, let's say, behaviour contrary to CAP procedures. 

What was the outcome of the IG investigation?

[NCRblues]

I'm sure he will get right on telling you that...

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

^^Oh, very simple, actually.

I was told in no uncertain terms by two lieutenant colonels that I was too much a stickler for the regs.

[SARDOC]

^^Oh, very simple, actually.

I was told in no uncertain terms by two lieutenant colonels that I was too much a stickler for the regs.

The funny part is that doesn't mean your complaint was unjustified, they just determined that regulations aren't important in that wing.  Which means you should have notified National IG.

[JeffDG]

^^Oh, very simple, actually.

I was told in no uncertain terms by two lieutenant colonels that I was too much a stickler for the regs.

The funny part is that doesn't mean your complaint was unjustified, they just determined that regulations aren't important in that wing.  Which means you should have notified National IG.

Well, Region first I would suggest...

[Hardshell Clam]

I'm sure he will get right on telling you that...

Hummmm, strange.

[jimmydeanno]

I'm sure he will get right on telling you that...

Hummmm, strange.

Not really, it seems par for the course.  I've never seen an IG investigation go well.  Not because the complaint wasn't justified, but because the IG's have never followed their own program rules, or play the "we've suspended them, so we'll just let them expire, because they're angry at CAP, instead of pursuing the complaint" deal.

[RRLE]

Why would we be "an" auxiliary?  Is there ANOTHER AF Aux out there that I don't know about?

USAF MARS

The Military Auxiliary Radio System (MARS) - formerly known as Military Affiliate Radio System - is a Department of Defense (DOD) sponsored program, established as separate managed and operated programs by the Army, Navy, and Air Force. The program consists of licensed amateur radio operators who are interested in military communications. They contribute to the MARS mission providing auxiliary or emergency communications on a local, national, and international basis as an adjunct to normal communications.

[Ned]

I've never seen an IG investigation go well. 

Not really all that surprising since - unless you are the complainant, the IG, or the commander - you will typically never see an investigation.  In order to protect the interests of both the complainant and the subject of the complaint, the ROI is confidential.  (See CAPR 123-2 para 8(o))  The regulation requires that the complainant be kept informed periodically on the status of the complaint and there are procedures for a complainant to request further review if they are unsatisfied with the result.  There IG's records are held confidentially and have a destruction schedule to preserve the confidentiality of the process.

Reasonable minds can differ about how confidential an IG process should be, and I imagine that different organizations do it somewhat differently.  The IGs tell me that our system (including the confidentiality aspects) is modeled closely on the USAF model, with some necessary differences.

Bottom line, most CAP members will never see how an IG investigation "goes," one way or another.

[jimmydeanno]

I have no problem with the confidentiality, and I have no problem with the process as written.  However, I have never seen an IG investigation that followed those prescribed rules, either on the IG side, or the actions taken by the Wing Commander.  I was a member of a unit who had 8 of it's members suspended because a cadet filed a false sexual harassment complaint against them.  The suspension limits listed and the actions required to be done by specific deadlines were never completed.

The investigating officer decided that they weren't going to pursue the investigation because most of the members were close enough to their membership expiration dates that they just "hoped" that none of them would renew.  None of the subjects of the complaint were ever informed of the status of the investigation, nor the result.

It was the same thing for the next four that I had to participate in. 

[Ned]

I have never seen an IG investigation that followed those prescribed rules, either on the IG side, or the actions taken by the Wing Commander.

So, how many IG investigations have you participated in?  (Your answer suggests five.)  In how many of them were you the IO, IG, complainant, or subject?

IOW, how do you know that the rules were not followed?

I'm not suggesting that IGs are not overworked or even inefficient on occasion.  Sometimes, regular complaints get bumped by "priority" investigations (see CAPR 123-2).  Based on the briefings I get, I know that not all investigations are completed within the timelines in the reg.

But based on the logs and documents I see, it appears that the great majority of IG investigations are completed in a timely manner. 

I was a member of a unit who had 8 of it's members suspended because a cadet filed a false sexual harassment complaint against them.  [. . .]

Sounds like a large investigation, all right.  I don't envy the IO or IG assigned.  But how do you know what the motivations of the IO were?

To be personally involved in five or more IG investigations is a little unusual.  Most CAP members go through their career without ever being involved in a single one.

I do think that we need to improve our IG system to increase accountability and speed of investigations.  It might be as simple as adequately resourcing the existing system to allow IGs time and resources to get out into the field and do the investigations.  It might take a more systemic fix.  And I think that some additional sunshine would help set the standards all of us.  I have suggested that the IG staff periodically publish sanitized ROIs along with actions taken; sorta like Uncle Sam does for safety situations.  That way we can all learn from other's mistakes, and see that wrongdoer's (and commanders) are held accountable.

It's on my list of CAP Stuff to Do.

[peter rabbit]

I'm not suggesting that IGs are not overworked or even inefficient on occasion.  Sometimes, regular complaints get bumped by "priority" investigations (see CAPR 123-2).  Based on the briefings I get, I know that not all investigations are completed within the timelines in the reg.

But based on the logs and documents I see, it appears that the great majority of IG investigations are completed in a timely manner. 

I do think that we need to improve our IG system to increase accountability and speed of investigations.  It might be as simple as adequately resourcing the existing system to allow IGs time and resources to get out into the field and do the investigations.  It might take a more systemic fix.  And I think that some additional sunshine would help set the standards all of us.  I have suggested that the IG staff periodically publish sanitized ROIs along with actions taken; sorta like Uncle Sam does for safety situations.  That way we can all learn from other's mistakes, and see that wrongdoer's (and commanders) are held accountable.

It's on my list of CAP Stuff to Do.

I've had the opportunity to be involved in the IG system. For the most part, I've seen it work well - few people became aware that there was an investigation, members were cooperative, the facts were determined within a reasonable period of time considering work schedules, other factors. There were gripes by complainants that wanted to know who complained and the exact nature of the complaint, but the process as written worked the way is was supposed to - the complainant was protected, and there weren't legal "games".

However, other than the regulation stating

Promoting, maintaining, and enforcing high standards of ethical conduct in Civil Air Patrol is a command responsibility.

there is no requirement that any action be taken or within a time frame.

Ned, on your list of stuff to do, would you consider adding:
1. Require that an ROI be acted on by the commander within a reasonable time period. The credibility of the system is impaired when the ROI sits for months - even years.
2. Either require some action be taken when serious findings are sustained - or provide some means of reviewing/modifying the results when no action is taken. Maybe your idea of publishing a santitized ROI along with a sanitized commander's response would be a start.
3. Require that non-member parents of cadets agree to the ethics code as a part of permitting their cadet to participate.
4. Require that non-member parents of cadets agree to the rules of the complaint process if they file or participate in a complaint.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I really doubt I would have got anywhere by going to Region or National.

What would I have gained?

First of all, consider the time period: The Generalissimo was National CC.  Not a high point on the ethics calendar for CAP's upper echelons.

Second, the subject had a position at Wing and was much better known there than this unimportant worker bee, not to mention a lot better at glad-handing (you wouldn't know it from my posts on CT, but I really am very reserved) than I will ever be.

Third, when I got the little "motivational speech" from the higher-ups (with the subject present) I was left with much less of my butt than I had before, plus I was ordered to apologise to the subject for initiating the investigation.  Fortunately, I did hold my cool (amazing even to me in retrospect).

I'm pretty good at reading situations...comes from doing a lot of observing and little talking...and the chorus from Kenny Rogers' The Gambler came to mind.  When my membership came up for renewal, I let it expire.

Oh, it was handled expeditiously, all right...in fact, the preparation of the paperwork and supporting documentation that I did took longer to do than it did for the powers that be to reach a decision.

Chances are very good that if I had pursued it further, all I would have ended up with is a 2B.

But, that was a long time ago and chances are very good I'll never see any of that lot again, unless it is at a National conference or something like that.

I will not make use of the IG system again, not unless I'm ordered to.

[peter rabbit]

Third, when I got the little "motivational speech" from the higher-ups (with the subject present) I was left with much less of my butt than I had before, plus I was ordered to apologise to the subject for initiating the investigation.  Fortunately, I did hold my cool (amazing even to me in retrospect).

IMO, ordering you to apologize to the subject for initiating the investigation is a violation of the current complaint process, as it disclosed the identity of the complainant to the subject.

[peter rabbit]

Back to the original topic: I joined because it was a way for me to fly, and for me to give back to my community and country. I've stayed because of the friends I've made and because I believe in our ability to contribute - like at DWH. I have encountered problems like will be found in any large organization. One is the issue of uniforms. What would I prefer: standardized, reasonably stable, accepted by most, and no corporate vs aux mentality. Will it happen? I don't know.

We need the affiliation with the AF, it is a part of our tradition, and it can make us better than other organizations. However, we also need the corporate missions to help justify the expense and to provide opportunities to keep members active and interested. Why can't both sides accept that and play well together?