Wing Suppliments to Uniform Regulations

[alamrcn]

Please discuss various Wing Suppliments to Uniform Regulations here, and their legitimacy. I have all the ones I could find on the web here...
http://www.incountry.us/cappatches/library.html
Pleas stay on topic, thanks!

--------------------

This is from the lastes Minnesota Wing suppliment to 39-1...

"With the National Headquarters option where the Wing patch on the left sleeve of the BDU uniform is authorized, Minnesota Wing members SHALL wear, on the left shoulder, the Minnesota Wing patch or a National Headquarters activity patch, ie. Blue Beret, Hawk Mountain, etc."

The part about the wing standardizing wear of the wing patch is legal - we've been over that dozens of times, so let's not approch that one again.

What I'm wondering is if the authorization to wear a National Headquarters activity patch on the left shoulder is within the Wing's abilities. I might have missed something, but I thought that the left-breast pocket was the only location for these.

-Ace

[Eclipse]

I don't personally believe that it is, since the directions on NCSA insignia, etc., are specific, however several states have been pushing that, which to me defeats the whole idea of making the wing patches optional in the first place.

Hopefully NHQ will clarify in February.

Like any law in the real world, the only people who can challenge it are those affected, and if they don't mind/care, things will stand.

[SDF_Specialist]

So if you don't have a Wing's policy letter on the site, does that mean you don't have their policy, or that Wing does not have a policy? Just looking for a better understanding. Great site!!

[mikeylikey]

Didn't NHQ already say that School Patches (Hawk, BB) were to be worn on the pocket of the BDU's??  How can Wings change that type of directive?  So basically what they are doing is saying "you spent $150.00 and attended a special activity, you no longer have to wear the Wing Patch, so take your School patch and post it like the Army does with Shoulder Sleeve Insignia, to make sure everyone knows how special you are".

Outstanding garbage!

[LittleIronPilot]

Didn't NHQ already say that School Patches (Hawk, BB) were to be worn on the pocket of the BDU's??  How can Wings change that type of directive?  So basically what they are doing is saying "you spent $150.00 and attended a special activity, you no longer have to wear the Wing Patch, so take your School patch and post it like the Army does with Shoulder Sleeve Insignia, to make sure everyone knows how special you are".

Outstanding garbage!

Why is it they are "special" (I cannot but hear the snarky sarcasm in your voice) in that way? Why not allow pride to be shown for doing extracurricular activities?

I, for one, have no issue with Wing on the shoulder and activities patches on the breast pocket.

[Hawk200]

Didn't NHQ already say that School Patches (Hawk, BB) were to be worn on the pocket of the BDU's??  How can Wings change that type of directive?  So basically what they are doing is saying "you spent $150.00 and attended a special activity, you no longer have to wear the Wing Patch, so take your School patch and post it like the Army does with Shoulder Sleeve Insignia, to make sure everyone knows how special you are".

Outstanding garbage!

Why is it they are "special" (I cannot but hear the snarky sarcasm in your voice) in that way? Why not allow pride to be shown for doing extracurricular activities?

I, for one, have no issue with Wing on the shoulder and activities patches on the breast pocket.

That's the way it's supposed to be worn. Problem is that there are wings that are requiring their special activity patch to be worn on the left sleeve, in the former placement of the wing patch.

[mikeylikey]

Why is it they are "special" (I cannot but hear the snarky sarcasm in your voice) in that way? Why not allow pride to be shown for doing extracurricular activities?

I, for one, have no issue with Wing on the shoulder and activities patches on the breast pocket.

I am all for keeping the school patches!  I would like to see them worn were they were mandated to be worn, on the pocket! 

That's the way it's supposed to be worn. Problem is that there are wings that are requiring their special activity patch to be worn on the left sleeve, in the former placement of the wing patch.

That's the problem right there.  They are saying "NHQ rules and regs don't apply to my Wing".  Commanders should be allowed to make additions to the manual, but to specifically change something that NHQ says "do it this way" is wrong. 

I am also a firm believer that all members should still be wearing Wing Patches on the sleeve.  It is a historical issue for CAP.  So if we allow school patches to be worn on the sleeve in place of a Wing Patch, then you just created two separate groups within the Wing.  Those that are "Rangers, Blue Berets, etc" and those that are not as "good" because they never attended the school.  So Instead of removing the Wing Patch alltogether, those that went to a school get to take it off, those that did not, have to wear the Wing Patch. 

^That strikes me as going against the reason for wanting to remove the Wing Patch in the first place.  To make all members part of ONE CAP.

[MIKE]

The part about the wing standardizing wear of the wing patch is legal - we've been over that dozens of times, so let's not approch that one again.

[alamrcn]

So if you don't have a Wing's policy letter on the site, does that mean you don't have their policy, or that Wing does not have a policy? Just looking for a better understanding. Great site!!

Thanks! If a wing doesn't have a 39-1 supplimental in the Document Library, it means either they don't have one (most wings), or don't have an electronic version on the web that I could find. I log current and outdated copies, so I may or may not have the applicable one for a particular wing. However, I'm ALWAYS open to submissions!

I think I may toss this up the chain of command about recinding the wing/activity patch on the left shoulder. I agree that it is not right according to National, no matter what personal feelings are. We'll see what happens.

Anyone else got an "uh oh" on their wing's uni-supp?

-Ace

Mike J - - Shea, tell me about it!

[jimmydeanno]

My wing has a bunch of uniform supplements that aren't even written down, just word of mouth from the wing CC.  I don't follow any of them because they aren't "official."

We have different colored ball caps depending on what your ES qual is, berets for a color guard 4 years ago that they still wear, blaze orange shoulder cord for "ES Special Ops," apparent authorization for all the ranger crap for people who complete the wing ES school, etc.  None of it is written down anywhere except the ball caps which the supplement was written against the old 39-1 2 wing CCs ago...

Drives me crazy...

We have a supplement to authorize a Blue and Gold (yellow) cord for our Cadet of the Quarter, in writing - but it only applies to our squadron, not the entire wing. (Wing CC authorized it in writing).

[MIKE]

Thanks! If a wing doesn't have a 39-1 supplimental in the Document Library, it means either they don't have one (most wings), or don't have an electronic version on the web that I could find. I log current and outdated copies, so I may or may not have the applicable one for a particular wing. However, I'm ALWAYS open to submissions!

I know MAWG has one, but since it is not publicly available they may not want me posting a copy here.  This may also be the case with other wings that have members only type access.

Mike J - - Shea, tell me about it!

Methinks you may be misinterpreting the roll eyes.

I think wing sups should pretty much just go down Table 1-3.  and then the other areas where wing has been granted specific authority to authorize an item elsewhere in the manual.  Other stuff does not belong in there, IMO.

[afgeo4]

Wings have as much authority to place patches on the left shoulder as they do to place them on the right knee.

Placement of special activity patches is prescribed by NHQ in 39-1. Changes to the regulation can only be made by NHQ. Additional authorizations may be made by subordinate units to be worn within that unit's AOR.

[afgeo4]

My wing has a bunch of uniform supplements that aren't even written down, just word of mouth from the wing CC.  I don't follow any of them because they aren't "official."

We have different colored ball caps depending on what your ES qual is, berets for a color guard 4 years ago that they still wear, blaze orange shoulder cord for "ES Special Ops," apparent authorization for all the ranger crap for people who complete the wing ES school, etc.  None of it is written down anywhere except the ball caps which the supplement was written against the old 39-1 2 wing CCs ago...

Drives me crazy...

We have a supplement to authorize a Blue and Gold (yellow) cord for our Cadet of the Quarter, in writing - but it only applies to our squadron, not the entire wing. (Wing CC authorized it in writing).

According to regs, whatever was written by your Wing Kings in past, if not approved by current Wing King is invalid. As far as other items go... there is some leeway for commanders to authorize additional items to be worn within their units. That is unless such items are specifically prohibited by NHQ. So... if say the RI Wing decides to wear purple beanies, they may do so (they do not have to, they are still authorized items in 39-1) while in Rhode Island only. When participating outside of the unit (in this case, Wing), they have to use the general 39-1.

In fact, given the commanders' responsibility to their members to keep uniform costs down as much as possible, supplement letters should contain wording to the effect of "these uniform items are optional for wear within the wing, but should be removed when outside wing to comply with 39-1 at member's expense"

[Eclipse]

I know MAWG has one, but since it is not publicly available they may not want me posting a copy here.  This may also be the case with other wings that have members only type access.

If its not publicly available, its not much use, is it?  If a cadet shows up to an NCSA or encampment wearing a bizarre item or insignia, he or she shoudl be able to point to a public document that shows it is at least authorized in their home state.

A double-secret addendum means it likely contains things that would not stand up to scrutiny by people who aren't automatically inclined to accept it.

[afgeo4]

I know MAWG has one, but since it is not publicly available they may not want me posting a copy here.  This may also be the case with other wings that have members only type access.

If its not publicly available, its not much use, is it?  If a cadet shows up to an NCSA or encampment wearing a bizarre item or insignia, he or she shoudl be able to point to a public document that shows it is at least authorized in their home state.

A double-secret addendum means it likely contains things that would not stand up to scrutiny by people who aren't automatically inclined to accept it.

That's a problem. When ordered by a superior to wear an item, the cadet or member will probably wear the item unless they can provide documentation to contrary, which most probably can't since it isn't published. Thus, the member would possibly end up embarrassed, but hopefully will let them know that their commander has ordered the change.

[RiverAux]

Wing supplements can go against national regulations.  Since wing supplements are supposed to be reviewed by National (some are required to be approved), there are opportunities for NHQ to say, l"I reviewed it and don't like it.  Do something else".  If the supplement has been properly reviewed by NHQ, then they have given tacit approval for anything in the supplement that goes against national regs. 

[mikeylikey]

Wings have as much authority to place patches on the left shoulder as they do to place them on the right knee.

Placement of special activity patches is prescribed by NHQ in 39-1. Changes to the regulation can only be made by NHQ. Additional authorizations may be made by subordinate units to be worn within that unit's AOR.

YES.  Right-on!!

[Ned]

If the supplement has been properly reviewed by NHQ, then they have given tacit approval for anything in the supplement that goes against national regs. 

Non-concur.

The National Commander "establishes and maintains" CAP regulations, which must be ratified by the NB.

IOW, nobody on the corporate team at NHQ can change a regulation, or "approve" non-compliance with a regulation.  There is simply no "repeal by implication" inherent in a NHQ review of a wing supplement.

If a wing supplement has a provision that is contrary to a current CAPR, then the wing supplement is simply in error.  And errors cannot change regulations.


Ned Lee
Former CAP Legal Officer