If you had the power

[ZigZag911]

Reduce administrative processes and staffing requirements at squadron level...some of the more bureaucratic functions should be handled at higher headquarters.  Our community level units should be focused on the program, training and missions, not paperwork.

Part of the problem on that is offloading paperwork to volunteers with no buy-in at the local level becomes difficult in my experience.

THough perhaps we could create a chairborne membership option for people that just want to do paperwork for everyone? 

My point is to get as much paperwork as possible OFF local level, move to higher echelons which, presumably, have more experienced people.

[Holding Pattern]

Reduce administrative processes and staffing requirements at squadron level...some of the more bureaucratic functions should be handled at higher headquarters.  Our community level units should be focused on the program, training and missions, not paperwork.

Part of the problem on that is offloading paperwork to volunteers with no buy-in at the local level becomes difficult in my experience.

THough perhaps we could create a chairborne membership option for people that just want to do paperwork for everyone? 

My point is to get as much paperwork as possible OFF local level, move to higher echelons which, presumably, have more experienced people.

Yes, and when those people later go inactive you have to get a new person in there who no longer even has the experience of pushing paper at the squadron level.

Also, how would you like to fail a SUI because someone not even local to you screwed up the paperwork?

There are a lot of reasons to do things the way they currently are.

Now if the paperwork was done by paid people, that might be a different story.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Speaking of speeding and parking tickets...

When I lived in Rockland County, NY and before my second iteration on CAP I used to go to West Point to see Retreat. One time I drove too far, wanted to do an u-turn. Did not see there was a yellow line... and one of those guys saw me. He yelled at me, "dont you see a yellow line there?" I told him that time was my first visit and did not see the line. It was true as it was faint. He could still have fined me as the turn I made put me towards his direction and he was in his patrol car. He let me go.

However I saw how relentless those guys are with infractions.

In the afternoon retreat call, drivers would park within 70 feet from the flagstaff and in front of where the Corps of Cadets would march. That area is not for parking, and is marked so. The MPs there, who were/are? the ones that posted the Flag during Revellie and removed It during Retreat, would show up 15 minutes before. And had a field day ticketing cars! Like sharks... Not one would escape them. Other times they were always stoping infractors.

After I joined CAP on my second iteration but before 9/11 I was there so often the guards at the gate would wave me through. I had a CAP license plate, and the CAP seal on my bumper. Other cars were inspected very meticulously, even when the alerts went up. After 9/11 I never tried entering into West Point.

[ZigZag911]

If the paperwork was done at a higher level, that HQ would be the one responsible during inspection.

What I'm really talking about is re-structuring the squadron staff to better reflect what is actually needed there.

I would move finance, admin, personnel, professional development and flight operations entirely to wing or group level.

If a local unit had aircraft, a unit member would be assigned as an ADY assistant ops officer at the higher echelon to look after  flying matters...much the way assistant IGs at groups are actually assigned to the wing.

Command, safety, cadet programs, testing, public affairs, supply would continue to be local functions...that is, those areas that actually, directly concern running the program.

This is just a first draft of the concept...obviously it needs further development...but the reality is that few CAP squadrons can actually effectively mirror a USAF squadron or group level staff. Let's address that, practically.

[Storm Chaser]

Reduce administrative processes and staffing requirements at squadron level...some of the more bureaucratic functions should be handled at higher headquarters.  Our community level units should be focused on the program, training and missions, not paperwork.

Part of the problem on that is offloading paperwork to volunteers with no buy-in at the local level becomes difficult in my experience.

THough perhaps we could create a chairborne membership option for people that just want to do paperwork for everyone? 

My point is to get as much paperwork as possible OFF local level, move to higher echelons which, presumably, have more experienced people.

I agree. We have too many administrative burdens at the unit level. In fact, many (most?) units are not even fully manned to run all these staff functions. No wonder we have members with 3-5 duty assignments. The sad part is that some think this is normal. Not only that, some of these members also work at the group or wing level.

Why do we have so many duplication of efforts at the unit, group, wing and region levels? Instead of higher headquarters alleviating the burden from lower headquarters, we just have additional layers of bureaucracy at each level. I think we need to empower units and lower level headquarters and remove those staff functions that must be performed at higher headquarters. Not every staff assignment needs to be perform at the unit level. Some of those could be consolidated at the group or wing levels.

[Holding Pattern]

If the paperwork was done at a higher level, that HQ would be the one responsible during inspection.

What I'm really talking about is re-structuring the squadron staff to better reflect what is actually needed there.

I would move finance, admin, personnel, professional development and flight operations entirely to wing or group level.

If a local unit had aircraft, a unit member would be assigned as an ADY assistant ops officer at the higher echelon to look after  flying matters...much the way assistant IGs at groups are actually assigned to the wing.

Command, safety, cadet programs, testing, public affairs, supply would continue to be local functions...that is, those areas that actually, directly concern running the program.

This is just a first draft of the concept...obviously it needs further development...but the reality is that few CAP squadrons can actually effectively mirror a USAF squadron or group level staff. Let's address that, practically.

So under your system, would the finance committee far away have authorization to deny local requests for funds disbursement?

When someone needs to be promoted to group level finance officer, and your selection pool is a series of SMs that have never done squadron level finance, do you simply hope that your applicant is capable of running the paperwork for 2-8 squadrons by just jumping in?

Now I'm not the biggest fan of red tape, and my POV is colored by the fact that I've never been with a squadron that had fewer people than available duty positions, so I acknowledge I don't know all the problems of running a small squadron. But I've seen our local "paperwork" officers (I'm not sure how you can put PD and flight in that category though, but perhaps that is also different for smaller squadrons) and they are integral to making our squadron better.

The diversity of jobs available also in fact helps get new members skin in the game IMO. When you look at the entire list of positions and compare that to what a person coming in might be capable of fulfulling, generally a volunteer can bring at least one of those skillsets to the table, and eventually, people currently in postings can rotate to other jobs.

I'll reiterate that if we somehow pay these people money I can see changing things to allow for kicking some of these tasks upstairs. But as an example, I'm a squadron IT officer. I coach a cyberpatriot team and work on updating our website to get it out of the 90's. If I was at the group level and I was the only IT guy? I'd probably consider a vacation from CAP. Overloading volunteers not local to squadrons with the paperwork of multiple squadrons is asking for mass desertion.

NOTE: I get this is the wish thread, and I'm trying to tie you down for details. I'm used to the system working as intended at the 2 squadrons I've been a part of, so if you can shed light on the small squadron + no plane experience, I'm all ears.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Name removed to protect the guilty...

[usafcap1]

Name removed to protect the guilty...

Tisk tisk... that's a shame.

But I think you mean innocent. Because they'd be considered innocent until proven guilty. Am I right.

[SarDragon]

The preponderance of available evidence is a presumption of guilt. It would be almost impossible to argue that the poster is not exhibiting moronic behaviour.

[Holding Pattern]

Starting with "their"...

[SarDragon]

Starting with "their"...

[usafcap1]

Starting with "their"...

+1 

[CAP_truth]

Regardless what you say Civil Air Patrol is still United States Air Force Auxiliary. It's on every members ID and on our Seal. Say Civil Air Patrol and most people do not know what your talking about. But, if you say your a member of the Air Force Auxiliary Civil Air Patrol they understand.

[Holding Pattern]

Regardless what you say Civil Air Patrol is still United States Air Force Auxiliary. It's on every members ID and on our Seal. Say Civil Air Patrol and most people do not know what your talking about. But, if you say your a member of the Air Force Auxiliary Civil Air Patrol they understand.

They think they understand.

But I find that if they don't know what CAP is, telling them you are in the Civil Air Patrol opens up a lot of opportunity to explain exactly what it is that we are and what we do.

Heck, I might actually get that recruiting ribbon one of these days because of it. 

"Why can't you meet me on Monday evening?"

"I have a previous commitment, I'm in the Civil Air Patrol."

"And what is that?"

"It's a non-profit funded by the government to promote emergency services, aerospace education, and cadet programs for the youth and general public."

"Why does the government fund it? Did you say "Cadets?""

"Well, as we are the civilian auxiliary of the USAF, it behooves them to make sure we have the tools we need to accomplish our mission. Founded shortly before the Pearl Harbor attacks, since then we've been involved in various aspects of civil defense and emergency support by flying prop aircraft and deploying ground teams as needed."

"Do we really need that today? I thought we had FEMA for that? And what can you do that the AF can't?"

"Well, with the advancement of GPS, we have a lot less search and rescue for individuals, but we also now need to prepare for much larger events that occur with much less frequency. Think of things like major hurricanes like Katrina. And when it comes right down to it, the coolest thing we do right now that the AF can't is provide cheap training for Predator drone pilots."

"Wait, what?"

"Yeah, we mount a sensor ball on a prop aircraft and a drone pilot trainee sends commands to the pilot, and the pilot mimics the action. Obviously this is an oversimplification, but as you can guess, flying our aircraft and keeping real pilots in control in case the ground trainee makes a mistake is far cheaper than losing a multi-million dollar drone."

"Wow, I didn't even think of that."

"We get to do lots of cool stuff like that. My local squadron has never done that, specifically, but we did once put all of our cadets on a C-130 flight. They thought that was pretty awesome."

"So, can I come along and see one of your meetings?"

"Sure, let me just let our squadron commander know that you'll be coming along and I'll let you know what the best day is to show up."

(Set up day to be something beyond the norm. AE competition, Color Guard presentation in the squad room, planning day to assist a major upcoming event, etc.) (While this isn't required, it definitely tends to provoke interest in the attendee.)

[Майор Хаткевич]

Regardless what you say Civil Air Patrol is still United States Air Force Auxiliary. It's on every members ID and on our Seal. Say Civil Air Patrol and most people do not know what your talking about. But, if you say your a member of the Air Force Auxiliary Civil Air Patrol they understand.

Agreed. But we're Civil Air Patrol - the USAF Auxiliary. Those who prefer to use the latter seem to think it makes them seem cooler by confusing a person to think they have some direct relationship to the AF.

[lordmonar]

We do have a direct relationship with the USAF. We are their auxiliary.

[usafcap1]

Huh

[Storm Chaser]

Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 9442, CAP is an auxiliary of the Air Force when the services of CAP are used by any department or agency in any branch of the Federal Government.

CAP is a federally supported, congressionally chartered non-profit corporation that may be utilized as a civilian volunteer auxiliary of the Air Force.

As a nonprofit corporation, CAP has a unique relationship with the Air Force. As set forth in 10 U.S.C. 9442, CAP is a volunteer civilian auxiliary of the Air Force and the Secretary of the Air Force may use the services of CAP to fulfill the noncombat programs and missions of the Air Force.

Civil Air Patrol is a private, nonprofit corporation chartered under special Act of Congress, 36 USC §§ 40301 - 40307, which sets forth the purposes, rights, and duties of the Civil Air Patrol.

The name of the Corporation shall be "Civil Air Patrol" and its status is that of the volunteer civilian auxiliary of the United States Air Force. The Corporation may also be referred to as "Civil Air Patrol" or by such other titles as may be approved in the Bylaws.

Civil Air Patrol (CAP) was established 1 December 1941 and is a private, nonprofit organization of a benevolent character, and incorporated by the United States Congress on 1 July 1946 (36 USC 40301- 40307) and its status and governing body are defined by 10 USC Chapter 909.

The Congress codified that status declaring CAP as the official Auxiliary of the newly created United States Air Force on 26 May 1948 by a law frequently referred to as the CAP Supply Bill (10 USC 9441). In 2000, Congress codified CAP's status as an auxiliary of the Air Force when it is performing a mission for a "department or agency in any branch of the Federal government".

[usafcap1]

Just give me a straight answer here. We are or we are not the Air Force auxiliary? Because I'm getting mixed signals here.

[LSThiker]

Just give me a straight answer here. We are or we are not the Air Force auxiliary? Because I'm getting mixed signals here.

Yes:

Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 9442, CAP is an auxiliary of the Air Force when the services of CAP are used by any department or agency in any branch of the Federal Government.

CAP is a federally supported, congressionally chartered non-profit corporation that may be utilized as a civilian volunteer auxiliary of the Air Force.

As a nonprofit corporation, CAP has a unique relationship with the Air Force. As set forth in 10 U.S.C. 9442, CAP is a volunteer civilian auxiliary of the Air Force and the Secretary of the Air Force may use the services of CAP to fulfill the noncombat programs and missions of the Air Force.