Longest TIG

[JeffDG]

I was looking at some stats today, and found some folks who have definitely met the TIG for promotion.

Our current record holder is a Captain who promoted in July of 1974.  Our #2 is a Lt Col who reached that grade before two other current Lt Cols were born (1976).  Record for Major is 1979.  1st Lt:  1984, 2nd Lt:  2006.

What are you guys records for longevity in grade?

[MSG Mac]

Lt Col Oct 1990

[PHall]

If they're happy with their current grade, what's the problem.
It's not like we have an "Up or Out Policy" in CAP if you're a senior member.

[a2capt]

I wouldn't quite say that a Lt Col has enough TIG for promotion, unless you mean -from- Major.

For the vast majority of CAP members, that's the end of the line, grade wise.

[AlphaSigOU]

Got promoted to Lt Col in July; after it becomes permanent in less than a year my chances at having chickens on my shoulder are slim to none!

[SarDragon]

Capt 1989-2003

Maj - 2003-current; I was promoted under duress, otherwise I'd have almost 26 yrs TIG as Capt

[Flying Pig]

I was a 1LT for about 10yr.  Made Capt after my 1yr as Sq CC rolled around.

[THRAWN]

Made major in 2001, and retired in grade in April 2014.

[DoubleSecret]

I know a lieutenant colonel whose date of rank falls in 1968. 

Anyone who has been serving in grade since the LBJ administration probably deserves a look for bird colonel, IMO.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Captain 1997-2000, 2004-2007, 2009-infinity.

[DoubleSecret]

Captain 1997-2000, 2004-2007, 2009-infinity.

So, 5 years TIG.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Captain 1997-2000, 2004-2007, 2009-infinity.

So, 5 years TIG.

I know my math skills are somewhere at the Sesame Street level but I would count:
1997-2000 - 3 years
2004-2007 - 3 years
2009-present - 5 years

11 years total, though not consecutive.

[MacGruff]

We have a Senior Member in our squadron with a join date in 1980. Not interested in promoting, or doing any Professional Development beyond the minimum requirements, but renews every year.

[Eclipse]

^ This - the problem with all the empty shirts is they skew all the statistics.

[LSThiker]

Captain 1997-2000, 2004-2007, 2009-infinity.

So, 5 years TIG.

I know my math skills are somewhere at the Sesame Street level but I would count:
1997-2000 - 3 years
2004-2007 - 3 years
2009-present - 5 years

11 years total, though not consecutive.

If you are out for more than 2 years, your TIG resets to zero.

[vorteks]

^ This - the problem with all the empty shirts is they skew all the statistics.

That is offensive. I have a cadet in the program and I joined because the squadron needs help. But I have neither the time nor much inclination (not to mention the means) to persue PD. Does that make me an "empty shirt"? The non-member cadet parents don't seem to think so. And neither does the CC, irrespective of the statistics.

[catrulz]

Captain 1997-2000, 2004-2007, 2009-infinity.

So, 5 years TIG.

I know my math skills are somewhere at the Sesame Street level but I would count:
1997-2000 - 3 years
2004-2007 - 3 years
2009-present - 5 years

11 years total, though not consecutive.

If you are out for more than 2 years, your TIG resets to zero.

This is not true, TIG does not reset to zero if your out for more than 2 years (it resets to zero for the E-services modules).  We just successfully promoted a major to LtCol that had a 10 year break, with only 2.5 as major since his return.  These promotions simply can't be submitted in e-services, but must be submitted on a CAPF 2.  Proof of total TIG must be provided on a duty performance promotion.  This promotion was approved by 4 Levels above squadron (group, wing, region and national).  CAPR 35-5 does not state that TIG must be contiguous.  This is not the first duty performance promotion I have processed with split TIG either, just the highest we have ever processed.  The individual has been a LtCol for about 4 months now.

CAPR 35-5 does say that former grade reinstatement is not automatic after a 2 year break.  Perhaps that's what your referring to.

[Eclipse]

^ This - the problem with all the empty shirts is they skew all the statistics.

That is offensive. I have a cadet in the program and I joined because the squadron needs help. But I have neither the time nor much inclination (not to mention the means) to persue PD. Does that make me an "empty shirt"? The non-member cadet parents don't seem to think so. And neither does the CC, irrespective of the statistics.

It's only "offensive" if you believe it refers to you.  If you are in the program with no interest in PD, then you should probably
be a cadet sponsor, not a full member.

For the record I was referring to check-writers that linger on the rolls for years and sometimes decades after leaving the program.

[Eclipse]

This is not true, TIG does not reset to zero if your out for more than 2 years (it resets to zero for the E-services modules).  We just successfully promoted a major to LtCol that had a 10 year break, with only 2.5 as major since his return. 

Why would you submit someone for promotion who was gone for ten years and didn't even qualify for the grade when they left?

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

RI Wing has a Lt Col with a 1968 promotion date. She's approaching the 60 years of CAP service.

[Flying Pig]

^ This - the problem with all the empty shirts is they skew all the statistics.

That is offensive. I have a cadet in the program and I joined because the squadron needs help. But I have neither the time nor much inclination (not to mention the means) to persue PD. Does that make me an "empty shirt"? The non-member cadet parents don't seem to think so. And neither does the CC, irrespective of the statistics.

Ehhhh.... I was a 1Lt for 10 years or so... never did PD beyond the minimums.  Never attended SLS or the UCC, only promoted to Captain because of being a SqCC for a year and ended up with Region and Wing Squadron of Distinction awards, two brand new G1000 182s and flew boat loads of CD missions.  I was far more of an asset to CAP than most people I know who have stacks of PD certificates to their name.   If the member provides a service to his particular unit he's not an empty shirt.  If I was still a member... I still probably wouldn't have done any PD.  However that is not to assume I do not know how CAP operates.  I was happy in CAP, I was a SqCC because I was approached quietly and asked to take over the unit and I agreed as long as 1 particular member agreed to be my Deputy for Seniors.  I was that classic example of a guy who knew how to pick the right people and then sat back and reaped the rewards.  And I made sure not to forget them when the time came.  If people are happy and don't create any drama, let them do the minimum.  If my attempts at motivation fail, so be it.  Again.... we all join for different reasons.  Im not at all concerned about skewed numbers on some CAP web site.

[Eclipse]

Someone performing at your level is hardly an empty shirt, nor even a CSM who helps out regularly.

Context is everything, but these days it's more important to be offended then understand the conversation.

[catrulz]

This is not true, TIG does not reset to zero if your out for more than 2 years (it resets to zero for the E-services modules).  We just successfully promoted a major to LtCol that had a 10 year break, with only 2.5 as major since his return. 

Why would you submit someone for promotion who was gone for ten years and didn't even qualify for the grade when they left?

Situation is everything.  After three months returning he became squadron CC.  He accomplished a lot since his return and got current on CAP policies and programs.  Understanding he had 3 years TIG when he left, and was already Level IV (granted the requirements have changed slightly).  This gentleman is the rare self starter.  It was well deserved.

[Flying Pig]

Right.... cuz Im a guy who gets offended.  My point is, nobody cares that a guy shows up, does the minimum and goes home.  More to the point, nobody and no agency cares about any of the "empty shirts" who continue to fund CAP.

[Eclipse]

This is not true, TIG does not reset to zero if your out for more than 2 years (it resets to zero for the E-services modules).  We just successfully promoted a major to LtCol that had a 10 year break, with only 2.5 as major since his return. 

Why would you submit someone for promotion who was gone for ten years and didn't even qualify for the grade when they left?

Situation is everything.  After three months returning he became squadron CC.  He accomplished a lot since his return and got current on CAP policies and programs.  Understanding he had 3 years TIG when he left, and was already Level IV (granted the requirements have changed slightly).  This gentleman is the rare self starter.  It was well deserved.

So he had 2.5 or 3 years when he left?  The example you gave to fit the narrative is now changing.  He was gone for 10 with only 2.5 as a major, and got promoted to
Lt Col.  Now he's got more then 3 years, was appointed as unit CC and got current on policies.  hardly the same thing.

[Flying Pig]

I had several members in my Sq whom I never met.  They did not cause me one single moment of extra work.  My father was a prime example.  He left CAP as a Captain and continued to pay his dues for years afterwards.  His intent was that someday he would re-join.  Again..... doesn't harm CAP in the slightest nor is there any agency or entity being deceived because of these people continuing to pay.

[Eclipse]

Right.... cuz Im a guy who gets offended.  My point is, nobody cares that a guy shows up, does the minimum and goes home.  More to the point, nobody and no agency cares about any of the "empty shirts" who continue to fund CAP.

Wasn't referring to you.

[Eclipse]

I had several members in my Sq whom I never met.  They did not cause me one single moment of extra work.  My father was a prime example.  He left CAP as a Captain and continued to pay his dues for years afterwards.  His intent was that someday he would re-join.  Again..... doesn't harm CAP in the slightest nor is there any agency or entity being deceived because of these people continuing to pay.

Um...Congress?

Empty shirts are reported regularly as "active members" - that's for starters.
Then there's the whole issue of charters without enough members to even stay open and wings
shuffling the empty shirts around just to keep those charters on the books.

Plenty more where that came from.

[catrulz]

This is not true, TIG does not reset to zero if your out for more than 2 years (it resets to zero for the E-services modules).  We just successfully promoted a major to LtCol that had a 10 year break, with only 2.5 as major since his return. 

Why would you submit someone for promotion who was gone for ten years and didn't even qualify for the grade when they left?

Situation is everything.  After three months returning he became squadron CC.  He accomplished a lot since his return and got current on CAP policies and programs.  Understanding he had 3 years TIG when he left, and was already Level IV (granted the requirements have changed slightly).  This gentleman is the rare self starter.  It was well deserved.

So he had 2.5 or 3 years when he left?  The example you gave to fit the narrative is now changing.  He was gone for 10 with only 2.5 as a major, and got promoted to
Lt Col.  Now he's got more then 3 years, was appointed as unit CC and got current on policies.  hardly the same thing.

No the narrative isn't changing.  We requested promotion after he had been back with 2.5 addition years TIG since his return.  He was out for 10 years but had been a member for 10 years before he left.  He was already Level IV complete, with 3 previous years TIG.  And that's what I was saying in my OP, you can add former TIG (even with a longer than 2 year absence) to current TIG to promote someone.  Whether they're deserving is individual case basis, and changes with situation and the person.

[Eclipse]

OK. I totally read that wrong.  I see what you're saying.

[Flying Pig]

I had several members in my Sq whom I never met.  They did not cause me one single moment of extra work.  My father was a prime example.  He left CAP as a Captain and continued to pay his dues for years afterwards.  His intent was that someday he would re-join.  Again..... doesn't harm CAP in the slightest nor is there any agency or entity being deceived because of these people continuing to pay.

Um...Congress?

Empty shirts are reported regularly as "active members" - that's for starters.
Then there's the whole issue of charters without enough members to even stay open and wings
shuffling the empty shirts around just to keep those charters on the books.

Plenty more where that came from.

Again, nobody cares.  Are there squadrons people actually call on that are nothing more than a name and a website?  No.  None of these people make one ounce of difference to congress or CAP operations.  I know you'd love a huge crackdown on people who pay but never show, but it doesn't matter.  it really doesn't.  Its no different than active members who cant be found any time other than required meetings.  They arent showing up to anything either.

[Eclipse]

I know you'd love a huge crackdown on people who pay but never show, but it doesn't matter.  it really doesn't.  Its no different than active members who cant be found any time other than required meetings.  They arent showing up to anything either.

So "integrity" that's off now?

Quoting CAPP 50-2

Integrity
Integrity is the cornerstone of the core values. It is the quality of being honest, sincere, and
morally upright; and without it, the other core values cannot prevail. Integrity requires
discipline, consistency and persistence in order to reflect the core values in everyday life. In
practice, it involves doing the right thing, understanding and implementing not just the
rules and regulations but the spirit of what they stand for.

Former Air Force Chief of Staff, General Charles A. Gabriel said, "Integrity is the
fundamental premise of service in a free society.
Without integrity, the moral pillars of our military strength – public trust and self-respect
– are lost."

Right now you have an organization that literally doesn't even know how many members it
actually has reporting readiness and strength in regards to an operational mission that
purports to be a life and property resource, but that doesn't matter?

The entirety of every other conversation stems from the baseline of knowing who and how many
people you have as members - whether its growth / attrition projections, readiness,
training levels, PD levels, whatever.  All are meaningless without integrity in the data.

The idea that membership numbers "don't matter" is probably the simplest way to distill what is wrong with CAP.

[Storm Chaser]

You guys crack me up. As I read this thread, it's obvious that there's some misunderstanding going on here.

Eclipse' "empty shirt" reference was not directed to members who choose not to complete certain PD requirements or participate in certain activities or promote beyond a certain grade. Eclipse was referring to "active" members who pay their dues, but do not participate or contribute in any significant way to the organization. This presents CAP as being 58,500 members strong, when in reality this number is much, much smaller.

While we may disagree with some of his comments (or even the tone he uses at times), there was nothing offensive about this particular statement.

[Eclipse]

^ Exactly, thank you!

[lordmonar]

You think that Congress or anyone else who read our numbers don't know that?

There is 1.3 million people in the US armed forces.....no one thinks that is 1.3 million fighters......they know that some of those numbers are empty shirts of one type or another.

[James Shaw]

GAWG Wing member Ben Stone (CGM Recipient)
Joined January 1, 1942
Promoted to Lt Colonel April  1950
Promoted to Colonel September 2007
57 Years TIG
He served 68 years straight until his death in 2009


[attachment deleted by admin]

[Eclipse]

You think that Congress or anyone else who read our numbers don't know that?

There is 1.3 million people in the US armed forces.....no one thinks that is 1.3 million fighters......they know that some of those numbers are empty shirts of one type or another.

Not the same thing, even a little.
Not being a "fighter" doesn't mean you're simply "unaccounted for".  With the exception of situations involving fraud, if you're on
the rolls, there's a reason for it beyond "dunno, guy's been on the roster 10 years, never met him, whatever...".

And you also don't have to be a "fighter", to use your term, in CAP to be a valuable resource, but you do have to show up on occasion
(whether actually or virtually).

[lordmonar]

You think that Congress or anyone else who read our numbers don't know that?

There is 1.3 million people in the US armed forces.....no one thinks that is 1.3 million fighters......they know that some of those numbers are empty shirts of one type or another.

Not the same thing, even a little.

It is exactly the same thing. The people who are concerned with our numbers...know what those numbers mean.  No one is tricked into thinking we have 50,000 pilots out there or that we have 50,000 ground team members.  They know that some of those 50K are pilots, some are CP types, some are admin, comm, cadet parents, and also they know that some of them are just guys who send in checks and never show up.   

[Eclipse]

You think that Congress or anyone else who read our numbers don't know that?

There is 1.3 million people in the US armed forces.....no one thinks that is 1.3 million fighters......they know that some of those numbers are empty shirts of one type or another.

Not the same thing, even a little.

It is exactly the same thing. The people who are concerned with our numbers...know what those numbers mean.  No one is tricked into thinking we have 50,000 pilots out there or that we have 50,000 ground team members.  They know that some of those 50K are pilots, some are CP types, some are admin, comm, cadet parents, and also they know that some of them are just guys who send in checks and never show up.

Sorry, no way.  If you think so, cite where CAP breaks out actual vs. Patron and other non-involved persons.

They don't even report the correct number, let alone how many are active.

Not saying everyone is a pilot isn't >NOT< the same thing as reporting 60,000 members when you know the real number is
significantly less on paper, and of those on paper, maybe a third ever show up.  There are units all over the country that
have 60-10 members on paper and can't get 10 people to a meeting.  In some wings, 000 is (or was until recently) the largest charter.
I think the last time I split out the 000 units it accounted for something like 10+ percent of the total membership,
and that's just in people you can point to easily as "non-factor".

Anything reported to Congress or externally uses the broad numbers in an attempt to make CAP look like a much larger
resource then it actually is on the ground.

[vorteks]

If you are in the program with no interest in PD, then you should probably be a cadet sponsor, not a full member.

That'd be fine if all they needed was someone to drive cadets to the occasional SAREX.

While we may disagree with some of his comments (or even the tone he uses at times), there was nothing offensive about this particular statement.

I'll be the judge of that.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I was a C/Capt from March 2007 until August 2010. Gotta be a record of sorts.

Of course any 16 year old Spaatz cadet can time out with 4+  years. An eternity in cadet years.

[Eclipse]

If you are in the program with no interest in PD, then you should probably be a cadet sponsor, not a full member.

That'd be fine if all they needed was someone to drive cadets to the occasional SAREX.

If you're doing more then that, you should be involved in the PD that provides the training and skills to be doing it.

[Storm Chaser]

You think that Congress or anyone else who read our numbers don't know that?

There is 1.3 million people in the US armed forces.....no one thinks that is 1.3 million fighters......they know that some of those numbers are empty shirts of one type or another.

That's not a good comparison at all. In the Armed Forces, most military personnel are available for duty, unless on some type of medical leave or something along those lines. In CAP, we have members who pay their annual dues year after year, but do not participate at all.

[lordmonar]

You think that Congress or anyone else who read our numbers don't know that?

There is 1.3 million people in the US armed forces.....no one thinks that is 1.3 million fighters......they know that some of those numbers are empty shirts of one type or another.

That's not a good comparison at all. In the Armed Forces, most military personnel are available for duty, unless on some type of medical leave or something along those lines. In CAP, we have members who pay their annual dues year after year, but do not participate at all.

My comparison is not in their availability....but in how congress thinks about those numbers.

1.3M members in uniform is NOT 1.3 M soldiers.   They know that there are maybe 100 support person for every gun toter.

In comparison to CAP  Congress or anyone else who matters know that a 50K member volunteer organization is going to have a significant number of people who are on the books but no one ever sees.   This is true for the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, soccer teams, school PTA, Red Cross et al.

[Eclipse]

1.3M members in uniform is NOT 1.3 M soldiers.   They know that there are maybe 100 support person for every gun toter.

So?  They are paying for those supporters and someone thinks they are necessary.  Not the same thing.

We're not talking about CAP having a roomful of hard-chargers with nothing to do but ready for the call, we're talking about
rosters full of "members" who are that in name only and are never seen or heard from beyond cashing their check.

In comparison to CAP  Congress or anyone else who matters know that a 50K member volunteer organization is going to have a significant number of people who are on the books but no one ever sees.   This is true for the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, soccer teams, school PTA, Red Cross et al.

Do they, really?  Are you confident enough to trot out the real numbers and see how the chips fall?
Part of the insinuation in reporting those numbers is that a ready force exists for a time of national
crisis, yet even in those times CAP is hard-pressed to get reasonable number to respond, and even
more hard-pressed to ask them to go (i.e. Katrina, Sandy).

CAP supposedly has 60k members, yet most wing rosters look more like Spirograph then a org chart,
many have 1/3rd to 1/2 of the positions vacant or being done as lip-service only, and everything is on a shoe-string
and last minute / brute force, with a healthy does of NIH at NHQ.

Would you be confident enough in your belief that "Congress knows" to start telling them next budget year
about the real numbers and state of CAP today?

And if you're going to compare, then compare like organizations in both scale, scope and mission.
The BSA doesn't get $25M+ a year and the largest private fleet of Cessnas in the world, nor do they have
a theoretical role in the national response framework (nor does the PTA).

[lordmonar]

We don't get that money and those air planes because we got xx number of people.

We got that money and those air planes because that is what it take to do the mission that congress and the USAF has given us.

We get some money based on the number of cadets served....but we don't get any more or less money for having 30K Senior members......vice having only 20K senior members (that is assuming we have a 30% empty shirt rate).

[Eclipse]

We get some money based on the number of cadets served...

Really?  OK, great.

It's the same or worse on the cadet side, so time to start giving it back.
I would hazard on the cadet side we've got at least a 50% empty shire rate, and part of that is an annual churn of
35-40% based om numbers our esteemed poster NIN ran recently.

[lordmonar]

We get some money based on the number of cadets served...

Really?  OK, great.

It's the same or worse on the cadet side, so time to start giving it back.

Why?  Now you are complaining about empyt shirt cadets?   Are there really that many cadets who pay their dues every year and just never show up? 

Sure we get a bunch who join up and then drop out sometime during the year and don't re-up.  Sure we got a some cadets who are in college or something and maintain their membership...but are not active.   

But again....CAP-USAF knows all this.  No need to give back any money.

[Eclipse]

Why?  Now you are complaining about empyt shirt cadets?   Are there really that many cadets who pay their dues every year and just never show up? 

Yes, there really are, and those number come into play in everything from the viability of a charter
to the planing and viability of large activities like encampments and NCSAs.  You have wings showing
a couple thousand cadets and then your larger activities wind up needing cadets from other wings just to
keep the doors open.

Again, it's baseline information and fundamental to the ability of any organization to succeed or even sustain.

You have to know who your members are and whether they can be counted on to show up.

CAP is not a social organization, a rec center, or an "affiliation" - it's a service organization,
and you're either there or you aren't.

[lordmonar]

So the problem is not congress but our own internal planning?

[Eclipse]

So the problem is not congress but our own internal planning?

No one said the problem was "Congress".  It's what we report to Congress, and market to everyone else,
not to mention what CAP fools itself with internally.

An organization with a legitimate 60K members has a significantly higher capability and reach
then one with 20K.  Not to mention higher expectations.

The same goes for a unit with 100 members vs. 20.  The former should be firing on all cylinders
and in most wings leading the way in terms of performance.  Yet we have an untold number of
unit with 60-100 on the roster which find it difficult to keep the doors open, yet no one makes an issue of it,
or for that matter seems to even take notice, then CAP wonders why it's struggling and the trend lines
of membership, mission, and capabilities are all negative.

[vorteks]

If you are in the program with no interest in PD, then you should probably be a cadet sponsor, not a full member.

That'd be fine if all they needed was someone to drive cadets to the occasional SAREX.

If you're doing more then that, you should be involved in the PD that provides the training and skills to be doing it.

That's true, and I've completed Level 1 and taken the relevant online technician-level tests. But I'll probably never get to 1st Lt let alone those grades that require spending money dressing up for and traveling to conferences. That appears to be true for many of the seniors I know. There's a lot of things that should be going on (like, for example, having a competent PDO), and then there are the realities of a volunteer organization. Point is we have value. We do what we can to support the cadet program and I think it's appreciated. So it looks like I'll be 2d Lt until the unit no longer needs my modest contributions, or until my cadet finishes the program. I expect that to be several years.

[Eclipse]

No one said you didn't have value.

1st Lt. Require Level II which does not require any conferences, or anything else that explicitly costs money.

You need SLS, which is usually done multiple times each year in each wing, and can be attended as a day-player
within reasonable driving distance (or completed online with Wing CC approval), OBC, another online test,
and a Tech rating, easily accomplished during the normal course of participation.

All can be accomplished with nothing more the required aviator whites you presumably already have or
the golf shirt uniform.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Part of the reason I left the times that I did was, for me, a matter of integrity.

I was not going to continue to be associated with an organisation that I, at the time, had got disgusted/angry/disillusioned with but just not show up.

When I make a break with someone/something, it's a clean one.  Every time I left CAP, I submitted a letter of resignation to my CC's.

[Private Investigator]

Captain 1997-2000, 2004-2007, 2009-infinity.

So, 5 years TIG.

I know my math skills are somewhere at the Sesame Street level but I would count:
1997-2000 - 3 years
2004-2007 - 3 years
2009-present - 5 years

11 years total, though not consecutive.

If you are out for more than 2 years, your TIG resets to zero.

This is not true, TIG does not reset to zero if your out for more than 2 years (it resets to zero for the E-services modules).  We just successfully promoted a major to LtCol that had a 10 year break, with only 2.5 as major since his return.  These promotions simply can't be submitted in e-services, but must be submitted on a CAPF 2.  Proof of total TIG must be provided on a duty performance promotion.  This promotion was approved by 4 Levels above squadron (group, wing, region and national).  CAPR 35-5 does not state that TIG must be contiguous.  This is not the first duty performance promotion I have processed with split TIG either, just the highest we have ever processed.  The individual has been a LtCol for about 4 months now.

CAPR 35-5 does say that former grade reinstatement is not automatic after a 2 year break.  Perhaps that's what your referring to.

When I was Group Commander I would have disapproved it. I disapproved several. Somebody who has been out of CAP for ten years is way out of touch with what is going on today. JMHO   

[Private Investigator]

This is not true, TIG does not reset to zero if your out for more than 2 years (it resets to zero for the E-services modules).  We just successfully promoted a major to LtCol that had a 10 year break, with only 2.5 as major since his return. 

Why would you submit someone for promotion who was gone for ten years and didn't even qualify for the grade when they left?

Situation is everything.  After three months returning he became squadron CC.  He accomplished a lot since his return and got current on CAP policies and programs.  Understanding he had 3 years TIG when he left, and was already Level IV (granted the requirements have changed slightly).  This gentleman is the rare self starter.  It was well deserved.

So he had 2.5 or 3 years when he left?  The example you gave to fit the narrative is now changing.  He was gone for 10 with only 2.5 as a major, and got promoted to
Lt Col.  Now he's got more then 3 years, was appointed as unit CC and got current on policies.  hardly the same thing.

No the narrative isn't changing.  We requested promotion after he had been back with 2.5 addition years TIG since his return.  He was out for 10 years but had been a member for 10 years before he left.  He was already Level IV complete, with 3 previous years TIG.  And that's what I was saying in my OP, you can add former TIG (even with a longer than 2 year absence) to current TIG to promote someone.  Whether they're deserving is individual case basis, and changes with situation and the person.

The way I call it; is if he is back and participating for 2 1/2 years, he needs another 1 1/2 years for Lt Col. If he is all that it should not be a problem. 

[catrulz]

This is not true, TIG does not reset to zero if your out for more than 2 years (it resets to zero for the E-services modules).  We just successfully promoted a major to LtCol that had a 10 year break, with only 2.5 as major since his return. 

Why would you submit someone for promotion who was gone for ten years and didn't even qualify for the grade when they left?

Situation is everything.  After three months returning he became squadron CC.  He accomplished a lot since his return and got current on CAP policies and programs.  Understanding he had 3 years TIG when he left, and was already Level IV (granted the requirements have changed slightly).  This gentleman is the rare self starter.  It was well deserved.

So he had 2.5 or 3 years when he left?  The example you gave to fit the narrative is now changing.  He was gone for 10 with only 2.5 as a major, and got promoted to
Lt Col.  Now he's got more then 3 years, was appointed as unit CC and got current on policies.  hardly the same thing.

No the narrative isn't changing.  We requested promotion after he had been back with 2.5 addition years TIG since his return.  He was out for 10 years but had been a member for 10 years before he left.  He was already Level IV complete, with 3 previous years TIG.  And that's what I was saying in my OP, you can add former TIG (even with a longer than 2 year absence) to current TIG to promote someone.  Whether they're deserving is individual case basis, and changes with situation and the person.

The way I call it; is if he is back and participating for 2 1/2 years, he needs another 1 1/2 years for Lt Col. If he is all that it should not be a problem. 

I know people that made LtCol in 6 years because of position jump promotions (Squadron CC, then Group CC, very possible when you consider you can be a Major Group CC as Level I complete, and It only takes 3-4 years to get to Level IV completion).  As a higher level commander, you can certainly deny any promotion for pretty much any reason.  This guy was deserving, Group Commander knew it, and Wing knew it.  He didn't even know he was recommended until Region called to set up the Prom Board interview.  He certainly didn't ask for it.   So by all means do what you need to do in Group I, but we need to take care of valuable people.

[Storm Chaser]

Captain 1997-2000, 2004-2007, 2009-infinity.

So, 5 years TIG.

I know my math skills are somewhere at the Sesame Street level but I would count:
1997-2000 - 3 years
2004-2007 - 3 years
2009-present - 5 years

11 years total, though not consecutive.

If you are out for more than 2 years, your TIG resets to zero.

This is not true, TIG does not reset to zero if your out for more than 2 years (it resets to zero for the E-services modules).  We just successfully promoted a major to LtCol that had a 10 year break, with only 2.5 as major since his return.  These promotions simply can't be submitted in e-services, but must be submitted on a CAPF 2.  Proof of total TIG must be provided on a duty performance promotion.  This promotion was approved by 4 Levels above squadron (group, wing, region and national).  CAPR 35-5 does not state that TIG must be contiguous.  This is not the first duty performance promotion I have processed with split TIG either, just the highest we have ever processed.  The individual has been a LtCol for about 4 months now.

CAPR 35-5 does say that former grade reinstatement is not automatic after a 2 year break.  Perhaps that's what your referring to.

When I was Group Commander I would have disapproved it. I disapproved several. Somebody who has been out of CAP for ten years is way out of touch with what is going on today. JMHO   

I disagree. He's had 2 1/2 years to get back "in touch" with CAP; plenty of time for someone who is very active to the point of being a squadron commander. That's why you have promotion boards and several layers (depending on grade) of approval authority. Good commanders should not be making blanket decisions without evaluating all the information and particular circumstances surrounding the decision to be made, including consideration for promotions.

[AirDX]

Another interesting CAPTalk thread hijacked by the same two or three people to argue the same points over and over again...

[Ned]

Hmmm.  I've received exactly 4 promotions in the last 40 years. 

Arguably that makes my average TIG about 10 years.

Sounds about right.   

[GroundHawg]

Another interesting CAPTalk thread hijacked by the same two or three people to argue the same points over and over again...

Every time...

[PHall]

Another interesting CAPTalk thread hijacked by the same two or three people to argue the same points over and over again...

Every time...

AKA   The Usual Suspects.

[Private Investigator]

This is not true, TIG does not reset to zero if your out for more than 2 years (it resets to zero for the E-services modules).  We just successfully promoted a major to LtCol that had a 10 year break, with only 2.5 as major since his return. 

Why would you submit someone for promotion who was gone for ten years and didn't even qualify for the grade when they left?

Situation is everything.  After three months returning he became squadron CC.  He accomplished a lot since his return and got current on CAP policies and programs.  Understanding he had 3 years TIG when he left, and was already Level IV (granted the requirements have changed slightly).  This gentleman is the rare self starter.  It was well deserved.

So he had 2.5 or 3 years when he left?  The example you gave to fit the narrative is now changing.  He was gone for 10 with only 2.5 as a major, and got promoted to
Lt Col.  Now he's got more then 3 years, was appointed as unit CC and got current on policies.  hardly the same thing.

No the narrative isn't changing.  We requested promotion after he had been back with 2.5 addition years TIG since his return.  He was out for 10 years but had been a member for 10 years before he left.  He was already Level IV complete, with 3 previous years TIG.  And that's what I was saying in my OP, you can add former TIG (even with a longer than 2 year absence) to current TIG to promote someone.  Whether they're deserving is individual case basis, and changes with situation and the person.

The way I call it; is if he is back and participating for 2 1/2 years, he needs another 1 1/2 years for Lt Col. If he is all that it should not be a problem. 

I know people that made LtCol in 6 years because of position jump promotions (Squadron CC, then Group CC, very possible when you consider you can be a Major Group CC as Level I complete, and It only takes 3-4 years to get to Level IV completion).  As a higher level commander, you can certainly deny any promotion for pretty much any reason.  This guy was deserving, Group Commander knew it, and Wing knew it.  He didn't even know he was recommended until Region called to set up the Prom Board interview.  He certainly didn't ask for it.   So by all means do what you need to do in Group I, but we need to take care of valuable people.

A Group Commander can be promoted to Major with AFIADL 13 or CAP OBC completed.

I would have to task you on what is a valuable person. as I consider all our members valuable assets. What makes one better than another? Now you are getting into 'good ole boy' territory. A good example, and not to judge used car salesmen, but one gentlemen 50% of the Wing thinks he walks on water and the other 50% wants to know why the other half is blind. JMHO, YMMV   

[Private Investigator]

Captain 1997-2000, 2004-2007, 2009-infinity.

So, 5 years TIG.

I know my math skills are somewhere at the Sesame Street level but I would count:
1997-2000 - 3 years
2004-2007 - 3 years
2009-present - 5 years

11 years total, though not consecutive.

If you are out for more than 2 years, your TIG resets to zero.

This is not true, TIG does not reset to zero if your out for more than 2 years (it resets to zero for the E-services modules).  We just successfully promoted a major to LtCol that had a 10 year break, with only 2.5 as major since his return.  These promotions simply can't be submitted in e-services, but must be submitted on a CAPF 2.  Proof of total TIG must be provided on a duty performance promotion.  This promotion was approved by 4 Levels above squadron (group, wing, region and national).  CAPR 35-5 does not state that TIG must be contiguous.  This is not the first duty performance promotion I have processed with split TIG either, just the highest we have ever processed.  The individual has been a LtCol for about 4 months now.

CAPR 35-5 does say that former grade reinstatement is not automatic after a 2 year break.  Perhaps that's what your referring to.

When I was Group Commander I would have disapproved it. I disapproved several. Somebody who has been out of CAP for ten years is way out of touch with what is going on today. JMHO   

I disagree. He's had 2 1/2 years to get back "in touch" with CAP; plenty of time for someone who is very active to the point of being a squadron commander. That's why you have promotion boards and several layers (depending on grade) of approval authority. Good commanders should not be making blanket decisions without evaluating all the information and particular circumstances surrounding the decision to be made, including consideration for promotions.

Correctamundo. One case I had was a Major, 8 years non particpation. Now he is back and wants Lt Col. The reason he was absent, the previous Squadron Commanders told him, he could not wear USAF blues (50+ pounds overweight). Gomer is the new CC and says, Junior is a valuable guy and will be the next CC too. Junior a Lt Col? Its your call, you know what mine was.   

[lordmonar]

Private Investigator.....you are pointing out a good example why we use situational leadership.

Each situation is different.  And we use leaders to make judgment calls.

The fact that we have a great debate out this one subject shows that we have a lot of different points of view. 

They are all good as far as they go.   

The bottom line is......promotions are up to the chain of command.   If you or i are not in the chain of command it makes no difference what our opinion is of the situation.

As they say on line.....YMMV. 

[MSG Mac]

Not quite as blatant as appointing a 21 year old Spaatz recipient as a Group/CC so he could be a Major.

[JC004]

...
No one said the problem was "Congress".
...

George Washington did.      You're saying the general is wrong?   

[DoubleSecret]

...
No one said the problem was "Congress".
...

George Washington did.      You're saying the general is wrong?   

In a CAP context, General Washington's stars would only get him Lt Col.  There'd probably be some delay on that, no DD-214.

* ambles away *

[PHall]

Not quite as blatant as appointing a 21 year old Spaatz recipient as a Group/CC so he could be a Major.

Really?  I just gotta see the cite on that one!

[catrulz]

Captain 1997-2000, 2004-2007, 2009-infinity.

So, 5 years TIG.

I know my math skills are somewhere at the Sesame Street level but I would count:
1997-2000 - 3 years
2004-2007 - 3 years
2009-present - 5 years

11 years total, though not consecutive.

If you are out for more than 2 years, your TIG resets to zero.

This is not true, TIG does not reset to zero if your out for more than 2 years (it resets to zero for the E-services modules).  We just successfully promoted a major to LtCol that had a 10 year break, with only 2.5 as major since his return.  These promotions simply can't be submitted in e-services, but must be submitted on a CAPF 2.  Proof of total TIG must be provided on a duty performance promotion.  This promotion was approved by 4 Levels above squadron (group, wing, region and national).  CAPR 35-5 does not state that TIG must be contiguous.  This is not the first duty performance promotion I have processed with split TIG either, just the highest we have ever processed.  The individual has been a LtCol for about 4 months now.

CAPR 35-5 does say that former grade reinstatement is not automatic after a 2 year break.  Perhaps that's what your referring to.

When I was Group Commander I would have disapproved it. I disapproved several. Somebody who has been out of CAP for ten years is way out of touch with what is going on today. JMHO   

I disagree. He's had 2 1/2 years to get back "in touch" with CAP; plenty of time for someone who is very active to the point of being a squadron commander. That's why you have promotion boards and several layers (depending on grade) of approval authority. Good commanders should not be making blanket decisions without evaluating all the information and particular circumstances surrounding the decision to be made, including consideration for promotions.

Correctamundo. One case I had was a Major, 8 years non particpation. Now he is back and wants Lt Col. The reason he was absent, the previous Squadron Commanders told him, he could not wear USAF blues (50+ pounds overweight). Gomer is the new CC and says, Junior is a valuable guy and will be the next CC too. Junior a Lt Col? Its your call, you know what mine was. 

This story doesn't sound plausible, and if it's true, then I wonder why the individual came back.  CAP's fixation on uniforms goes a little overboard at times.  I hope the information you acted on was not just hearsay.  Even the rumor mill in CAP is below par.  Bottom line is you have to do what you believe is right.  Just be sure you are right, and not acting on personal feelings.  Unfortunately, too many award and promotion boards act on exactly that.  Yet every board member will swear it's someone else integrity that lacking.  Only you know if you've done the right thing, I can't judge you.