CLC

[JeffDG]

Should I email wing to find out my options?

99% of the time the answer to this question is "No"

You have a squadron and a chain of command for a reason.

[EMT-83]

Should I email wing to find out my options?

99% of the time the answer to this question is "No"

You have a squadron and a chain of command for a reason.

In theory, this answer is correct. In practice, I received a lot of inquiries directly from members while on Wing staff. The black hole between the squadron and Wing is enormous - sometimes by accident, other times not.

[JeffDG]

Should I email wing to find out my options?

99% of the time the answer to this question is "No"

You have a squadron and a chain of command for a reason.

In theory, this answer is correct. In practice, I received a lot of inquiries directly from members while on Wing staff. The black hole between the squadron and Wing is enormous - sometimes by accident, other times not.

I know.  And wing staff being "helpful" simply perpetuates it...

These inquiries need to go through the chain-of-command for the simple reason that the rest of the CoC needs to know what is happening in their units.  A call to a "helpful" Wing Staffer bypasses that entirely.

[EMT-83]

Should I email wing to find out my options?

99% of the time the answer to this question is "No"

You have a squadron and a chain of command for a reason.

In theory, this answer is correct. In practice, I received a lot of inquiries directly from members while on Wing staff. The black hole between the squadron and Wing is enormous - sometimes by accident, other times not.

I know.  And wing staff being "helpful" simply perpetuates it...

These inquiries need to go through the chain-of-command for the simple reason that the rest of the CoC needs to know what is happening in their units.  A call to a "helpful" Wing Staffer bypasses that entirely.

When the squadron commander's desk is the black hole and no one else knows what's going on, a "helpful" staffer can be essential to the guy trying to get past first base. Is it the way it should be? No. Is it the way it is? Yes.

[GaryVC]

I have recently rejoined CAP. I think that the CoC thing is badly overdone in CAP. When I was in a MAJCOM Hq in the Air Force I never hesitated to reach out (usually by telephone as it was long before email) to anyone that I thought could help me with a issue. I wasn't calling colonels but their subordinates. The problems I have seen so far in CAP seem to be exactly like this one: lack of information about training. However, if you are communicating by email I suggest you CC your commander. If that is uncomfortable you probably shouldn't send the message until you are.

[SarDragon]

I don't know if you were O or E, but being at a MAJCOM has a different dynamic than a a regular rubber-meets-the-road unit. WIWOAD, I had occasion to call the Pentagon on a personal matter, and my immediate supervisor was in the loop on it ahead of time.

CoC certainly matters in CAP. It allows those who need to know what's going on to do that.

[GaryVC]

I don't know if you were O or E, but being at a MAJCOM has a different dynamic than a a regular rubber-meets-the-road unit. WIWOAD, I had occasion to call the Pentagon on a personal matter, and my immediate supervisor was in the loop on it ahead of time.

CoC certainly matters in CAP. It allows those who need to know what's going on to do that.

While I agree to a certain extent, I was balled out when I tried to find out when the next SLS was. No one in the squadron knew (and still don't, we have been told vaguely "in the fall"). I don't know why anyone would get this excited about someone trying to find out about training. This is not a subject that ever came up in the Air Force and it really isn't CoC related other than it would be nice for everyone concerned to know.

[Eclipse]

I have recently rejoined CAP. I think that the CoC thing is badly overdone in CAP. When I was in a MAJCOM Hq in the Air Force I never hesitated to reach out (usually by telephone as it was long before email) to anyone that I thought could help me with a issue. I wasn't calling colonels but their subordinates.

Comparing the organizational cultures fails due to the lack of baseline training.  In the military, everyone (for the most part) has attended the same BMT, A-schools, academy, or saluting school,
so there is an expectation of a basic understanding of protocol and how the chain should work.  Some services or sections may be more or less lax then others, but
it's turned back to "10" with a look or a comment.  Not so in CAP.

CAP doesn't have anything near to that - pilots walk in the door as Captains and never complete Level 1, yet they start flying with their friend on
wing staff and just ignore their CC (BTDT). In that case they don't even recognize a chain exists. Then CAP sets up all sorts of circular reporting relationships
because everyone is triple-billeted at 4 echelons ("Wait, are you my CC for this, or am I yours?"), and in the mix the grade means nothing in regards to
expectation of knowledge or authority.

But the biggest issue with jumping the chain in CAP is that everyone feels "empowered".  Between NPD-inducing social media, diminished attention span, and
general outrage culture, many believe all opinions are equal and there should be no hierarchy.  Mind you, they have no interest in doing the 6-8+ months
of prep work to actually execute a respective activity, they "just want to be heard".   

In that paradigm, if the chain wasn't hammered constantly, the wing staff would never get anything done because they'd just have the
same circular conversations over and over.

Another issue is higher HQ staff making "decisions" and directing action outside their non-existent authority. Again, due largely to lack of
consistent training and poor leadership, many Group, wing and region staffers believe their are the defacto commander of their department for
their echelon, when in fact, they have zero authority (absent specific and published delegation). 

The CAP chain is actually quite short, 6 people at most, usually 5, and in some wings 4, people are the only ones who
can actually direct action and make policy decisions and interpretations. Everyone else is acting under staff delegation and can't do anything
outside the regs or make a policy decision in gray areas without their CC's approval.

So to bring this back around to real-world examples, I've had more then a few issues where as a CC, I am working with my either
subordinate CC's or higher HQ to come to a policy decision on "x".  It's gray, it's a PITA, and we need an eagle to eventually make a descision
so we can stop asking the question(s).

Meanwhile, well-intentioned member calls 2 clicks over his unit of assignment and asks a staffer "what's the deal?" The staffer
gives him his opinion, the well-intentioned member takes it as gospel, and never says anything to his CC, just implements.  The staffer
speaking out of turn wants things "a certain way", so he perpetuates his opinion, and never says anything either.  Manwhile the CC"s
working the problem have to keep re-correcting people on the "right" way to do things.

Huge time suck and unnecessary.

And with all that said...

While I agree to a certain extent, I was balled out when I tried to find out when the next SLS was. No one in the squadron knew (and still don't, we have been told vaguely "in the fall"). I don't know why anyone would get this excited about someone trying to find out about training.

In a lot of cases this happens because the staffer responsible for the "thing" blew it off or was "going to get around to it soon" and
felt called out, so it's easy to hammer the chain instead of eating it. 

Lack of information is a huge problem in CAP, they can't even decide what the publication medium is, and are
under the humorous misconception that TwitSpace is the place to publish news and important information,
despite having a disparagingly anemic actual social presence, not to mention no actual strategy whatsoever,
so even when things are published, you have to work far too hard to find them.

[GaryVC]

I think the main publication method for getting out the word on training and many other activities should be the wing calendar. If it was up to date (a year out is best) many of the kind of questions I have (when is TLC, SLS, CLC, RSC, etc?) would never arise.