Insubordination

[vorter]

What should a person do if he/she (not an officer, but enough to give orders) is giving an order(not forceful or ridiculous) to a cadet, say a basic, but he/she doesn't commend to it, refuses or ignores. What measures would you take?

[IceNine]

Mention it to the next in your chain, and get their advice.

Ultimately,  "punishment" is the responsibility of the unit commander.

[vorter]

Okay but I want to know what to do with the minor stuff, like not picking something up. Actions you can do on the spot.

[IceNine]

There simply isn't enough detail here.

Are you a cadet or senior?  Are the orders to cadets or seniors?

Are you in a position of authority or simply higher grade?

Have your proven to them that you are willing to do the same things you are asking of them?  Are you providing enough direction and guidance, AND following up on every order you issue?

When you ask someone to do something do you provide direct, specific, measurable performance marks so they are informed enough to know when they have met your expectations?

[mynetdude]

Insubordination is a pretty big word for something so minor in my opinion, no matter how minor or serious it is its still not ok however I like to look at it this way:

Your fellow cadets are amongst your peers some may or may not be the same age or close to your age so it may be difficult for SOME cadets to get the idea that their peers are their superiors rather than an adult kinda like brother/sister/siblings kind of issues in the home.

Overall if ASKED to pick something up and one does not do it, it is considered disrespect FWIW. If that cadet has a history of doing so you have some options which can include writing an essay about respect but why what they are doing is disrespectful and if they continue to show that trend there could be much more consequences including 2B termination of membership. 

[lordmonar]

Okay...say for the sake of argument.

You are a C/SrA and you are tell a C/AB to pick up some trash and they just ignore you.

1) Repeat yourself.  "Cadet...I just asked you to pick up that trash".
2) If #1 Fails....tell your flight sergeant/flight commander.
3) They will handle it.

Basically there is nothing you can do....and at lower levels of rank you are not experienced enough to really follow all the steps that a leader can do to establish his/her authority.

At this stage you only have the legitimate authority of your rank and position.  Ask for assistance from your chain of command.

[vorter]

Cadet to cadet.
Only few grades different.
Actually had this happed to one of my peers, was a few grades up and was a minor order.
I do believe it is related to peers, as it's weird to have a friend order you around.

[mynetdude]

Cadet to cadet.
Only few grades different.
Actually had this happed to one of my peers, was a few grades up and was a minor order.
I do believe it is related to peers, as it's weird to have a friend order you around.

I can understand that but not relate so its always nice to keep this in mind IMHO.  I'm not saying its excusable so I don't have any other suggestions other than what others have posted (I know my brother had this issue, CAP isn't for everyone so hopefully you and this cadet and your CoC can work this out .

[wingnut55]

TRY leading by Example, it would be rude behavior to be barking orders to a Cadet about picking up paper. Unless you are supervising a work detail. Even in that case you should be picking up the paper too.

[nesagsar]

The most effective method of leadership is good training folloed by laissez-faire supervision. Your cadets should know well enough to follow instructions without it becoming an order. Your cadets should know to follow orders in a pinch. If there is a disciplinary porblem the response must be measured against the offence and both people should be prepared for escalation while attempting de-escalation. At the lowest level you should simply talk to the cadet and explain your position firmly. There is always the possibility that there is a very real underlying issue to be dealt with. If the issue must go up the chain of command you should mention it to the cadet's immediate superior (or yours if you happen to be the immediate superior) and that person should do the same thing you did, just talk. After that it goes formal in the form of a 341 in the cadets squadron record. bring the issue up at the next squadron staff meeting if appropriate and consider disciplinary action. If disciplinary action is agreed on then take it to the squadron commander for advice.

Always attempt to settle the issue at the lowest level possible.

[wingnut55]

And you wonder why the kids drop out of CAP. I went to our local cadet squadron and they are averaging 4, FOUR kids at the meeting. The biggest complaint: " All we do is march around and play army". this not about insubordinate behavior but a response to arrogance and egotistical make believe tin soldier stuff.

But hey there are four kids, two are joining the USMC in a few months, and those two run the squadron. Well what does that say. Are the cadets Devil Dogs? Boot camp all the time?

[Bobble]

The most effective method of leadership is good training folloed by laissez-faire supervision. Your cadets should know well enough to follow instructions without it becoming an order.

Actually, it seems to have been an order, and not a suggestion or recommendation.  If it did indeed come across as a suggestion or recommendation, then that might be the problem in and of itself.

I apologize if I get too technical on a relatively simple issue, but the OP might also look up the definitions of the different leadership styles (authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire) and try to implement your recommendation.  When working with technically proficient subordinates who are are able to carrry out their responsibilities well based on prior experience, then the laissez-faire style of leadership is a suitable approach.  But what the OP has described to this point (cadet interaction at a less than Mitchell Award level and a simple manual-labor directive or assignment) would point towards the authoritarian leadership style as being most effective, at least according to CAP documentation (OBC, Leadership Traits and Leadership Styles, 1 and 2. The Traits of Leadership Styles And Their Uses).  Of course, despite the sound of the word "authoritarian", you can still lead in that style without being overbearing or dictatorial.  It all depends on your bearing and presentation.

For the OP, I don't know how involved your Squadron Commander or DCC is in terms of sitting in on promotion boards, but I always make it a point to sit in on them if possible, especially in border-line or negative recommendation scenarios, so that (1) The cadet in question understands via my comments that I am aware of their attitiude and behavior, and (2) That awareness is always a significant factor in whether or not I sign-off on a promotion.

Part of the Squadron Commander's job (and DCC and Cadet Programs Officer) is to evaluate and back-up their cadet staff in situations like this as required.  Cadets need to know that this type of behavior (refusing to carry out the orders of a higher-grade cadet) could have consequences that reach further than the originally intended power play game between two people.

[lordmonar]

The most effective method of leadership is good training followed by laissez-faire supervision.

I really hate this statement.

We should be teaching situational leadership.

The "most effective method of leadership" is based on the competence and commitment of the team.

Low commitment/low competence you should use "telling" or dictating leadership style.
Low commitment/High competence you should use "selling" or coaching leadership style.
High commitment/Low competence you should use "participating" leadership style.
High commitment/High competence you should use "delegating" or laissez-faire leadership style.

The is NO ONE BEST style of leadership because there are too many factors that are always constantly changing.  Each new task will have different commitment/competence levels, each team will have different dynamics based on their team building stage and how that relates to different tasks and each individual on the team will have his/her own competence/commitment level as it directly relates to each task.

Also you have to factor in other variable like time constrains, how critical the task is and the abilities of the leader him/her self.

Just saying that "each cadet should know to follow orders in a pinch" glosses over the whole dynamics of situational leadership.  Yes it would be ideal that each and everyone of your subordinates is an expert at all the possible tasks presented and they are all 100% motivated and committed to accomplishing those tasks...and that the team those member belong to are working at the optimum performing phase.....but if that were always the case we would not need leaders at all.

You stepped on one of my pet peves as CAP teaches leadership.  The way it discribes the leadership styles it tries to give the impression that one or the other is the "best" all the time.  That is just not true.

Okay.....thanks for listening to my rant.  Have a nice day 

[Pingree1492]

The most effective method of leadership is good training followed by laissez-faire supervision.

I really hate this statement.

We should be teaching situational leadership.

The "most effective method of leadership" is based on the competence and commitment of the team.

Low commitment/low competence you should use "telling" or dictating leadership style.
Low commitment/High competence you should use "selling" or coaching leadership style.
High commitment/Low competence you should use "participating" leadership style.
High commitment/High competence you should use "delegating" or laissez-faire leadership style.

The is NO ONE BEST style of leadership because there are too many factors that are always constantly changing.  Each new task will have different commitment/competence levels, each team will have different dynamics based on their team building stage and how that relates to different tasks and each individual on the team will have his/her own competence/commitment level as it directly relates to each task.

Also you have to factor in other variable like time constrains, how critical the task is and the abilities of the leader him/her self.

Just saying that "each cadet should know to follow orders in a pinch" glosses over the whole dynamics of situational leadership.  Yes it would be ideal that each and everyone of your subordinates is an expert at all the possible tasks presented and they are all 100% motivated and committed to accomplishing those tasks...and that the team those member belong to are working at the optimum performing phase.....but if that were always the case we would not need leaders at all.

You stepped on one of my pet peves as CAP teaches leadership.  The way it discribes the leadership styles it tries to give the impression that one or the other is the "best" all the time.  That is just not true.

Okay.....thanks for listening to my rant.  Have a nice day 

Thank you!!!  I was getting all ready to reply to that statement, and you beat me to it!   :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Also, regarding:

[snip]
After that it goes formal in the form of a 341 in the cadets squadron record. bring the issue up at the next squadron staff meeting if appropriate and consider disciplinary action. If disciplinary action is agreed on then take it to the squadron commander for advice.

There is not Form 341 in CAP, so I'm not sure to what you're referring.  The closest thing we have is the Form 50-XX series.

[nesagsar]

There is not Form 341 in CAP, so I'm not sure to what you're referring.  The closest thing we have is the Form 50-XX series.

http://selfridgecap.org/341.pdf

[Pingree1492]

There is not Form 341 in CAP, so I'm not sure to what you're referring.  The closest thing we have is the Form 50-XX series.

http://selfridgecap.org/341.pdf

Again, there is no Form 341 in CAP.  That is a form was used in AFROTC.  NOT the same thing.

[SABRE17]

i have had a similar problem, i am a cadet staff sergeant, I'm not officially in a staff position but am the supply and logistic NCOIC, at our fly day event while two cadets were up, the rest of the cadets were in side messing around doing nothing (we planned an ELT search just to give the cadets something to do, but we couldn't find the beacon in the building, no it wasn't turned on so we couldn't DF it, love irony)

here's the first thing Ive run into
a flight sergeant (c/Tsgt) was sitting with our FO, in the class room, the cadets were mucking about eating/ goofing off, as the supply sergeant i had about 20 pairs of boots to move as we are rearranging the supply section of our building. i asked cadets to help in an assertive tone.  also i was asking basics and airmen to help.

well the illustrious tech sergeant told me "your not on staff you cant give orders" how ever this pertains to my area of operations and I'm a staff sergeant. can i really not give orders?/ not ask for help in my operating area?

second problem there is one cadet that i think may be beyond just leading by example, i think there are some bad influences, how can i curve these bad influences? very often i feel as i am fighting an up hill battle with the staff on fixing things

also what fun activities can i plan during fly day (orientation flights) which often involves lots of sitting around to avoid the stale times in between aircraft rotations?

thanks

[lordmonar]

1.  Your C/TSgt needs to get his butt kicked.

2.  You don't need to be on "staff" to give orders.

3.  You are on staff the instant they gave you a job with a title.

4.  With the flight sergeant there you should have gone through him before you started giving orders....his people his program....it is a courtesey.


Okay...you need to go to your C/CC or DCC ASAP and get this resolved.   The c/TSgt is undermining your authoity as a leader and you should not stand for it.

[JC004]

what he said.

[tsrup]

i have had a similar problem, i am a cadet staff sergeant, I'm not officially in a staff position but am the supply and logistic NCOIC, at our fly day event while two cadets were up, the rest of the cadets were in side messing around doing nothing (we planned an ELT search just to give the cadets something to do, but we couldn't find the beacon in the building, no it wasn't turned on so we couldn't DF it, love irony)

here's the first thing Ive run into
a flight sergeant (c/Tsgt) was sitting with our FO, in the class room, the cadets were mucking about eating/ goofing off, as the supply sergeant i had about 20 pairs of boots to move as we are rearranging the supply section of our building. i asked cadets to help in an assertive tone.  also i was asking basics and airmen to help.

well the illustrious tech sergeant told me "your not on staff you cant give orders" how ever this pertains to my area of operations and I'm a staff sergeant. can i really not give orders?/ not ask for help in my operating area?

second problem there is one cadet that i think may be beyond just leading by example, i think there are some bad influences, how can i curve these bad influences? very often i feel as i am fighting an up hill battle with the staff on fixing things

also what fun activities can i plan during fly day (orientation flights) which often involves lots of sitting around to avoid the stale times in between aircraft rotations?

thanks

Some problems with these turn of events, and some food for thought.

Instead of walking into a room of cadets (with their flight sgt. present) and giving an order to pick up boots, you should have talked to their flight sgt.   I guarantee that you would have had a different outcome if you hadn't gone stepping on toes of someone a higher rank than you. 
Positional authority also only works within your category.  A c/capt. tries to issue himself uniform items?  you have the authority to stop it.  You have a c/msgt as a volunteer that wants to start working in supply? as NCIOC you can tell him what to do while working in a supply capacity. 

Your authority extends to supply and those who work for you in supply.  If the Flight Sgt. has other plans for his flight, especially if he outranks you he wins.  For all you know, the flight staff had orders to follow, and your plans didn't mesh with that.  Talking to them would have enlightened you on the issue, but instead you chose to skip that part.

Rank may be great, but part of the thing now of being a staff sgt, and having a duty position is to know how to use your chain of command.  You want manpower?  You talk to the people in charge of the manpower.  I need a van?  I don't just take it because I need it because I'm the ES officer (or whatever duty hat I'm wearing at the moment), I talk to logistics first. 

Maybe your uphill battle is something that you've created for yourself by not using the chain?

I don't know all the details, and I doubt that the majority ever will for your situation, but from what it sounds like, neither one of you handled the situation well.  If the order was reasonable, then he should have supported you, if not, then he should have counseled you privately.  However if you had made the request the right way, the situation would never have unfolded as such.

[tsrup]

1.  Your C/TSgt needs to get his butt kicked.

Sounds like both of them do.  There is two sides to every story afterall..

2.  You don't need to be on "staff" to give orders.

True and not true.  Like most things in life there is a right way and a wrong way.  Our logistics officer would get an earful from me if they came by and ordered my cadets to clean the van or move boxes without talking to me first.  Especially if I was in the room when he did it.

3.  You are on staff the instant they gave you a job with a title.

I have no argument with that. 

4.  With the flight sergeant there you should have gone through him before you started giving orders....his people his program....it is a courtesey.

This is the right way.

Okay...you need to go to your C/CC or DCC ASAP and get this resolved.   The c/TSgt is undermining your authoity as a leader and you should not stand for it.

Wrong way again.  And a classic example of undermining the chain of command.  You have a problem with the c/Tsgt?  You talk to him/her first.  Then you go further up to the First Sgt.  etc...  till the problem is resolved.

[Short Field]

Okay...you need to go to your C/CC or DCC ASAP and get this resolved.   The c/TSgt is undermining your authoity as a leader and you should not stand for it.

Wrong way again.  And a classic example of undermining the chain of command.  You have a problem with the c/Tsgt?  You talk to him/her first.  Then you go further up to the First Sgt.  etc...  till the problem is resolved.

He needs to go to the C/CC or DCC ASAP.  He already talked to the C/TSgt.  He also didn't just ask for help, he "asked in an assertive tone".  I expect his leadership will quickly sort things out to the mutual education of both the C/TSgt and the C/SSgt. 

[tsrup]

Okay...you need to go to your C/CC or DCC ASAP and get this resolved.   The c/TSgt is undermining your authoity as a leader and you should not stand for it.

Wrong way again.  And a classic example of undermining the chain of command.  You have a problem with the c/Tsgt?  You talk to him/her first.  Then you go further up to the First Sgt.  etc...  till the problem is resolved.

He needs to go to the C/CC or DCC ASAP.  He already talked to the C/TSgt.  He also didn't just ask for help, he "asked in an assertive tone".  I expect his leadership will quickly sort things out to the mutual education of both the C/TSgt and the C/SSgt.

Absolutely not.

He should then take it up with his next step in his chain of command.  End of story.  If he/she goes directly to the DCC then it undermines the chain of command entirely.  The next step above the flight sgt. would be the First sgt, then Chief.  The problem should be taken care of at the lowest possible level.

[JC004]

Absolutely not.

He should then take it up with his next step in his chain of command.  End of story.  If he/she goes directly to the DCC then it undermines the chain of command entirely.  The next step above the flight sgt. would be the First sgt, then Chief.  The problem should be taken care of at the lowest possible level.

?!  A First Sergeant is properly outside the chain of command.  Chief?

[tsrup]

Absolutely not.

He should then take it up with his next step in his chain of command.  End of story.  If he/she goes directly to the DCC then it undermines the chain of command entirely.  The next step above the flight sgt. would be the First sgt, then Chief.  The problem should be taken care of at the lowest possible level.

?!  A First Sergeant is properly outside the chain of command.  Chief?

And so is Flight Sgt.  But the person you should be talking to WRT to NCO's would be the First Sgt., then the Chief (being the First Sgt's supervisor)

If these positions don't exist then go to the flight commander. 

The point is not to go over anyone's head.

[JC004]

The Flight Sgt IS in the chain of command.  Reference: CAPR 20-1.

The First Sgt is an adviser to the commander's office, a direct-report, the enlisted adviser.  The First Sgt belongs to the commander, not to a Chief. 

There is no Chief (assuming this is some sort of Command Chief Master Sgt) at the squadron level.  Even if so, they are a higher-level First Sergeant and also outside the chain of command.

[Pylon]

And so is Flight Sgt.  But the person you should be talking to WRT to NCO's would be the First Sgt., then the Chief (being the First Sgt's supervisor)

If these positions don't exist then go to the flight commander. 

The point is not to go over anyone's head.

That's not at all how the cadet chain of command works.    Cadet -> Element Leader -> Flight Sergeant -> Flight Commander -> Cadet Commander -> Deputy Commander for Cadets -> Squadron Commander.

The Cadet First Sergeant is the "enlisted" cadet advisor, a member of the commander's staff, and not in the chain of command. 

There is no "Chief" position in CAP.

And "if these positions don't exist..."?   Why would you have no element leaders or flight sergeant, but have a flight commander?   

Take a look at the recommended cadet org charts in CAPP 52-15: www.capmembers.com/media/cms/P052_015_21F7ACED34F45.pdf

[tsrup]

point taken but what I say still stands.  He should take it up his chain rather than going direct to the top.



*as for chief, that was an oversight on my part, been spending too much time planning our next encampment....

[lordmonar]

There are somethings which you go directly to the top for.

One of them is, as in this chase, a major lapse in the understanding that all leaders are supposed to support all other leaders.

Yes in theory you should resolve issues at the lowest levels.

Peer to peer and then up the chain of command.

As a Staff NCO the C/SSgt's chain  of command is up to the C/CC (or maybe a C/XO if they have one).  So by passing the flight commanders is okay IN THIS SITUATION.

YMMV.