National Conference

[Ed Bos]

This is the first time in a long time where the organization's CEO was unmistakeably and in fact a member. Previously we had a national leader that was a volunteer, and a national leader that was an employee, and a governance that appeared to be a bit hands-off until a major problem occurred.

Do you really think this has made any difference, or has even been noticed by the average rank and file member?
It's a nuance at best, at least from a practical perspective.

Yeah, I do.

[Garibaldi]

This may sound dumb, but from a rank and file member with no aspirations for command, I don't give a rat's posterior who is helming this ship. Who it is has never made one bit of difference to me at all, from the cadet side all the way through the berry boards. I wasn't around for the HWSNBN horror, but that's about the only instance that could make me give a crap about anyone above Wing commander.

I know, I know, that's a broad  generalization based on one man's experience. I do see how the decisions s/he makes can affect me down at my level, but as far as interacting and s/he making a direct impact, no. You could have Larry the Cable Guy in charge and it wouldn't affect me unless we started wearing BDUs with the sleeves cut off. The decisions FROM THE OFFICE, good, bad, or indifferent, will happen regardless of who is in charge and those decisions will give me pause to think. To tell the truth, I rarely pay attention to who my WING commander is, let alone region or national.

Not trying to troll or start a flame war, but that's just me.

[Eclipse]

This is the first time in a long time where the organization's CEO was unmistakeably and in fact a member. Previously we had a national leader that was a volunteer, and a national leader that was an employee, and a governance that appeared to be a bit hands-off until a major problem occurred.

Do you really think this has made any difference, or has even been noticed by the average rank and file member?
It's a nuance at best, at least from a practical perspective.

Yeah, I do.

Like what? There's actually less transparency, since the Command Council meetings aren't televised any more,
commenting on regs has been done away with, where's the difference to Joe Squadron member?

[PHall]

This is the first time in a long time where the organization's CEO was unmistakeably and in fact a member. Previously we had a national leader that was a volunteer, and a national leader that was an employee, and a governance that appeared to be a bit hands-off until a major problem occurred.

Do you really think this has made any difference, or has even been noticed by the average rank and file member?
It's a nuance at best, at least from a practical perspective.

Yeah, I do.

Like what? There's actually less transparency, since the Command Council meetings aren't televised any more,
commenting on regs has been done away with, where's the difference to Joe Squadron member?

Why do you need to televise the Command Council meetings? They don't have any authority anymore.

[Eclipse]

You don't, though in theory they still have influence, right?

As discussed when the governance was changed, moving from a group of 60 some voices discussing
issues and casting votes in the open, to a group of 12 people making decisions behind closed
doors does not make the process somehow "more transparent".

Less exciting?  Yes.  More transparent?  No.

[SARDOC]

My only comment on this thread so far is I agree with Eclipse.   Definitely go to Hash House a go-go.  Google it, get directions.  You won't be disappointed.

[Ned]

As discussed when the governance was changed, moving from a group of 60 some voices discussing
issues and casting votes in the open, to a group of 12 people making decisions behind closed
doors does not make the process somehow "more transparent".

I'm not who you are talking about here, but both BoG and CSAG meetings are open except for the rare executive session to discuss litigation, safety, or personnel matters.  Feel free to drop by.

Ned Lee
(Attendee at a whole bunch of BoG and CSAG meetings)

[Fubar]

Feel free to drop by.

What about those of us who don't quite have the travel budget that you do (though I'm glad you go, you're often our only source of information)?

[Eclipse]

Which account do I charge the air fare and bail to?

[MisterCD]

I will not arrive until Thursday, but hope folks will attend the National History Program meet and greet/Q & A session, and I'll be out and about the conference area if anyone has questions or wishes to chat. 

[AirAux]

"1) The "Ask the National Commander" button within eServices,"  Negatory Ghostrider.  I asked and never even got the courtesy of a response, however, I believe my concern was run by my Group and Wing Commanders as there was a form of arse chewing had later on.  So not only was there no response, but the transparency turns out to be between National Commander and one's chain of command.  Hardly an open door policy in my book.  Pretty cheap and low life as far as I am concerned.  So much for the diversity he brought to us.  No class.  Once a sergeant, always a sergeant.  Good riddance.

[Fubar]

I was pretty sure that the "Ask the commander" feature in eservices plainly warned you that your message would go to your chain of command as well, but now that I'm going to look for it, the entire "Ask the commander" feature is gone in both the new and old eservices.

I guess the new commander isn't interesting in receiving daily emails about when we're switching to ABUs.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

This may sound dumb, but from a rank and file member with no aspirations for command, I don't give a rat's posterior who is helming this ship. Who it is has never made one bit of difference to me at all, from the cadet side all the way through the berry boards. I wasn't around for the HWSNBN horror, but that's about the only instance that could make me give a crap about anyone above Wing commander.

Kind of where I stand too.  It is impossible for a national CC to have his/her finger on the pulse of the membership...it's illogical to expect otherwise.

I met the former Generalissimo at a wing conference once.  I said, "pleased to meet you, sir," and he said "likewise, Captain" (or something along those lines).  I was in dire need of a visit to the latrine and considered that more important than trying to make small talk with someone I did not know and would likely never know.

[Private Investigator]

...  Once a sergeant, always a sergeant.  Good riddance.

Am I taking this out of context or is this just a immature remark?   

[Mitchell 1969]

Once a sergeant, always a sergeant.

Let me test that ...

Sgt. Alvin York? Staff Sgt. (later Major) Audie Murphy? MSG Raul Benavidez? SSG Salvatore Giunta? CMSgt Richard L. Etchberger?

(I think you might want to consider a different "clever" saying...)

[ColonelJack]

This may sound dumb, but from a rank and file member with no aspirations for command, I don't give a rat's posterior who is helming this ship. Who it is has never made one bit of difference to me at all, from the cadet side all the way through the berry boards. I wasn't around for the HWSNBN horror, but that's about the only instance that could make me give a crap about anyone above Wing commander.

Kind of where I stand too.  It is impossible for a national CC to have his/her finger on the pulse of the membership...it's illogical to expect otherwise.

I met the former Generalissimo at a wing conference once.  I said, "pleased to meet you, sir," and he said "likewise, Captain" (or something along those lines).  I was in dire need of a visit to the latrine and considered that more important than trying to make small talk with someone I did not know and would likely never know.

Kind of like when I met Gen. Courter at the SER Conference a few years ago.  She just happened to be standing around looking at something or other when I walked by.  I extended my hand to her and said, "How do you do, General?" and introduced myself.  She shook my hand (while I bowed - which I do whenever I meet a lady at any time) and said she was glad to meet me.  We exchanged approximately 30 seconds of small talk and I moved on.

Nice lady.

Jack

[JacobAnn]

...  Once a sergeant, always a sergeant.  Good riddance.

Am I taking this out of context or is this just a immature remark?   

I was wondering that too.

[FW]

It is impossible for a national CC to have his/her finger on the pulse of the membership...it's illogical to expect otherwise.

Why would that be?  A National Conference is a good time to "mingle with the masses".  One would think the "chain of command" would report on "the pulse" during the year. The commander also goes to region and wing conferences to get an idea of what is going on.  Do you not think this is happening?  Do you just think the commander sits in a lonely room, contemplating the nature command?

I would hope someone has their finger on the pulse of the membership.  How else would CAP move forward?  Do you really think a successful organization just makes things up as it goes along without knowing the people who populate it? Just sayn'! :angel:

[JeffDG]

As to Maj Gen Carr, the question isn't of dislike, he's a committed volunteer like the rest of us, the
question is "What is his legacy?".

In other threads, Ned put forth that his legacy is 39-1 and "no scandals".  Yes, keeping the doors open
is important in and of itself, but that's what the National staff is for.

I had a discussion about this very topic a few weeks ago with a squadron-mate of mine. This gentleman and I ended the discussion with thought that there were a few items that would be a noteworthy legacy after General Carr's term:
1) The "Ask the National Commander" button within eServices,

Check you e-services...it's gone now.

2) Leading the organization after the transition in the governance structure.

This is the first time in a long time where the organization's CEO was unmistakeably and in fact a member. Previously we had a national leader that was a volunteer, and a national leader that was an employee, and a governance that appeared to be a bit hands-off until a major problem occurred.

Not really.  The COO (Executive Director) is still hired and evaluated by the BoG.  The COO and the CEO both report to the BoG, so there's still the same split in governance.

Cite: 
ARTICLE XIII
SELECTION OF CORPORATE OFFICERS
3. The Chief Operating Officer (COO) shall be selected, retained, evaluated, and removed by the Board
of Governors. The Personnel Committee will establish criteria for the position and vet the initial
candidates. Final selection of the Chief Operating Officer will be by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of
the members of the Board of Governors. The Chief Operating Officer serves at the pleasure of the Board
of Governors and may be removed by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members of the Board of
Governors, subject to any contractual rights he or she may have at the time of removal.

[James Shaw]

Since I am not involved in that call my responses are generalized.

I disagree that the National Commander should not be involved in the "minutiae" of a hanger rash. The National Commander has the overall responsibility for all CAP Assets that includes people and equipment. The strength behind the program should come from the Commander. If the National Commander has no participation in the safety program then it might as well be stopped.

Asking someone about a prior safety incident is not "calling them out", it is trying to use lagging indicators to mitigate risk. What can we learn from someone else's incident that can further mitigate risk to people or equipment?

The problem already exists if the Hanger Rash occurred, that is "true problem". I don't know the approach that was taken but "learning and holding someone accountable" is not a witch hunt. It is his responsibility to make sure it doesn't happen again.

We have to learn from the incidents that occur. If we don't then we are simply ignoring the issue in the hopes that it will go away. It doesn't and it won't.


**I recently had an employee go into a machine to do some work and did not follow the lockout procedure for the equipment. They did not see it as an issue. During the investigation the employee commented what the big deal was they had done the task a thousand times. Besides the fact it was company policy I asked them a simple question. Would you knowingly allow your child to go into a machine that can kill them? No further comments from employee.

Just my .02 cents worth.