The CAP NCO Program - your experience?

Started by JohhnyD, August 07, 2020, 03:32:04 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

The CAP NCO Program - your experience?

I have never even seen a CAP NCO
5 (4.3%)
I am a CAP NCO
4 (3.4%)
Wow, they are the best!
10 (8.6%)
A solution in search of a problem, meaningless.
44 (37.9%)
Ought to be abandoned, useless!
20 (17.2%)
I have no idea!
5 (4.3%)
I could be a CAP NCO, but have no desire to do so.
12 (10.3%)
Bacon
54 (46.6%)

Total Members Voted: 116

Voting closed: September 21, 2020, 03:32:04 PM

Eclipse

Quote from: TheSkyHornet on August 12, 2020, 01:50:11 PMLet's focus on the important stuff : the duties and responsibilities that need to be carried out.

What's it going to take to motivate someone to do that?

Eliminate.

Grade.

Completely.

Done.

"That Others May Zoom"

THRAWN

Quote from: SarDragon on August 11, 2020, 06:21:50 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on August 11, 2020, 12:00:28 PM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on August 10, 2020, 07:54:33 PM
Quote from: JohhnyD on August 10, 2020, 01:53:25 PMWhat ever it takes to get people to meetings.

If someone is a prior E-4, and they really want to be an NCO, and they're super gung-ho about it; well, I'm also skeptical. This person did not have much experience as a military NCO to begin with, and they may seem a bit eager to jump right in (and I need to instill some patience in them as they grasp the new environment and take it all in).

 

Marine corporals and PO3s, especially Coasties, disagree with this statement.

It's still pretty easy to find PO3s with minimal leadership training/skills. Go to an advanced tech school, sign up for two more years, and you have an instant PO3. We called them "rent-a-crows". It is possible for someone to spend over a year in a training environment, be an NCO, and never do real NCO stuff, particularly supervision.

Agree, but just as easy to find one who has done real NCO stuff.
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

THRAWN

Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2020, 03:24:12 PM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on August 12, 2020, 01:50:11 PMLet's focus on the important stuff : the duties and responsibilities that need to be carried out.

What's it going to take to motivate someone to do that?

Eliminate.

Grade.

Completely.

Ayup.

Done.
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

PHall

Quote from: THRAWN on August 12, 2020, 03:36:33 PMAgree, but just as easy to find one who has done real NCO stuff.

So what is "real" NCO stuff? The duties of NCO's vary greatly between the various branches and even within a branch.
For example an SSGT E-6 in Army or Marine Infantry has a totally different job and skill set from an Air Force TSGT E-6 or a Navy PO1 who are working in aircraft maintenance.
Heck an Air Force TSGT E-6 who is an Aircraft Loadmaster has a totally different skill set then an TSGT E-6 who is a Shift Supervisor in a Security Forces Squadron. The Loadmaster might supervise one or two people while the Cop may be supervising 15 or 20.
So all military NCO's are not the same. So what it comes to is that former military NCO's are just any other member of CAP. They all bring their own unique set of skills and abilities.

THRAWN

Quote from: PHall on August 12, 2020, 04:02:42 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on August 12, 2020, 03:36:33 PMAgree, but just as easy to find one who has done real NCO stuff.

So what is "real" NCO stuff? The duties of NCO's vary greatly between the various branches and even within a branch.
For example an SSGT E-6 in Army or Marine Infantry has a totally different job and skill set from an Air Force TSGT E-6 or a Navy PO1 who are working in aircraft maintenance.
Heck an Air Force TSGT E-6 who is an Aircraft Loadmaster has a totally different skill set then an TSGT E-6 who is a Shift Supervisor in a Security Forces Squadron. The Loadmaster might supervise one or two people while the Cop may be supervising 15 or 20.
So all military NCO's are not the same. So what it comes to is that former military NCO's are just any other member of CAP. They all bring their own unique set of skills and abilities.

You might want to redirect that to the person that made the "real NCO stuff" comment. It wasn't me. I agree that there are wide variances between the roles of NCOs across the services and within the services. Blanket statements about the great value NCOs will bring to CAP doesn't reflect that.
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

Eclipse

The NCO "stuff" that NCOs "do", isn't relevent to CAP.

    There is no enlisted corps to care and feed.

    There are no specialist jobs to fill.

    All CAP staff roles are program-management-type situations and are generally a team of one.

ES / GT is not an NCO role, per se, despite people trying to shoe-horn it in, and especially these
days, the vast majority of ES roles are program-management or aircrew (unless driving a van with a picnic cooler in it is something NCOs are hyper-qualified to do).

Due to the nature of a volunteer organizaiton, there is no job in CAP in which you can
dictate requirements for appointment.  Everything is "should" at best, and by far the
majority are filled based on "precense" and "you're lucky I showed up at all".

The idea that RDCs, DIs, or TIs make good CP leaders, per se, is about 180° off.
Their skills and training are focused on molding young adult warfighters who are obligated
to obedience, not adolescents in a volunteer career-exploration program who can leave
the minute someone looks at them cross-eyed. 

BTDT in-person for 20 years in a basic training environment and with CAP members who
come from that background.  It's one thing to have some fun during an encampment under
full supervision, and a totally different ball game to propagate the rhetoric that a
25 yro E-4 without kids of his own and who has never worked with adolescents is somehow
extra-qualified to guide cadets in a program they have never experienced themselves.

If they have kids, or are involved in Scouting or similar programs, then
they'd have the same experience and skills as any other person off the street.

Yes, there are a few things that would be short-cutted. They can (presumably)configure a uniform
and teach drill properly.  That's a VERY small part of the CP (if you're doing it right).

Consider this...

The rhetoric is that NCOs would be the savior of CAP from a leadership and retention perspective.
This has literally been said on numerous occasions...

...yet they are barred from holding THE most important job in CAP - Squadron Commander.

What else needs to be said on this?

"That Others May Zoom"

Holding Pattern

Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2020, 03:24:12 PM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on August 12, 2020, 01:50:11 PMLet's focus on the important stuff : the duties and responsibilities that need to be carried out.

What's it going to take to motivate someone to do that?

Eliminate.

Grade.

Completely.

Done.

Join

Another

Org

For

That.

Grade is never going away until the Cadet Program does too.

Holding Pattern

Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2020, 04:51:22 PMConsider this...

The rhetoric is that NCOs would be the savior of CAP from a leadership and retention perspective.
This has literally been said on numerous occasions...

...yet they are barred from holding THE most important job in CAP - Squadron Commander.

What else needs to be said on this?

That the job of commander has been made so unappealing that being able to point at your stripes as the reason you can't hold it is shown to be a positive selling point?

Eclipse

Quote from: Holding Pattern on August 12, 2020, 06:38:23 PMGrade is never going away until the Cadet Program does too.

Adult leaders do not need to have grade themselves in order to administer and
facilitate the Cadet Program.  If anything, adult staff and leaders not
holding any grade makes the CP progression, mission and goals more clear.

Adult leaders do not need to have grade in order to wear military-style uniforms,
and without it would make CAP's place in the grande scheme of "Total Force" more
clear, and greatly reduce the instances of members insinuating they are something they are not.

Eliminating grade for adult staff and leaders would reduce the cost of uniforms, as well as
confusion as to roles and authority, all for zero cost either monetarily or to mission readiness,
in fact it actually enhances mission readiness because of the reduced distractions.

"That Others May Zoom"

Holding Pattern

Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2020, 07:12:49 PM
Quote from: Holding Pattern on August 12, 2020, 06:38:23 PMGrade is never going away until the Cadet Program does too.

Adult leaders do not need to have grade themselves in order to administer and
facilitate the Cadet Program.  If anything, adult staff and leaders not
holding any grade makes the CP progression, mission and goals more clear.

Adult leaders do not need to have grade in order to wear military-style uniforms,
and without it would make CAP's place in the grande scheme of "Total Force" more
clear, and greatly reduce the instances of members insinuating they are something they are not.

Eliminating grade for adult staff and leaders would reduce the cost of uniforms, as well as
confusion as to roles and authority, all for zero cost either monetarily or to mission readiness,
in fact it actually enhances mission readiness because of the reduced distractions.

And eliminating grade would get rid of a lot of the membership too, no doubt. Throwing away all that PD progression is a GREAT strategy.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2020, 07:12:49 PM
Quote from: Holding Pattern on August 12, 2020, 06:38:23 PMGrade is never going away until the Cadet Program does too.

Adult leaders do not need to have grade themselves in order to administer and
facilitate the Cadet Program.  If anything, adult staff and leaders not
holding any grade makes the CP progression, mission and goals more clear.

Adult leaders do not need to have grade in order to wear military-style uniforms,
and without it would make CAP's place in the grande scheme of "Total Force" more
clear, and greatly reduce the instances of members insinuating they are something they are not.

Eliminating grade for adult staff and leaders would reduce the cost of uniforms, as well as
confusion as to roles and authority, all for zero cost either monetarily or to mission readiness,
in fact it actually enhances mission readiness because of the reduced distractions.

Feel free to join the grade-free non-profits that are out there.

Eclipse

Quote from: Holding Pattern on August 12, 2020, 09:04:41 PMAnd eliminating grade would get rid of a lot of the membership too, no doubt. Throwing away all that PD progression is a GREAT strategy.

I don't see anythng about PD ET in my statement.

"That Others May Zoom"

Holding Pattern

Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2020, 10:03:16 PM
Quote from: Holding Pattern on August 12, 2020, 09:04:41 PMAnd eliminating grade would get rid of a lot of the membership too, no doubt. Throwing away all that PD progression is a GREAT strategy.

I don't see anythng about PD ET in my statement.

The PD/ET is closely tied to the grade, and usually the carrot used to get people to advance their PD/ET.

Eclipse

Quote from: Holding Pattern on August 12, 2020, 10:13:56 PMThe PD/ET is closely tied to the grade, and usually the carrot used to get people to advance their PD/ET.

Thank you, good to see we agree.

"That Others May Zoom"

JohhnyD

Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2020, 12:38:55 AM
Quote from: Holding Pattern on August 12, 2020, 10:13:56 PMThe PD/ET is closely tied to the grade, and usually the carrot used to get people to advance their PD/ET.

Thank you, good to see we agree.
Irony is not your strong suit. Amazing and enthusiastic motivation is more your style.

SarDragon

Quote from: undefinedThat moment when the Navy already has this system set up...

Unrestricted Line Officers: Eligible to hold command; perform a variety of advanced mission roles

Restricted Line Officer: Not eligible to hold command; perform a variety of advanced skill roles and oversight

Limited Duty Officers: Specialized skill officers without a Bachelor's degree receiving a commission through a shortened training program (often prior-NCOs)

I'm not sure where you wanted to go with, so I will just provide some additional detail for those folks not as familiar with the Canoe Club.

URL, RL, and LDO are different because of both source and job assignment.

URLs come almost exclusively from college, and have varying lengths of Navy specific education - USNA and ROTC for four years, and OCS for a few months. They enter service as ensigns and are assigned to various occupational areas - Surface Warfare Officer (SWO), Submarine Warfare Officer, Special Warfare Officer (SEAL), Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Officer, Naval Aviator, Naval Flight Officer, or Naval Aviator-Astronaut. All except the SWOs get additional schooling prior to their first duty assignment. They progress up the leadership chain and could eventually command a deep draft ship at the Captain level. They relocate every two-three years, and are assignable world-wide.

The non-SWOs are assigned to more specialized units - aviation squadrons, SpecOps units, submarines, etc. Promotion progression and relocation are similar.

RLOs are restricted in the performance of duty by having been designated for aviation duty, engineering duty, aerospace engineering duty, or special duty. RL officers are authorized to command ashore within their particular specialty, but are not eligible for combatant command at sea, which remains strictly within the purview of URL officers. Promotion progression and relocation are similar to URL officers.

Staff Corps officers (you left this one out) almost always have advanced degrees on entry into the Navy, and serve in specialized fields - Medical Corps Officer; includes Naval Flight Surgeon, Naval Surface Medical Officer and Naval Submarine Medical Officer, Dental Corps Officer, Medical Service Corps Officer; includes Naval Aviation Physiologist and Naval Aviation Experimental Psychologist, Judge Advocate General's Corps Officer, Senior Health Care Executive Officer, Nurse Corps Officer; includes Navy Flight Nurse, Supply Corps Officer, Chaplain Corps Officer, and Civil Engineer Corps (i.e., Seabee) Officer. They may or not have command potential, and then only in their specialized areas. Relocation is variable;  doctors may stay in one location for 8-10 years, depending on specialty. The promotion path between ranks is longer.

LDOs perform of duty in the broad occupational fields indicated by their former warrant designators or enlisted rating groups. They typically only get to the division officer level, or sometimes convert to RL and progress in that manner.

More here.

All that said, I do not see any need for a similar CAP structure.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

Mitchell 1969

Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2020, 07:12:49 PM
Quote from: Holding Pattern on August 12, 2020, 06:38:23 PMGrade is never going away until the Cadet Program does too.

Adult leaders do not need to have grade themselves in order to administer and
facilitate the Cadet Program.  If anything, adult staff and leaders not
holding any grade makes the CP progression, mission and goals more clear.

Adult leaders do not need to have grade in order to wear military-style uniforms,
and without it would make CAP's place in the grande scheme of "Total Force" more
clear, and greatly reduce the instances of members insinuating they are something they are not.

Eliminating grade for adult staff and leaders would reduce the cost of uniforms, as well as
confusion as to roles and authority, all for zero cost either monetarily or to mission readiness,
in fact it actually enhances mission readiness because of the reduced distractions.
Can you name ONE military-based cadet program, anywhere in the world, where NONE of the leaders wear uniforms, have ranks and are addressed as such by their cadets?

I'm not talking about "Cadet Instructors List" people in blazers who, well, instruct. I'm talking about commanders of local squadrons/corps/battalions/regiments or whatever local units are called.

One? I'm predicting no. And there are ample good reasons for that, otherwise that field would have been plowed long ago.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.

Shuman 14

And this is why I keep pushing the Warrant/Flight Officer grade Insignia  tied to Education/PD:

Senior Member without Grade = No Education / No Insignia

Flight Officer = Level 1 / WO-1 Insignia

Technical Flight Officer = Level 2 / CWO-2 Insignia

Senior Flight Officer  = Level 3 / CWO-3 Insignia

Chief Flight Officer = Level 4 / CWO-4 Insignia

Master Flight Officer = Level 5 / CWO-5 Insignia

The USAF no longer uses Warrant Officer grades, this will help eliminate "confusion as to roles and authority" of CAP members in relation to USAF personnel.

Flight Officers out rank the Cadets, they still will have to use proper Customs and Courtesies when dealing with Senior Members.

Warrant Officers are normally specialist, our Flight Officers will be specialist in CAP Operations. This eliminates the confusion of the lack of formal education (ie Bachelor degrees) needed for Regular/Reserve Commissioned  Officers of the Armed Forces for many of our Members.

As to the topic itself, I see no need for an NCO Corps in CAP, there is no real mission difference between what a CAP NCO or Officer (or a SMWOG for that matter) does when it comes to real world missions.
Joseph J. Clune
Lieutenant Colonel, Military Police

USMCR: 1990 - 1992                           USAR: 1993 - 1998, 2000 - 2003, 2005 - Present     CAP: 2013 - 2014, 2021 - Present
INARNG: 1992 - 1993, 1998 - 2000      Active Army: 2003 - 2005                                       USCGAux: 2004 - Present

Eclipse

Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on August 13, 2020, 09:38:25 AMCan you name ONE military-based cadet program, anywhere in the world, where NONE of the leaders wear uniforms, have ranks and are addressed as such by their cadets?

Can you name ONE military based-cadet program that operates in the manner that CAP does, has an operational
component which includes an adult program, and has Lt Cols reporting to 2nd Lts and an NCO corps without
enlisted personnel?  Perfect "model" for cadets to understand how things work.

Heck, for that matter, name ONE military-based cadet program that has 1/2 or more of the adult leadership
in a different uniform altogether despite there being no difference in their status.

I believe "Sir, Ma'am, Mr., & Ms." are still function and appropriate addresses that would work in lieu of grade when addressing adults.

Also, you might want to re-read, I am not advocating getting rid of the military uniforms, my only comment to that
effect was that you can still wear them without any grade, which would actually eliminate a lot of issues
people purport members have.

"That Others May Zoom"

TheSkyHornet

Quote from: shuman14 on August 13, 2020, 02:26:41 PMThe USAF no longer uses Warrant Officer grades, this will help eliminate "confusion as to roles and authority" of CAP members in relation to USAF personnel.

What's this myth about confusion existing as to the roles and authorities of CAP members in relation to USAF personnel?

I don't think I've ever come across that despite the fact that I keep hearing about it.

If you want to tie grade to PD/ET level, by all means. Standardize it across the board. Don't over complicate it by having plurality. Just have officer roles and leave it at that. We don't need to reinvent everything. Maybe we need to get rid of stuff.

Or, what we could do, is overhaul an existing program to reestablish an appropriate use of terminology and designated roles which already exist (i.e., Squadron NCO).

I'll ask this:
Does a Squadron NCO need to exist?

I'll answer it myself:
No, because most squadrons don't even have an NCO on the roster. And many squadrons that have an NCO don't put their NCO into that role or even use them as an NCO for that matter.

I'll as this as well:
Does being the Aerospace Officer have any difference in being the Aerospace NCO?

I'll answer:
No, it doesn't. There's literally no difference between those two individuals.

An NCO can be the Deputy Commander for Cadets. They can be the Safety Officer. They can be the Emergency Services Officer. They can be a Mission Pilot. They can be a Ground Team Leader. There's literally no difference between a CAP O-4 and a CAP E-7 exercising those very roles/duties.

So we can either:
1.  Take the NCO Corps and modify it to treat it like an NCO Corps (if that need exists);

2.  Take the NCO Corps and get rid of it altogether;

3.  Continue to use the NCO Corps as-is for recruiting purposes (no change);


The way I see it, the issue isn't officer grades, or warrant officers, or any of that. The matter at hand is whether or not NCOs have a distinctive purpose and benefit the organization in their capacity as NCOs.

It is my opinion that we do not employ NCOs in most circumstances. We employ members who have NCO insignia and title and treat them as any relative officer.

Let's either use them as NCOs, get rid of the NCO grades, or drop the subject and just carry on. The never ending debate topic needs to go away more than anything else.


Quote from: SarDragon on August 13, 2020, 04:50:55 AMI'm not sure where you wanted to go with, so I will just provide some additional detail for those folks not as familiar with the Canoe Club.

(Content removed)

All that said, I do not see any need for a similar CAP structure.

It was an anecdotal point that different structures exist for different organizational/hierarchical needs.

We copy an Air Force structure because of the heir apparent status of CAP as an Air Force underbelly. I think our organization has spent so much time trying to mimic the Air Force without some individuals paying attention to our design criteria and requirements to support our missions and operational necessities.

There is literally only one place in CAP where mimicking the Air Force structure makes sense in its near entirety, and that is in the Cadet Program. We use the training flight model, much like any other JROTC or collegiate ROTC would: flights, platoons, floatilla, whatever you want to call it. It makes sense there, if employed correctly and with the roster numbers (and participation rates) to make it work.

As far as the remainder of the CAP hierarchy goes, it's all janky, from top to bottom.

We have a Wing confined to a state (in most cases) that has, say, 30 squadrons. But that Wing really isn't internally supportive of a common mission. Every squadron kind of does its own thing. Those squadrons may vary in size, not complementary to the mission needs of that unit, but in the reverse; the squadron's size really dictates what it's capable of rather than being capably built around it's assigned mission. That's a given in a volunteer organization where we can't really just add more manpower to support the mission. Additionally, our squadrons don't really specialize in an area. There isn't a logistics squadron, or a search and rescue squadron, or a medical squadron, and so forth. Some squadrons only do one thing, maybe train cadets or fly, and some squadrons do a great deal more. Again, that comes with the volunteer structure.

Okay, so we take the Air Force design, and we employ that. It's easy to understand why we settled on that, but at best we're just mimicking the terminology; not really the design elements in support of the mission.

Then we mimic the rank structure of the Air Force, and we use the same terms. But we change it up and add our own elements. Your grade is really encompassed around what you've trained on, not so much what you're able to do in the organization. You can command as a 2d Lt. You can command as a Lt Col. Then we add in some other ranks, such as NCOs. And we don't really make that any different aside from saying "To be this grade, you have to be prior military, and if you hold that grade, you can't be a commander or a Chaplain or really any traditional officer role...except you can really be in any other officer role."

At that point, my eyes go crossed, and I don't even know why it's a thing. "Well, because NCOs add value." Now I thought some of the people's comments previous to mine said that's not necessarily the case. You can be an NCO, but you still have to do all of the other officer-type stuff in CAP. Um, okay. Losing me again. What's the purpose? What's the difference here?

Then, there are some other comments about why don't we switch to new grades, or get rid of grades, or all of these things.

Hang on, everyone.

Let's go back and look at what we need to accomplish in order to fulfill our mission. What does it take to train and education the manpower to do that? What does it take to encourage and motivate those individuals to undergo that training, to show up, and to stay active in their advancement?

Let's do that.

TheSkyHornet

Quote from: Eclipse on August 13, 2020, 04:58:06 PMCan you name ONE military based-cadet program that operates in the manner that CAP does, has an operational
component which includes an adult program, and has Lt Cols reporting to 2nd Lts and an NCO corps without
enlisted personnel?  Perfect "model" for cadets to understand how things work.

This is kind of my frustration in that realm.

We don't model the program for the cadets, so we have to instill it based on stories, textbooks, and hopefully some first-hand experience.

What I think happens, more often than not, as I've griped about previous, is that you get a situation where there is a squadron of, say, 20 cadets. Three of those cadets have parents in the squadron as senior members, maybe O-1 through O-3. The O-3 is the squadron commander; he's prior military enlisted. In addition, the two other officers are non-military. One of them is the Deputy Commander for Cadets and Aerospace Officer, the other is the Testing Officer and Supply Officer. The Commander covers Character Development and Personnel/Admin. A new cadet member joins along with mom. Mom volunteers to help with Testing and help do cadet training "things." Dad joins as a Cadet Sponsor Member, but doesn't really want to get too involved. He sits on the sidelines during the meetings playing on his phone, and he chaperones the activities. He's quirky and likes to boast about how great the program is, but he really doesn't understand any of it. He just helps when he can.

In this example, you have a relatively inexperienced corps of senior cadre who don't really know much from a military perspective thrust into a paramilitary training culture, like that of a JROTC. Without that experience, they don't really get the gist of what the difference is between a Flight Sergeant or First Sergeant. They think the Cadet Second Lieutenant has worked really hard, and they appoint him to be the Cadet Commander despite the fact that when asked what the difference is between officers and NCOs during a review board, he says "Well, officers make the decisions and NCOs follow the orders." Okay, it suffices.

I'm coming to the point where I'm caring so little about anyone's grade and the fact that I run across numerous "officers" who couldn't tell you the difference between an officer and an NCO in the military, let alone in CAP, let alone in the Cadet Program.

We worry about so much stuff like insignia that we're not spending that energy on training improvements at the local level, and with a lack of mentoring from Wings in assisting those local units in fulfilling their duties.


CAVEAT:
I speak solely out of frustration for Cadet Programs, since that's essentially all I've done since being in CAP. Don't take this as any correlation to the other facets of the organization.