For those that subscribe to NotF, check your email

[ncc1912]

This would only facilitate more issues.  An AF general would be far less tolerant of CAP's volunteer nature.

What brings you to this conclusion?

Well, just speaking from my own experience, they're not accustomed to issuing orders to a recipient that has the option to carry out the orders or disregard them through nonpunishable insubordination or voluntary/forced resignation... at least the ones I've worked for aren't accustom to it.

[ZigZag911]

A modest proposal:

1) wing commanders stay home and command their wings....they should still be corporate officers, but NOT the National Board members

2) the NB member from each wing should be a former wing commander (preferably, but not necessarily, from that wing.....'immediate past wing CC" should have right of first refusal on the job -- that is, when he/she completes a full term commanding the wing, becomes that wing's board rep for the next 4 years

3) commanders not completing terms would be ineligible

[Pylon]

A modest proposal:

1) wing commanders stay home and command their wings....they should still be corporate officers, but NOT the National Board members

2) the NB member from each wing should be a former wing commander (preferably, but not necessarily, from that wing.....'immediate past wing CC" should have right of first refusal on the job -- that is, when he/she completes a full term commanding the wing, becomes that wing's board rep for the next 4 years

3) commanders not completing terms would be ineligible

Doesn't work, because the Wing Commander needs to be a board member in order to be a "corporate officer" (that's what the term means, in and out of CAP - a member of officeholder of the board of directors). The Wing Commander needs that authority as a corporate officer to "stay home and run the wing"  -- a corporate officer is needed for many things: to obligate CAP resources and monies, to accept donations, to authorize 911T missions, and the like. 

If someone other than the Wing King were the corporate officer from each wing, certain things needing approval would be going up the chain until Wing, and then diverting not to the wing commander, but to another individual.  This would severely undermine the authority of the sitting Wing King and limit his or her ability to actually command the wing and do their job.  Imagine a Wing Commander wanting to accept a donation from a company, but needing to go ask some designated board member if he or she is allowed to do so! 

The National Board is not a glorified senior member version of the CAC.  It's not just a forum where CAP SMs voice their concerns and make decisions.  The NB serves as the corporate board of directors.  (Of course, let's not get into the whole Board of Governors bit, then it gets confusing). 

You cannot separate the status of corporate officer from being a member of the National Board.  They're one in the same.  Membership on the national board is what makes the individual a corporate officer.

Certain authorities of the Wing King do not come from fulfilling the slot of Wing Commander, but rather from their status as a corporate officer.  The Wing Commander needs that status to command at that level effectively.  Any other structure would severely screw up the chain of command and limit the ability of the Wing Commander to do their job.

[ZigZag911]

A modest proposal:

1) wing commanders stay home and command their wings....they should still be corporate officers, but NOT the National Board members

2) the NB member from each wing should be a former wing commander (preferably, but not necessarily, from that wing.....'immediate past wing CC" should have right of first refusal on the job -- that is, when he/she completes a full term commanding the wing, becomes that wing's board rep for the next 4 years

By the way, as a former cadet, i've always felt the wing commanders could do a lot worse than listen to their CAC members....not necessarily implement their ideas, but hear them out.

Oh, I forgot....most wing CCs don't even bother with 'their' cadet advisory council.

A Board cmprised of former wing CCs, nonetheless, would be a far cry from a CAC at any level.

3) commanders not completing terms would be ineligible

Doesn't work, because the Wing Commander needs to be a board member in order to be a "corporate officer" (that's what the term means, in and out of CAP - a member of officeholder of the board of directors). The Wing Commander needs that authority as a corporate officer to "stay home and run the wing"  -- a corporate officer is needed for many things: to obligate CAP resources and monies, to accept donations, to authorize 911T missions, and the like. 

If someone other than the Wing King were the corporate officer from each wing, certain things needing approval would be going up the chain until Wing, and then diverting not to the wing commander, but to another individual.  This would severely undermine the authority of the sitting Wing King and limit his or her ability to actually command the wing and do their job.  Imagine a Wing Commander wanting to accept a donation from a company, but needing to go ask some designated board member if he or she is allowed to do so! 

The National Board is not a glorified senior member version of the CAC.  It's not just a forum where CAP SMs voice their concerns and make decisions.  The NB serves as the corporate board of directors.  (Of course, let's not get into the whole Board of Governors bit, then it gets confusing). 

You cannot separate the status of corporate officer from being a member of the National Board.  They're one in the same.  Membership on the national board is what makes the individual a corporate officer.

Certain authorities of the Wing King do not come from fulfilling the slot of Wing Commander, but rather from their status as a corporate officer.  The Wing Commander needs that status to command at that level effectively.  Any other structure would severely screw up the chain of command and limit the ability of the Wing Commander to do their job.

First, let me state again that I find the term "Wing King" serves only to reinforce the attitude of non-accountability all too prevalent in this organization.

I know it rhymes nicely, and is alliterative, and no doubt is CAP's version of "The Old Man" or "The Skipper"....but in the interests of full disclosure, I gotta tell you the term really aggravates me!

Having said that, let me add a quotation from Wikipedia's article on "corporate officers":  "A corporate officer or corporate executive is a senior manager or other similarly high-ranking officer in a corporation...The members of the board of directors, including the chairman of the board, depending on context, are somtimes considered to be and sometimes considered not to be corporate officers."

CAP's history has been that the 'corporate officers' and the 'national board members' have been the same people.

I feel it's time that changed.....the complexity of today's missions, the demands of running a wing competently, do not mix well with the equally difficult task of setting policy for a national organization.

Wing commanders could and should remain 'corporate officers', in the sense of the leaders with the responsibility AND authority to execute CAP's missions and programs.

The Board would benefit from having 52 of its members ALREADY with the experience of a term as Wing CC....individuals who would probably be more independent in thought, action, and vote, since they would no longer be concerned about losing their wing if they anger the region CC, national CC, or a host of other luminaries.

And please accept my word that this happens....I know of one instance where a wing commander was relieved immediately before the summer Board meeting, and an 'interim wing commander' from the national staff (who resided in a different wing than the one concerned) was appointed for FOUR DAYS to insure that the vote from that wing remained in someone's pocket.

CAP in general, and each of the wings, can only benefit from having a state commander who is focused on the wing and its personnel, rather than the backroom silliness that passes for high level policy setting in this organization.

[ncc1912]

Well, in a normal corporation the corporate officers usually hold a substantial amount of stock in the company.  CAP, however, is not a publicly traded company. 

My suggestion would be to have the Wing Commanders and National CC (on a ticket with the National CV) elected by the general membership.  In today's technological age (i.e. E-Services) an election would be easily conducted.

Region Commanders would be selected by the National CC from the sitting wing commanders.  Region Commanders would also have the duty to confirm the Wing Commanders (elect).

Divide the National Board and the National Executive Committee into two separate entities which together govern CAP as a check and balance to the National CC.

The National Board (NB) would consist of the 52 wing commanders and be chaired by a speaker elected by the board - similar to the U.S. House of Representatives.

The National Executive Committee (NEC) would consist of the 8 selected region commanders and the national staff officers.  It would be chaired by the National CV - similar to the U.S. Senate.

Either committee/board would be able to suggest changes (bills), but they would then have to be passed by the other committee/board in a manner similar to the U.S. Congress.

The NB would also be responsible to confirm national officers appointed by the National CC.

I think that this could serve both purposes.  This way the only seats the National CC would be able to "strong arm" would be in the NEC and if he/she did, it would show when he/she comes up for re-election.

[flyguy06]

Exactly whatis News of the Force and what was in this email

[ncc1912]

Exactly whatis News of the Force and what was in this email

It is a not-so popular Yahoo! group that describes itself as follows:
NEWS OF THE FORCE is a FREE email newsletter sent to your email address every morning. It contains news about or related to the military services of the United States and their auxiliary forces, including the Civil Air Patrol and the U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary. Also included is news of the military reserves and the Army and Air National Guard, and world military news. We also include stories about police and stories of rescues.
On the Web: http://newsoftheforce.org
Email us at: newsoftheforce@aol.com; newsoftheforce@yahoo.com; or NewsoftheForce-owner@yahoogroups.com .
Got a news tip? Send it to us at: newsoftheforce@aol.com. You can also call us toll-free at 1-877-837-6550 or send us a fax at 813-839-1259. You can remain anonymous. You do not have to give us your name. If you do give us your name, your identity will be protected.
Free syndication of News of the Force is available at: http://rss.groups.yahoo.com/group/NewsoftheForce/rss
News of the Force, newsoftheforce.com, newsoftheforce.org, and NOTF Copyright 2001-2006 by News of the Force. All rights reserved.
NEWS OF THE FORCE, PO Box 10794, Tampa, Florida 33679-0794 USA.

The original post was in reference to this article placed on their Yahoo! site:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewsoftheForce/message/4154

The attachment is no longer there, but the contents of the letter can be found at:
/perl/cap.pl/id,eq,0169492259.htm]http://[bannedurl]/perl/cap.pl/id,eq,0169492259.htm

[Major_Chuck]

Exactly whatis News of the Force and what was in this email

News of the Force is an on-line "Digest" of bits and pieces of information, most of it military related and some Homeland Security stuff thrown in.  The owner of the group (Skip Munger) at one time was a member of Florida Wing and had a bad experience.  Naturally the bad experience is Civil Air Patrol's fault, he is/was blameless and somehow it involves Tony Pineda.

Occassionally in NoF efforts to portray itself as a legitimate piece of journalism will put out a blurb or two about CAP, usually copied from our National Website.  However, when given the chance or opportunity  NoF will use its forum as a chance to slam Civil Air Patrol and its leadership.