NCO development: Is there a specific program?

[Hawk200]

When it comes to NCOs, is there work on a specific progression for them?
Unique requirements?

[JohhnyD]

Are there recruiting materials? Welcome materials? Does the NCO program even still exist?

[Jester]

The program does still exist, and we've added a couple hundred in the last few years (last number I saw was around 320 total).  Recruiting materials from the national level have failed to materialize, but I know several wings/regions creating their own. 

As far as the progression goes, we're working on it.  The new E&T program has several NCO-focused modules, and there's some stuff in the works regarding how to employ us.

Our appointment and promotion structure is still more restrictive than the officer track, and I don't see that changing any time soon.

[Private Investigator]

When it comes to NCOs, is there work on a specific progression for them?
Unique requirements?

Look at the latest CAPF2 (AUG 2014) To make TSgt = Level II; MSgt = Level III; SMSgt = Level IV and CMSgt = Level V.

Every Specialty Track except Command can be achieved by a NCO.

[Fubar]

There is a big top-down push to assign NCOs into a variety of "NCO Duty Positions" at the squadron, group, wing, and region levels. When you ask up the chain why this is such an urgent matter and what exactly are these NCOs supposed to do in these positions, the only answer I've heard is, "Uh... NCO stuff? Don't worry about it, just appoint them."

The officer and NCO grades are actually irrelevant in the big picture, both are "Senior Members" first, which is the actual job description. The rest of it is just for cosplay.

[Capt Thompson]

When it comes to NCOs, is there work on a specific progression for them?
Unique requirements?

Look at the latest CAPF2 (AUG 2014) To make TSgt = Level II; MSgt = Level III; SMSgt = Level IV and CMSgt = Level V.

Every Specialty Track except Command can be achieved by a NCO.

If I'm not mistaken, you can actually move from the NCO grades to equivalent Officer grades in order to take on a Command position, and then move back to an NCO grade after correct?

[kcebnaes]

Yep, that's correct.

[JohhnyD]

Where can we find more info? What is the point of the NCO program and has anyone done a pros and cons analytic?

[arajca]

There are several lengthy discussions here on the NCO program. As far as what's the point, there's an official answer (I forget what it is), then there's reality. I haven't seen a analysis, but I haven't looked for one.

Opinions differ, but basically fall into to two categories - "Solution looking for problem" and "An outstanding way to take advantage of the unique skills NCOs bring".

Personally, I thinks it's a feel good thing for some members since, unlike the military, CAP does not have NCO only or Officer only (excluding command) jobs. CAP just has jobs that need to be done regardless of what grade or lack thereof you're wearing.

[Stonewall]

At the last wing conference I attended in 2019 (not my wing) there was a breakout session to discuss the NCO corps, how it works and its purpose.

Literally, the strongest stance pro-NCO program advocates could bring to that table was "NCOs get stuff done" and "it allows us to capitalize on military NCOs expertise."

So, I'm a CMSgt in my real life and a Lt Col in my CAP life. So what I apparently bring to that table from my military experience is only valid if I enter into CAP's NCO corps?

Someone said it before, we are all senior members first, and our assigned rank is secondary at best. What I bring to the table is irrelevant when it comes to the rank I wear on my collar or sleeves.

Someone also said "a solution looking for a problem." I agree with that.

[Holding Pattern]

So, I'm a CMSgt in my real life and a Lt Col in my CAP life. So what I apparently bring to that table from my military experience is only valid if I enter into CAP's NCO corps?

I'll put it this way. If I see a CAP officer I don't know much about them based on their rank other than their ability to check certain boxes. If I see a CAP NCO I know they were prior military service and have at least some training and skills to bring to the table that a CAP officer of any rank may or may not have.

Some of the things I've seen CAP officers do have made me overall less impressed with the overall officer program.

The NCOs while new and with a smaller pool of people haven't disappointed me yet.

[Eclipse]

If I see a CAP NCO I know they were prior military service

That's it. That's all you know.

Being prior military does not automatically make you an asset to CAP, and often brings attitudes and
ideas that run counter to CAP's process and mission.  BTDT

And as Stonewall and others say on repeat every time this comes up, being an NCO
does not give you force powers in regards to CAP, nor the cadets, nor does it provide
for any other service, duty, or station that a CAP officer can't perform, in fact quite the reverse.

It's also humorous that some of the people who are most vehement about how
"CAP is! not! the! military!", also espouse members of the military as being CAP's saviors.

Math is hard.

[JohhnyD]

Every Specialty Track except Command can be achieved by a NCO.

I do not think Chaplain can be an NCO, no?

[Private Investigator]

Every Specialty Track except Command can be achieved by a NCO.

I do not think Chaplain can be an NCO, no?

Chaplain has always been commissioned officers.

[Private Investigator]

... The officer and NCO grades are actually irrelevant in the big picture, both are "Senior Members" first, which is the actual job description. The rest of it is just for cosplay.

Whatever you do in CAP, if its fun and rewarding, you will stay in. So thru the years I did a variety of assignments.

Now the cosplay. Some of us like to wear the USAF uniform, others just the polo and then the fans of the aviator shirt. Now we have another option. For example you can be a Chief Master Sergeant and/or a Lieutenant Colonel. I am for whatever makes that volunteer a happy volunteer.   

[Stonewall]

I'll put it this way. If I see a CAP officer I don't know much about them based on their rank other than their ability to check certain boxes. If I see a CAP NCO I know they were prior military service and have at least some training and skills to bring to the table that a CAP officer of any rank may or may not have.

Some of the things I've seen CAP officers do have made me overall less impressed with the overall officer program.

The NCOs while new and with a smaller pool of people haven't disappointed me yet.

This is bad. Really bad.

When you see an NCO you KNOW they bring something to the table? Judging books by their cover? Not very NCO of you. That's like hiring someone based on their resume without ever interviewing or speaking to them.

Many, MANY of the officers in CAP are in fact former NCOs. In fact, many more are officers in CAP than the NCO corps. I guess they aren't contributing to their fullest unless they revert to the NCO ranks? I guarantee you that what I bring to CAP's table has a whole lot more to do with being in CAP for 33 years, 29 as a Senior Member, than my 26 years in the military where I've served in two branches, both as NCOs.

Look, I appreciate that some senior members may feel "unworthy" of being labeled an officer, albeit in CAP, but we aren't portraying ourselves as military officers, we are officers in CAP. I'd be happy to be in the program if there were no formal rank structure, but I think it helps. An NCO rank structure may have its place, but no one has yet to convince me of its relevancy.

[Brit_in_CAP]

Look, I appreciate that some senior members may feel "unworthy" of being labeled an officer, albeit in CAP, but we aren't portraying ourselves as military officers, we are officers in CAP. I'd be happy to be in the program if there were no formal rank structure, but I think it helps. An NCO rank structure may have its place, but no one has yet to convince me of its relevancy.

Agree on all points.  Solution looking for a problem, like several other initiatives I've encountered.

[TheSkyHornet]

NCOs bring the "Ooh" and "Ahh" for some people, since they're blinding by military thingies whilst in a paramilitary organization.

There is zero difference as to what an NCO can do in CAP versus an officer. In fact, being a NCO is more restrictive. But in most cases, the it's titular only with no distinction other than knowing that this individual has a military background.

Military backgrounds and NCOs are fairly different "things" in CAP. A military background brings about a certain way of doing things and a different perspective in an operational environment (particularly in training) that maybe non-military don't have. It's not always the case. But it can bring in some use, particularly when it comes to Cadet Programs, which is much more military-like than the "rest" of CAP. NCOs...well, it's really just an insignia. That's kind of it. Yes, one brings about the other, but we get into the whole "What if they were a military officer? How about that experience?" and so forth.

I had an NCO as my assistant in Cadet Programs. We were a perfect pair, and became best buds on the outside. I joined and became a Second Lieutenant. He joined and became a Second Lieutenant. When the regulations changed, he switched to Staff Sergeant because he felt like it worked for him. He had the enlisted background and could employ that mindset, whereas he admitted that strategic planning was not his forte (so leave it to me). But that's a rarity that this duo exists. You can take two officers and do the same thing, but you have to match personalities and teaching techniques.

We focus so much on terminology and not enough training/work intent.

I want to employ someone to work alongside me who can tactically apply my training format. I want someone who can provide direct instruction and mentor junior grades on front line subject matter that requires technical proficiency while I distant planning and monitor the overall effectiveness of the program. Call these people NCOs, officers, warrants, whatever the heck you choose to call them and put on them whatever shiny things they wear on their collar or patches on their sleeve. But I need these people to help perform that role. And I find it increasingly difficult to find these individuals because that's not what we produce for the most part.

[Holding Pattern]

I'll put it this way. If I see a CAP officer I don't know much about them based on their rank other than their ability to check certain boxes. If I see a CAP NCO I know they were prior military service and have at least some training and skills to bring to the table that a CAP officer of any rank may or may not have.

Some of the things I've seen CAP officers do have made me overall less impressed with the overall officer program.

The NCOs while new and with a smaller pool of people haven't disappointed me yet.

This is bad. Really bad.

When you see an NCO you KNOW they bring something to the table? Judging books by their cover? Not very NCO of you.

Good thing I'm not a NCO.

It may be bad for me to look at things this way but the reality is that CAP has a horrible leadership problem and the NCO portion of the program so far seems to have far less of it.

I've written my screed on leadership and got responses that include "We don't think this is a problem." Well, that means I hold all CAP officers to a lower standard thereby until proven otherwise. Even more when people simply treat CAP officers as "cosplay."

Well, I consider prior service to be more than "cosplay." Perhaps if CAP members stop this self-degradation I'll gain more respect for them in their actions. Until then.



And yes, it is bad. But that is what the current leadership has gotten us.

[AirDX]

The NCOs while new and with a smaller pool of people haven't disappointed me yet.

CAP NCOs haven't disappointed me either. Because I have never seen one in the wild. Ever.

Prior military or not, the only status I care about in CAP is whether or not some individual is one of the 10% in the unit that actually does work, or is just another empty shirt. And that has nothing to do grade, rank, status, prior military or how much bling you bring to the table.

[Shuman 14]

Perhaps it is again time to have a discussion about doing away with permanent Officer and/or NCO rank and make everyone a Flight Officer/Warrant Officer with grade insignia based solely on the Professional Development/Education level completed...

Level 0 = Senior Member Without Grade

Level 1 = Flight/Warrant Officer

Level 2 = Chief Flight/Warrant Officer 2

Level 3 = Chief Flight/Warrant Officer 3

Level 4 = Chief Flight/Warrant Officer 4

Level 5 = Master Flight/Warrant Officer

No prior Cadet or prior Military advanced promotions. Do your education, do your time, get promoted.

If you choose to accept a Leadership position, you temporarily wear Officer Grade while in the position...

Squadron = Captain

Group = Lieutenant Colonel

Wing = Colonel

Region = Colonel

When your tenure is over, you revert to wearing your earned Flight/Warrant Officer Grade.

Maybe less chest thumping will result and more work will get done, maybe.

[Eclipse]

Perhaps it is again time to have a discussion

It's not.

[Capt Thompson]

Perhaps it is again time to have a discussion about doing away with permanent Officer and/or NCO rank and make everyone a Flight Officer/Warrant Officer with grade insignia based solely on the Professional Development/Education level completed...

You're talking about revamping the entire program, and causing 30,000 members to have to purchase all new rank insignia, some of which would need to be created, all so that we can have a different honorary rank than we already have. Just stop please.

No prior Cadet or prior Military advanced promotions. Do your education, do your time, get promoted.

Except that we have current Cadet Officers who are better educated on the program than many L4 and L5 Seniors. Taking away this promotion would ensure most wouldn't cross over to the Senior program, which would be a huge loss for CAP. I'll take a former Earhart or Spaatz Cadet over a brand new SMWOG fresh off of the street, or who used to be a Patron, any day of the week. We need to encourage their higher level of training, not ask them to start over.

[Shuman 14]

Captain Thompson,

Yes, I am talking about revamping the entire program. There clearly there is a problem with rank based on the hundreds of discussions that have been held on CAPTalk over the years. It has happened before, blue shoulder slides and pin on rank, add a maroon band to the epaulet, then maroon shoulder slides, then the current grey slides.

Blue corporate uniforms... for a minute.

BDUs to ABUs... soon OCPs... its coming.

You're argument is superfluous at best.

With the new education plan, there is no starting over, prior Cadets and Military simply have modules of the Education program completed based on their previous experience. We're talking about rank.

Currently any Prior Military, up to O-5, can walk in the door, complete Level 1 and request a special promotion to their previously rank and it's almost never denied. They then can be a CAP Lieutenant Colonel and never do another piece of the Education program... and still be a Lieutenant Colonel. How does that help?

If we are Flight/Warrant Officers, rank really doesn't matter.

Also, by using Flight/Warrant Officer grades we never have to worry about being confused for USAF Officers except for the selected few in leadership positions.

[Capt Thompson]

I wasn't aware there was a problem with our membership being confused for actual USAF officers. Sure that may happen as a one off from time to time, but I assure you it's not a huge issue.

Notice I defended prior Cadets, but not prior military. You're correct, a Spaatz Cadet will make a valuable Captain as soon as they transfer to the Senior Program. A former LTC in the Army won't necessarily be a valuable addition, although they may. The Spaatz Cadet has already earned their grade in CAP, where the LTC may not have any CAP experience beyond L1.

As for Warrant Officer grades, which are something the AF phased out decades ago, moving a Captain to an FO position isn't really solving a problem we currently have, it's looking for a problem to match a perceived solution.

This thread wasn't about Officer grades, which aren't an issue, it was about NCO grades, which nobody seems to know what to do with. We have NCO's, we don't really know why other than the fact that former military NCO's want to have stripes instead of bars due to years of being told that bars are evil. If you have suggestions for the NCO corps, please share, but there is no need to rehash the Warrant Officer argument, again.

[etodd]

Ranks - Titles - Uniforms

Always debates.

Five years and just renewed to start my sixth.  Only due to being in a Squadron/Wing that is job/mission focused instead of the above. Glad to be here in my little world, as a simple worker bee, doing my jobs. 

[Eclipse]

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/condescend

[Shuman 14]

If you have suggestions for the NCO corps, please share, 

There is no need or purpose for an NCO Corps in CAP.

[Shuman 14]

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/condescend

Lady Macbeth doth protest too much.

Perhaps that is a mirror that you are gazing into my Dear Eclipse.

[Shuman 14]

Ranks - Titles - Uniforms

Always debates.

Five years and just renewed to start my sixth.  Only due to being in a Squadron/Wing that is job/mission focused instead of the above. Glad to be here in my little world, as a simple worker bee, doing my jobs. 

Which is why I will be a SMOG for my entire CAP Career.  ;-)

[etodd]

Wasn't meaning it in a condescending way. Merely showing how very different Squadrons/Wings can be. I visited mine nearly 10 years ago, and after two meetings, knew it wasn't for me.  Was asked to visit 5 years ago, and it was day/night difference, and have been very active ever since.

Its something that can't be accounted for in the recruitment process. You either mesh with what you see, or you try another Squadron, or like me, wait a few years until the focus has changed.

Its just 'my' story. Luck of the draw when you fist visit a Squadron.

[TheSkyHornet]

a Spaatz Cadet will make a valuable Captain as soon as they transfer to the Senior Program. A former LTC in the Army won't necessarily be a valuable addition, although they may. The Spaatz Cadet has already earned their grade in CAP, where the LTC may not have any CAP experience beyond L1.

Most cadet officers I've come across and/or worked with can barely manage a project let alone train others beyond the textbook lessons on leadership principles.

Most senior member captains I've come across and/or worked with can barely manage a project let alone do anything beyond a simple task that has to be micromanaged by their superior, or even their superior's superior. Junior grade senior members tend to perform more at my expectation of an E-3 than they do an O-3.

And I'm not knocking them. I think we need to do a better job at mentoring our cadets and teaching them as well as our seniors. In that regard, there's no difference between what cadets should be capable of doing versus senior members. We're just employing that training on different terms because of the lack of life experience and maturity.

As for the NCO Corps, what specifically does a CAP E-5 know versus a CAP O-1?

[kcebnaes]

Most senior member captains I've come across and/or worked with can barely manage a project let alone do anything beyond a simple task that has to be micromanaged by their superior, or even their superior's superior. Junior grade senior members tend to perform more at my expectation of an E-3 than they do an O-3.

 

So what I'm hearing is that we should bring ALL members in at E-1, like our parent service, and then members can work their way up like cadets.

[TheSkyHornet]

Most senior member captains I've come across and/or worked with can barely manage a project let alone do anything beyond a simple task that has to be micromanaged by their superior, or even their superior's superior. Junior grade senior members tend to perform more at my expectation of an E-3 than they do an O-3.

 

So what I'm hearing is that we should bring ALL members in at E-1, like our parent service, and then members can work their way up like cadets.

The Air Force doesn't do that...

Officer Candidates enter as E-5s while in training. ROTC is an entirely different process altogether, but much more comparable to the Cadet Program.

Enlisted and Officer tracks are exceptionally different training curricula. This is why an E-6 can go through as an Officer Candidate and commissions as an O-1 at the junior-most officer grade.

The Cadet Program's ROTC-like training method takes people through the junior grade and advances them. The difficult I have in that is there is no standardized timeline to accomplish that progression in CAP, which results in 50 cadets progressing at 50 different rates. Collegiate ROTC is essentially all on the same page, and insignia worn is commensurate with one's role (despite some differences between schools).

In the OCS/OTS route, you're going to enter in and go through a 12-week (plus or minus a few) training program where you may play the role of various ranks/duties before commissioning as an O-1. Everyone goes through at the same progression (except anyone who is rolled into a later class due to performance or medical issues).

And unlike our senior members, we progress at our own pace, versus being on a military-like periodic timeline consistent with a board (as well as "slot" assignments available for a particular grade). We essentially match the cadets in CAP as far as our progression goes.

[kcebnaes]

You're absolutely correct; they have a TON of different ways to join. I was only kidding, though! It'd be too much of a PITA to figure out how something like would actually work, let alone getting that kind of system to actually work with for us.

[Eclipse]

This is all moot until staff and command appointments are based on something other then "presence".

To develop talent, the "talent" has to be motivated, either by mandate or by interest,
and there has to be ramifications for failure, with remediation also based on motivation
by mandate or interest.

Hard to do in the volunteer environment of an organization focused on quantity over quality
in regards to its "members".

Someone who thinks they are doing CAP a favor by just showing up, knowing full well no
one else will take his job, and that the doors may close if he fails to check his box,
isn't going to be forced into doing much he's not already intending on doing.

Further to this, the very idea that an organization like CAP would allow people to be
appointed as staff officers (of record) or worse Commanders, literally before their ID
cards are dry, is ridiculous, yet for "reasons", this practice has persisted for
decades, despite all indications it is the worst possible way to operate.

[Hawk200]

Perhaps it is again time to have a discussion about doing away with permanent Officer and/or NCO rank and make everyone a Flight Officer/Warrant Officer with grade insignia based solely on the Professional Development/Education level completed...

This was not the point of this thread.

I'm looking at the program as is now, primarily to increase my own awareness of its content. If I go back into the PD (or ET) track, I want do my best to make certain that folks wearing stripes are progressing as they need to.

Does anyone have info as to more specific requirements on the NCO progression? That's what I'm looking to know.

[Capt Thompson]

Perhaps it is again time to have a discussion about doing away with permanent Officer and/or NCO rank and make everyone a Flight Officer/Warrant Officer with grade insignia based solely on the Professional Development/Education level completed...

This was not the point of this thread.

I'm looking at the program as is now, primarily to increase my own awareness of its content. If I go back into the PD (or ET) track, I want do my best to make certain that folks wearing stripes are progressing as they need to.

Does anyone have info as to more specific requirements on the NCO progression? That's what I'm looking to know.

As far as PD is concerned, I thought NCO's follow the same PD as Officers as outlined in 40-1.

Level I = SSgt
Level II = TSgt
Level III = MSgt
Level IV = SMSgt
Level V - CMSgt

[Hawk200]

As far as PD is concerned, I thought NCO's follow the same PD as Officers as outlined in 40-1.

Level I = SSgt
Level II = TSgt
Level III = MSgt
Level IV = SMSgt
Level V - CMSgt

I'll read through it a little more studiously in time. Just want to make sure that if I do PD again, I either know it, or know where to find it.

[TheSkyHornet]

Refer to ICL 19-08 to CAPR 35-5:
https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/R355_with_ICL_1908_and_ICL_2004_inc_F9ADEB5A35E90.pdf

There is an officer-NCO grade conversion table.

Once your grade is converted from officer to NCO, you'll need to follow the standardized progression path for all senior members.

Section 6.3 shows the progression table for NCOs, to include time in grade and professional development levels required for advancement. NCOs also have a manning requirement for advancement, meaning that you must have served in a key position for a tenured time in order to promote to the next higher grade.

Short version:
You still need to complete the PD Levels to advance. As an NCO, you'll have different TIG requirements and additional duties at echelon to be eligible to promote.

[Private Investigator]

Refer to ICL 19-08 to CAPR 35-5:
https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/R355_with_ICL_1908_and_ICL_2004_inc_F9ADEB5A35E90.pdf

There is an officer-NCO grade conversion table.

Once your grade is converted from officer to NCO, you'll need to follow the standardized progression path for all senior members.

Section 6.3 shows the progression table for NCOs, to include time in grade and professional development levels required for advancement. NCOs also have a manning requirement for advancement, meaning that you must have served in a key position for a tenured time in order to promote to the next higher grade.

Short version:
You still need to complete the PD Levels to advance. As an NCO, you'll have different TIG requirements and additional duties at echelon to be eligible to promote.

I think it is straight forward. The former military Veteran will start where he left off, i.e., E5, E6, E7 or E8.

But what about a former E9? My previous experience in CAP most prior NCOs were CMSgt.

Another thing what about former E2 and E3? It appears the CAP NCO Program is only for E5* and above. But that makes sense because most E2 and E3 have not had any advance training beyond Boot Camp.

E5* = ICL 19-08 2 December 2019 shows E4.   

[TheSkyHornet]

CAP NCOs can roll over their military credit if they were E-4 or higher.
This is because it's inconsistent across all branches as to when the NCO Corps begins for each branch (i.e., An Air Force E-4 is not an NCO, but in the Marine Corps an E-4 is an NCO; in the Army an E-4 may or may not be an NCO depending if they are a Specialist or Corporal).


Every E-2 and E-3, after basic training/boot camp is going to go through some form of advanced skill training in respect to their particular MOS/AFSC/NES. However, that's comparative to technician or vocational training in the sense of it being job-specific. There may or may not be additional leadership subject matter in those courses, but it varies across the board.

As for the NCO Corps in each respective branch, this widely depends on the branch and how far up the ladder the enlisted person climbs. You can be an E-5 in the Army National Guard without additional training, having never been a Corporal. I have a college buddy who went straight from E-4 Specialist to E-5 Sergeant; funny dude, but entirely useless as a leader (and he knows it). But that's how the game works when slots are open and the board is relaxed.

This whole one-for-one swap logic doesn't really make sense. In some cases, you can switch military branches and retain grade, but you're still going to (most of the time) have a transition program or introductory training. This is what CAP is trying to employ by saying you still need to meet the PD Level requirements.

The problem that CAP has versus military branches is, as previously discussed, that CAP does not have a distinction between what NCOs and officers do in the organization. If you switch the Army to the Navy and want to remain an E-6, that's not a big deal. If you switch from the Army to the Navy, and want to go from E-6 to O-1, well then you have to go through the officer training program; and it's not going to be pleasant for you as an individual going "But I've already been through boot camp." The officer and NCO worlds are very different in their progression and duty responsibilities.