Good old boy network!

[Simplex]

We have two majors in our squadron that are overdue for promotion. Overdue by years, not just weeks or months. Both have reached Level V, met all requirements, and have both been turned down three times by wing promotion board. Having just been appointed as our squadron PDO I started asking questions. I did not like what I learned. Apparently the good old boy network is alive and well in our wing. And for a volunteer organization I find that disgusting! One major was told a year of wing staff position was required. The other was told their previous wing position didn't count. Apparently promotion to major and above has turned into a popularity contest. I had thought better of our wing staff, but as someone has said, it is what it is.
Have any of you folks found the same to be true in your various wings?

[Garibaldi]

I heard something similar from WIWG, that promotion required a wing position.

[arajca]

I've heard of such things, but I haven't seen them.

If you want to push the issue, refer to CAPR 35-5, CAP OFFICER AND NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICER APPOINTMENTS AND PROMOTIONS, Para 1-1:

1-1. General. Criteria for promotion of CAP senior members will be applied uniformly throughout Civil Air Patrol. CAP unit supplements to this regulation in the form of publications or oral instructions that change the basic policies, criteria, procedures, and practices prescribed herein are prohibited.

emphasis mine

I presume you're talking about Duty Performance promotions, not any of the special ones.

[Simplex]

Yes Sir, that's correct!

[RogueLeader]

I've never seen it happen.  I would gather all the evidence I could and send it to the Region IG, with an explanation of why you are bypassing Wing IG.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I've heard quite a few rumblings from a lot of CAP members that they will hit Major and that's the end of it. Seems that if you don't want to do wing staff, you don't get past it.

YMMV

[Pylon]

Prior commanders in my AO have refused to grant promotion to Major to those without current (not prior) duty assignment service at the Group level.  While the regulation says higher HQ cannot add supplementary requirements, the promoting authority still has discretion to approve or deny a promotion.  What reasons they can use in their discretion (assuming its not an EEO issue, which this is not) is really up to the commander.

I think to deny these promotions on such a basis is a poor leadership behavior that discourages dedicated volunteers over something that is, when it comes down to it, trivial to CAP and costs the organization nothing.  That being said, I still think it falls within a commander's purview to approve or deny promotions and that the IG won't be able to help in this situation.  Truly a lose-lose for CAP.  I would hate to see someone who is dedicated enough to the organization to earn a duty performance promotion to Major (no small feat) to end up being discouraged, disgruntled, and potentially leave over such a matter.  When in doubt, we should strive to go out of our way to recognize our volunteers in every way possible -- not hold back recognition.

[Camas]

I served on my wing promotions board for a time and I can tell ya - one had better have a very good reason for denying a promotion if requirements IAW CAPR 35-5 were met to include professional development requirements, time in grade and performance in an exemplary manner.

Serving at the wing or group level for field grade promotions makes no sense and, if it's not in CAPR 35-5 I can only ask - what's going on??

[Garibaldi]

When I move to my new unit, I think I will make no mention of TIG or anything regarding promotion for quite some time, since I don't know what their policies are regarding promotion to LTC. I haven't dealt with GAWG as a senior.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I served on my wing promotions board for a time and I can tell ya - one had better have a very good reason for denying a promotion if requirements IAW CAPR 35-5 were met to include professional development requirements, time in grade and performance in an exemplary manner.

Serving at the wing or group level for field grade promotions makes no sense and, if it's not in CAPR 35-5 I can only ask - what's going on??

Some folks have taken upon themselves to rid CAP of "All those old LtCols"?

[Garibaldi]

I served on my wing promotions board for a time and I can tell ya - one had better have a very good reason for denying a promotion if requirements IAW CAPR 35-5 were met to include professional development requirements, time in grade and performance in an exemplary manner.

Serving at the wing or group level for field grade promotions makes no sense and, if it's not in CAPR 35-5 I can only ask - what's going on??

Some folks have taken upon themselves to rid CAP of "All those old LtCols"?

Yeah I was wondering about that. I know we don't have an "up or out" but isn't there some kind of limit on the number of LTC spots? Eventually, we're gonna be butt deep in silver oak leaves, I'd think.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I heard that there were a lot of "do nothing silver oak leaves" six-seven years ago and that "wing is finally making it mean something".

Seven years later apparently that something is wing staff service...

[Thrashed]

Who cares how many LtCols there are. Why would it even matter? If they did everything and earned it, let them have it and keep it. CAP can afford to have that many LtCols on the payroll.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Who cares how many LtCols there are. Why would it even matter? If they did everything and earned it, let them have it and keep it. CAP can afford to have that many LtCols on the payroll.

But then what's the point of review boards? How will those members feel important (who make the rules and titles for these boards). Sure, you can call up the commander of the members unit, see what they are like, verify that everything for promotion is ready, but then where's the fun of a phone/in person board where you get to feel powerful? 

[SarDragon]

Check out the various 200 series pamphlets. I recall that some actually require service at the group or wing level to complete senior or master ratings. Depending on the PD track, there may be a valid delay.

[lordmonar]

I would submit them for promotion.....if/when they get kicked back....ask specifcally why...if it is for some BS "need a wing staff position" rule....do an IG complaint to Region and go from there.

[Ned]

Semi-deliberate thread shift:

There is some irony that many of the same folks who complain that Lt Col in CAP "doesn't mean anything" are the same folks who complain when a hypothetical promotion board /group, wing, or region commander tries to make it "mean something" by favoring applicants with wing or higher service.

It is axiomatic that promotion standards should be uniform, consistent, and transparent.  And administered without bias or favoritism.  And unsuccessful applicants should receive feedback on exactly what they need to do to become successful.  I suspect we can all agree on that.

But I do enjoy a little irony now and then on CT.

Ned Lee

[arajca]

It's one thing to complain it doesn't mean anything. It's entirely different when group/wing/region deicide to violate the regs to make it mean something.

You would probably hear some complaining if National decided to change the requirements EVENLY thoughout CAP, but most would not complain and many would probably applaud the move. However, at this time, you have different levels trying to apply their own personal preferences in a seemingly arbitrary manner in violation of CAP regs. That's what causes the current crop of complaints, along with the lack of these preferences being codified in written form so members can be aware of them before being spit upon.

[Eclipse]

Have they been denied or deferred?

If they have been denied, the approving authority must provide the reason for the denial - if the reason is based on an added objective criteria such as
required staff service, then you will have grounds for a sustainable complaint.

If they are simply not acted upon, there is not much you can do beyond addressing it with the Wing CC, since there is no specific requirement
on a time frame for action, nor action of any kind at all (unless your wing has a supplement or OI to that effect).

Not saying it's right, just that it "is".

[RiverAux]

I served on my wing promotions board for a time and I can tell ya - one had better have a very good reason for denying a promotion if requirements IAW CAPR 35-5 were met to include professional development requirements, time in grade and performance in an exemplary manner.

Serving at the wing or group level for field grade promotions makes no sense and, if it's not in CAPR 35-5 I can only ask - what's going on??

Some folks have taken upon themselves to rid CAP of "All those old LtCols"?

Yeah I was wondering about that. I know we don't have an "up or out" but isn't there some kind of limit on the number of LTC spots? Eventually, we're gonna be butt deep in silver oak leaves, I'd think.

Well, we've had essentially the same promotion requirements for decades and there is absolutely no evidence that we're getting overrun with Lt. Cols.  In fact, if you analyze the number of senior members at various grades in CAP you'll see just what the system expects ---  there are way more Lts. than Captains, way more Captains than Majors and way more Majors than Lt. Cols. 

[Pylon]

If they are simply not acted upon, there is not much you can do beyond addressing it with the Wing CC, since there is no specific requirement
on a time frame for action, nor action of any kind at all (unless your wing has a supplement or OI to that effect).

You can send a memorandum up the chain to wing requesting an update on the status of a promotion that they've simply let stay pending.  IIRC, CAP regulations require units to respond to correspondence within 30 days.

[ColonelJack]

When I move to my new unit, I think I will make no mention of TIG or anything regarding promotion for quite some time, since I don't know what their policies are regarding promotion to LTC. I haven't dealt with GAWG as a senior.

I don't know if this will be of any help, but when I re-joined in 2009 from retirement the GAWG CC at the time didn't want to immediately reinstate my grade.  He told the squadron CC that he would like for me to come back as a major for a while, then reapply for promotion (re-promotion?) to lieutenant colonel.  My unit CC told him exactly what he thought of that idea, and the wing CC changed his mind.

Granted, the situation wasn't the same...and there's a different wing king now (actually a wing queen), but I hope there's something in my story that helps.

Jack

[jimmydeanno]

Semi-deliberate thread shift:

There is some irony that many of the same folks who complain that Lt Col in CAP "doesn't mean anything" are the same folks who complain when a hypothetical promotion board /group, wing, or region commander tries to make it "mean something" by favoring applicants with wing or higher service.

It is axiomatic that promotion standards should be uniform, consistent, and transparent.  And administered without bias or favoritism.  And unsuccessful applicants should receive feedback on exactly what they need to do to become successful.  I suspect we can all agree on that.

But I do enjoy a little irony now and then on CT.

Ned Lee

The irony also extends to the point that many of the people out to make it "mean something" haven't completed the professional development or TIG requirements that most members end up having to go through.  Jumping grades because of professional appointments, and becoming a Wing Commander (or even Region Commander) with only Level II complete, only to play "catch up."

The 1-year probationary period also serves to penalize those who move frequently, have life circumstances that preclude their CAP service for a while, etc.  Say one of our members in the military and moves every three years.  They get promoted to Lt Col and in the middle of their probationary period get PCS'd to another wing.  The move, getting settled into the new job, etc., makes it so that they don't have a duty assignment for four months.  The new wing isn't going to appoint that person to a wing staff position without knowing them, and at the end of the year he gets a "sorry, you haven't been active, or served on wing staff, you're a major again" e-mail.  Meanwhile, the previous 15 years of his life he's dedicated countless hours to CAP, and done far more than the Wing Assistant Test Control Officer will ever do.

[Eclipse]

The 1-year probationary period also serves to penalize those who move frequently, have life circumstances that preclude their CAP service for a while, etc. 

That's kind of the point - field grade promotions are supposed to be for those who serve at the higher(est) levels. If you're unable to complete
your probationary period, then you didn't.

Say one of our members in the military and moves every three years.  They get promoted to Lt Col and in the middle of their probationary period get PCS'd to another wing.  The move, getting settled into the new job, etc., makes it so that they don't have a duty assignment for four months. The new wing isn't going to appoint that person to a wing staff position without knowing them, and at the end of the year he gets a "sorry, you haven't been active, or served on wing staff, you're a major again" e-mail.  Meanwhile, the previous 15 years of his life he's dedicated countless hours to CAP, and done far more than the Wing Assistant Test Control Officer will ever do.

You're either in CAP or you aren't.  "Why", you're not doing anything is pretty much irrelevant to the rest of the people who have to hold up your corner. And in this day and age, if you're not able to stay connected enough to serve, it's almost always a choice.  There's very few staff jobs anymore that can't be done remotely if the people involved have the will and can be flexible.

When there is work to be done, activities to run, inspections to do, and CI's to sit for, why should someone who took 4-6+ months "off" be granted
the same consideration at the guy who's actually there, doing the job?

Your example is pretty much comparing apples to oranges - and who are you to say the Wing A/TCO's job isn't important, or that he hasn't busted >his< butt for 20 years waiting for his silver oaks?  At least he's in the office.  Also, maybe your wing is so flush with people that they can afford to turn away members with 15 years of solid experience, but I'd hazard most aren't.  It's not uncommon at all for people to transfer between wings, and pop up on the new wing staff out of nowhere.  If they have a solid rep and are knowledgeable, why not? Then it's just a matter of the current (maybe new) Region CC approving the permanent status instead of the former one.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I have submitted my promotion package for Major.

I have all my ducks in a row: Grover Loening, TIG, master rating, etc. etc. etc.

However, I am hearing the deafening sounds of silence, and it just isn't in my nature to rattle cages about such things.

I submitted a promotion package in another Wing about 10 years ago and got a very GOB response as to why Wing (the state didn't have Groups) wouldn't approve it.   Basically it had to do with personality differences between me and the Wing PD Officer...PD Officer was very into glad-handing, etc., and I don't do that.

The Wing CC could have gone to bat for me, but the Wing CC and the Wing PD Officer were "good buds" and Colonel Wing CC wouldn't go against Lt Col Wing PD Officer.

I got so disgusted with it that eventually I left CAP for a couple of years.

If it happens again, I'll probably leave CAP for good.  I've been a Captain since 1997 and I don't like the feeling of being a hamster on a spinning wheel.

It's not that I'm rank-mad.  When I last rejoined CAP ('09) I offered to come in as a SMWOG and work my way back up through the levels, but my then-CC said it was silly to do that, so she got my rank of Captain back.

[SarDragon]

OK, I just looked in the latest CAPP 200 (series) PD guides, and wing level service is required in the following specialties to achieve a Master rating: Finance, IG, Ops, ES, and Historian (group, wing or region). A few others suggest/recommend service at levels higher than squadron, as a progression in skills and knowledge.

[jimmydeanno]

OK, I just looked in the latest CAPP 200 (series) PD guides, and wing level service is required in the following specialties to achieve a Master rating: Finance, IG, Ops, ES, and Historian (group, wing or region). A few others suggest/recommend service at levels higher than squadron, as a progression in skills and knowledge.

If you're going for Lt Col, you need to have a Master Rating already, so does it matter?

[SarDragon]

OK, I just looked in the latest CAPP 200 (series) PD guides, and wing level service is required in the following specialties to achieve a Master rating: Finance, IG, Ops, ES, and Historian (group, wing or region). A few others suggest/recommend service at levels higher than squadron, as a progression in skills and knowledge.

If you're going for Lt Col, you need to have a Master Rating already, so does it matter?

Part of the original discussion had to do with a possibly bogus requirement to have performed in a wing staff billet to promote to Lt Col. I was pointing out that there is a valid requirement in a few specialties.

[Eclipse]

The broken paradigm is that we want the grades to mean something while simultaneously acknowledging that they don't mean anything buy experience.

If we went to a legit military model, few members would ever get past Captain, which might be the way to go - the PD badges and ribbons can denote
experience and longevity, and for those who accept more responsibility with a greater scope, the higher grades are open to them.

That idea, in and of itself, would cause huge wailing and gnashing of teeth, even if most affected agreed, and assuming you didn't wholesale demoted
thousands of members, it would probably take 10 years to normalize the situation.

[lordmonar]

Have they been denied or deferred?

If they have been denied, the approving authority must provide the reason for the denial - if the reason is based on an added objective criteria such as
required staff service, then you will have grounds for a sustainable complaint.

If they are simply not acted upon, there is not much you can do beyond addressing it with the Wing CC, since there is no specific requirement
on a time frame for action, nor action of any kind at all (unless your wing has a supplement or OI to that effect).

Not saying it's right, just that it "is".

What exactly is deferred?  If someone is delibertly just sitting on these things....it is a defacto denial....and worse...because they don't have the good leadership ethics of just telling someone why they are not getting promoted.

[FW]

There are reasons why a member, who has completed the necessary PD requirments, is denied promotion.  Completing a PD level makes one "eligible" for promotion.  Final decison rests with the appropriate commander. POC for Major is the wing king; for LT Col, the Region Jeffe'.  Promotion boards consider the candidate's activities and willingness to take on responsibility.  There is much "wiggle room" here.  I've denied candidates a promotion;  for failing to do anything except aquire passing test scores and, only showing up to events which advance their PD.  Some candidates have tried to go over my head.  Everything was always documented and, I was never over ruled.
To the OP: Failure to promote because of the GOBN, maybe.  I doubt it though.

[LGM30GMCC]

We have two majors in our squadron that are overdue for promotion. Overdue by years, not just weeks or months. Both have reached Level V, met all requirements, and have both been turned down three times by wing promotion board. Having just been appointed as our squadron PDO I started asking questions. I did not like what I learned. Apparently the good old boy network is alive and well in our wing. And for a volunteer organization I find that disgusting! One major was told a year of wing staff position was required. The other was told their previous wing position didn't count. Apparently promotion to major and above has turned into a popularity contest. I had thought better of our wing staff, but as someone has said, it is what it is.
Have any of you folks found the same to be true in your various wings?

I'm noticing something about this that I am finding a bit disturbing on some level. I think there are some serious misunderstandings going on here.

First, regarding your wing promotion board:

CAPR 35-5 Para 1-10a states: "The action by the promotion board will be in the form of a  recommendation to the approving authority as to whether the promotion or demotion should be  approved or disapproved."

So the Commander who is the approving authority can take the recommendation of the review board or not. However, I want to look very specifically at the situation you have states

CAPR 35-5 Para 1-5d states: "The region commander is the promoting authority for  promotions to the grade of lieutenant colonel for all senior members assigned to the region  headquarters and subordinate units within the region.  This authority will not be delegated"

So, what this means is that your wing cannot approve/disapprove a promotion to Lt Col. They can only make a recommendation to the approving authority, in this case, a region commander. Some may interpret this to mean they could stop the package before it got to the Region/CC but that isn't their purpose. They should forward it on with a recommendation for disapproval if that's what they think.

[JeffDG]

Well, we've had essentially the same promotion requirements for decades and there is absolutely no evidence that we're getting overrun with Lt. Cols.  In fact, if you analyze the number of senior members at various grades in CAP you'll see just what the system expects ---  there are way more Lts. than Captains, way more Captains than Majors and way more Majors than Lt. Cols.

Wanted to validate that...

My wing shows:
SM:  16%
2nd Lt:  18%
1st Lt:  19%
Capt:   18%
Maj:  16%
Lt Col:  12%
Col:  1%

There's also 1 Sgt and 1 SSgt in the mix, both well below 1%.

Long story short, We don't have a lot few Captains than Lieutenants, nor a lot fewer Majors than Captains or a lot few Lieutenant Colonels than Majors.

[RiverAux]

Ok, maybe "a lot" isn't the right descriptor, but it does show that we have the pyramid-shaped distribution of ranks that you would expect in a paramilitary structure and that we aren't "overrun" with Lt. Cols. 

But, shouldn't our goal be to have as many Lt. Cols. as possible?  That would mean that almost all of them (except for those very few former military people that come in at that rank) have completed just about all the professional development CAP has available and have a lot of capability and experience? 

It wouldn't bother me a bit if 25% or more of our members were Lt. Cols. 

[Private Investigator]

There are reasons why a member, who has completed the necessary PD requirments, is denied promotion.  Completing a PD level makes one "eligible" for promotion.  Final decison rests with the appropriate commander. POC for Major is the wing king; for LT Col, the Region Jeffe'.  Promotion boards consider the candidate's activities and willingness to take on responsibility.  There is much "wiggle room" here.  I've denied candidates a promotion;  for failing to do anything except aquire passing test scores and, only showing up to events which advance their PD.  Some candidates have tried to go over my head.  Everything was always documented and, I was never over ruled.
To the OP: Failure to promote because of the GOBN, maybe.  I doubt it though.

I concur.

I denied promotions when I was a Group Commander. One case was a member was upset because he did not get Squadron Commander but paid his dues but was not seen for six years. Then one day he returned and wanted to be Lt Col. He quoted he completed Level IV seven years ago and TIG is only four years. I asked what has he done in CAP for the last six years. His answer, "I paid my dues on time." Not a good reason for Lt Col.

A lot of people have a problem with TIG. They let their membership lapse. A few years later they come back and they want credit for their previous TIG. i.e., I was a Major for 28 months previously and I got reinstated to Major 20 months ago so that is 48 months. I tell them their TIG started over again when they returned 20 months ago, so their TIG is just 20 months.

My pet peeve is somebody with a Master rating in anything should know something about it. 

[Private Investigator]

Well, we've had essentially the same promotion requirements for decades and there is absolutely no evidence that we're getting overrun with Lt. Cols.  In fact, if you analyze the number of senior members at various grades in CAP you'll see just what the system expects ---  there are way more Lts. than Captains, way more Captains than Majors and way more Majors than Lt. Cols.

Wanted to validate that...

My wing shows:
SM:  16%
2nd Lt:  18%
1st Lt:  19%
Capt:   18%
Maj:  16%
Lt Col:  12%
Col:  1%

Long story short, We don't have a lot few Captains than Lieutenants, nor a lot fewer Majors than Captains or a lot few Lieutenant Colonels than Majors.

In the past the biggest log jams were 1st Lts not having ECI 13 or all the Majors who did not want to go to RSC. Very similar to your Wing.

[a2capt]

It's time for..

[flyboy53]

Promotions are about the only way that you can recognize volunteers. I would rather, however, recommend that your unit commander start asking up the chain of command why these two individuals have never been promoted and what will it take to get them there. You, in your capacity, can attempt to do the same thorough your counterparts up the chain of command.

Also, with Level 5 and obvious years of experience under their belts, I would hope that the two members are capable of networking themselves to do the same.

Ultimately, the duty of the promotion board is not to promote whose due, but rather whose deserving. Find out what your wing's promotion policies are for lieutenant colonel, and know that it may change with commanders. Ultimately you may either agree or disagree with the policy but respect that it exists for specific reasons.

I think we can all tell different stories. Years ago when I joined, you never saw anything but company grade officers and warrant offices at squadron and group level, some majors, and rarely saw a lieutenant colonel. My personal favorite, however, was back in the 70s when I was doing both administrative and personnel officer duties for a squadron in the PA Wing. We had a member re-join who was a personal friend of Gill Robb Wilson (for real) who was returning to the CAP from a long absence and the group commander wouldn't restore his rank of captain largely for political purposes -- he felt threatened.

This individual was a petroleum engineer who was a flight instructor, a Charter CAP member, and one of the actual airmail pilots. Anyway, he was a wartime organizer of CAP units in Northwestern PA and Northeastern Ohio, served as a squadron commander and then was actually called to active CAP service as an AAF aviation cadet flight instructor. During that active tour, he was promoted to captain by General Curry -- true -- he had the documentation to prove it. It took a year of stonewalling by group and then National found out and did the restoration of rank at their level. I don't think the group commander ever knew what hit him.

[SamFranklin]

Almost everyone I talk with seems to agree that for CAP the squadron is the most important echelon. Sure, the other echelons are valuable, but were they to disappear CAP could still serve America because the squadron is our basic operational unit where CAP meets the communities we serve. Moreover, if we build really good squadrons, CAP as a whole will thrive. Build an awesome region staff and I'm not sure that awesomeness will have much influence on CAP as a whole.

So, if squadrons are so critical, why is there a bias against people who choose to serve at that echelon, as demonstrated by this "must serve at Group or Wing" business?

Were I king for a day, I'd try to get the very best people in CAP to agree to serve as squadron commanders. I'd do that by exalting the squadron commander position -- it'd be the "coolest" and "best paying" job in CAP and no random wing staffer would dare be less than helpful to a unit commander.

Perhaps our organization is being held back partly because squadron-level service is not honored as it should be. CAP needs to do a better job of aligning its purported value system with its recognition, promotions, and awards systems.

In the context of this discussion on promotions, I'd have no problem promoting someone who serves at the unit level to Lt Col, assuming he or she has fulfilled the requirements.

[Walkman]

Almost everyone I talk with seems to agree that for CAP the squadron is the most important echelon. Sure, the other echelons are valuable, but were they to disappear CAP could still serve America because the squadron is our basic operational unit where CAP meets the communities we serve. Moreover, if we build really good squadrons, CAP as a whole will thrive. Build an awesome region staff and I'm not sure that awesomeness will have much influence on CAP as a whole.

So, if squadrons are so critical, why is there a bias against people who choose to serve at that echelon, as demonstrated by this "must serve at Group or Wing" business?

Were I king for a day, I'd try to get the very best people in CAP to agree to serve as squadron commanders. I'd do that by exalting the squadron commander position -- it'd be the "coolest" and "best paying" job in CAP and no random wing staffer would dare be less than helpful to a unit commander.

Perhaps our organization is being held back partly because squadron-level service is not honored as it should be. CAP needs to do a better job of aligning its purported value system with its recognition, promotions, and awards systems.

In the context of this discussion on promotions, I'd have no problem promoting someone who serves at the unit level to Lt Col, assuming he or she has fulfilled the requirements.

Well said!

[Майор Хаткевич]

Almost everyone I talk with seems to agree that for CAP the squadron is the most important echelon. Sure, the other echelons are valuable, but were they to disappear CAP could still serve America because the squadron is our basic operational unit where CAP meets the communities we serve.

That line is in the SLS course materials.

Of course at the end of the SLS, where we were told that we're serving at the most important level of CAP, the wing staff then tried to encourage us to apply to wing level posts... :angel:

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Promotions are about the only way that you can recognize volunteers.

Then why do we make them so hard to get for some and almost automatic for others, depending in far too many cases on "who you know?"

As I've stated before, I am a very reserved type in person and not one to put myself forward.  I have never served above Squadron level, but I'd like to think I've done well at that (I would say that my Commander's Commendation is proof of that, but unfortunately those seem to get handed out like treats at Hallowe'en by the GOBN).  A lot of it has to do as well with health reasons that have cropped up in the past 10 years or so.  My involvement in CAP is much more limited than it was when I was a much younger second lieutenant in 1993; but am I less valuable (promotable) to CAP because of health reasons beyond my control?  Also, I was single back in the day.  I'm married now, and have other activities I'm involved in, especially church.  Before I was married, I lived CAP like it was almost Active Duty; any time I wasn't with an employer I was doing CAP work.

Ultimately, the duty of the promotion board is not to promote whose due, but rather whose deserving.

And we decide that how?  If it's on the basis of who is the most visible and active, I'm not very deserving, I suppose.

Years ago when I joined, you never saw anything but company grade officers and warrant offices at squadron and group level, some majors, and rarely saw a lieutenant colonel.

And, as I have stated, I wish that warrant officer grades still existed...I would much rather be promoted on my ability to do my job than my ability at personal interaction.

My personal favorite, however, was back in the 70s when I was doing both administrative and personnel officer duties for a squadron in the PA Wing. We had a member re-join who was a personal friend of Gill Robb Wilson (for real) who was returning to the CAP from a long absence and the group commander wouldn't restore his rank of captain largely for political purposes -- he felt threatened.

Even Erich Hartmann, the highest-scoring Ace in history, suffered from this.  He was captured by the Americans and turned over to the Soviets as a Major.  He endured 12 years of Soviet captivity with the NKVD trying their hardest to break him (even offering him a commission in the East German Air Force) and failing.  When he was finally released and rejoined the Luftwaffe, he almost had to come in as a Captain, but he did get his Major rank back.  However, he never made it any higher than Oberst (Colonel) because he had a tendency to call it as he saw it (especially regarding the F-104) and didn't play politics.  It was said of him, "Erich is a good pilot but not a good officer."

He even stood up to Hitler, refusing to take his pistol belt off when he was awarded the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross...that could have been more hazardous to his health than anything!

I'm not in any way comparing myself to Oberst Hartmann, but I can understand his mindset about playing politics a bit.

Unfortunately, CAP sometimes doesn't have a similar understanding.

[Simplex]

Thanks everyone for your input!

[Private Investigator]

So, if squadrons are so critical, why is there a bias against people who choose to serve at that echelon, as demonstrated by this "must serve at Group or Wing" business?

Were I king for a day, I'd try to get the very best people in CAP to agree to serve as squadron commanders. I'd do that by exalting the squadron commander position -- it'd be the "coolest" and "best paying" job in CAP and no random wing staffer would dare be less than helpful to a unit commander.

I remember 20+ years ago when a Squadron Commander who was a Major said the only way to get beyond Captain or get a Senior or Master rating was by being on Group and/or Wing Staff and that is how he ran his little kingdom since we did not have term limits then.

Actually Squadron Commander is the 'coolest' assignment, in three year tours. 

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I remember 20+ years ago when a Squadron Commander who was a Major said the only way to get beyond Captain or get a Senior or Master rating was by being on Group and/or Wing Staff and that is how he ran his little kingdom since we did not have term limits then.

If it is still that way, I don't stand a chance of pinning on Major, even though I have my Grover Loening, Master's rating (Administration) and all my other ducks in a row.

[Garibaldi]

I remember 20+ years ago when a Squadron Commander who was a Major said the only way to get beyond Captain or get a Senior or Master rating was by being on Group and/or Wing Staff and that is how he ran his little kingdom since we did not have term limits then.

If it is still that way, I don't stand a chance of pinning on Major, even though I have my Grover Loening, Master's rating (Administration) and all my other ducks in a row.

I don't know about all that, but I hit Major and Level 3 in 2000 and have never had a position of responsibility higher than assistant-to. I don't plan on going any higher than this because I really can't afford to take time off for RSC and I don't quite have a college degree so I can't take SOS or any of the other on-line schools to get out of going.

[Private Investigator]

I did not think I could do RSC either. But luckily I took it right after I retired and before the economy took a dump. Now I am working so much I can not make it to weekend activities.

I think for the most part CAP has gotten away from the good old boy network but a few old timers like it their way. The bad part is we have new members who think good old boy and want to network that way, JMHO.

[Critical AOA]

I have never been in any organization where there wasn't at least some semblance of a good 'ol boys club.  Whether it was a civilian job, the Army, CAP or another organization, it always exists in some form.  It takes solid leadership to eliminate or at the very least to mitigate it.   Unfortunately, that is sometimes lacking even in CAP.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I have never been in any organization where there wasn't at least some semblance of a good 'ol boys club.  Whether it was a civilian job, the Army, CAP or another organization, it always exists in some form.  It takes solid leadership to eliminate or at the very least to mitigate it.   Unfortunately, that is sometimes lacking even in CAP.

Your point is well taken.

However, to use your other examples:

Army: Service discipline/RHIP limits what the average Soldier can do to limit the GOBN.

Civilian employment: I was never any good at office politics.  I'm still not.  I usually don't say much, but if you ask me a question, you're going to get an answer, and it may not be very tactfully-worded.  In that environment, you can do about anything you like to buck the GOBN, but the end result could be a boot out the door.

I noticed some of it in the CGAUX but not to the extent it seems to permeate CAP.

[Private Investigator]

Civilian employment: I was never any good at office politics.  I'm still not.  I usually don't say much, but if you ask me a question, you're going to get an answer, and it may not be very tactfully-worded.  In that environment, you can do about anything you like to buck the GOBN, but the end result could be a boot out the door.

Same thing in the police department. Depending on who's in command makes a difference if you are "in" or "out".

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Same thing in the police department. Depending on who's in command makes a difference if you are "in" or "out".

I imagine that would be somewhat akin to the military, wouldn't it?

After all, you do have captains, lieutenants, sergeants and corporals.

[RogueLeader]

Same thing in the police department. Depending on who's in command makes a difference if you are "in" or "out".

I imagine that would be somewhat akin to the military, wouldn't it?

After all, you do have captains, lieutenants, sergeants and corporals.

The difference in the military is that they won't be there for too long.  a few years at best, then they get promoted and or PCS/ETS.