Who are, in your opinion, the enemies of CAP?

[DNall]

Listen, once we remember that we are here to accomplish missions for America and build our units up to met those needs, the better off we will be.  We have spend the last year building our unit...I'm over in South Texas.  It really matters little to those of us on the frontier "Who is National Commander" or "Who has he  fired," I'm too busy trying to get Form 5s and BFRs for our Aviators to meet our November Goals.  Also, to see what i can do to get our cadet program back on its feet.  To train our staff...

Now, why should I waste the energies and capital we are building in our community on this mishegas!!!

Well now I'll tell you exactly why. Who sets those Nov goals, or the ones for the next quarter or year? Who controls the relationship with the AF & hence the training dollars & equipment? Who controls the vision & direction of CAP & our relationship w/ customer agencies which in turn generates all the missions you're training those aviators to fly? Just cause you're out in teh middle of no where (which makes it hard to get directly invovled) doesn't mean the stuff at the top doesn't effect you, nor does it relieve you from the responsibility to confront behavior not in the best interest of CAP.

No one knows what the hell "missions for America" specifically means, nor do we see lots of new missions being generated despite massive opportunity sitting there for the taking. Of course we do you jobs locally. No one is saying we should be so concerned with the morons on top that we are unable to perform at Sq, I think we're all smart enough to be able to do both at the same time. To trudge along doing the very best we can to make the CAP around us better in the short-term, but also working strategically to make the big picture better for the future. No matter what you do locally, you aren't an NCO, you're an officer & strategic thinking & staffing action items is part of your job.

[lordmonar]

Listen, once we remember that we are here to accomplish missions for America and build our units up to met those needs, the better off we will be.  We have spend the last year building our unit...I'm over in South Texas.  It really matters little to those of us on the frontier "Who is National Commander" or "Who has he  fired," I'm too busy trying to get Form 5s and BFRs for our Aviators to meet our November Goals.  Also, to see what i can do to get our cadet program back on its feet.  To train our staff...

Now, why should I waste the energies and capital we are building in our community on this mishegas!!!

Hear! Hear!

[Major Carrales]

Who sets those Nov goals, or the ones for the next quarter or year?

My officers and I set those goals, we resolved to have that level of professional development in avaition within our unit.   The Squadron is where the "rubber meets the road." 

...nor does it relieve you from the responsibility to confront behavior not in the best interest of CAP.

I do not care for the tenor of your post and respectfully ask that you retract that statement and all it implies.

[DNall]

Retract that you have a responsibility to confront behavior not in the best interest of CAP, be that in a cadet at your Sq or from the Nat CC? That IS the responsibility of every member. I know it's a popular thing to say that you should just plow on ahead locally & not worry about what happens in leadership, but it does effect us all & we all have a responsibility to confront & correct it. No one else is going to or even can fix it for us. CAP is only as good as we make it, and the fact is the quality of units & operations 'where the rubber meets the road' is greatly effected by the quality & actions of leadership from Gp to Wg to NHQ. You shouldn't let the duty to hold it accountable consume you, but you do have a responsibility to be concerned & demand action to fix it. Nothing there to retract my friend unless you misunderstood what I was saying, and if that's the case, my bad.

I'm glad to see you setting local goals & driving forward. Of course those are based on expectations & standards set from above & no matter how good you are it doesn't effect if state or federal agencies ask CAP for help. It sounds like you're doing a fine job down there & I commend you for it. We have to address the bigger picture though cause we're not judged as the sum of our parts, but by the worst among us & by our Wg/Reg/Nat officers. We have to take care of the small picture we control in our units, but we also have to fix the big picture right too or ultimately none of our local sacrifices mean much - at best they're transitory.

[lordmonar]

Retract that you have a responsibility to confront behavior not in the best interest of CAP, be that in a cadet at your Sq or from the Nat CC? That IS the responsibility of every member.

Excuse me?  Capt's don't tell generals how to do their job.  Sure...if I see General Pineda walking around not saluting or smoking in a no smoking zone, I'll respectfully correct him.  But HE sets the direction of CAP not me, not you.  Last time I checked CAP is NOT a democracy.  We follow some democratic ideas, but I don't elect any of my commanders and they ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE TO ME for their conduct.  They are responsible to their commanders and the regulations.

[ZigZag911]

Just a couple of points to try to calm these troubled waters.

First, it is true that the local squadron is where the CAP program, our missions for America, are executed.  As the good Major Carrales said, squadrons are indeed where the rubber meets the road.

That said, squadrons do not exist in a vacuum.....they are not the 21st century equivalent of the frigates of the Napleonic Wars (Horatio Hornblower, Jack Aubrey?),
independent commands travelling far from the influence of central authority!

In fact, leaving groups, wings and regions aside, the best squadrons in our more populous wings, where they are geographically close enough to do so, are interdependent and support each other!

Secondly, commanders are supposed to be leaders, not dictators.

[DNall]

Excuse me?  Capt's don't tell generals how to do their job.  Sure...if I see General Pineda walking around not saluting or smoking in a no smoking zone, I'll respectfully correct him.  But HE sets the direction of CAP not me, not you.  Last time I checked CAP is NOT a democracy.  We follow some democratic ideas, but I don't elect any of my commanders and they ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE TO ME for their conduct.  They are responsible to their commanders and the regulations.

In fact they do. If you're a staff officer in the military & you see your boss doing something wrong it IS your job to say, "excuse me sir, but do you think it might be better if we tried it this way" or "I think this might be a problem with XYZ reg" etc. If he then tells you to shut the hell up & do what you're told, then you have to decide if it's legal or not & mostly do it, but if it's found later to be illegal & you knew that & did it anyway, you can go to jail in cases where the commander won't. If I wore my nametag on the wrong side to work I'd fully expect an NCO to tell me about it. If you see a cadet walking around with a glarring uniform mistake, it doesn't matter if he's from your Sq or not or if you're a cadet programs officer, you're still supposed to correct him. Uniforms & regs are obvious, but the same is true of core values. For instance, we only have as much integrity as we enforce on each other. That's the culture that's being refrenced. You have a responsibility to do what you can to make things better, but yes there is a point when you've made your case to leadership & they've refused your advice & order you to go forward with their plan. That's when you salute & execute, but you argue like hell right up to that point for what's best for the org. After that point, the responsibility transfers to whomever they are accountable to. In CAP, you can argue that the Nat CC is accountable to either the AF or to membership. The AF doesn't have the legal authority to hold them accoutnable & membership isn't allowed to have a voice, so both those situations need fixing.

In the military in a legal sense officers are responsible to the commissioning org via the officers appointed over them. In a more practical sense though they very much are responsible to thier subordinates. You're only a credible leader if your subordinates think you are & only have that power over them which they give you in exchange for meeting their expectations for good leadership principles, quality, & character.

I'm not trying to start trouble here, I'm just saying that the national situation is a problem, which we all agree it is, and you can't run away & escape that by focusing locally. The problem is there because they were empowered by us out here in the field & they remain empowered by the field as long as we're tolerant of their behavior. Now what to do about it is a more contentious debate, but I do think we each have a duty to help do something.

[ELTHunter]

Listen, once we remember that we are here to accomplish missions for America and build our units up to met those needs, the better off we will be.  We have spend the last year building our unit...I'm over in South Texas.  It really matters little to those of us on the frontier "Who is National Commander" or "Who has he  fired," I'm too busy trying to get Form 5s and BFRs for our Aviators to meet our November Goals.  Also, to see what i can do to get our cadet program back on its feet.  To train our staff...

Now, why should I waste the energies and capital we are building in our community on this mishegas!!!

I have felt the same as you for most of my time in CAP.  However, recently I have recognized two things. First, while folks like you and I are working our rear ends off at the squadron or group level to make our little area of CAP the best it can be, poor leadership can be undermining all that work by making CAP look like a bunch of amateurs where we are most visible to the people that hold the purse strings and the missions.  It won't do us a lot of good to have a crack squadron, group or wing if the leadership of the USAF, FEMA, etc. decide we are not worth the trouble to deal with or might be an embarrassment to them.  If we truly want to have a CAP we can be proud to be a part of, we need to look at it from top to bottom.

Secondly, how can we expect our cadets to really live our values if we do not hold ourselves and our leadership to the same standard?  By being apathetic to poor inappropriate conduct of the leadership that supposedly represent us, we are condoning the violation of our own core values.

[lordmonar]

I am not talking about if some leader is violating the law.  I am talking about if i disagree with where a leader is taking the organization.

And that seems to be what most people are having a problem with.

As far as I know, General Pineda has not violated any laws.  He may or may not have bent some of the bylaws or the CAP Constitution and he is NOT subject to the regulations (being the top dog he writes them!).

So....has he abused his power?  Maybe.  Has he turned the organization on its ear?  Definitely.  Has he violated any laws?  Don't know, none that I know of.

But some don't like where he is taking us.  They don't see his vision or don't agree with his choice of paths to take us to that end state.

That is NOT for us to question.  It is for him to dictate.  The NEC and NB can question him on it, they can vote him out, but we can't.  We can voice our concerns up the chain of command and that is it.

So what do we have left?

Well, in theory the National Commander serves at the bequest of the NB...that is the the region and wing commanders.  He in-turn appoints those commanders.  Hence the one term rule....we don't want anyone loading the board in their favor.

So what can we do?  We can focus on our piece of the pie and ignore the rest.  We can get involved, by becoming a face at the wing level, getting the ear of your wing commander and persuading him to see your point of view.  We can become a staff member and step up to the plate and take on leadership roles and have a direct voice in the political process.

What we should not do is undermine the authority of our commanders.  We do this at our own peril.  Suggesting "strikes" or organizing people to ignore directives is the short path to getting a 2b.  Even if I agreed with your point of view, I would not tolerate that sort of person in my squadron.

The only way to reform is from with in.  If you can't work with the system then quit and form your own group.  This is not a love it or leave it option....it is a work with it or leave it option.

My new enemy of CAP is people who are frustrated with the system and want to tear it down instead of fixing it.

[DNall]

I am not talking about if some leader is violating the law.  I am talking about if i disagree with where a leader is taking the organization.

And that seems to be what most people are having a problem with.

I understand what you're saying, and yes you have a responsibility if they are taking you in the wrong direction also. The same one when the experienced platoon sgt says, "ahh, excuse me sir, but I think you're holding that map upside down," or "sir you're calling for fire on our position, please give me the radio now." Even if it's the Billy Mitchell style the org leadership doesn't get it & is going the wrong way, you do have an obligation to do what you can to set it right. Billy Mitchell's mistake was trying to do more than he could & embarassing the service in the process, and I think if he were alive today he'd go back & do it all over again & we'd each thank him for what he did for our country.

As far as I know, General Pineda has not violated any laws.  He may or may not have bent some of the bylaws or the CAP Constitution and he is NOT subject to the regulations (being the top dog he writes them!).

So....has he abused his power?  Maybe.  Has he turned the organization on its ear?  Definitely.  Has he violated any laws?  Don't know, none that I know of.

That's not correct actually. He doesn't govern CAP. He's in a powerful position as chair of both the NEC & NB, & with a seat on the BoG, but the NB & NEC actually make policy, and frankly the BoG is legally the governing body & can do whatever it pleases w/o regard to there even being a NB or NEC, and I wish they'd do a lot more of that. I realize the Nat CC has great influence on the process & the power to write emergency policy letters, but he's not above the law, nor does he write it.

Congress is not entirely happy (I am qualified ot speak to that) & the few I've talked to in AF leadership positions aren't really either. There have been some questionable legal situations & clear disregard of CAP & AF regs in other situations. That's not a good thing.

But some don't like where he is taking us.  They don't see his vision or don't agree with his choice of paths to take us to that end state.

That is NOT for us to question.  It is for him to dictate.  The NEC and NB can question him on it, they can vote him out, but we can't.  We can voice our concerns up the chain of command and that is it.

So what do we have left?

Well, in theory the National Commander serves at the bequest of the NB...that is the the region and wing commanders.  He in-turn appoints those commanders.  Hence the one term rule....we don't want anyone loading the board in their favor.

There might be more some of us can do, but I'm not formenting rebellion. You should do all that's in your power to hold your leaders accountable & make CAP better. If that just consists of forwarding complaints up th chain, then do that - I mean actually do that, not just talk about it. If everyone did so, the pressure on the NB would be pretty strong to make some changes.

So what can we do?  We can focus on our piece of the pie and ignore the rest.  We can get involved, by becoming a face at the wing level, getting the ear of your wing commander and persuading him to see your point of view.  We can become a staff member and step up to the plate and take on leadership roles and have a direct voice in the political process.

What we should not do is undermine the authority of our commanders.  We do this at our own peril.  Suggesting "strikes" or organizing people to ignore directives is the short path to getting a 2b.  Even if I agreed with your point of view, I would not tolerate that sort of person in my squadron.

The only way to reform is from with in.  If you can't work with the system then quit and form your own group.  This is not a love it or leave it option....it is a work with it or leave it option.

My new enemy of CAP is people who are frustrated with the system and want to tear it down instead of fixing it.

Certainly strikes or undermining your command is very worthy of a 2b & not at all what I've suggested. Demanding accountability from your leaders is not undermining, it's supportive & drives the organization to greater success. I'd argue that the Nat CC does not single handedly determine the vision, direction, or methods of the organization, and even if he did & that was harmful to CAP it would be your place to stand up & be heard on the subject.

I do advocate getting involved & working from the inside out to influence the process. I'm in a little bit different situation where I have the ear of a couple people that make folks uncomfortable from the top down, but each in their own way with the resources they have available to them, and to the extent you're capable of.

I think you'll find I very much want to fix CAP, and want to see no harm come to it. Some of the things I'd do if given the chance would involve rather dramatic changes on a few points and any dramatic change would cause some members to leave & others to come in, but NEVER should you describe that as tearing down CAP. I'm not saying you were, just clarifying.

[Psicorp]

I am not talking about if some leader is violating the law.  I am talking about if i disagree with where a leader is taking the organization.
And that seems to be what most people are having a problem with.
The only way to reform is from with in.  If you can't work with the system then quit and form your own group.  This is not a love it or leave it option....it is a work with it or leave it option.
My new enemy of CAP is people who are frustrated with the system and want to tear it down instead of fixing it.

I think that the greatest amount of frustration from members is the not knowing where our leadership is taking us.    I've never cared much for following blindly...it's not that I want to question the leadership abilities of my Officers, it's just that if I had a Vision that I could see, touch, and integrate, then I'd be much more likely to help push the cart rather than just follow behind it.

It could be that we are facing greater budget cutbacks and modifying our physical image is required in order to expand our CAPabilities and increase our funding in order to do even more, rather than a visual restructuring to drive a wedge between us and our Parental Organization.

You are absolutely right, sir...throwing tantrums and muttering words of mutiny are not the way to go about things.   I take solice in two things.  1) The new Commander's Column on the National website, it's a step forward in communication. 2)  Everything is subject to change, even the National CC isn't a lifetime position.

The "enemies" of CAP that have been listed in this thread are the same types of people who sow malcontentment in every organization.   We are supposed to be professional Officers and NCOs (and Cadets) whenever we are in uniform.  Some people may change their opinions in time, others never will.   

[Major Carrales]

Feel like talkin' positive about CAP?

Wilkommen zu...http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=994.0

Between these two threads we can uncover the TRUTH about how we can improve CAP!!!

[Jim Quinn, Longview, TX]

In my previous post I slammed MIMS fairly hard and probably did some disservice to those folks at NHQ who have worked long and hard to try to make it more workable.

I would like to add that though I most certainly do think it is an irritant and fairly user-unfriendly, it is steadily getting easier to use and as one poster put it, it most definitely IS a huge improvement over the paper-based systems of yesteryear.

(Gripe Switch now off)

[DNall]

Good or bad (excellence) is never measured against where we came from, only where we're trying to get to. I also don't think you can jusge it getting better by us as we get used to all the functions, but rather you have to look at it at each stage like the new person coming aboard trying to grasp the whole thing from scratch. It's still got a very long way to go on that front, and franly what we have now is just missing a lot of things that need to be there also (PD for instance).

I think if you hired a team of pros to create a user friendly for the semi-computer-illiterate program that covers every aspect of our personnel administration, then I'd bet it'd look & work a good bit differently. I appreciate what it is & how it came together over the years, but at some point the cobbled together system isn't good enough & needs to be overtaken by new software. Considering the degree to which this effects volunteer retention, I'd think that's sooner rather than later. Also, I'm not sure it should be required to have what amounts to a tech rating in MIMS to keep your record up to date. I tend to think most organizations would put those responsibilities in the hands of specialists (admin/personnel/ES-trng officers) and leave a less capable read-only & request system out there for the general membership. It's just too much for people.

[lordmonar]

Good or bad (excellence) is never measured against where we came from, only where we're trying to get to. I also don't think you can jusge it getting better by us as we get used to all the functions, but rather you have to look at it at each stage like the new person coming aboard trying to grasp the whole thing from scratch. It's still got a very long way to go on that front, and franly what we have now is just missing a lot of things that need to be there also (PD for instance).

I partially agree with you here....but you have to accept that it is a work in progress and it is truly improving...we are not just getting used to its quirks.

I

think if you hired a team of pros to create a user friendly for the semi-computer-illiterate program that covers every aspect of our personnel administration, then I'd bet it'd look & work a good bit differently. I appreciate what it is & how it came together over the years, but at some point the cobbled together system isn't good enough & needs to be overtaken by new software.

And how many flying hours are we going to sacrifice to pay for this?  Not saying it would be nice...but to say that "the cobbled together system isn't good enough" is not really true.  It is good enough...it gets the job done....just as paper did 5 years ago.  Is it perfect?  Heck no!  Can it be fixed?  I hope so.  Can we hire pros to do a better job?  Sure we can.  But it comes down to money.  How much does a professional computer programmer makes these days?  How many hours of coding are we talking about?

I for one, would like to keep flying and use MIMS as bad as it is.

[DNall]

I partially agree with you here....but you have to accept that it is a work in progress and it is truly improving...we are not just getting used to its quirks.

I understand. I'm not saying it's not, nor am I un-accepting of reality or un-grateful for progress. I'm certainly not looking for the gold standard of unobtainable perfection, or remotely close to it for that matter. I'm merely stating we must look always forward. You can't run half a race a great pace & stop there to pat yourself on the back about how well you've done so far. It's true you've done well & should be happy about that, but you must also soldier on to the end where the cold beer awaits.

Don't take me as overly negative on this or anything else. I'm not. We have a long way to go on many things. Some we're doing well on, some we're not, either way the goals in front & oress on always - that's what I take 'excellence in all we do' to mean.

And how many flying hours are we going to sacrifice to pay for this?  Not saying it would be nice...but to say that "the cobbled together system isn't good enough" is not really true.  It is good enough...it gets the job done....just as paper did 5 years ago.  Is it perfect?  Heck no!  Can it be fixed?  I hope so.  Can we hire pros to do a better job?  Sure we can.  But it comes down to money.  How much does a professional computer programmer makes these days?  How many hours of coding are we talking about?

I for one, would like to keep flying and use MIMS as bad as it is.

The context I said that in is that software goes obsolete & is no longer good enough. There's a point out front, closer rather than farther, where laying a new system in is better than strapping grandma on the roof to pile on this one. Is it worth a few flying hours? I certainly think so, and I'll tell you why...

How many members do we lose each year due to overall frustration? Even w/o counting their active participation, how many dollars is that dropping off the MML? Would fixing MIMS alone change that big number, no way, but I bet it'd keep a hundred out of the thousands we lose & try to replace each year. What's a hundred times $70 & how many flying hours is that? Let me ask you another one, how many members are delayed in getting mission qualified or frustrated enough to quit before they are because this clunky system is hard to use? You think our mission capable rate would increase at all if we streamlined some things? And one more thing. You know we can get help from AF, specifically from AU, but probably most anything we need, as long as we're willing to pay for it right? Now, that's pay the man days on Govt salary to use govt employees that do this kind of thing professionally, NOT the crazy outside contractor rate. I think there's probably a pretty good solution out there if we give it a little study.