Cadet's Right to Participate in ES vs. Cadet Maturity

[Spaceman3750]

CAPR60-3 states:

Use of qualified CAP cadets is encouraged as much as possible on appropriate missions.

Can an ESO subjectively determine "qualification" to include the cadet's maturity level? For example, if you put together a ground team, Cadet Goofoff might be fully capable of completing the tasks, but when it actually comes down to it, is too immature to participate because he doesn't follow directions, doesn't pay attention, or whatever (this could come out before or after qualification is complete).

Can I say "Cadet Goofoff, you are not mature enough to be on ground team and I will not allow you to participate. Here's why: X, Y, and Z." More importantly, can Cadet Goofoff throw that line from 60-3 in my face and say "use me anyways, I'm a cadet and you just don't like me", even if he has issues?

[RogueLeader]

I don't think an ESO can stop them, but a commander can. If Cadet Goofoff is that immature, I doubt they could full capable of completing the tasks.

A notice to the cc would be in order.

[FW]

I don't know.  Should we allow cadets who throw temper tantrums to go on "appropriate missions"?  That's a very good question...

[Ned]

I don't know.  Should we allow cadets who throw temper tantrums to go on "appropriate missions"?  That's a very good question...

We should treat qualified cadets exactly the same as we treat seniors who throw "temper tantrums." 

(N > 0)

[Eclipse]

An ESO, unless specifically charged to do so, doesn't have a commander's authority in this regard, however, he does have a lot of pull to
recommend qualifications be suspended, remedial training be performed, etc.

During a mission or training, the GTL or GBD always has full "no go" authority on individuals who do not comport themselves properly.

No one, cadet or otherwise, has a "right" to participate.  Everyone has a standard they must meet, and personal and team safety is going to be at the
top of everything.  Next is efficacy, and if either safety or mission effectiveness is compromised because of lack of maturity, or anything else, that's not acceptable.

This should fall into the same bucket that Lordmonar has been harping on - leadership.  If a cadet is too immature to function on a team properly, then
his quals should be revoked until this issue is fixed.

[NCRblues]

I don't know.  Should we allow cadets who throw temper tantrums to go on "appropriate missions"?  That's a very good question...

We should treat qualified cadets exactly the same as we treat seniors who throw "temper tantrums." 

(N > 0)

Give them a nice staff/command job and promote them?? 

[Flying Pig]

I don't know.  Should we allow cadets who throw temper tantrums to go on "appropriate missions"?  That's a very good question...

We should treat qualified cadets exactly the same as we treat seniors who throw "temper tantrums." 

(N > 0)

I was going to say....As a commander, I had Seniors I didnt call for things for reasons of maturity, or politically incorrect way of putting it, I knew they would embarrass the crap out of me, the unit and themselves.  Youthful immaturity is a solid reason to not allow a cadet to participate.  When the real call comes, thats not the time to let some clown go ruin things.

[a2capt]

We should treat qualified cadets exactly the same as we treat seniors who throw "temper tantrums."

Except cadets do have a magic ace in the hole .. and the ones that are vindictive and don't get their way .. can throw the H word at the senior member(s) they don't like by way of the IG .. and start all kinds of crap. Even when it's disproven, it's still a hassle.

[Eclipse]

I can't begin to imagine how being told to go home, for whatever reason, would fall into a remote definition of hazing, or abuse, for that matter.

The only point I could see is how and where you deny someone fully qualified, which is why you should yank their quals if they can't fly right.

[bassque]

If I'm not mistaken, the IC has all control over the resources of the mission.  Cadet or Senior.  Of course, then begs the question if they are aware of the members emotional maturity (again both seniors and cadets).  From my experience, even though those members are signed off, ES is a fairly tight nit community and generally folks know who they want to go to various tasks because they develop that working professional relationship with them over the course of training and real missions. 

[bassque]

We should treat qualified cadets exactly the same as we treat seniors who throw "temper tantrums."

Except cadets do have a magic ace in the hole .. and the ones that are vindictive and don't get their way .. can throw the H word at the senior member(s) they don't like by way of the IG .. and start all kinds of crap. Even when it's disproven, it's still a hassle.

While this may be true, I don't think this would stand up very long.  The IG would then throw the S word (Safety) and the burden of proof would switch. 

[Major Lord]

I would do what is prescribed: used the cadet as much as possible. If I as a GTL decide that a cadet cannot go out with my team because of lions and tigers and bears, or rain and sleet and even snow, I consider that my call to make. The HQ people can usually use someone to run photocopies or empty the trash cans. I would not restrict the issue solely to maturity, but to any condition in which the Cadet and/or the mission may be compromised. I have only had to play that card once, and Cadet Goofy's mom was delighted that I was not going to use her son for cannon fodder. That being said, I think Cadets should be able to do as much of the ES world as they can handle, and maybe just a little bit more; thats how we grown them....by stretching them. Fornicate the IG!...I am not going to kill a member just because I am afraid of what the boy's upstairs might say.

Major Lord

[RogueLeader]

Truth be told, I had two cadets that I was dubious about, but I took them on a sarex. They did better than two other cadets from another unit that did not have any qualms about.

I would give them a chance in training, and go from there.

[EMT-83]

Except cadets do have a magic ace in the hole .. and the ones that are vindictive and don't get their way .. can throw the H word at the senior member(s) they don't like by way of the IG .. and start all kinds of crap. Even when it's disproven, it's still a hassle.

If you are truly afraid of this, you have no business being anywhere near a cadet.

[bassque]

Except cadets do have a magic ace in the hole .. and the ones that are vindictive and don't get their way .. can throw the H word at the senior member(s) they don't like by way of the IG .. and start all kinds of crap. Even when it's disproven, it's still a hassle.

If you are truly afraid of this, you have no business being anywhere near a cadet.

+1

[ol'fido]

I guess I was lucky in that in 20 some odd years of being a GTL I never had a cadet that I felt was too immature to go on a mission AFTER they were trained and qualified. When you have a cadet that you worry about their maturity, train them thoroughly and completely before you let them test for GTM period. Don't just let them get the minimum training to pass the tasks. Have them know everything about survival, land nav, GSAR, first aid, DF, etc. before you take them on a mission. Take them on a couple of weekend bivouacs and other field training. Let them know how you expect them to act on a mission. This process will take some time(6-12 mos). If they stick around for it, they probably will develop the maturity they will need and you will expect of them. If they don't mature, they will probably not have the patience to stick around anyway.

Don't fall into the trap of "we need GTMs now" and do a few training sessions and a quick weekend with a SET and "ta da, you're all GTMS!" Even in the military, people are not considered effective or "seasoned" until they are out of training at least a year and in some cases longer. GTM can become qualified relatively quickly but they don't become COMPETENT for a long time.

Another thing you can do is to not train "individuals". Train Ground TEAMS. Get yourself a core group of seasoned GTMs and use them as your best training tool.

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

Fornicate the IG!...I am not going to kill a member just because I am afraid of what the boy's upstairs might say.

No thank you. But then I don't think we're in the same wing.

BTW the GBD and IC are much older than the IG appointment.

[a2capt]

If you are truly afraid of this, you have no business being anywhere near a cadet.

Oh, I'm not afraid of it, I'm just saying it like it is. ..and my comment wasn't strictly related to ES, actually. I've seen it happen. Cadet Special Snuffy feels slighted and complains they're being discriminated against. With a sense of entitlement on the "right to participate" side of things, and doesn't understand why, due to the lack of maturity. 

[CAPSGT]

I've had cases where as a GTL I restricted individual cadets because of the specific type of mission.  Not to say they are incapable or might be problematic, but for the sake of their own mental well being. 

If in my initial alert I am told that we are being sent to do CSS of a very greusome crash site where there is a 100% chance we will be in reasonable proximity to body parts, I am not going to take a 13 year old cadet GTM with me.  There is no telling how somebody will react if they come across a corpse or a body part.  I've seen younger cadets who handle it fine while an older cadet who was an EMT completely lost it.  I just would rather take the chance on somebody who is older and has more comprehension of what they may be walking into. 

[lordmonar]

Hell just froze over....because for one me and Eclipse are 100% in agreement.

First off.....I would like to take a second to comment about the title of this thread.

No one has a "right" to particpate in anything in CAP.

The IC, OSC, GBD, GTL all have a duty to insure that all personnel joining a mission/team are trained, equiped, capable and ready to perform the assigned mission.

So.....I don't have any problem with a leader saying NO to anyone based on "maturity".   Also....just because it is easy to do....if the circumstances warrent it....I see no problem with an IC putting an age limit on who can participate in a mission or SAREX.

Often our customers will ask that no minors participate.
Often we may not have the facilites or manpower needed to supervise minors/cadets IAW the regulations and common sense.

As per CAP policy.....we should be making every effort to get cadets of all ages involved in ES.  It is good for CAP, it is good for the cadets and it is good for the mission.  But as per policy....we have to deal with realities and the regulations and ensure that the cadets are properly supervised, they have proper facilites for them and that they (or anyone) is not hindering the mission.