Lets make all CAP senior members follow the same program

[davedove]

While we're at it, let's give all Lt. Col. promotees a free consultation at Hair Club for Men - most of them could use it.

For that matter, so do a lot of our Lieutenants.

[lordmonar]

Perhaps the answer is to define "what does a 2 Lt. need to know? a captain? a major?" and proceed from there,

We do that now through the current professional development program.   In order to move up you have to take various classes, demonstrate knowledge and/or successfully carry out programs at various levels of CAP.   It clearly lays out what a CAP Major should know and be able to do within the CAP program.

Lets just make everyone do it.

An let's completely ignore the unintended consequences when all those Retireed types refuse to join or quit?

Let's not throw the baby out with the wash water!

[Eclipse]

An let's completely ignore the unintended consequences when all those Retireed types refuse to join or quit?

If these "retired types" will only join to be given things as "thanks for joining gifts", and refuse to progress in the program, I'll hold the door for them on the way out.

We'd have a better ROI on squeeze balls, pens, and t-shirts.

[RiverAux]

An let's completely ignore the unintended consequences when all those Retireed types refuse to join or quit?

And thats one of the reasons I mentioned in the my original post for this thread -- there is absolutely no evidence that this system has any impact whatsoever on recruiting.  If someone can prove to me that it is helping recruit people that wouldn't have joined anyway, then I'll reconsider.  If all we're doing is giving a reward to someone who was going to join anyway, we can safely discard the system.  I think the latter is more likely. 

[lordmonar]

An let's completely ignore the unintended consequences when all those Retireed types refuse to join or quit?

And thats one of the reasons I mentioned in the my original post for this thread -- there is absolutely no evidence that this system has any impact whatsoever on recruiting.  If someone can prove to me that it is helping recruit people that wouldn't have joined anyway, then I'll reconsider.  If all we're doing is giving a reward to someone who was going to join anyway, we can safely discard the system.  I think the latter is more likely.

I think the burden of proof should be on you.

You should show that making the change will not have an adverse impact on recruiting...or any impact will be offset by the benifits of the change.

Like I said.....clearly eliminating advanced promotions for Health Professionals and Aircraft mechanics will not have much of an impact.
I would have to see the numbers for pilots and military retirees and do some field research before I would (If I were the National Commander) sign off on any changes that would take away thier rank.

If it ain't broke....why fix it?

[RADIOMAN015]

An let's completely ignore the unintended consequences when all those Retireed types refuse to join or quit?

And thats one of the reasons I mentioned in the my original post for this thread -- there is absolutely no evidence that this system has any impact whatsoever on recruiting.  If someone can prove to me that it is helping recruit people that wouldn't have joined anyway, then I'll reconsider.  If all we're doing is giving a reward to someone who was going to join anyway, we can safely discard the system.  I think the latter is more likely.

I think the burden of proof should be on you.

You should show that making the change will not have an adverse impact on recruiting...or any impact will be offset by the benifits of the change.

Like I said.....clearly eliminating advanced promotions for Health Professionals and Aircraft mechanics will not have much of an impact.
I would have to see the numbers for pilots and military retirees and do some field research before I would (If I were the National Commander) sign off on any changes that would take away thier rank.

If it ain't broke....why fix it?

I agree with you on that -- Although I did get advance rank for being a retired military officer (and have since completed level III and also gained a CAP promotion), it wasn't the REASON WHY I joined CAP.  Surely IF the regulation allows advance rank, why not happily accept it (there's plenty of other punitive compliance regulations that members have to comply with).

As far as advance rank for Doctors/Other Medical Professionals and other advance rank for aviation related skills -- I've found that these personnel do come in handy with their expertise (and they aren't even going to say anything to anyone when they intervene).  I've also seen locally promotions held for a bit to see what the individuals would contribute to the unit.  I do think there's controls in the system currently that the adult leadership can utilize IF the advanced member does not live up to expectations.  Surely when an adult joins a unit the leadership is going to set some sort of expectation with that individual.

Also it's amazing about the occasional "jealously" that is exhibited by a very small minority against those that get advanced rank.   Perhaps these long time members are best referred to as "members that love to play military dress up" or who are into some sort of ego trip, that they "know it all" due to their years of service in CAP and no one else knows anything.  I personally just can't figure that out because I don't personally put it (the rank) in anyones face, because most of the time I'm just in a golf shirt.  I'm willing to bet that most retired military personnel operate in the same low key way.
RM     

[RiverAux]

I think the burden of proof should be on you.

No, all of these advanced promotions exist as EXCEPTIONS to the general rule of CAP life, which requires you to progress through the PD system to move up in rank.  For an EXCEPTION to exist, there should be a good reason for that exception.  If you are going to make an exception, you need to prove that it is a good idea.

If its not obvious to everyone that the exception is either necessary or provides some useful benefit to CAP, then it should go away.

Now, you want me to prove that the exceptions are unnecessary.  Okay, if I went around asking everyone who got one of these whether it affected their decision to join CAP, do you really think more than a handful would say "Yes, I joined so I could get a higher rank once I'm a member"?    Get real.  No one is going to SAY that, even if it was the truth. 

[Ned]

I think the burden of proof should be on you.

No,

Sir,

YOU are proposing a change to existing regulations.  Regulations that were validly enacted by our senior leadership, and that have been in effect for decades.  I suppose I don't need to point out that despite the regulation you compain about, we have managed to save lives, train cadets, and educate ourselves and the public on aerospace topics.

Since you are proposing the change, the burden is indeed on you to show why the change should be made.  Otherwise we descend into the sillyness of some sort of Seinfeld episode. 

"Hey, what is it with Regulation X?  I mean, seriously?  Prove to me that regulation X is necessary and maybe I'll shut up and follow it.  I think we should change it to Regulation Y.  Yeah, that's the ticket.  Regulation Y would be much better cause I say so.  If you can't prove I'm wrong, then I must be right."

That is the logic of bloggers and malcontents.

[JeffDG]

That is the logic of bloggers and malcontents.

Wait, there's a difference?   

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

That is the logic of bloggers and malcontents.

Wait, there's a difference?   

I believe  loggers would be a _subset of ^malcontents.

[Eclipse]

Sir,

YOU are proposing a change to existing regulations.  Regulations that were validly enacted by our senior leadership, and that have been in effect for decades.  I suppose I don't need to point out that despite the regulation you compain about, we have managed to save lives, train cadets, and educate ourselves and the public on aerospace topics.

Irrelevant (or maybe logical fallacy?) - that we are theoretically successful in our mission, does not negate the significant amount of internal angst and unnecessary drama during the rest of our operations, which encompass the majority of our time.

The inconsistent award of grade and decorations is absolutely a significant problem for CAP, and it costs us a considerable amount of member good will and has cost us more than a few good members as well.

Giving grade to new guys as "welcome gifts" with no expectation of ramifications for non-performance is not the sole reason for the above, but it is a big piece of the puzzle.

Every time a new slick-sleeve looks to a Captain for a simple answer and the response is "I have no idea...", a kitten dies, but worse so does a piece of our credibility.   

[Spaceman3750]

Sir,

YOU are proposing a change to existing regulations.  Regulations that were validly enacted by our senior leadership, and that have been in effect for decades.  I suppose I don't need to point out that despite the regulation you compain about, we have managed to save lives, train cadets, and educate ourselves and the public on aerospace topics.

Irrelevant (or maybe logical fallacy?) - that we are theoretically successful in our mission, does not negate the significant amount of internal angst and unnecessary drama during the rest of our operations, which encompass the majority of our time.

The inconsistent award of grade and decorations is absolutely a significant problem for CAP, and it costs us a considerable amount of member good will and has cost us more than a few good members as well.

Giving grade to new guys as "welcome gifts" with no expectation of ramifications for non-performance is not the sole reason for the above, but it is a big piece of the puzzle.

Every time a new slick-sleeve looks to a Captain for a simple answer and the response is "I have no idea...", a kitten dies, but worse so does a piece of our credibility.

I haven't been around nearly as long as you have, but I've never heard of a member quitting CAP because someone else got a promotion before they did.

And even if they did, I don't want them. Why? Because things aren't always fair, and a member who doesn't realize that isn't mature enough to be a successful SM. I don't need more people stamping their feet, I need people willing to do the missions and follow the rules as they exist now, not take their ball and go home.

[RogueLeader]

That is the logic of bloggers and malcontents.

Wait, there's a difference?   

I believe bloggers would be a _subset of ^malcontents.

FTFY

[Eclipse]

I haven't been around nearly as long as you have, but I've never heard of a member quitting CAP because someone else got a promotion before they did.

And even if they did, I don't want them. Why? Because things aren't always fair, and a member who doesn't realize that isn't mature enough to be a successful SM. I don't need more people stamping their feet, I need people willing to do the missions and follow the rules as they exist now, not take their ball and go home.

Agreed, for the most part, but this isn't a black and white situation, and further, like most discussions easier on the macro, then when a valued, productive member is standing in front of you asking why >he's< been denied a promotion, when he sees "That new guy who just showed up and they gave him "x".  You can try the management speak, etc., but unlike professional employment, CAP is mostly just a bunch of old women sitting on the porch knowing everybody's business, and people know whether someone is doing something or not.  I don't care if you are a butter-bar or a two-star,
new CAP members with no previous CAP experience are generally useless for 6-months to a year as they ramp-up their understanding and qualifications.
Can they help?  Sure, but most of their time is spent learning, not serving in any meaningful way related to experience from outside that might garner them a "welcome gift".

Since we don't train combat troops, and many seniors disdain the military mindset, a brigade commander is not likely to have much more to offer
than any other well-experienced manager from the private sector, and they are both going to get befuddled by the WBP.

Rarely would someone quit as a direct result of these things, more so it is a degradation of their initiative and interest in "the nonsense' that slowly moves them away from the organization. This is demonstrable and I'm sure you seen that sort of thing already.

The only thing that "welcome gifts" incentivize is joining, and the only thing joining fulfills is a recruiter's mission.
Recruiting is not a mission, per se, of CAP.  Recruiting is a tool of the organization to fulfill the real missions.

Recruiting using "welcome gifts" serves no purpose in retention, and may well be a negative factor in that regard.  The motivation for
professional development should be wanting to be a better staff officer, but the unevenness of some of our higher training such
as SLS/CLC means that in some cases the only way we can get people involved is the carrot of the grade.  Welcome gifts remove that
from a commander's tool box, and further gives the impression to the member that they "already know everything they need" coming in
the door.   "No, you know how to fly an airplane, you do not know how to fly an airplane for CAP."
As we all know, CAP is excellent at recruiting, but very poor at retention, and can't seem to figure out why. Here's one of your factors.

I will again repeat the anecdote about the field-grade officer who, when called on something very basic, told a commander that
"I read FARs, not regulations".  Very nice.

Bottom line, you can't play both sides of the argument with this. Anything which has value for recruiting, has a value, or at least a meaning, to everyone, and the interpretation of something subjective like this is usually in the eyes of the beholder.  (i.e. "Sorry, but your 18 months attending unit meetings, encampments, SAREx's, and overnight training is not as valuable to CAP as the check this new guy wrote, so you get one bar and he gets two...).

[lordmonar]

Sir,

YOU are proposing a change to existing regulations.  Regulations that were validly enacted by our senior leadership, and that have been in effect for decades.  I suppose I don't need to point out that despite the regulation you compain about, we have managed to save lives, train cadets, and educate ourselves and the public on aerospace topics.

Irrelevant (or maybe logical fallacy?) - that we are theoretically successful in our mission, does not negate the significant amount of internal angst and unnecessary drama during the rest of our operations, which encompass the majority of our time.

The inconsistent award of grade and decorations is absolutely a significant problem for CAP, and it costs us a considerable amount of member good will and has cost us more than a few good members as well.

Giving grade to new guys as "welcome gifts" with no expectation of ramifications for non-performance is not the sole reason for the above, but it is a big piece of the puzzle.

Every time a new slick-sleeve looks to a Captain for a simple answer and the response is "I have no idea...", a kitten dies, but worse so does a piece of our credibility.

Okay....that's all we are saying.....In my experince with CAP I have not see any of thi s"significant amount of internal angst and unnecessary drama" nor has it "cost us a considerable amount of member good will and has cust us more then a few good memers...".

All I said was if THAT is your view of the problem....then prove it!  Give me some numbers, give me some anacdotal case studies....give me something.

If in fact, which I doubt, is a significant problem.....then we can look at possible solutions.  Killing advanced grade may solve one proble "angst" and "lost members" but it may create other problems "lost retired military members" "lost high skilled pilots/lawyers/CPA/AE Educators/Medical/A&P mechanics".

Once the problems have been identified, we brain storm possible fixes, we look at those fixes and see what the impact they may have.   

I said before....don't thow the baby out with the wash water.  There may be other solutions that still allow us to recruit those special skills, and retired military AND reduce the angst and heart burn of other members and potential members.

All I ask of you is to prove your inital premise.....that advanced promotions are not necessar (River Aux) and/or they creat angst and effect recruiting/retention.   If you can show me that those are really problems.....Im all in for a solution.

[lordmonar]

Bottom line, you can't play both sides of the argument with this. Anything which has value for recruiting, has a value, or at least a meaning, to everyone, and the interpretation of something subjective like this is usually in the eyes of the beholder.  (i.e. "Sorry, but your 18 months attending unit meetings, encampments, SAREx's, and overnight training is not as valuable to CAP as the check this new guy wrote, so you get one bar and he gets two...).

Strange.

I see that all the time in the real world and the military.

Signing bonuses, extra stripes for signing up for six years, extra stripes for joining the right AFSC, extra stripes for having college, JROTC, CAP.

Recruiting, training, and utilisation are all run by the same guy in CAP....the squadron commander.

So......who is dropping the ball?  You recruit the guy, you use the advanced promotion to get him to join, you then train him to do the job and then you manage him doing it.

IF you don't need perspecitive member X and his skills.....don't recruit him.  If you do need him recruit him.  If you don't need the extra tool of advanced promotion to seal the deal....good on you....nothing is garanteed....you don't have to give him the advanced promotion....you don't even need to tell him about it.   If you do need the member and his skills and you need the advanced promotion to seal the deal.....and he then fails to follow through and use those skills for your squadron.....demote him....it's in your power to do so.

So......I don't really understand where the problem is comming from.  You have heart burn about pilots who are CFIs so they get captain but then never use their skills.......be a leader and manage them. 

If your problem is what happens in other squadrons......well.....you can't fix that.....and you should not try to fix that.  Leave the tools alone.   If you really feel that driven.....take on Group/Wing leadership and then lead your subordinate commanders in your vision of how things should be done.

[Eclipse]

You cannot compare compensated organizations with direct command structures and explicit expectations, with a bunch of uncompensated volunteers who receive little to no training in leadership and essentially are all equals.

The only way to compensate for the uneven training and lack of personal leadership is with clear, specific guidance as to the expectations of those who receive promotions and decorations.

[lordmonar]

You cannot compare compensated organizations with direct command structures and explicit expectations, with a bunch of uncompensated volunteers who receive little to know training in leadership and essentially are all equals.

The only way to compensate for the uneven training and lack of personal leadership is with clear, specific guidance as to the expectations of those who receive promotions and decorations.

Okay...ignore the comparison.

I'll grant you that for the sake of argument.

However, you still need to show that the damage of the current system out weighs the possible damage of completely eliminating advanced promotions.

[RiverAux]

Its really quite simple -- the only potential benefit of the current system is as an incentive to join.  There is no proof that this works. 

The benefit of eliminating the current system is that everyone has to learn the same things and be capable of generally the same level of performance in the context of CAP in order to promote.  The benefit of this should be obvious to everyone. 

Do you truly believe that the recruiting value, if it actually exists, of the advanced promotion system is significantly more important to CAP than it is to make everyone use the CAP PD system? 

Now, if you want to say that the CAP PD system is useless and we might as well eliminate ranks, then fine.  There is nothing that we're going to be able to say about making the PD system universal that you're going to see as a benefit. 

[Eclipse]

How do we "show it"?  Start naming names?  Those of us with experience, especially the commanders, and you know that this issue raised all the time.

And there is no risk to eliminating is because it's not an effective tool as it is.

Can you show any instances where giving someone something, especially with no follow-on expectations, increases the value of the thing given and spurs that person on to even more effort?

We live in a world where people will stand in line for 15 minutes for a free pen, then throw it out on the way home.  If your recruiting conversations
tell people they can be a "Captain day-1.", then that sets the minimum expectation in their head, and that becomes a check-box.  If you tell them
that they can earn grade with work and effort, that becomes the expectation.

The "welcome gifts" do the same thing to CAP.  Someone who legitimately earns something is far more likely to value it, and also encourage others to do the same.

Who's more inclined to follow directives?  Someone who was given Captain or someone who earned it?

Who's more inclined to properly wear the uniform?  Someone who was given Captain or someone who earned it?

Who's more inclined to progress further?  Someone who was given Captain or who earned it?
(On this one, we routinely hear pilots say how they've got a 3-4+ year "pass" on "bothering with PD" because they've "already got what the tracks...")