Can 2 (or more) people get credit for recruiting one person?

[talldude]

Can 2 (or more) people get credit (towards the ribbon) for recruiting one person?

[Eclipse]

No.

[LSThiker]

Not that I disagree in principle, but just to play FSM's advocate, where is the citation for that answer?

[Storm Chaser]

The membership application has room for only one recruiter CAPID, which is then documented in eServices under Members Reports > Member Recruiting.

[LSThiker]

The membership application has room for only one recruiter CAPID, which is then documented in eServices under Members Reports > Member Recruiting.

Which came first:  the chicken or the egg (assuming it is a chicken egg we are talking about)?

So you say because the application only has 1 spot, therefore, only 1 person can be credited.  However, is it not possible that because the form was created with only 1 spot, we assume only 1 person can be credited?

Also, the CAPF 15 states "person most responsible" "optional:  for recruiting purposes".  This does not necessarily mean that a person cannot be given recruitment credit for the purpose of the recruitment ribbon.  CAPR 39-3 does not specifically say one way or another. 

[a2capt]

There's only one place to enter it. It may not say it, but that is certainly implied. Does 39-1 say to tie your shoes or button the shirt?

[lordmonar]

The membership application has room for only one recruiter CAPID, which is then documented in eServices under Members Reports > Member Recruiting.

The membership application is not the only source for verifying recruiting credit.

[NIN]

So you say because the application only has 1 spot, therefore, only 1 person can be credited.  However, is it not possible that because the form was created with only 1 spot, we assume only 1 person can be credited?

Next thing you know, you'll want to log PIC credit from the backseat with that logic!

"Just because there are only two sets of controls and they're in the front doesn't mean you can't be in charge in the back seat!!"

[Luis R. Ramos]

Yeah, so I still remember the jokes from the 70's and 80's about mothers-in-law being the real car drivers, from the back of the seat!

How can it even be possible for two people to recruit one? There has to be only one who is most responsible!

Flyer

[Walkman]

How can it even be possible for two people to recruit one? There has to be only one who is most responsible!

While I agree on the answer that currently only one person can get credit, I can easily see how a couple of people could be responsbile for someone joining up. Two cadet BFFs work together to recruit their other buddy. Doesn't seem al that far fetched to me.

[Garibaldi]

There's only one place to enter it. It may not say it, but that is certainly implied. Does 39-1 say to tie your shoes or button the shirt?

"Corporal Barnes, can you turn to the page in this book that says where the mess hall is, please?"
"No, sir, I can't."
"Why not?"
"It's not in there."
"You mean to say that during your whole time in Gitmo you've never had a meal?"
"No, sir.  Three squares a day."
"Then how did you know where to go to eat if it's not in this book?"
"I guess I sort of just followed the crowd at chow time, sir."

[Storm Chaser]

Also, the CAPF 15 states "person most responsible" "optional:  for recruiting purposes".  This does not necessarily mean that a person cannot be given recruitment credit for the purpose of the recruitment ribbon.  CAPR 39-3 does not specifically say one way or another.

What do you think "most responsible means"? If they wanted to credit more than one recruiter, it would say something like "persons responsible".

The membership application has room for only one recruiter CAPID, which is then documented in eServices under Members Reports > Member Recruiting.

The membership application is not the only source for verifying recruiting credit.

Really? So how do you document it? eServices does that already; no need to reinvent the wheel. Since I joined in 1987 it's always been that way (not the eServices part, but the recruiting credit part). One recruiter gets credit for one recruit. During recruiting events, recruits are divided as evenly as possible.

It's funny though, there are things that are spelled out in the regulations, but many members find the way to "interpret" them to their convenience or ignore them all together. When the intent of the regulation is enforced in eServices, people still complain that it's not written in the regulation. No wonder CAP has so many problems. When did everything become about how easy we can "earn" awards? How about putting the effort to earn them since they're already easy enough to earn?

Two recruits for the cadet ribbon; that's it. And now we want to make that 1.5 or two 0.5 recruits per recruiter for credit? Seriously? The senior ribbon is a bit harder to earn; so what? Recruiting (and retention) are crucial to CAP. We need more members, not more ribbons or workarounds for earning them easier.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Storm-

As usual. I find other members very articulate, much more than I am, for some of the issues I believe in. Very well put response!

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Flyer

[talldude]

How can it even be possible for two people to recruit one? There has to be only one who is most responsible!

While I agree on the answer that currently only one person can get credit, I can easily see how a couple of people could be responsible for someone joining up. Two cadet BFFs work together to recruit their other buddy. Doesn't seem all that far fetched to me.

I recruited my brother (my 1st person). My brother's best friend (who is also one of my good friends), joined a few months after my brother (my 2nd person & I am wondering if it is my brothers 1st recruited person). I am the one that told him all about CAP, however, I doubt If he would have joined if my brother had not of joined. (This cadet and my brother are both currently C/CMSgts).

My youngest brother will be joining in August. I am wondering if both my (C/CMSgt) brother and I, can/will both get credit (my 3rd & my brothers 2nd person recruited)?

Another reason I am asking this, is because our squadron just started a recruiting team of about 7 cadets that will soon be speaking in schools. I have a feeling that this question will come up and I would like to have the correct answer.


Thank you to everyone for all the input so far! 

[NIN]

Best way to solve this issue: Recruit a LOT of cadets.

After the 14th cadet, your 7 member recruiting team won't have to fight over who recruited who, as they will all have a recruiter ribbon and be more sanguine about the whole thing.

When you're only recruiting a few people a year, everybody wants to tussle over the scraps. ("I talked to him for 45 minutes at the open house. I sealed the deal!" "Yeah? Well, I'm the one who gave him an Open House flyer!")

[LSThiker]

What do you think "most responsible means"? If they wanted to credit more than one recruiter, it would say something like "persons responsible".

Except that as stated on the CAPF 15 is for recruiting purposes, not for the purpose of award criteria.  Again, CAPR 39-3 does not indicate either way.  Nor does it reference CAPF 15.

Since I joined in 1987 it's always been that way (not the eServices part, but the recruiting credit part). One recruiter gets credit for one recruit. During recruiting events, recruits are divided as evenly as possible.

Except that "it's always been that way" is not an accepted answer for when determining regulations.  A lot of things have always been that way, it does not mean they are correct or accepted that way.  Would you accept, "Well that is the way we have always done it"? 

Also, the documenting through eServices is messed up for me.  According to eServices, I only have 5 people, but I have my CAPF 2a and proof demonstrating recruitment of more than 5.  So, no eServices is not the only method of documentation.  If a person says I have 7 and eServices shows only 5, but they have a CAPF 2a signed by the commander, I will put more faith in the CAPF 2a than eServices.

When the intent of the regulation is enforced in eServices, people still complain that it's not written in the regulation.

Except that is the question, where is the intent of the regulation?  What regulation shows this intent?  A form having only 1 spot does not show intent of a regulation, it merely shows 1 spot on a form.

Two recruits for the cadet ribbon; that's it.

No one is arguing otherwise and no one is arguing for more awards.

Again, I agree that only 1 person should receive credit, but my question is "what is the regulation that forms said basis?"  Can I really argue with proof, and not opinion, if a commander were to disagree with me on this subject?

Next thing you know, you'll want to log PIC credit from the backseat with that logic!

"Just because there are only two sets of controls and they're in the front doesn't mean you can't be in charge in the back seat!!"

Except that the FAA has a definition for PIC and states how to log PIC time.  Both of which can be found in the FAR. 

[Eclipse]

Except that as stated on the CAPF 15 is for recruiting purposes, not for the purpose of award criteria.  Again, CAPR 39-3 does not indicate either way.  Nor does it reference CAPF 15.

No it is for both.

Awards are presented for the number of recruits indicated in eServices.  There is no other mechanism for submitting or
entering those CAPIDs.   As indicated, only one person can be "most" responsible.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Tall

The question is what are you doing to recruit them. Are you talking to them about CAP, the uniforms, the activities? Then are you going back to that person with more info? Then comparing etc.? It is not just "I talked to him for ten minutes, he saw me with the uniform, so I want credit for recruiting him / her now."

Flyer

[Luis R. Ramos]

Dudes,

Stop arguing and place two names on that spot! See what NHQ Does!!! If they accept both names, you are OK. If they accept only one, there is your answer!!!

Flyer

[Eclipse]

Or you could get the app back unprocessed.