2 promotion per year, or 2B

[Equinox]

Is there a regulation somewhere that states cadets will have their memberships terminated if they cannot complete 2 or more achievements/promotions within 12 months? I thought I remembered hearing this somewhere.

[Garibaldi]

Try 52-16 or 39-3. It used to be that we would 2b, but that be something we be not doing.

I think I'm having a stroke...

[vorteks]

Is there a regulation somewhere that states cadets will have their memberships terminated if they cannot complete 2 or more achievements/promotions within 12 months? I thought I remembered hearing this somewhere.

Not exactly. Have a read through 35-3.

SECTION A . CADETS
3. Causes to Terminate Cadet Membership.
    b. Failure to progress satisfactorily in the CAP cadet program.

http://capmembers.com/media/cms/R035_003_B74F5A60C44CF.pdf

[Майор Хаткевич]

It USED to say 2 achievement per year. Now it's more flexible as quoted above.

[LSThiker]

There was. It has since been removed.  I forget when, but I think it was in early or mid-2000s

[Майор Хаткевич]

There was. It has since been removed.  I forget when, but I think it was in early or mid-2000s

No, it was definitely in one if the 2009-on rewrites.

[vorteks]

Is there a regulation somewhere that states cadets will have their memberships terminated if they cannot complete 2 or more achievements/promotions within 12 months? I thought I remembered hearing this somewhere.

Also consider having a look at this lively discussion.   

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=19637.0

[PHall]

Really???  A cadet doesn't promote twice a year and you want to 2b them?

What's your "real" reason for wanting to terminate them?  Cuz a 2b for not promoting fast enough is just plain bogus.

[Capt Thompson]

I know I'll catch flack for saying this, but oh well....... the reg doesn't seem to state the 2 promotion rule, but the CP portion of OBC Block 2 still mentions it, so I'm sure there are Squadrons following the rule. If a Cadet were to appeal the decision though, and it isn't in the regs they could probably get it overturned.

If I'm not mistaken, this was 2 promotions through the enlisted grades. If a C/LtCol didn't make Spaatz in a year we wouldn't terminate them I wouldn't think.

[Майор Хаткевич]

[/size]Really???  A cadet doesn't promote twice a year and you want to 2b them?What's your "real" reason for wanting to terminate them?  Cuz a 2b for not promoting fast enough is just plain bogus.

Why can't that be the real reason? If they are on the rolls for..."whatever", then after discussions, attempts, and no signs of improvement, why would they stick around?

I know I'll catch flack for saying this, but oh well....... the reg doesn't seem to state the 2 promotion rule, but the CP portion of OBC Block 2 still mentions it, so I'm sure there are Squadrons following the rule. If a Cadet were to appeal the decision though, and it isn't in the regs they could probably get it overturned.

If I'm not mistaken, this was 2 promotions through the enlisted grades. If a C/LtCol didn't make Spaatz in a year we wouldn't terminate them I wouldn't think.

There was never a specific cut off, and no one will terminate an Eaker cadet for lack of progression.

[vorteks]

Really???  A cadet doesn't promote twice a year and you want to 2b them? What's your "real" reason for wanting to terminate them?  Cuz a 2b for not promoting fast enough is just plain bogus.

Why can't that be the real reason? If they are on the rolls for..."whatever", then after discussions, attempts, and no signs of improvement, why would they stick around?

I know I'll catch flack for saying this, but oh well....... the reg doesn't seem to state the 2 promotion rule, but the CP portion of OBC Block 2 still mentions it, so I'm sure there are Squadrons following the rule. If a Cadet were to appeal the decision though, and it isn't in the regs they could probably get it overturned.

If I'm not mistaken, this was 2 promotions through the enlisted grades. If a C/LtCol didn't make Spaatz in a year we wouldn't terminate them I wouldn't think.

There was never a specific cut off, and no one will terminate an Eaker cadet for lack of progression.

FTFY

[Capt Thompson]

Ok wasn't sure if there was a cutoff. I also wouldn't consider terminating a Cadet that was actively trying to promote, and falling short, or a Cadet that was struggling with making the PT test score and it took a little longer to promote.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Really???  A cadet doesn't promote twice a year and you want to 2b them? What's your "real" reason for wanting to terminate them?  Cuz a 2b for not promoting fast enough is just plain bogus.

Why can't that be the real reason? If they are on the rolls for..."whatever", then after discussions, attempts, and no signs of improvement, why would they stick around?

I know I'll catch flack for saying this, but oh well....... the reg doesn't seem to state the 2 promotion rule, but the CP portion of OBC Block 2 still mentions it, so I'm sure there are Squadrons following the rule. If a Cadet were to appeal the decision though, and it isn't in the regs they could probably get it overturned. If I'm not mistaken, this was 2 promotions through the enlisted grades. If a C/LtCol didn't make Spaatz in a year we wouldn't terminate them I wouldn't think.

There was never a specific cut off, and no one will terminate an Eaker cadet for lack of progression.

FTFY

I have NO idea why that happens...>_>

Ok wasn't sure if there was a cutoff. I also wouldn't consider terminating a Cadet that was actively trying to promote, and falling short, or a Cadet that was struggling with making the PT test score and it took a little longer to promote.

A cadet trying, is not what the option was for.

[Eclipse]

Really???  A cadet doesn't promote twice a year and you want to 2b them?

Want to?  No. Need to?  Maybe.

What's your "real" reason for wanting to terminate them?  Cuz a 2b for not promoting fast enough is just plain bogus.

If they are trying and failing, then you still have to have the discussion.  If they aren't attempting or testing, not
much to discuss.  CAP isn't a rec center, it has expectations of performance for cadets, and one of those is progression.
A cadet not progressing is either not participating enough, or has his attention in the wrong place.

With that said, it's entirely subjective to the respective CC, and was never mandatory.

[Equinox]

Really???  A cadet doesn't promote twice a year and you want to 2b them?

What's your "real" reason for wanting to terminate them?  Cuz a 2b for not promoting fast enough is just plain bogus.

Oh I don't know, maybe the core value of "excellence".

Or maybe the part of the cadet oath where the cadet swears to "advance my education and training rapidly".

"Integrity" might also play a part in the decision.

[LSThiker]

There was. It has since been removed.  I forget when, but I think it was in early or mid-2000s

No, it was definitely in one if the 2009-on rewrites.

Possibly. I was thinking it was around the same time they removed the pregnancy clause, which was in the early 2000s.  Meh, not like it really matters anyway since it has been removed.

[Luis R. Ramos]

With that sad, it's entirely subjective to the respective CC...

Well, it would make a lot of people sad if cadets do not promote, but I think you really meant the following. If that is the case IWFTFY.

With that sad said, it's entirely subjective to therespective CC...

[coudano]

I don't have authoritative memory here,
but I think the membership reg always called for 'satisfactory'

the CP regs, I think, used to specify 2 a year


Having run a local program where I have enforced non-progression with verbal, written counseling and even administrative action (unlike the vast majority of cap squadrons i'm sure), I could probably thread-jack with a dozen reasons why having cadets promoting less often than every 6 months can create issues that you really don't want to deal with on the short or long term, but it's friday night.

[Grumpy]

Really???  A cadet doesn't promote twice a year and you want to 2b them?

What's your "real" reason for wanting to terminate them?  Cuz a 2b for not promoting fast enough is just plain bogus.

Oh I don't know, maybe the core value of "excellence".

Or maybe the part of the cadet oath where the cadet swears to "advance my education and training rapidly".

"Integrity" might also play a part in the decision.

What do we do with senior members who have been 1st Lieutenants for 5 to 10 years and just don't want to jump through all the hoops and promote?  Haven't seen many of them who have been Administratively Discharged.

[coudano]

What do we do with senior members who have been 1st Lieutenants for 5 to 10 years and just don't want to jump through all the hoops and promote?  Haven't seen many of them who have been Administratively Discharged.

get them a cup of coffee and thank them for their service.

advancing education and training rapidly to prepare themselves to be of service to their community, state, and nation is not a core (regulatorily programmed) element of the senior member PD program, like it is for cadets.  Failure to progress is not listed as a 'cause' for termination for senior members in the membership reg like it is for cadets.

[Equinox]

What do we do with senior members who have been 1st Lieutenants for 5 to 10 years and just don't want to jump through all the hoops and promote?  Haven't seen many of them who have been Administratively Discharged.

If you read the OP, you'll see that this thread pertains to cadet promotions, not senior member.

[Grumpy]

What do we do with senior members who have been 1st Lieutenants for 5 to 10 years and just don't want to jump through all the hoops and promote?  Haven't seen many of them who have been Administratively Discharged.

If you read the OP, you'll see that this thread pertains to cadet promotions, not senior member.

Whoa there big fella, just a little Devil's advocate there.  If we're thinking about giving the boot to cadets for not progressing shouldn't we "clean up our own house first".  You know, lead by example.

[PHall]

What do we do with senior members who have been 1st Lieutenants for 5 to 10 years and just don't want to jump through all the hoops and promote?  Haven't seen many of them who have been Administratively Discharged.

If you read the OP, you'll see that this thread pertains to cadet promotions, not senior member.

Whoa there big fella, just a little Devil's advocate there.  If we're thinking about giving the boot to cadets for not progressing shouldn't we "clean up our own house first".  You know, lead by example.

Grump, you forgot to attach the little Devil icon.    You can't play Devil's Advocate if you don't attach the Devil.

Bad cop, no donut for you!

[Grumpy]

What do we do with senior members who have been 1st Lieutenants for 5 to 10 years and just don't want to jump through all the hoops and promote?  Haven't seen many of them who have been Administratively Discharged.

If you read the OP, you'll see that this thread pertains to cadet promotions, not senior member.

Whoa there big fella, just a little Devil's advocate there.  If we're thinking about giving the boot to cadets for not progressing shouldn't we "clean up our own house first".  You know, lead by example.

Grump, you forgot to attach the little Devil icon.    You can't play Devil's Advocate if you don't attach the Devil.

Bad cop, no donut for you!

Thanks Phil, you've got my back.  You know how I so much like my doughnuts.  Former training, you understand.

[Eclipse]

If we're thinking about giving the boot to cadets for not progressing shouldn't we "clean up our own house first".  You know, lead by example.

I would agree, however the initial expectations for cadets are very clearly stated, not to mention they
reaffirm them every time they repeat the oath, so there's no question progression is a requirement and
should be considered the priority.

I've known any number of senior members who are high-level contributors that don't seem interested in progression -
some even progress in PD, just don't care about grade.

I don't know that I have met a cadet yet who eschews progression but would still be considered "successful".

[Private Investigator]

What do we do with senior members who have been 1st Lieutenants for 5 to 10 years and just don't want to jump through all the hoops and promote?  Haven't seen many of them who have been Administratively Discharged.

If you read the OP, you'll see that this thread pertains to cadet promotions, not senior member.

Whoa there big fella, just a little Devil's advocate there.  If we're thinking about giving the boot to cadets for not progressing shouldn't we "clean up our own house first".  You know, lead by example.

John J. Pershing was a Captain with 20 years in the Army when he made the jump to BG. Back in those days a officers career of 20 years was 1LT or CPT. No HYT then either for the enlisted. 

[Luis R. Ramos]

No Grump, get NHQ to put promotions for seniors, then you can expect seniors to promote and lead by example. Not before.

[Flying Pig]

This is always interesting for discussion. I've never heard of this actually being used although I'm sure it has.  If a cadet is creating problems i guess this could be an easy way to dump them.  But let's face it, it really doesn't happen.   

I look at personal examples.  I was a C/2Lt for almost 3yrs before I left and joined the Marines.   My brother was a C/A1C for about 2 1/2-3yrs.  He was perfectly happy just showing up to meetings and being one of the "troops". He was however, heavily involved in NJROTC.  He graduated and joined the Air Force. 

If you have cadets who stagnate absolutely motivate them to promote. But some kids just like the meeting nights, and that's ok too.

[Storm Chaser]

If you have cadets who stagnate absolutely motivate them to promote. But some kids just like the meeting nights, and that's ok too.

Is it? I wouldn't necessarily terminate a cadet's membership just because he or she is promoting slowly. But the expectation of progression is clearly stated in CAPR 52-16, CAPR 35-3, and the Cadet Oath, among others. We need to not only encourage cadets to promote, but they should also be expected to do so (or at least try).

A cadet who doesn't seem interested in progressing in the Cadet Programs may need to reconsider why they joined CAP in the first place. While followership is important, it's not one of the Cadet Programs elements; leadership is. The opportunity to lead is also one of the key traits of cadet life. The promotion and grade system is meant to facilitate that. It's also a way to measure their progress and development in the program.

[foo]

This also bears repeating (H/T Capt Hatkevich - http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=19647.msg362161#msg362161):

Saw some interesting things that are GREAT in terms of "what we expect of you and your cadet":


Haven't had a chance to look at it myself yet (only seen bits and pieces).
Some interesting things that cadets need to commit to:

As you apply for membership in the Civil Air Patrol Cadet Corps, please tell us you're serious about being a cadet by reading the statements below and checking the checkboxes to indicate that you agree.

   
• I want to be a CAP cadet. I think CAP's for me, and I'm willing to give it a try for one full year. 
• I'll participate in most weekly squadron meetings and will try to attend one 'Saturday' event per month. 
• I plan to attend the next 1-week, overnight summer encampment available in my state. 
• Most encampments are 1-week in duration and take place in the summer or during winter vacation. Tuition averages $200 - $300. Local leaders will tell you more about the encampment opportunities in your area.
• If family or school obligations come up, I'll let my local leaders know in advance that I'll be absent from CAP. 
• I have been assigned a mentor, an experienced cadet who is my #1 source for information on how to succeed in CAP. Or, if I haven't been assigned one, I'm going to ask for one at my next meeting. 
• I understand that what I get out of CAP depends on what I put into it.

As a symbol of my readiness to enter the CAP Cadet Program, I make the following pledge:
THE CADET OATH
I pledge that I will serve faithfully in the Civil Air Patrol Cadet Program,and that I will attend meetings regularly,participate actively in unit activities,obey my officers,wear my uniform properly,and advance my education and training rapidly to prepare myself to be of service to my community, state and nation.

Parents need to commit to:

Parent's or Guardian's Authorization

   
• I approve my child's membership application for the Civil Air Patrol. 
• I have personally met with the local CAP leaders and received a basic introduction to CAP. I know that CAP policies are available to me through the CAP website, especially the parents' home page, capmembers.com/parents. If I have not yet personally met with the local CAP leaders, I understand that this application will remain on-hold until I do so. 
• I understand my child may be flying in CAP aircraft and participating in vigorous outdoor activities, under the supervision of CAP adult leaders. 
• I understand that by joining CAP, my child is expected to participate in CAP for a minimum of 1 year. He or she will attend weekly meetings at our local squadron and one special 'Saturday' event per month, on average, but of course school and family obligations take priority over CAP. If we can't participate in an activity, we'll try to let the local leaders know in advance. 
• I understand that my child is tentatively scheduled to attend the next cadet encampment, which is typically a 7-day, overnight activity conducted in the summer or during school vacation. I will make an effort to support his or her participation at that program. (Information about the next encampment is posted at capmembers.com/encampment as it becomes available. Your local leaders will also be providing more information.) 
• If CAP provides my child with a uniform, I promise to return that uniform when he or she outgrows it or decides to leave the CAP Program. 

Are you interested and able to volunteer your time and talents to support the cadets or other CAP missions? Check any that apply:

   
•      Helping with transportation
•      Fundraising
•      Supervising cadet events once in a while
•      Taking an active role in leading cadets on a weekly basis
•      Getting involved in the adult-focused emergencey services or aerospace eduation programs
•      Setting up tours or telling you about connections I have that might interest CAP. Please explain briefly: 

BY COMPLETING THIS FORM AND CHECKING THIS CHECKBOX, I HEREBY 'SIGN' THIS APPLICATION 

[Capt Thompson]

^^^This

[Capt Thompson]

As a Cadet, I was very active in JROTC (C/LtCol/Battalion Commander), 2 or 3 teams, and other extracurricular activities. CAP wasn't necessarily the priority as I was in JROTC first, and spent much of my attention there, but I still found time to participate actively, and promote regularly. The only time I didn't promote in a timely manner was when I was waiting to attend encampment as the final requirement for Mitchell.

Again, if a Cadet is trying, this rule doesn't really apply. If they are trying hard, and just don't get it, we need to focus on why they don't get it, and find ways to help them along. If they aren't actively promoting because of JROTC, baseball, football, karate, guitar class, drama club, underwater basket weaving and 15 other activities they're trying to cram in, than a discussion needs to happen, and if it turns out CAP is on the bottom of the priority list, maybe it's time to focus on other things.

[Airplane girl]

Another problem with cadets not promoting is when one cadet joins after another cadet and promotes a lot. The first cadet is still a C/Amn after a year, and the second is a C/SSgt. The first cadet asks why the second now has some sort of authority, since he joined first...

[foo]

Again, if a Cadet is trying, this rule doesn't really apply. If they are trying hard, and just don't get it, we need to focus on why they don't get it, and find ways to help them along. If they aren't actively promoting because of JROTC, baseball, football, karate, guitar class, drama club, underwater basket weaving and 15 other activities they're trying to cram in, than a discussion needs to happen, and if it turns out CAP is on the bottom of the priority list, maybe it's time to focus on other things.

+1

[Flying Pig]

If you have cadets who stagnate absolutely motivate them to promote. But some kids just like the meeting nights, and that's ok too.

Is it?

Yes. It's OK.  If they aren't disrutpting or creating any issues.  Not everyone was born to lead or born to set the example.  I had cadets who came to CAP because they lived in gang infested neighborhoods in Fresno CA and CAP was the one night a week they got to go outside.  Some of you guys are such hard -"a--'s it's comical. 

[Luis R. Ramos]

Another problem with cadets not promoting is when one cadet joins after another cadet and promotes a lot. The first cadet is still a C/Amn after a year, and the second is a C/SSgt. The first cadet asks why the second now has some sort of authority, since he joined first...

Why is that a problem? Why should that be a problem???

Should not be a problem. Just point out to the progression rate! If the first one complains, just state You have failed to be promoted! and leave it at that! Or are you afraid of a confrontation? You should not be!

[Airplane girl]

I've tried to explain that to him, sir.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Then continue. Maybe the problem is that he does not accept you in an authority position. Are you the second cadet that has promoted a lot? Are you in another position of authority over the first cadet? Enlist the support of your Cadet Programs Officer or the Deputy Commander for Cadets, and the next time the cadet raises the issue, state I am not discussing this anymore with you and take him to the Cadet Programs Officer. And talk about another thing with him except that issue.

[coudano]

I had cadets who came to CAP because they lived in gang infested neighborhoods in Fresno CA and CAP was the one night a week they got to go outside.

Is that what the cadet program is???

[Майор Хаткевич]

I had cadets who came to CAP because they lived in gang infested neighborhoods in Fresno CA and CAP was the one night a week they got to go outside.

Is that what the cadet program is???

Certainly many units are run as rec. Centers...

[Luis R. Ramos]

The last two replies missed the point or introduced stuff not stated in the message they addressed.

What is the problem of the Cadet Program being a positive alternative in a problem neighborhood?

And where does the comment "Is that what the cadet program is?" fit in that quoted message? I would say, "That is the start."

[Майор Хаткевич]

The last two replies missed the point or introduced stuff not stated in the message they addressed.

What is the problem of the Cadet Program being a positive alternative in a problem neighborhood?

And where does the comment "Is that what the cadet program is?" fit in that quoted message? I would say, "That is the start."

Not quite. Allowing kids to 'just be there', no matter the noble sentiment, misses the point.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Capt,

You are still missing my point.

Where are you getting the idea they are "just letting kids be there?" This is not evidenced by the message. You have to assume they are doing a complete, supervised program as outlined by CAP regs.

[vorteks]

Capt,

You are still missing my point.

Where are you getting the idea they are "just letting kids be there?" This is not evidenced by the message. You have to assume they are doing a complete, supervised program as outlined by CAP regs.

You are missing the point. He obviously used it as an example to support his stated position that it's OK for kids to join CAP and just go to meetings without progressing in CP.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Veritec,

You missed the entire point.

The originator of the message was Flying Pig. He was the first one to mention it. Nowhere does he states that the only thing the cadet was there for was for a "night out." That he was not giving them a chance to participate in a complete program.

The other two, Coudano and Captain, are reacting as if Flying would not have given them a program.

[PHall]

Veritec,

You missed the entire point.

The originator of the message was Flying Pig. He was the first one to mention it. Nowhere does he states that the only thing the cadet was there for was for a "night out." That he was not giving them a chance to participate in a complete program.

The other two, Coudano and Captain, are reacting as if Flying would not have given them a program.

Sr Ramos, maybe you're the one who is missing the point since everybody else seems to be wrong but you.
Time to reevaluate your position on this maybe?

[Flying Pig]

I had cadets who came to CAP because they lived in gang infested neighborhoods in Fresno CA and CAP was the one night a week they got to go outside.

Is that what the cadet program is???

Certainly many units are run as rec. Centers...

I can assure you my unit was not a rec center.  Several cadets appointed to service academies as well as Wing and Region Squadron of Distinction and Unit Citation.  But I'm sure some units are

[vorteks]

The other two, Coudano and Captain, are reacting as if Flying would not have given them a program.

No they weren't. No one accused FlyingPig of denying anyone a program. You're creating a straw man there. Maybe you just like to argue.

[vorteks]

What is the problem of the Cadet Program being a positive alternative in a problem neighborhood?

No one said that was a problem.

The last two replies missed the point or introduced stuff not stated in the message they addressed.

That's exactly what you're doing.

[Private Investigator]

Can we have punch and cookies and just get along? 

[Eclipse]

If you have cadets who stagnate absolutely motivate them to promote. But some kids just like the meeting nights, and that's ok too.

Is it?

Yes. It's OK.  If they aren't disrutpting or creating any issues.  Not everyone was born to lead or born to set the example.  I had cadets who came to CAP because they lived in gang infested neighborhoods in Fresno CA and CAP was the one night a week they got to go outside.  Some of you guys are such hard -"a--'s it's comical.

I'll respond directly to the comment to insure I didn't misinterpret.

Yes, this is a problem, because again, CAP is not a rec center, and for the record, citing awards such as Merit and Distinction doesn't actually help your point with those of us who understand both the subjective nature of who wins those, >and< the fact that
keeping non-performing cadets on the books can actually help the baseline scores.  I know of more then a couple
rec-center units who have that pretty streamer on their flag.

Cadets join CAP and promise to adhere to a set of standards which very specifically includes active participation
and academic work towards progression.  Cadets not accepting this mandate became a problem if only by the negative example of
"being around and not doing anything but being around" (or by concentrating on non-core areas that they use as excuses for
non-progression).  BTDT here as well.

These cadets become a drag on the program, especially if they increase in numbers, because instead of becoming the
leaders they should be, and giving back, they simply remain as "takers", which isn't fair to those actually working the plan.

As someone who has had to deal personally with this issue on a pretty significant scale, I can tell you that while it might
look like a good idea from 50K feet, it causes more negative ripples then it's worth, and these cadets would be better off
elsewhere for all involved.

CAP's role is not to be anyone's "last resort" and certainly the average put-upon commander is not in a position to be filing that role.

[SarDragon]

Tick-tock. Tick-tock.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Tick-tock. Tick-tock.

How so? We're quite on point.

[SarDragon]

Tick-tock. Tick-tock.

How so? We're quite on point.

Mostly, until it started coming off the rails around Reply #42, and continued thru #49.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Message 46 by Flying Pig supports the feeling I am right in my interprertation...

[Flying Pig]

All mighty Eclipse has spoken.  I had no idea those awards didn't actually mean anything. Do you jump to conclusions naturally or do you work at it?  Where did I ever say we were running a rec center?   Making exaggerated assumptions to make a point makes about as much sense as citing a fictional movie to make a point.

[vorteks]

Message 46 by Flying Pig supports the feeling I am right in my interprertation...

Welp, no one can argue with your feelings. Have a nice day.

[catrulz]

One thing you have to love (or hate) about CAP, is that everyone thinks they are doing everything absolutely correctly, and everyone else is just entirely messed up! :clap:

There are cadets that I don't want to promote very fast.  Most 12 year old shouldn't be Flight Sergeants (lack the maturity), just like most 15 year old shouldn't be C/Col (lack the maturity).   The expected maturity between the Wright Brothers and the Spaatz are rated on different scales.  I've always found it interesting that you have to be an Earhart or greater and a Junior in High School to be cadet of the year, but you can earn your Spaatz as a Freshman.

Many units are officer mills, churn em out before they get a chance to actually learn anything.  You visit a unit and see the cadet officers doing element leader functions. 

Personally, I use a 2b for one thing.  Someone that is disruptive, undisciplined, has abused another cadet, or has done something illegal.  One of the best cadets I knew was an C/Amn for over a year.  She finished as an Eaker cadet.  Some cadets just start slower than others.   

[Spaceman3750]

You know, some cadets are probably best served staying in one spot, being the best followers they can be. Leading requires practice, but if you have a personality like mine, knowing when to raise a concern and "shut up and color" when appropriate is something you have to learn the hard way, sometimes several times.

[Eclipse]

All mighty Eclipse has spoken.  I had no idea those awards didn't actually mean anything. Do you jump to conclusions naturally or do you work at it?  Where did I ever say we were running a rec center?   Making exaggerated assumptions to make a point makes about as much sense as citing a fictional movie to make a point.

You should read what's typed, not filter with what you thought it said.

[Flying Pig]

Do you get nose bleeds way up there on the pedestal?  I know you love to talk about baselines and you are really hardcore when it comes to CAP. Fact is there are loads of kids who look back on CAP and see it as a time in their life when it kept them out of trouble. They didn't come and cause problems.  They weren't cut any slack.  But I knew when they went home, they didn't live in environments that allowed them to sit and study or put money aside for encampments or other activities.  A few were not great students.  They joined the program and it provided the direction they needed.  We are talking about a couple cadets on a 35 cadet unit.  Not running a rec center where kids came and played ball and called me "Coach".  But I knew who the cadets were who were accomplishing a tremendous feat just by walking out their front doors with a CAP uniform on.  If that cadet chose to stay an A1C for a year, we encouraged and motivated. But it was Ok. Those 2 particular cadet are now in the Air Force.   

Keep running with your hardline CAP mindset. I'm sure there are people who enjoy it.   I don't have any need for it.

[Eclipse]

Keep running with your hardline CAP mindset. I'm sure there are people who enjoy it. 

How is this "my" mind set?  This is the program as written and put forth by NHQ.  It appears a lot of people forget that.
In most cases, I advocate simply following the program, because all the "local allowances" are what is driving this organization
into the ground on the whole through "death by a thousand cuts".

I also never said >you< were specifically running a rec center, I disagreed with your general statement that it was
OK for cadets with nowhere else to go to just come to meetings (which it isn't).  I further indicated that
waving a Merit or Distinction streamer as validation of your program, given the nature of that award, did not support
your argument.

I don't know you personally, but I feel I know you from your years of posting, and doubt very seriously that you personally
would ever run a substandard program, if I did I would make those accusations, or wouldn't say anything. 

That doesn't preclude me from making the general disagreement on principle that CAP should be run like a rec center
and kids allowed to come and go because they have "no where else to go". That's not what CAP is about.  I have personally
seen units run that way, to the ultimate detriment of a lot of people involved, because contrary to the belief of some Commanders,
units do not exist in a vacuum.

[Spam]

Any CP officer who has some experience has seen "fast burner" and "slow burner" cadets progress at different rates based on ability and desire. This can be seen as situationally good or bad on an individual or unit basis:

There are without question cadet units that are "fast burner" units, pushing promotions as rapidly as possible, sometimes without consideration to the maturity level of the cadets in question and their suitability for additional leadership. An abnormally high promotion rate is not, in my mind, an absolute quality index of the relative health of a cadet unit. After all, CAPP 52-15 Cadet Staff Handbook, Sec. 1.7, states, "School squadrons might never have a cadet advance beyond the Mitchell Award, which is fine because most middle school students lack the maturity required of cadet officers. But if the squadron strictly followed this handbook's guidelines, they would never have a cadet qualify for cadet commander. Therefore, the school unit commander might appoint several flight commanders, or a "cadet commander," but assign that top cadet flight commander-level responsibilities commensurate with their CAP grade and leadership abilities." If such a unit pushes cadets through as rapidly as ever possible based on "book learning" and scores without consideration for individual maturity and suitability for the grade, the probability of conflicts deepens where they are thrown into leadership waters too deep for their ability. I mention all this in context for my assertion that a least time "below the zone" promotion path is not necessarily always a great thing, and our program elements of record support that.


Some units are "slow burner" units, based sometimes on low expectations, low manning or external support, or low training to execute the missions. I have seen a handful of units with both urban and rural youth whose parents are frankly just happy to have their dependents in a safe activity program and not in gangs. That is fine, but, as has been said here, that is NOT the CAP Cadet Program of record:  we have an expectation not of simple participation as with a church or community youth group, but of rapid advancement through a structured program. It is in the Oath, which should be the wellspring source of inspiration and expectations (along with Core Values) for our cadet units. Bottom line: if your unit is active but your test average is low (verifiable through eServices reports) and you haven't had a reasonable number of cadet SNCOs and Officers lately, you're doing it wrong systematically and your expectations and methods need to be adjusted.


On the "slow burner" individual side, many of us have seen less capable cadets who, frankly, have managed to struggle through one or two promotions per year or less, but we would not dream of separating a cadet who gave it his all. Learning disabilities, family illnesses or divorce, a near total lack of parental support in some cases, lack of finances... the list of complexities in adolescent lives that could be valid reasons for the stops and starts of intermittent progress are many. Our responses to each individual cadets circumstance should therefore be on an individual basis, but should always promote the core Cadet Oath... defining "rapidly" as rapidly as possible given individual circumstances.


Where progressive discipline fits in then, (and a Form 2B action is ultimately a last disciplinary action to write off a failed cadet, NOT an action to fix a developmental or motivational problem) is when you have an adolescent "gaming" you and the system. I have denied cadets slots on field trips, O flight rosters, NESA and National Special Acts due to lack of effort to promote, in a few instances where the cadet only wanted activities out of the program. (Note again, lack of effort for their respective ability, not lack of promotions). I have even gone so far as to contact NHQ/CP to withdraw my permission as CC for a cadet slotted for an activity since he failed to live up to his promise to attend meetings regularly (in lieu of his competing robotics club, and yes, that slot went to some more deserving cadet in another Wing).  When you start digging into the whys of a cadets lack of advancement, you may be stunned at what you find... illiteracy in 10th grade, undiagnosed learning disabilities, etc. etc. Use of the Form 2B process should, in my view, be the nuclear option at the very end of a long program of progressively more involved nurturing and feedback (formally, with the required Form 50 Cadet Leadership Feedback, plus a multiple-witness board of review and direct counseling) up through progressively stiffer disciplinary actions. 


In short, I would recommend the use of multiple Form 50s and involved counseling to correct behavior before using a Form 2B to eliminate forever the chance to salvage a potentially good cadet. When you use a Form 2B, you are declaring failure.


V/R,
Spam

[Майор Хаткевич]

Pretty sure the spirit of the reg is to first ADDRESS the issue, and 2B in the case of "where's c/Jones? He renewed, but hasn't been here in almost a year, with zero progression", or "We've tried and tried to explain, but C/Smith just won't do his testing, even when we tried to make him study/work on it at the unit!".

[Eclipse]

SPAM pretty much nailed it, and I would re-enforce his post by saying that those cadets with little
support at home can still get things done on meeting nights.  Seriously, there are still a lot of cadets who
can't test at home, or won't, and still make good progress, and I would hazard the majority get most of their
academic info only at, and during meetings, this might be an issue in Phase III & IV, especially, but get the pip
and then worry about it.

And I really wish more CCs would consider who they are approving for activity participation with more care.
It's somewhat shocking how many cadets rise to a certain level, especially Mitchell, and then just check out
for anything but outside activities - cadets looking for command and staff jobs at encampments who haven't
even tried a test in a year.  "I was too busy at NESAPJOCHMRSNBBRCLSCOSMOUSE" or "I'm the unit
PAOESCOMMADMINSE and don't have time".  Failure all over the board with those, especially the latter.

Then people wonder why Phase II cadets are running units and encampments.

Pretty sure the spirit of the reg is to first ADDRESS the issue, and 2B in the case of "where's c/Jones? He renewed, but hasn't been here in almost a year, with zero progression", or "We've tried and tried to explain, but C/Smith just won't do his testing, even when we tried to make him study/work on it at the unit!".

+1 - perhaps it's the nature of the internet to assume things not in evidence, but that's always been my stance and assertion.

No one, at least not me, is proposing that cadets, or anyone else, is 2b'ed the first time they are 5 minutes late to a meeting,
but the members should be aware that this is a legitimate and ultimate option when expectations aren't met.

There's really no blanket policy possible for any of this beyond the fully legitimate empty shirts of people who have never and
will never participate, beyond that it is subjective to the respective CC's call, with the caveat that it should never be off the table
for reasons which are outside CAP's mission and mandates.

Perfect example of how these conversations evolve - at the last staff meeting, it came to light that at least 11 senior members
in my AOR have no level 1 recorded, all of who have been members-of-record for at least a calendar year, and some in excess of 18 months.
Interestingly, a couple of them are safety current, which means there is likely an "explanation" somewhere that involves a dog eating
paperwork, and we know a couple are recent dark-siders, but with that said, for those who wrote a check and can't even get L1 done in nearly 2 years, why would CAP even entertain the idea of retaining them?  At a minimum all of those members are, by default, Patron members.

Despite assertions to the contrary, managing the membership is one of a Commander's primary responsibilities, generally delegated to
Personnel, the problem is far too many CC's who simply don't want to be bothered.

The scary thing is we know we're going to find a fair number who have been participating as if they are actually authorized to participate ((*sigh*)).

[SARDOC]

Really???  A cadet doesn't promote twice a year and you want to 2b them?

What's your "real" reason for wanting to terminate them?  Cuz a 2b for not promoting fast enough is just plain bogus.

Honestly, I can see it both ways.  I see the two promotions a year as really strict for cadets who are actually benefitting from the program.  It's gives the local leaders of providing a definition of "progressing satisfactorily".  On the flip side, the cadet program is a leadership program, with the intent of developing young leaders.  If Cadets aren't progressing, they aren't necessarily developing or being put into positions that challenge their leadership abilities.

This program is more than a "Club", it's a Club that has a real mission.

[Garibaldi]

By this logic, I should have been bounced by 1983. Five years, four stripes, the fourth having come in '84 after serious cajoling from not only my peers but my father. I was a very active cadet but it was quite obvious to everyone that I wouldn't ever get the Mitchell. I promoted to C/Amn after about a year, then C/A1C about six months later. Had issues passing promo boards and not possessing the maturity to be an NCO, so that kind of killed my urge to promote. I tried for a 5th stripe but couldn't pass the AE test. So, there is motivation and there is motivation. Like I said, very active, not dead weight but looked sucky on paper.

[Майор Хаткевич]

By this logic, I should have been bounced by 1983. Five years, four stripes, the fourth having come in '84 after serious cajoling from not only my peers but my father. I was a very active cadet but it was quite obvious to everyone that I wouldn't ever get the Mitchell. I promoted to C/Amn after about a year, then C/A1C about six months later. Had issues passing promo boards and not possessing the maturity to be an NCO, so that kind of killed my urge to promote. I tried for a 5th stripe but couldn't pass the AE test. So, there is motivation and there is motivation. Like I said, very active, not dead weight but looked sucky on paper.

You certainly weren't active in the actual cadet program.

[Garibaldi]

By this logic, I should have been bounced by 1983. Five years, four stripes, the fourth having come in '84 after serious cajoling from not only my peers but my father. I was a very active cadet but it was quite obvious to everyone that I wouldn't ever get the Mitchell. I promoted to C/Amn after about a year, then C/A1C about six months later. Had issues passing promo boards and not possessing the maturity to be an NCO, so that kind of killed my urge to promote. I tried for a 5th stripe but couldn't pass the AE test. So, there is motivation and there is motivation. Like I said, very active, not dead weight but looked sucky on paper.

You certainly weren't active in the actual cadet program.

Very active in ES, but since that was pretty much my unit's raison d'etre, it was my default setting. AE, not so much. We had a program, flew an awful lot of o-flights. CP, yep. Drill team, encampments, morale boosting trips to Wright-Patterson, Fort Rucker, and other places in decent driving distance.

Disinterested in promoting does not necessarily equal disinterest in the cadet program. I participated actively in unit activities, obeyed my officers (most of the time), wore my uniform properly, attended meetings regularly (probably should have gotten a perfect attendance award), but advancing my education and training rapidly is up for debate.

[CadetSnuffy]

Another problem with cadets not promoting is when one cadet joins after another cadet and promotes a lot. The first cadet is still a C/Amn after a year, and the second is a C/SSgt. The first cadet asks why the second now has some sort of authority, since he joined first...

Time in CAP has little to do with leadership opportunities. It is difficult to have any authority as an airman, that must be earned. Show you are a leader, that you are dedicated to the program, then you can be given authority. I know too many cadets who have been in the cadet program actively for over two years longer than I have and have not even achieved the Wright Brothers award. The question I ask (silently) is, why are you in CAP for this long and haven't promoted? You should at least give an attempt to promote. I'm not sure I would 2B them, but it gets ridiculous after a while.

[AirAux]

Back in the 60's we were in it for the Khaki's, the cigarettes, and the beer.  And we turned out okay.. 

[deshazo]

I guess this is as good a place to say this as anywhere, although I could pick a few others.

I have been a lurker for quite some time.  I was a cadet a long time ago, and a senior member too.  One year as a senior member.  I came around here to take a look at the modern CAP, and considered rejoining.  After looking around, for maybe a year, this forum has changed my mind for me.

I was reminded why being a cadet, and senior member, was less than fun at times.  I have held back from saying anything for a long time.  What do I care?  I have no skin in the game.  This topic was it for me. 

Want a recruiting and retention tip?  It's people like Eclipse (and others like him), and their attitudes, that will always drive away people.  People will realize they have better things to do than waste time arguing with jerks, because you'll never win.  They're better at being a jerk, and will beat you with it.  Jerks almost always win out in CAP because less-jerky people who have lives outside of CAP, will move on, or never join.

One problem is people like him will never see it.  Maybe when they're going towards the light, they'll get it.

Now I've given you something to talk about other than uniforms, ribbons, decorations, and sniping each other.

[SarDragon]

Two things -

This forum isn't really representative of CAP as a whole. You're seeing a group of the more involved, vocal members.

The jerk to non-jerk ratio is lower than you might think. Check out a local unit and see what you will really be dealing with on a week-to-week basis. It will likely be something different from CAP Talk.

[Eclipse]

One year as a senior member. t's people like Eclipse (and others like him), and their attitudes, that will always drive away people.  People will realize they have better things to do than waste time arguing with jerks, because you'll never win.  They're better at being a jerk, and will beat you with it.  Jerks almost always win out in CAP because less-jerky people who have lives outside of CAP, will move on, or never join.

So, you can't make an argument, or have any relevent experience to base a counterpoint, you just don't like the fact that
people are discussing things on a discussion forum?

Since this is likely a drive-by and we won't hear from you again, the odds of a response are fairly low, but if you want to be taken seriously,
perhaps disagreeing on the points made, versus just making a personal attack will assist your credibility.

As SarDragon indicated, CAPTalk ≠ CAP, discussions like these rarely occur in meetings or activity environments,
which is part of the problem, because absent forums like this, a lot of the issues raised ad nauseum would be lost in the
"Every Thing Is Awesome" haze.

So make a point, or disagree on an issue, but if you just don't like it when people speak directly and don't back down when
they have relevent experience and data to back up their opinions, then perhaps you would be better served participating elsewhere.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Yea, I ran into this Eclipse jerk IRL once. He was such a massive Jerk that I've spent 10+ years in CAP than I otherwise would have...

[Garibaldi]

Eclipse a jerk? Nah. Just has some very strong and well-reasoned arguments backed up by years of experience.
IMO, people who have opinions and are vocal about them, who do NOT have the experience to back their arguments, are usually the jerks. Like...oh, I don't know...college kids who take 1 poli-sci course and immediately know how to fix the country, then spend the rest of their college career protesting and activisting all over the place instead of taking a good look around to see what the real issues are.

Sound somewhat familiar?

[NIN]

Back in the 60's we were in it for the Khaki's, the cigarettes, and the beer.  And we turned out okay..

Well, mostly okay...

[Garibaldi]

Back in the 60's we were in it for the Khaki's, the cigarettes, and the beer.  And we turned out okay..

Well, mostly okay...

That will be our entry in CAP Cadet History: Mostly Okay.

[Panzerbjorn]

Exactly what does it mean to run a cadet program like a rec center?  I'd be very interested to know that.

My squadron has a very successful DDR program, character development, produced last year's Regional Color Guard champions, a highly successful CyberPatriot team that has grown into two teams, a cadre of enthusiastic Rangers, a full cadet ground team, and produces more Green Light NCSA cadets than any other squadron in the Wing.  It never crosses our minds to warn cadets that if they don't promote twice a year, they're in danger of being 2B'd.  We maintain the attitude that we provide a program that positively influences the lives of our cadets.  So.....is that a rec center attitude?

Are we providing an alternate activity to drive-by shootings?  I would tend to think that our cadets aren't at-risk youth.  There's a leadership academy just down the road from us that their entire student population above the age of 12 are CAP cadets.  So, if they don't earn two promotions a year, they're in danger of being expelled from the academy?  My hunch tends to think not.

If the cadet isn't active and really have no interest in the program, yes, by all means have a chat with them and let them know that they may be happier being somewhere else than in CAP.  But if the cadet is active, happily participating, and contributing to the program, but isn't promoting, why would you want to even consider 2Bing them?

If the cadet is trying, and just not passing their tests, then truthfully, it's a failure on your part for not helping them succeed.  If you have a cadet that wants to participate in the program and activities, but not interested in promoting, then let them know that what activities they can participate in widen as they promote and more doors open.

2B as a last resort, and on a case by case basis.

[Майор Хаткевич]

...and advance my education and training rapidly...

There's a reason eservices has a report for "no promotions in 120 days".

Everything you listed is great, but it's supposed to be built on the actual CADET PROGRAM, which consists of the AE and Leadership books, PT, CD as the basic baseline.

[Panzerbjorn]

Yes, that reason is to know which cadets need some attention.  They'll get some counseling, encouragement, and see what we can do to help.

Okay, you have a cadet that has a hard time with PT and isn't eligible for a waiver. You're going to 2B a cadet who's active and benefits from the program because they have a hard time running a mile or doing push-ups?

Perhaps an appropriate first step would be to Form 50 the cadet and get a clearer picture of what's going on.

But what I staunchly disagree with is the blanket statement of "if they don't promote twice in a year, kick em out!"

[Майор Хаткевич]

Yes, that reason is to know which cadets need some attention.  They'll get some counseling, encouragement, and see what we can do to help.

Okay, you have a cadet that has a hard time with PT and isn't eligible for a waiver. You're going to 2B a cadet who's active and benefits from the program because they have a hard time running a mile or doing push-ups?

Perhaps an appropriate first step would be to Form 50 the cadet and get a clearer picture of what's going on.

But what I staunchly disagree with is the blanket statement of "if they don't promote twice in a year, kick em out!"

Perhaps reading would actually be of help. Because it's been stated numerous times, that before a 2B is taken, all efforts to help the cadet should be taken. No one is going to boot a kid struggling with PT,as long as he's actually trying to improve.

[Panzerbjorn]

Yes, that reason is to know which cadets need some attention.  They'll get some counseling, encouragement, and see what we can do to help.

Okay, you have a cadet that has a hard time with PT and isn't eligible for a waiver. You're going to 2B a cadet who's active and benefits from the program because they have a hard time running a mile or doing push-ups?

Perhaps an appropriate first step would be to Form 50 the cadet and get a clearer picture of what's going on.

But what I staunchly disagree with is the blanket statement of "if they don't promote twice in a year, kick em out!"

Perhaps reading would actually be of help. Because it's been stated numerous times, that before a 2B is taken, all efforts to help the cadet should be taken. No one is going to boot a kid struggling with PT,as long as he's actually trying to improve.

Did you mean to sound so condescending and patronizing, or was it an accident on your part?

[Eclipse]

Exactly what does it mean to run a cadet program like a rec center?  I'd be very interested to know that.

Hat, myself, and others on this board have direct contact and prolonged experience with the rec center mentality.

Units with large numbers of cadets who somehow magically all make their promotions and achievements to the day
of their eligibility, yet when challenged can't perform to 1/2 their grade level.  Clock to a diamond like a rocket and
then not a single one challenges Spaatz because that's the one place where a disinterested 3rd party would be
doing the examination. (Yes it was addressed up the chain, by a lot of people, no nothing is/was done.)

These units show up in force to wing activities like SARExs and encampments, only to wreck havoc because
neither the adult leadership from the unit, nor the cadets, are prepared for the environment, despite their age and
grade, because in many cases, they have never been asked to do some of the most basic cadet "stuff" that their peers
perform on a regular basis.

Then comes the disappointment on these cadets' faces when they see how they have been let down by their leadership,
and the pips and badges they have are meaningless.  Add the cherry on top of the behavioural issues that present themselves
when a large group of ill-prepared adolescents descend upon an unsuspecting activity, or when a Cadet Major who can't even
stand at attention properly is trying to "drill" his flight, when he's clearly never done anything close in his life.

It's not fair to anyone involved, and is a disservice to the cadet(s).

But what I staunchly disagree with is the blanket statement of "if they don't promote twice in a year, kick em out!"

Which is fine, I suppose, except it's been made clear several times that this isn't what is being espoused here, so
disagreeing with it insinuates we're supporting that.  No one here is.

With that said...

Everyone wants these badges, bling, and accomplishments to "mean something".  That requires that the respective
award or affiliation have expectations, and with expectations come the very real chance that some people won't
make a particular cut, or that they can't do everything.

Objective standards require lines be drawn somewhere, whether absolutes, or for conversation's sake, you have to have something,
yet the minute standards are discussed, there's always people who want to assume the worst edge-case scenario to make their argument.
Suggest two a year is a good measure, and you get people running to the stage thinking that on day 366 the 2b has already been processed, etc.

An expectation of two clicks a year for the average cadet is not unreasonable considering CAP's mission, and the way the
average adolescent's attention span can waver these days.  It's also a good general judge of a cadet's real progress and
interest.  Too many more then two a year and you have to start looking at whether the Unit CC has a happy pen,
too many fewer and you have to ask if the time invested by both the unit and the cadet is a good ROI.

The problem is that many Unit CCs don't want to even bother with that math.

[Panzerbjorn]

That's a much more meaningful response, Eclipse, than "Perhaps reading would help..." which throws up the defensive walls and raises the hackles.

That answer is also a good baseline for me too. We have a handful of cadets our of our 40 or so that show up regularly do promote every two months because they ARE high speed low drag cadets.  We also have some on the other side of the spectrum that would be a subject of this conversation.

As I write this, I'm sitting at the State EOC with some of my cadets as we have been asked to provide support to the emergency operations here for the next couple of days.  Really, all I'm here to do is be here to comply with CPPT regs, which says well of their capabilities.

So, good...by your definition, we don't have a rec center program.

[Майор Хаткевич]

That's a much more meaningful response, Eclipse, than "Perhaps reading would help..." which throws up the defensive walls and raises the hackles.

That answer is also a good baseline for me too. We have a handful of cadets our of our 40 or so that show up regularly do promote every two months because they ARE high speed low drag cadets.  We also have some on the other side of the spectrum that would be a subject of this conversation.

As I write this, I'm sitting at the State EOC with some of my cadets as we have been asked to provide support to the emergency operations here for the next couple of days.  Really, all I'm here to do is be here to comply with CPPT regs, which says well of their capabilities.

So, good...by your definition, we don't have a rec center program.

Defensive walls? That's what you got when you mischaracterized the discussion. I stand by my comment, no matter HOW you perceived it. Feel free to continue being indignant.

[Panzerbjorn]

Defensive walls? That's what you got when you mischaracterized the discussion. I stand by my comment, no matter HOW you perceived it. Feel free to continue being indignant.

Okay, at least now I know you were deliberately being a toolbag.  Noted.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Defensive walls? That's what you got when you mischaracterized the discussion. I stand by my comment, no matter HOW you perceived it. Feel free to continue being indignant.

Okay, at least now I know you were deliberately being a toolbag.  Noted.

If that's how you feel about it, whatever floats your boat.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Regular people in here know the rules, expectations, and behaviors and comments of others. It always amazes me when someone that has been posting regularly comes mid-post and gets offended when someone tells them "read the posts before your comment," or "answered sometime ago," etc. Ad nauseum, we read "already answered," etc.

[Pylon]

If we can't all be civil, then we can't continue the conversation.