Cadets in Assistant Duty Assignments

[SAR Officer]

I would like to ask a question on the Assistant Duty Assignments for Cadets?

Recently it has been brought to my attention that we can assign Cadets using either a CAPF 2a (not needed at wing level) Just for squadron Archives, or a  P.A., or list it on a CAPF 66 is what I heard from some other squadrons.....Has anyone else heard this?

[lordmonar]

Cadets my serve as assitants.

You should use a 2a for duty assignment (if you want to bother).

[SAR Officer]

Thank You Sir,


I planned on doing the 2a and probably list them on the F66....Just for Administration archives so when I do the POA for 2012 I can show the 2 cadets that want to do it being involved and assisting my AEO throughout AE activities....

[Woodsy]

Just a friendly warning/word of advice here...

If dealing with a composite squadron, make sure the senior member filling the "primary" roll is willing and/or able to have a cadet as an assistant.  Many composite squadrons are in reality a seperate senior and cadet squadron rolled into one, with senior members who have no interest in the cadet program and vise versa...  You can't force a senior member interested only in ES to mentor a cadet,  It just doesn't work 

That said, if a cadet wants to learn a certain position, let him handle that for the cadet side of the house, but don't make it the senior member's problem.


Personally, as a squadron and group PAO, I have very little interest in the cadet programs.  That said, I do my best to see that they get recognized, cover cadet events, and have no problem mentoring cadets in the position as much as I can. However, I have seen this arrangement turn ugly more than once, so just handle it delicately. 

[SAR Officer]

You are right on that.....One thing that really got this going was communications between Seniors and Cadets....A year ago we started having staff meetings every other meeting night and by including the Cadet staff in one meeting a month has allowed a better communications forum for the unit.....


It took time to get the bugs worked out.....But I guess we are a lucky unit because my officers see the programs as joint when it involves Cadets....Grant it we still have to keep the programs in check when it only involves Seniors....But we discussed it and the Senior counterparts are wanting to mentor the Cadets for those positions and we ran trials over the last few months and now we are making those positions for the Cadets available for a full test run as Assistant Cadet Staff.....I will post how it goes in the next few weeks after the holiday's of course.....

[EMT-83]

It's all well and good that cadets serve as assistants, but take care that their primary responsibility is to be a cadet and progress in the cadet program.

I've seen two cadets that were exposed to the dark side as assistants, and then wanted nothing to do with the cadet program. After hanging out with the donut-eaters, they found certain elements of the cadet program to be silly and had no interest.

[Extremepredjudice]

Not to hijack this thread, but can  cadets serve as assistant ES officer, if there isn't a SM as the ES officer?

I used ES as an example, obviously it could be anything.

I assume you could, but I dunno. I guess it depends on the position...

[lordmonar]

Not to hijack this thread, but can  cadets serve as assistant ES officer, if there isn't a SM as the ES officer?

I used ES as an example, obviously it could be anything.

I assume you could, but I dunno. I guess it depends on the position...

No.

an assistantnt....is an assistant to someone.......no bending the rules.
Point is....staff officer has authority over his area of specialisation....and cadets (except in a very few instances) can't have authority over senior members.

a) It is outside the scope of their program.
b) It screws up the chain of command too much.
c) If you don't have enought senior members to do the job you need to recruit more or scale back your operations.

[Ed Bos]

Not to be contentious, but I would be comfortable assigning a cadet as an Assistant Logistics Officer under a Squadron Deputy Commander or Squadron Commander if there was no primary Logistics Officer from the Senior Member side assigned.

[Extremepredjudice]

And what about something more "technical" (meaning it requires a level of knowledge that not everyone may possess [not everyone knows how to build websites, or how to provide tech support]) like IT? Or logistics officer? or [insert specialty here]?

I don't think the DCC or CC will be of much help in those cases.

[Ed Bos]

And what about something more "technical" (meaning it requires a level of knowledge that not everyone may possess [not everyone knows how to build websites, or how to provide tech support]) like IT? Or logistics officer? or [insert specialty here]?

I don't think the DCC or CC will be of much help in those cases.

I believe you're under the assumption that a supervisor needs to know everything about the technical aspects of the job someone is doing. It is often useful, but that's not necessarily the case.

You may often work for individuals who may not understand the subtleties or nuances of a project or program that you're working on. In that case part of your job is to respectfully translate the details into laymen's terms, and ensure that your boss gives you a clear picture of what they expect so that you can fulfill their directions.

I have had that experience personally, where I have tasked a subordinate to accomplish the task of turning in vehicles to the DRMO program, while I know nothing about the paperwork or details of how to accomplish that task. I clearly defined what I wanted done, and this person accomplished the task, while I still don't know HOW it was done.

Don't dismiss the job of your leadership just because they don't understand how to code a website. They will still be the person who tells you whether or not you did it right, even if they don't know how you did it. Just work hard to communicate clearly so that there are no surprises at the end of the day.

[Spaceman3750]

In the case of many duty assignments (we'll keep using LG as an example), someone has to be doing it. Whether it's the CC or SM Bagodoughnuts it's getting done somehow, so there's always going to be someone that the cadet can be paired with.

[Extremepredjudice]

And what about something more "technical" (meaning it requires a level of knowledge that not everyone may possess [not everyone knows how to build websites, or how to provide tech support]) like IT? Or logistics officer? or [insert specialty here]?

I don't think the DCC or CC will be of much help in those cases.

I believe you're under the assumption that a supervisor needs to know everything about the technical aspects of the job someone is doing. It is often useful, but that's not necessarily the case.

You may often work for individuals who may not understand the subtleties or nuances of a project or program that you're working on. In that case part of your job is to respectfully translate the details into laymen's terms, and ensure that your boss gives you a clear picture of what they expect so that you can fulfill their directions.

I have had that experience personally, where I have tasked a subordinate to accomplish the task of turning in vehicles to the DRMO program, while I know nothing about the paperwork or details of how to accomplish that task. I clearly defined what I wanted done, and this person accomplished the task, while I still don't know HOW it was done.

Don't dismiss the job of your leadership just because they don't understand how to code a website. They will still be the person who tells you whether or not you did it right, even if they don't know how you did it. Just work hard to communicate clearly so that there are no surprises at the end of the day.

Leadership isn't really the main topic of what we are discussing. We are talking about mentoring (which does have a bit of leadership).

You can't mentor someone if you don't know how to do the task! I can't waltz in and correct someone doing physics, if I don't know how. Even if I am their tutor, mentor, or whatever. Knowledge of the tasks are the key to mentoring someone.

I'd be willing to guess the average CC/DCC doesn't know enough about some things to provide a viable mentor.

Supervisor and mentor are two different animals. One means you are the boss of someone. You have hire/fire powers. The other you are teaching, if you don't like what they are doing, you correct it.  Supervisors don't need to know the technical details of stuff. A mentor does, a mentor is there to teach you a better way of doing things.

Layman terms are great. They are useful for communicating with someone that isn't proficient in whatever. You shouldn't need to use layman terms with your supervisor. He should teach you the technical mumbo-jumbo.

On a different note, the regs mention "cadet X officer" not "Assistant X officer."
So is the cadet's title C/X officer or Assistant X officer?

[Ed Bos]

Leadership isn't really the main topic of what we are discussing. We are talking about mentoring (which does have a bit of leadership).

You can't mentor someone if you don't know how to do the task! I can't waltz in and correct someone doing physics, if I don't know how. Even if I am their tutor, mentor, or whatever. Knowledge of the tasks are the key to mentoring someone.

I'd be willing to guess the average CC/DCC doesn't know enough about some things to provide a viable mentor.

Supervisor and mentor are two different animals. One means you are the boss of someone. You have hire/fire powers. The other you are teaching, if you don't like what they are doing, you correct it.  Supervisors don't need to know the technical details of stuff. A mentor does, a mentor is there to teach you a better way of doing things.

Layman terms are great. They are useful for communicating with someone that isn't proficient in whatever. You shouldn't need to use layman terms with your supervisor. He should teach you the technical mumbo-jumbo.

On a different note, the regs mention "cadet X officer" not "Assistant X officer."
So is the cadet's title C/X officer or Assistant X officer?

Leadership is EXACTLY what we are talking about. This isn't the right forum to go into great lengths of detail, but I am willing to describe what I'm talking about more if you care to PM me. I recommend that you bring this thread to your DCC or Leadership Officer and ask for their input, so they can better explain in person.

And as far as being taught the, "technical mumbo-jumbo," is concerned: if you're asking to be taught how to do web design at CAP, that's not really what the cadet program is for.

Go with the regs for the office titles. You're not wrong if you choose to follow them. I was using the term interchangeably, because I was thinking of non-primary-but-still-assigned functionaries in broader terms. The way I'm thinking about it, you can also have a new Senior Member assigned as an "assistant recruiting officer," when no primary recruiting officer is assigned if they're not ready to do all the paperwork without oversight.

[Ed Bos]

In the case of many duty assignments (we'll keep using LG as an example), someone has to be doing it. Whether it's the CC or SM Bagodoughnuts it's getting done somehow, so there's always going to be someone that the cadet can be paired with.

Glad to know I'm not alone on this train of  thought!

[Eclipse]

On a different note, the regs mention "cadet X officer" not "Assistant X officer."So is the cadet's title C/X officer or Assistant X officer?

Unless you are serving in one of the few recently instituted cadet staff positions such as Cadet Safety Officer or Cadet IT Officer,
you would be listed as "Assistant To The X Officer", not "Assistant X Officer".

The nuance here is that while cadets are allowed to provide assistance to basically anyone on staff, they are never posted as staffer of record
with regard to senior positions.  When someone is the "Deputy" or "Assistant" "X", the expectation is that person can generally act with all or most of the authority and responsibility delegated to that position, especially in the absence of the primary.

Not so with cadets. They can only be posted as "assistant to" "x", which is a helper assigned to a specific area, but generally has little or no authority in the area they are providing assistance.

An excellent example would be Logistics, which is primarily charged with taking personal responsibility for any equipment issued to, or otherwise acquired by, the squadron.  Cadets are not allowed to have CAP property issued to them, so they can't be responsible for it, nor can they issue it to anyone else, or conduct an ORMS inventory.  They could, of course, help physically count equipment, and perform other tasks in direct assistance to the Logistics Officer(s).

It should also be noted that the regulatory emphasis is on cadets working within the cadet program, not other administrative or operational jobs.
This is by design as that is where their focus should be.  As mentioned earlier, a big risk in getting younger cadets involved with senior staff duties is that they decide they like sitting on that side of the table and lose interest in their program.  I've sure we've all seen a few times when cadets involved too high on the senior side have disciplinary issues or attempt to assume roles that are inappropriate.

4-1. Cadet Organization and Staff. The unit commander assigns ranking cadets to the unit's cadet staff so they may put into practice the abstract leadership concepts they study in their textbooks. As discussed in paragraph 1-2, the opportunity to lead and challenge are key traits of cadet life. Commanders should encourage the maximum use of their cadets both in planning and conducting the Cadet Program. See CAPP 52-15 for guidance on cadet staff term limits, cadet staff selection procedures, and how the role of seniors changes as cadets advance.

a. Design Considerations. There is no standard organizational structure for a cadet staff. Each unit should design a staff structure that is appropriate for its mix of cadets, be the unit big or small, top-heavy or bottom heavy. See CAPP 52-15 for suggested cadet staff organizational structures, duty assignments appropriate for each cadet grade, and detailed position descriptions.

b. Advanced Positions. Cadets may not serve in any of the senior member staff positions listed in CAPR 20-1, Organization of Civil Air Patrol, but may serve as assistants to those officers. Phase I and II cadets who serve as staff assistants may not use that service to fulfill staff duty analysis requirements.

[Spaceman3750]

On a different note, the regs mention "cadet X officer" not "Assistant X officer."So is the cadet's title C/X officer or Assistant X officer?

Unless you are serving in one of the few recently instituted cadet staff positions such as Cadet Safety Officer or Cadet IT Officer,
you would be listed as "Assistant To The X Officer", not "Assistant X Officer".

The nuance here is that while cadets are allowed to provide assistance to basically anyone on staff, they are never posted as staffer of record
with regard to senior positions.  When someone is the "Deputy" or "Assistant" "X", the expectation is that person can generally act with all or most of the authority and responsibility delegated to that position, especially in the absence of the primary.

Not so with cadets. They can only be posted as "assistant to" "x", which is a helper assigned to a specific area, but generally has little or no authority in the area they are providing assistance.

An excellent example would be Logistics, which is primarily charged with taking personal responsibility for any equipment issued to, or otherwise acquired by, the squadron.  Cadets are not allowed to have CAP property issued to them, so they can't be responsible for it, nor can they issue it to anyone else, or conduct an ORMS inventory.  They could, of course, help physically count equipment, and perform other tasks in direct assistance to the Logistics Officer(s).

It should also be noted that the regulatory emphasis is on cadets working within the cadet program, not other administrative or operational jobs.
This is by design as that is where their focus should be.  As mentioned earlier, a big risk in getting younger cadets involved with senior staff duties is that they decide they like sitting on that side of the table and lose interest in their program.  I've sure we've all seen a few times when cadets involved too high on the senior side have disciplinary issues or attempt to assume roles that are inappropriate.

4-1. Cadet Organization and Staff. The unit commander assigns ranking cadets to the unit's cadet staff so they may put into practice the abstract leadership concepts they study in their textbooks. As discussed in paragraph 1-2, the opportunity to lead and challenge are key traits of cadet life. Commanders should encourage the maximum use of their cadets both in planning and conducting the Cadet Program. See CAPP 52-15 for guidance on cadet staff term limits, cadet staff selection procedures, and how the role of seniors changes as cadets advance.

a. Design Considerations. There is no standard organizational structure for a cadet staff. Each unit should design a staff structure that is appropriate for its mix of cadets, be the unit big or small, top-heavy or bottom heavy. See CAPP 52-15 for suggested cadet staff organizational structures, duty assignments appropriate for each cadet grade, and detailed position descriptions.

b. Advanced Positions. Cadets may not serve in any of the senior member staff positions listed in CAPR 20-1, Organization of Civil Air Patrol, but may serve as assistants to those officers. Phase I and II cadets who serve as staff assistants may not use that service to fulfill staff duty analysis requirements.

The last time I issued equipment in ORMS it stated that if the member being issued equipment is under 18, it will spit out an agreement which must be signed by the cadet's parents and uploaded. Leading me to believe that you CAN issue equipment to cadets.

[Eclipse]

The last time I issued equipment in ORMS it stated that if the member being issued equipment is under 18, it will spit out an agreement which must be signed by the cadet's parents and uploaded. Leading me to believe that you CAN issue equipment to cadets.

I haven't ever tried to do it based on our wing's policies making it verboten. 

I can't see too many parents signing for a $2500 radio or $1000 notebook computer, etc., nor is it a good idea to be
expecting a non-member to be responsible for CAP property.

c. Since minors (individuals under the age of 18 years) cannot legally obligate themselves,
when non-expendable property is to be issued to an individual under the age of 18, ORMS will
generate a property receipt to be co-signed by the individual's parent(s) or legal guardian(s).  When
the signed property receipt is received and scanned into ORMS, the property issue transaction will be
completed.  Following these guidelines, individuals under the age of 18 years are not permitted to
hold logistics, supply, transportation or communications duty positions that include ORMS
permissions to transfer, issue or assign property

[Extremepredjudice]

With all due respect Major,

Leadership is EXACTLY what we are talking about.

I agree.

I recommend that you bring this thread to your DCC or Leadership Officer and ask for their input, so they can better explain in person.

Blank stares, and a "now what?"

And as far as being taught the, "technical mumbo-jumbo," is concerned: if you're asking to be taught how to do web design at CAP, that's not really what the cadet program is for.

I had no intention or thought of being taught web design by someone in CAP. I already can design on a professional level (other than images).
Here, sir, this is a project I worked on briefly before they decided to fire everyone[including volunteers] that mattered, and hire 10 marketing guys (Titan Gaming can't run a business to save their lives). http://beta.xfire.com/

During this time I answered technical support for Xfire Inc. (I had 23k posts, in the tech forum alone) (when owned by MTV/Viacom). After which they made me head of their beta testing team, and I formed an alpha testing team. After which I was allowed to work with their staff, and program on their IM client. I fixed glitches and added 3rd party IM client support

I can program in C++, C, Python, (hate this language, it is pointless) JavaScript, and C#. I can design websites in CSS, HTML, PHP, MySQL, and good ol' Java.

Would you agree that I know a little more than the average person?

Let's try creative role-playing. Say you and I are in the same squadron. I am assigned C/ITO. You are my mentor (cause for the sake of this you are DCC or CC.).

Oh noes, I ran into a problem designing the squadron's website. I come to you as my mentor, and ask "what is wrong with this code?"

<div id="content">
   <?php
   // Query database for Page Name text
   $dbQueryString = "SELECT FROM Example_Page WHERE content_id='1'";
   
   // Run query
   $dbQuery = $dbConn->query($dbQueryString);
   
   // If error
   if((int) $dbConn->affected_rows === -1) {
      exit("Database query error.");
   }
   
   // Fetch results
   $dbQueryResults = $dbQuery->fetch_assoc();
   $introPageBody = stripslashes($dbQueryResults['content_text']);
   ?>

One last question, and I would appreciate an answer: How can you mentor someone in something you have no idea how to do?
If I can't tie my shoe, I can't mentor someone on how to tie their shoe.

[lordmonar]

And what about something more "technical" (meaning it requires a level of knowledge that not everyone may possess [not everyone knows how to build websites, or how to provide tech support]) like IT? Or logistics officer? or [insert specialty here]?

I don't think the DCC or CC will be of much help in those cases.

Cadet can be assigned the task of making and updateing the web page...or inventoring the supply room with out being assigned as assitant anything.

The assingment to a duty position...is not just giveing the task to someone...but giving them the authority (read as power) to get the job done.
It does no one any good to assign responsiblity with out also giveing them the authority to do the job.....and cadets by definition (except in a few ES cases) cannot hold that authority.

[Eclipse]

Being a squadron ITO is about more than programming a website, and that's the rub.

[Ed Bos]

Blank stares, and a "now what?"

One last question, and I would appreciate an answer: How can you mentor someone in something you have no idea how to do?
If I can't tie my shoe, I can't mentor someone on how to tie their shoe.

To the first part I quoted above, that's a shame, I hope you just caught them off guard.

To the latter, I'll PM you so we don't drag this out further.

[lordmonar]

Leadership isn't really the main topic of what we are discussing. We are talking about mentoring (which does have a bit of leadership).

You can't mentor someone if you don't know how to do the task!

Absolutley WRONG.....

I can't waltz in and correct someone doing physics, if I don't know how. Even if I am their tutor, mentor, or whatever. Knowledge of the tasks are the key to mentoring someone.

No...but you can certainly manage and lead those physists.

I'd be willing to guess the average CC/DCC doesn't know enough about some things to provide a viable mentor.

Again...you are confusing the idea of a mentor and a trainer. 

Supervisor and mentor are two different animals. One means you are the boss of someone. You have hire/fire powers. The other you are teaching, if you don't like what they are doing, you correct it.  Supervisors don't need to know the technical details of stuff. A mentor does, a mentor is there to teach you a better way of doing things.

Nope...you understand neither role of supervisor or the role of a mentor.  Supervisors...do just what they say.  They monitor your work, make sure you are meeting your task goals and dead lines....they are the primary point of contact to the rest of the organisation to get help with road blocks.  Mentors are there to help you develope as a leader.  They don't teach.  The provide support, the provide guidance...but they don't teach you technical stuff.

NOW.....often...the roles of trainer, mentor and supervisor are often combined into the same person....the USAF uses this model for the most part...but not always.  When I was a MSgt I had a Major who was my supervisor, but my trainer was a SSgt and my mentor was a CMSgt.....but when I was an SrA my mentor, trainer and supervisor were all the same SSgt.

In the buisness world...you are often supervised by someone other then your mentor, and both of them may not a thing about how to do your job (right now neither my mentor nor my supervisor are qualified to do my job as a Ground Control Segment technican).

Officers in the USAF almost always have zero clue on how to do your job.....but they are still your supervisor.

Layman terms are great. They are useful for communicating with someone that isn't proficient in whatever. You shouldn't need to use layman terms with your supervisor. He should teach you the technical mumbo-jumbo.

And yet you will be required, no matter where you end up working, have to deal with the fact that your mentor and/or supervisor may not know what the heck you are talking about.

On a different note, the regs mention "cadet X officer" not "Assistant X officer."
So is the cadet's title C/X officer or Assistant X officer?

With in the structure of the CADET program you can have any title you want.  Cadet Admin Officer takes care of all the admin functions for the cadet corps......he may also hold the assitant admin officer for the whole squadron.....but he can't be the squadron admin officer.

[tsrup]

Extreme,

If you want to be the squadron ITO, then why don't you just become a senior member?

You're obviously tired of the restrictions of responsibility placed on cadets,  why don't you come play the game for real, and have your name put on stuff.  So when things are screwed up, Wing crawls down your throat.

THAT, is really why there are no squadron cadet positions.  Because at the end of the day someone has to be responsible for what happens, and cadets aren't able to accept that responsibility.

[lordmonar]

One last question, and I would appreciate an answer: How can you mentor someone in something you have no idea how to do?
If I can't tie my shoe, I can't mentor someone on how to tie their shoe.

Mentoring is not the same as training.

I train you to do something.  Mentoring is about is about providing support, and guidance.  It only requires experince, a knowledge of the workings of the company and an understanding of the buisness environment.  It does not require an expert knowledge of the task at hand.

Now...it certainly helps if your supervisor and/or mentor are just as versed in the mechanics of the task as you are....but it is not necessary.
A Cadet Programs officer does not need to know how to drill and ceremonies in order to effective supervise his cadets and mentor his cadet officers.  Same is true for just about any other discipline.....especaially the Air Force.  Wing Commanders are 99% most likely to be pilots...fighter pilots at that.  Most of them have never had to supervise any more people then 2-3 other pilots until they are Lt Cols when they get a whole squadron and now they have to deal with enlisted guys!  The wing commander knows zero about satellite communications....and yet he is ultimaly my supervisor...He has to supervise Support Group Commander who has to supervise the Cops, Civil Engineering, Supply, Services, Communications et al.  He may be a pilot himself, or he may have come up through services, CE, Suppy or SF or Comm.....but just as likely to have come over from operations.  The Comm Squadron commander may be a network guy, or an ex air crew guy or an intell weenie....or maybe an ex comm maintenance officer....then there is me a MSgt who by regulations does not have to be qualifed on the systems he is responsible for maintaining.  As a Satellite, Wideband And Telemetry Systems specialist...I could have spent my entire career working on large fixed satellite facilities, or on mobile tropo equipment, or man portable satt comm, or working the R&D area doing testing that had nothing to do with radios.......and yet all of these people are responsible for supervising and mentoring their subordinates....even if they don't talk the talk.

So...bottom line, is that you need to break this ideal that mentoring and supervision is the same as training.   Having the BTDT knowledge certainly helps....but it is no 100% necessary.

The other side of that coin is the attitude I have encountered a few times where people think that technical knowledge is the only criteria for selecting supervisors.  I can't tell you how many times I have encountered people who say things like "I don't know how he can be in charge, he does not know a thing about XXXX (insert technical knowledge here)!"

Don't fall into that trap either.

[Extremepredjudice]

Mentor is defined as "a wise and trusted counselor or teacher" Teacher is "a person who teaches  or instructs, especially as a profession; instructor." training is defined as "the education, instruction, or discipline of a person or thing that is being trained"

Supervise is defined as "to oversee (a process, work, workers, etc.) during execution or performance; superintend; have the oversight and direction of."

Therefore, if mentor is defined as a teacher, and a teacher is an instructor, and instruction is part of the definition of training, than you guys are operating on a logical fallacy. Sorry, but with all due respect, if you can come up with an argument that isn't based on a fallacy than I would enjoy debating this further.


Supervising and mentoring are different animals, just as I said. You can be both. I never said you couldn't. Training is mentoring. As I proved above.

Blank stares, and a "now what?"

One last question, and I would appreciate an answer: How can you mentor someone in something you have no idea how to do?
If I can't tie my shoe, I can't mentor someone on how to tie their shoe.

To the first part I quoted above, that's a shame, I hope you just caught them off guard.

Nah.

Extreme,

If you want to be the squadron ITO, then why don't you just become a senior member?

You're obviously tired of the restrictions of responsibility placed on cadets,  why don't you come play the game for real, and have your name put on stuff.  So when things are screwed up, Wing crawls down your throat.

THAT, is really why there are no squadron cadet positions.  Because at the end of the day someone has to be responsible for what happens, and cadets aren't able to accept that responsibility.

Well first there is a problem of age. Second, I don't really want to be the squadron ITO. (I was planning on building a site, and donating it, but that is just boredom.) Third, I believe we have an ITO.

I am using ITO as an example because I have the best knowledge of it. I can talk about it the most, and I have experience with related items.

But sure, if you can figure out a way to make me a Senior Member, I will take you up on your challenge.

Being a squadron ITO is about more than programming a website, and that's the rub.

When did I say it was only about designing a website? Yes, I have been using that as an example. But never have I said something like that.

[tsrup]

Extreme,

If you want to be the squadron ITO, then why don't you just become a senior member?

You're obviously tired of the restrictions of responsibility placed on cadets,  why don't you come play the game for real, and have your name put on stuff.  So when things are screwed up, Wing crawls down your throat.

THAT, is really why there are no squadron cadet positions.  Because at the end of the day someone has to be responsible for what happens, and cadets aren't able to accept that responsibility.

Well first there is a problem of age. Second, I don't really want to be the squadron ITO. (I was planning on building a site, and donating it, but that is just boredom.) Third, I believe we have an ITO.

I am using ITO as an example because I have the best knowledge of it. I can talk about it the most, and I have experience with related items.

But sure, if you can figure out a way to make me a Senior Member, I will take you up on your challenge.

I was under the (obviously false) impression that you were over the age of 18 from some of your earlier posts in other threads.

If you're not old enough, you're not old enough. 


My point still stands.  Cadets cant head up these squadron positions because most of the time they aren't old enough to legally accept the responsibility.

A supervisor can delegate the authority to do a project, but what separates the supervisor from you, is if things go south, he/she still is ultimately responsible for what happens.

[NCRblues]

"hello, I am Dwight Schrute, assistant regional manager" ~ Dwight

"no, he is the assistant TO THE regional manager...big difference Dwight" ~ Michael Scott

[lordmonar]

Granted a mentor is a teacher.....but not in necessarily in a technical field.

He certainly can be....but more often then not he is an experrenced hand in the general area that one is seeking mentorship in.

And a supervisor certainly oversees the work of a subordinate....but again that does not necessarilly mean that he is a technical expert in that work.  Again it is a definate benifit...but not necessary.

A squadron commander in CAP is not an expert in all the areas that a squadron must do.  It is just impossible.  He hires individuals to be the SME's in each area and supervises them as they do the work.

If anything you have the roles reversed.  A mentor with no technical knowledge is less of a problem then a supervisor with no technical knowledge.....and neither of them are always tasked with providing technical knowledge.  I know that my current supervisor could not train me and I know that those I go for mentorship absolutly have no technical know how in my current work.

I can still learn from them...but I learn leadership, management and other skills that make me a better asset to the company....but not a better technican.

And finally as tsrup said....cadets cannot by regulation, role, and maturity be the primary for any area with a CAP squadron.  This is not to say they are not useful....it is just the way things are.

[EMT-83]

... and in the real world, life doesn't always mirror a textbook.

[Eclipse]

A squadron commander in CAP is not an expert in all the areas that a squadron must do.  It is just impossible.  He hires individuals to be the SME's in each area and supervises them as they do the work.

If anything you have the roles reversed.  A mentor with no technical knowledge is less of a problem then a supervisor with no technical knowledge.....and neither of them are always tasked with providing technical knowledge.  I know that my current supervisor could not train me and I know that those I go for mentorship absolutly have no technical know how in my current work.

I can still learn from them...but I learn leadership, management and other skills that make me a better asset to the company....but not a better technican.

Put the bold part on the front of a t-shirt, and the rest on the back.

[jimmydeanno]

Even in the IT field, I would not consider my "mentor" to be the person that I go to for troubleshooting issues.  Anyone can do that.  Your mentor is someone you should pick to help you with your personal development.  Perhaps they provide insight and guidance to you as you pursue a job they have, give suggestions, help you navigate through difficult choices, identify skill sets you should develop, and can point you in the right direction when you hit hard times.

There was an AF Wing Commander that I heard speak once, who related that his mentor was his grandmother.  He'd call her to ask her what she thought about personnel issues, leadership stuff, things related to his family, among other things.  Do you think she knew how to be a Wing Commander?  Probably not, but she'd been around the block a few times when it came to dealing with people, she'd had her share of hard times, and fallout, and could provide him with just enough insight so he could view the problem from the direction that he was missing.  That person, who had no first-hand experience in leading an AF wing somehow was able to provide guidance and relevant information.

A mentor certainly does not have to be an expert in the field.  They are just someone who you trust with your goals, interests, and even problems.  You can even have more than one if you want - just in case you need a mentor to teach you about web design.

That idea that the mentor is a teacher, doesn't necessarily mean that they are technical gurus that instruct C#, or a graphic design, but that they are someone you can learn something from.  As long as there is an information exchange, they have met the "teacher" "requirement."

[Eclipse]

^ This is a difficult thing to understand, especially for young people new to the universe and people who haven't had experience in management.

In most cases a manager manages process and people, he does not turn the wrenches.  Payroll, performance reviews, production plans, etc.
It's the indirect leadership styles taught in the later phases of the CP.  I've seen it far too many times - a hot poop wrench turner reaches
the point in his career that it's time to "move up", and some just have no tolerance for things that don't respond immediately to their input.

And that's fine, not all good techs can be managers, and certainly not all managers can be techs.  Neither can exist without the other.  CAP fails
in the assumption by many that these skills are interchangeable and exist in equal quantities in everyone.

[JeffDG]

^ This is a difficult thing to understand, especially for young people new to the universe and people who haven't had experience in management.

In most cases a manager manages process and people, he does not turn the wrenches.  Payroll, performance reviews, production plans, etc.
It's the indirect leadership styles taught in the later phases of the CP.  I've seen it far too many times - a hot poop wrench turner reaches
the point in his career that it's time to "move up", and some just have no tolerance for things that don't respond immediately to their input.

And that's fine, not all good techs can be managers, and certainly not all managers can be techs.  Neither can exist without the other.  CAP fails
in the assumption by many that these skills are interchangeable and exist in equal quantities in everyone.

+1

And just to make a point that grates on me about "IT Officer does the website".  Honestly, I don't care a whit if an ITO can create a website.  It's about "information", period.  Getting the information people need to the places they need it when they need it.  If you have to contract out building a website for that, great.  But you need to understand information first and foremost as an ITO.  The technology, as implied by the name, is secondary.

[Eclipse]

The technology, as implied by the name, is secondary.

Wow and a half, exactly.

The information needed to convey to the viewer should inform the tech, not the other way around.  I can't count the number of CAP (and other) websites and projects overly complicated and wrapped around the axle because of someone's personal tie to a particular technology.

By far the majority of CAP units, and nearly every echelon could do more than well with template-based sites like Blogger or Sites, and concentrate on the content.

[Spaceman3750]

In my squadron the responsibility for the website is supposed to be split. The ITO is responsible for the mechanics of the website and the PAO is responsible for the content. This was originally accomplished through a "web team" that I created consisting of three people with the PAO as the head. My intention was that they would collaborate independently and return a finished product on a two-month timeline.

[Extremepredjudice]

^ This is a difficult thing to understand, especially for young people new to the universe and people who haven't had experience in management.

Dear sir, do you know what I do all day? That question goes for everyone on this forum.
I'm afraid to say you don't. Therefore, I can't accept your statement because it is built on the assumption I know nothing about management, and have no experience with it. Even if the statement is true, it is an assumption.

In most cases a manager manages process and people, he does not turn the wrenches.  Payroll, performance reviews, production plans, etc.

Yes, I agree. That is the roll of a supervisor, IMHO.

I've seen it far too many times - a hot poop wrench turner reaches
the point in his career that it's time to "move up", and some just have no tolerance for things that don't respond immediately to their input.

I assume you are talking about me. I have extremely high levels of tolerance. The only things I don't have tolerance for is fallacies and lying.

After months of logic-based, well reasoned, and well articulated arguments, my suggestions have been rejected on the premise of, in essence, not changing the status quo, I do tend to get a little frustrated. It is my experience that this is normal. (If it isn't than a lot of stuff I've learned is wrong.) I stand by what I have done and said. If you want to discuss this, or inquire about this, I ask we do it in a private setting.

And that's fine, not all good techs can be managers, and certainly not all managers can be techs.  Neither can exist without the other.  CAP fails
in the assumption by many that these skills are interchangeable and exist in equal quantities in everyone.

True, but some managers can be techs. Some techs can be managers. It isn't black or white; either or.

By far the majority of CAP units, and nearly every echelon could do more than well with template-based sites like Blogger or Sites, and concentrate on the content.

It conveys a level of... how do I say this? laziness, we can't build our own site. Unprofessional, professionals would be able to build their own site. That isn't really what I want to say, but for some reason I can't come up with the correct words. It just annoys me that they are to lazy to pay the 1000$(average price for a good site) to build their own. They just go use some POS product some corporation built. They use a cookie-cutter product rather than come up with something on their own. I can understand some things, like calenders, forums, etc.

Besides, if I want to take your statement literal, most designers build their sites via templates.

In my squadron the responsibility for the website is supposed to be split. The ITO is responsible for the mechanics of the website and the PAO is responsible for the content. This was originally accomplished through a "web team" that I created consisting of three people with the PAO as the head. My intention was that they would collaborate independently and return a finished product on a two-month timeline.

Great idea, and I hope it works out for your squadron. The ITO shouldn't really be responsible for content. Neither is updating the site.

Since the website is your online public face, kudos for putting the PAO on it.

[Eclipse]

Extreme,

You've indicated here that you are a cadet too young to go senior, so regardless of "what you do all day", it's not going to be very relevant in
terms of experience. 

As to the custom vs. template argument, sorry, the needs and capabilities of the customer come far before the desire to do things "custom".
In CAP's case, the need is for clear, simple, conveyance of information, hosted at a member-agnostic facility, provided in a way which costs
little to nothing, and which can be updated and edited by anyone with no special skills.

Anything else is wasted effort, overkill, and dies the minute the "custom guy" gets a new CAP job, decides he's "tired of it", or leaves CAP.

A $1000 to devel a custom site?  Seriously?  That's twice the operating budget of most units, not to mention borderline an FW&A.  You don't
pay for things you can do just as well, or better, for free, just to make it kewl.

CAP is not a code shop, and no one joins to discuss PHP or CSS.  I know it's frustrating - Comm guys want the world to be all about the radios,
IT people the websites, pilots...heh, they like their airplanes, but it's not about any of those "things" - they are just tools to accomplish the mission,
which isn't actually about "radios", "websites", or even ((*gasp*)) airplanes.

[Extremepredjudice]

You've indicated here that you are a cadet too young to go senior, so regardless of "what you do all day", it's not going to be very relevant in
terms of experience. 

uh-huh. Sir, I manage 20-200 people. I have done so for 4 years. For a total of over 7000 hours. If you think that gives weight let me know. That is just one thing I do all day.

As to the custom vs. template argument, sorry, the needs and capabilities of the customer come far before the desire to do things "custom".

I agree. I am talking about things like tumblr. That vs something someone made. Tumblr would lose, always.

In CAP's case, the need is for clear, simple, conveyance of information, hosted at a member-agnostic facility, provided in a way which costs
little to nothing, and which can be updated and edited by anyone with no special skills.

all of my sites are able to be updated by the admins. The admins can add/remove anyone. The only things the admin needs is their web browser and a keyboard.
I keep an account, and I keep a test admin account, in case of a problem.The reason WordPress is so widely used is it provides a tool for designers to do the same thing, but easier.

Anything else is wasted effort, overkill, and dies the minute the "custom guy" gets a new CAP job, decides he's "tired of it", or leaves CAP.

agreed, see above item for my codicil.

A $1000 to devel a custom site?  Seriously?  That's twice the operating budget of most units, not to mention borderline an FW&A. 

I was ranting about sites in general. Not really CAP. FYI 1k is cheap for a good site, really good designers are usually 1000-5000. Over 5000 it starts to become cheaper to hire them on as part of your company.

You don't
pay for things you can do just as well, or better, for free, just to make it kewl.

I guess individuality is out the window.

I think you think I am some teenager that cares more about "cool factor" than functionality. I am the total opposite. Functionality is my main goal. It is my first thought when I sit down with customers. Coolness only affects my work when I am coding against friends.

CAP is not a code shop, and no one joins to discuss PHP or CSS.  I know it's frustrating - Comm guys want the world to be all about the radios,
IT people the websites, pilots...heh, they like their airplanes, but it's not about any of those "things" - they are just tools to accomplish the mission,
which isn't actually about "radios", "websites", or even ((*gasp*)) airplanes.

we all have our likes and dislikes. We also have what we are good at. I am good at IT. you may be good at eating doughtnuts.  I have no idea. If what I am good at will help my squadron I will do it.  This thing grew out of my claim that cadets can run a directorate, such as IT, without SM mentors. Supervisor, manager, or boss, yes they need that. Not necessarily a mentor though. Remember, mentor = teacher. 

I still believe this. We are definitly off topic, now... At least we aren't discussing uniforms.

[tsrup]

You've indicated here that you are a cadet too young to go senior, so regardless of "what you do all day", it's not going to be very relevant in
terms of experience. 

uh-huh. Sir, I manage 20-200 people. I have done so for 4 years. For a total of over 7000 hours. If you think that gives weight let me know. That is just one thing I do all day.

you've been managing 20-400 people since you were 13 (at the oldest)...

[Extremepredjudice]

You've indicated here that you are a cadet too young to go senior, so regardless of "what you do all day", it's not going to be very relevant in
terms of experience. 

uh-huh. Sir, I manage 20-200 people. I have done so for 4 years. For a total of over 7000 hours. If you think that gives weight let me know. That is just one thing I do all day.

you've been managing 20-400 people since you were 13 (at the oldest)...

20-200, yes. It is a position in juvenile justice.

[Eclipse]

?

[NCRblues]

I'm going to go ahead and throw the BS flag on this one.

A 13 year old is not going to be supervising 20-200 people. Nope....


and if so, please give me the number of the "justice" system you work for. I will have some strong words for those officials that would even think to allow that to happen.

[tsrup]

You've indicated here that you are a cadet too young to go senior, so regardless of "what you do all day", it's not going to be very relevant in
terms of experience. 

uh-huh. Sir, I manage 20-200 people. I have done so for 4 years. For a total of over 7000 hours. If you think that gives weight let me know. That is just one thing I do all day.

you've been managing 20-400 people since you were 13 (at the oldest)...

20-200, yes. It is a position in juvenile justice.

and this is a paid position?  And of which you were held personally liable and accountable for all 20-400 people?

[Extremepredjudice]

You've indicated here that you are a cadet too young to go senior, so regardless of "what you do all day", it's not going to be very relevant in
terms of experience. 

uh-huh. Sir, I manage 20-200 people. I have done so for 4 years. For a total of over 7000 hours. If you think that gives weight let me know. That is just one thing I do all day.

you've been managing 20-400 people since you were 13 (at the oldest)...

20-200, yes. It is a position in juvenile justice.

and this is a paid position?  And of which you were held personally liable and accountable for all 20-400 people?

No it isn't paid. Yes I am accountable.

The point of the program is for juveniles to be sentenced by their peers. It is extremely successful, and has now become an international program, with programs in the UK and france.

[NCRblues]

No, your not accountable.

From the National center of state courts.

"Teen courts are staffed by youth volunteers who serve in various capacities within the program, trained and acting in the roles of jurors, lawyers, bailiffs, clerks and judges. Teen courts usually function in cooperation with local juvenile courts and youth detention centers, middle and high schools, and/or community organizations such as the YMCA. Most teen courts are sentencing courts in which the offender has already admitted guilt or pled no contest."

From the National association of youth courts

"The average amount of training that most youth court volunteers receive is 10 hours."

From Missouri case law books

"These programs are administered
directly by juvenile courts or juvenile probation departments."

[Extremepredjudice]

No, your not accountable.

From the National center of state courts.

"Teen courts are staffed by youth volunteers who serve in various capacities within the program, trained and acting in the roles of jurors, lawyers, bailiffs, clerks and judges. Teen courts usually function in cooperation with local juvenile courts and youth detention centers, middle and high schools, and/or community organizations such as the YMCA. Most teen courts are sentencing courts in which the offender has already admitted guilt or pled no contest."

From the National association of youth courts

"The average amount of training that most youth court volunteers receive is 10 hours."

From Missouri case law books

"These programs are administered
directly by juvenile courts or juvenile probation departments."

I've recieved more than 10 hours of training.

I'd disagree on the accountable part, (personal experience dictates otherwise.) but hey, now you can't call my B.S.  :angel:

I still have a managerial position there. By the by, what you quoted is missing a lot of positions...

[lordmonar]

While I am sure that you are learning a lot with the youth court....and CAP.  You still have to learn that there is still a lot to learn.

You are setting yourself up for failure.

Don't be come the big frog in the little pond.

[tsrup]

Extreme,

From what you've described, you're a volunteer program that provides you with an opportunity to lead or manage a multitude of similarly aged and motivated individuals (which is in and of itself commendable)

Which can be said about any CAP cadet.

Or any CAP Senior Member, many of whom have been doing this for a lot longer than 4 years.


This isn't a debate on agesim, it is a debate on experience.  Generally when those who have had 20 years of experience tell you something isn't so, they very well could be right.  But when others agree, and you find your viewpoint in the minority, it's time to call it a day.  And right now you have easily over 60+ years of leadership experience in various facets of professional and volunteer organizations telling you that what you think is correct, isn't.


Unfortunately this is one of those cases where we hate to say it, but it is true:  You'll understand when you're older.  Not because you will physically be older, but because you will have gained an even larger and diverse experience.  Which I'm sure you will if you continue to stay as motivated as you are now.

Stick it out, and just chalk this up as another lessoned learned.  Even if you don't agree with it right away.

[JeffDG]

And another point you tend to learn from management in the real world is resource management.

Yep, we could spend a bunch of time on cool websites.  But the purpose of the website is simply to disseminate information.  The cool, fancy features tend to detract from it.

And the time spent on making the custom website, over the simple template website, is time that could have been spent furthering one of our actual missions.  Time is the most valuable commodity in existence, because everyone has a finite, unknown, quantity of it.  Website design is not a mission.  AE, CP and ES are.

[Extremepredjudice]

I'll say this again: I don't believe ITO is sooo important. I am merely using it as an example to support my thesis.
My thesis is, again: Cadets can run some SM positions without a SM mentor.

While I am sure that you are learning a lot with the youth court....and CAP.  You still have to learn that there is still a lot to learn.

You are setting yourself up for failure.

Don't be come the big frog in the little pond.

I assume you are saying I have a big ego. I was merely disproving Eclipse's claim that I had little or no experience with management. I gave you guys one of my experiences. Since I have a big ego, should I list them all? Maybe I should list more of my experiences with IT? I merely did what I thought was satisfactory to disprove what you guys are saying. That said, I know I need to watch and make sure I don't have an ego. The only thing I have an ego about is pool.

This isn't a debate on agesim, it is a debate on experience.  Generally when those who have had 20 years of experience tell you something isn't so, they very well could be right.  But when others agree, and you find your viewpoint in the minority, it's time to call it a day.  And right now you have easily over 60+ years of leadership experience in various facets of professional and volunteer organizations telling you that what you think is correct, isn't.

Isn't it possible, one, just ONE person, not me, just someone could do it? In the 26618 (as of 30 Nov 2011) cadets in CAP, I think one could handle it.

Besides, while you guys have a lot of experience with CAP and management, haven't you ever been wrong? Just once?

Unfortunately this is one of those cases where we hate to say it, but it is true:  You'll understand when you're older.  Not because you will physically be older, but because you will have gained an even larger and diverse experience.  Which I'm sure you will if you continue to stay as motivated as you are now.

Stick it out, and just chalk this up as another lessoned learned.  Even if you don't agree with it right away.

I'll understand that a cadet can't run a SM position when I am older. Say that aloud, it sounds absurd.

And another point you tend to learn from management in the real world is resource management.

Yep, we could spend a bunch of time on cool websites.  But the purpose of the website is simply to disseminate information.  The cool, fancy features tend to detract from it.

And the time spent on making the custom website, over the simple template website, is time that could have been spent furthering one of our actual missions.  Time is the most valuable commodity in existence, because everyone has a finite, unknown, quantity of it.  Website design is not a mission.  AE, CP and ES are.

As I said before:

I think you think I am some teenager that cares more about "cool factor" than functionality. I am the total opposite. Functionality is my main goal. It is my first thought when I sit down with customers. Coolness only affects my work when I am coding against friends.

I can put a site up in about 45 minutes. I will then update it, in about 4 hours. Than I may tweak it, depending on individual needs.
So call it 5 hours for a site. Not bad? If I want to test it (extensively, I test it as I go along), add another 30 minutes.

[lordmonar]

I'll say this again: I don't believe ITO is sooo important. I am merely using it as an example to support my thesis.
My thesis is, again: Cadets can run some SM positions without a SM mentor.

No they can't.  A cadet must always have supervision and the whole function of the cadet program is to provide cadets mentoring.

Are individual cadets capabile of doing and SM's job with out supervision or mentoring?  Sure.....but the point is not if they are capable....but what is allowed.

End of story.

Everything else that follows is just a reattack on this basic theme.  It does not matter how mature you are, what certs you have, what sort of work experince you have, how much managment experince you have or even how old you are......if you are cadet.....then you are a cadet.  That means you must have SM supervisions and by being a member of the cadet corps you will be getting menotring from a SM.

[Extremepredjudice]

I'll say this again: I don't believe ITO is sooo important. I am merely using it as an example to support my thesis.
My thesis is, again: Cadets can run some SM positions without a SM mentor.

No they can't.  A cadet must always have supervision and the whole function of the cadet program is to provide cadets mentoring.

Are individual cadets capabile of doing and SM's job with out supervision or mentoring?  Sure.....but the point is not if they are capable....but what is allowed.

End of story.

Everything else that follows is just a reattack on this basic theme.  It does not matter how mature you are, what certs you have, what sort of work experince you have, how much managment experince you have or even how old you are......if you are cadet.....then you are a cadet.  That means you must have SM supervisions and by being a member of the cadet corps you will be getting menotring from a SM.

Sir, we established supervision and mentoring are two different things. Never did I say they could do it without supervision.

So in a squadron with only a few SM, a capable cadet couldn't, under any circumstance, run a SM position? I bet you my whole salary with CAP that there is at least 1 cadet out there doing this, and doing a kick-ass job.

[tsrup]

I'll say this again: I don't believe ITO is sooo important. I am merely using it as an example to support my thesis.
My thesis is, again: Cadets can run some SM positions without a SM mentor.

No they can't.  A cadet must always have supervision and the whole function of the cadet program is to provide cadets mentoring.

Are individual cadets capabile of doing and SM's job with out supervision or mentoring?  Sure.....but the point is not if they are capable....but what is allowed.

End of story.

Everything else that follows is just a reattack on this basic theme.  It does not matter how mature you are, what certs you have, what sort of work experince you have, how much managment experince you have or even how old you are......if you are cadet.....then you are a cadet.  That means you must have SM supervisions and by being a member of the cadet corps you will be getting menotring from a SM.

Sir, we established supervision and mentoring are two different things. Never did I say they could do it without supervision.

So in a squadron with only a few SM, a capable cadet couldn't, under any circumstance, run a SM position? I bet you my whole salary with CAP that there is at least 1 cadet out there doing this, and doing a kick-ass job.

And fortunately regulations aren't written with the minority in mind.

As for said squadron, I don't know of one that exists, but I do know that if a wing was conducting it's operations in accordance with regulation, it is something that would go notices during the SUI and would be corrected.

[arajca]

So in a squadron with only a few SM, a capable cadet couldn't, under any circumstance, run a SM position? I bet you my whole salary with CAP that there is at least 1 cadet out there doing this, and doing a kick-ass job.

The issue is not one of capability. No one here is saying cadets cannot be capable of serving in a SM duty position. The issue whether or not it is allowed.

Cadets may not serve in any of the senior member staff positions listed in CAPR 20-1, Organization of Civil Air Patrol, but may serve as assistants to those officers.

This is the part YOU fail to understand, despite several senior members pointing it out to you.

[Extremepredjudice]

Well there is a contradiction then.

You guys have mentioned cadet safety, comms, IT, ES officers. So which is it? 

Also, the IT pamphlet mentions C/ITO not assistant, but full ITO. None of the others have mention.

So first you guys are contradicting yourselves, then the regs, forms, pamphlets are. 

[Spaceman3750]

Well there is a contradiction then.

You guys have mentioned cadet safety, comms, IT, ES officers. So which is it? 

Also, the IT pamphlet mentions C/ITO not assistant, but full ITO. None of the others have mention.

So first you guys are contradicting yourselves, then the regs, forms, pamphlets are. 

C/Anything is not a senior member staff position as listed in 20-1. It is a cadet position, not a SM position.

[lordmonar]

I'll say this again: I don't believe ITO is sooo important. I am merely using it as an example to support my thesis.
My thesis is, again: Cadets can run some SM positions without a SM mentor.

No they can't.  A cadet must always have supervision and the whole function of the cadet program is to provide cadets mentoring.

Are individual cadets capabile of doing and SM's job with out supervision or mentoring?  Sure.....but the point is not if they are capable....but what is allowed.

End of story.

Everything else that follows is just a reattack on this basic theme.  It does not matter how mature you are, what certs you have, what sort of work experince you have, how much managment experince you have or even how old you are......if you are cadet.....then you are a cadet.  That means you must have SM supervisions and by being a member of the cadet corps you will be getting menotring from a SM.

Sir, we established supervision and mentoring are two different things. Never did I say they could do it without supervision.

So in a squadron with only a few SM, a capable cadet couldn't, under any circumstance, run a SM position? I bet you my whole salary with CAP that there is at least 1 cadet out there doing this, and doing a kick-ass job.

Then I will bet you much more substantial salary that there is atleast one squadron commander out there who does not know how to do his job.

Like I said...it is not about capability.....but what is allowed by regulations and the aims of the cadet program.

[lordmonar]

Well there is a contradiction then.

You guys have mentioned cadet safety, comms, IT, ES officers. So which is it? 

Also, the IT pamphlet mentions C/ITO not assistant, but full ITO. None of the others have mention.

So first you guys are contradicting yourselves, then the regs, forms, pamphlets are. 

No....within the structure of the CADET organisation.....under the CADET commander he may have a CADET ES officer, a CADET Comm, A CADET IT guy.  They are only responsible for those parts of the overall program areas that falls within the CADET program.

The CADET Comms guy should not also be the Squadron Comms guys....he can be the Assitant Comms guy.....but that is all.

Like I said many posts ago.....any cadet can be tasked with specific tasks and/or be assigned as the Assitant to a SM officer....but he cannot.....cannot.....cannot be the primary staff officer.

END OF STORY....no contradiction, no violation of the regulations.

[SAR Officer]

My thought on this thread was to be a simple matter....I see there is lots of items being discussed from my thread.....
My question pertained to MENTORING as a assistant to the Senior counterparts.....I looked at 20-1 and had discussions with my staff on this MENTORING program for those Cadets that were interested in Senior positions working as Cadet assistants as Safety, Aerospace, Operations and ect. My function was to mentor the Cadets in learning Leadership and the roles of Senior staff....I actually encourage the Cadets to take interest in these positions - I am not asking them to do the Senior positions (Only Assist and Learn)....I limit the mentoring with staff positions so not to interfere with the Cadet programs side....My Senior officer are responsible for their assigned positions and understand that the Cadets will never be more than assistants for learning purposes until they become Seniors themselves....

[Ed Bos]

My thought on this thread was to be a simple matter....I see there is lots of items being discussed from my thread.....
My question pertained to MENTORING as a assistant to the Senior counterparts.....I looked at 20-1 and had discussions with my staff on this MENTORING program for those Cadets that were interested in Senior positions working as Cadet assistants as Safety, Aerospace, Operations and ect. My function was to mentor the Cadets in learning Leadership and the roles of Senior staff....I actually encourage the Cadets to take interest in these positions - I am not asking them to do the Senior positions (Only Assist and Learn)....I limit the mentoring with staff positions so not to interfere with the Cadet programs side....My Senior officer are responsible for their assigned positions and understand that the Cadets will never be more than assistants for learning purposes until they become Seniors themselves....

Did you see a void that isn't met by the current Staff Duty Analysis program?