Uniform policies if NAT/CC

[Alaric]

Then what more "evidence" does anyone need that this is a serious problem?

Oh, I quite agree.  When nitpicking on uniforms clouds proper recognition of members' successes and takes focus from our missions, clearly things have gone too far.  It is indeed a serious problem.

Reflected right here on CT where we spend far more time discussing uniforms than missions or members.

(That's what you meant, right?)

If you were trying to make some sort of comment about how local commanders are not doing enough to enforce uniform standards, I was initially inclined to agree with you.

But then I remembered how successful you were as a commander and I am reassured that our commanders have all the tools and guidance they need to accomplish their responsibilities.


If your point was something to effect that "Although NHQ has clearly articulated the standards (39-1) and clearly fixed the responsibility on commanders (and members) to ensure the proper wear of the uniforms, they need to tell us again --  maybe louder or something --  to make us do our jobs.  'Cuz otherwise we won't.  And it's their fault that we are not doing our jobs here at the squadron," then I really don't have a response that will satisfy you.

I'm sure you're not surprised.

I think that National publishing a manual is great, but when you see photos, go to conferences, etc at the Wing, Region and National level where people are improperly wearing the AF style uniforms and there is no enforcement by these luminaries, that's the problem.  If higher echelons of command will not enforce the regulations, how can they expect the CC of Podunk squadron which is having a hard time just getting enough members (of both genders) support their overnight activities enforce them?  Leadership on this issue needs to come from the top, if a Wing Commander is at a Wing conference and sees someone outside the guidelines, he needs to correct it, then and there and have the person change or go home.  If we had that kind of leadership, you wouldn't be able to find so many pictures of people at official events in violation of the regs.

[Ned]

if a Wing Commander is at a Wing conference and sees someone outside the guidelines, he needs to correct it, then and there and have the person change or go home. 

We mostly agree on this (assuming you can accept a woman as wing commander and the notion that there may be other options besides "fix it or go home.")

Again, commanders at all level share the responsibility with individual members to ensure the proper wearing of the uniform.  As a practical matter, that means that local commanders have the lion's share of work to do, since something like 95% of the members are at the squadron level.

I know that when my uniform has a glitch, I genuinely appreciate someone quietly touching my elbow and giving me a clue.  For some reason, not all the members apparently feel the same way.

[Eclipse]

It seemed that we would much rather harp on tiny errors in uniform wear than congratulate and admire members for their successes.

Again, you keep trying to minimize this to people not using a micrometer for their badge placement, as if that was the real problem,
it isn't.  The problem is people ignoring the weight tables as if they didn't apply.

We should not be lauding people's success if they can't even follow these basic rules.  Those people don't deserve a flag or a dec,
they should be considered for termination, not admiration.

if a Wing Commander is at a Wing conference and sees someone outside the guidelines, he needs to correct it, then and there and have the person change or go home. 

We mostly agree on this (assuming you can accept a woman as wing commander and the notion that there may be other options besides "fix it or go home.")

Again, commanders at all level share the responsibility with individual members to ensure the proper wearing of the uniform.  As a practical matter, that means that local commanders have the lion's share of work to do, since something like 95% of the members are at the squadron level.

I know that when my uniform has a glitch, I genuinely appreciate someone quietly touching my elbow and giving me a clue.  For some reason, not all the members apparently feel the same way.

A glitch?  Why are you trying to minimize this issue as if this was 1982 and we couldn't just pull up 10 photos with
no effort that demonstrate the issue?  There have been photos with this problem this week.

We're not talking about "glitches", are we?  We're talking about National, Regional, and Wing CCs handing flags and awards to
people who are clearly, from 50k feet, not even close to being in weight, and usually surrounded by supporting staff in the same situation.

This is not a "Unit CC's" problem when it is ignored by the leadership, whether local or national.  People emulate the example,
and do the least required, most painful (when ignored) thing they have to do, unless you have some way to abrogate human nature
because it fits the assertion.

If there was some way to tie this to donations, or a lawyer woke up and felt it was causing some risk to
the corporation or the USAF financially, it would be fixed THAT DAY, but because this causes "soft cost"
to our reputation, incentive and the fix might make people sad, it's ignored and marginalized.

We get that you, personally, are probably just as concerned as we are, and would press more if you could, fair
enough, but it's not cricket to make this a local problem when the national example is the opposite of the
behavior sought.

[Ned]

This is not a "Unit CC's" problem when it is ignored by the leadership, whether local or national.  People emulate the example,
and do the least required, most painful (when ignored) thing they have to do, unless you have some way to abrogate human nature
because it fits the assertion.

Bob, we know that isn't true, and you yourself are the proof of it.

You didn't shirk your duties even when you thought that others above you in the chain were perhaps not as diligent.

You had those "difficult conversations" when necessary.

Why do you think your fellow commanders are somehow more easily discouraged than you?

Is it possible that you are letting your "post command" cynicism color your views?

[Luis R. Ramos]

Storm-

by Storm.

Really? So a civilian Air Force Auxiliary MUST be allowed to wear the Air Force-style uniform, but the Air Force Academy can't? I'm sorry, but that's a weak argument.

Re-read the entire thread. I am not the one proposing different treatment for cadets and senior members. Nor did I started this part of the discussion.

As to your specific question, yes!!! If the service academies decide their cadets should not wear the military-style uniform, it is on them and their officers. That is why I keep saying the CAP is not the real military, nor it is a service academy. Different organization, different procedures.

Zigzag was the one that suggested military-style uniforms for cadets, other for seniors.

[Eclipse]

This is not a "Unit CC's" problem when it is ignored by the leadership, whether local or national.  People emulate the example,
and do the least required, most painful (when ignored) thing they have to do, unless you have some way to abrogate human nature
because it fits the assertion.

Bob, we know that isn't true, and you yourself are the proof of it.

You didn't shirk your duties even when you thought that others above you in the chain were perhaps not as diligent.

You had those "difficult conversations" when necessary.

Why do you think your fellow commanders are somehow more easily discouraged than you?

Is it possible that you are letting your "post command" cynicism color your views?

Seriously?  You're going to assert that people >don't< emulate the example?  That people don't drop
to LCD, especially when they know nothing else and no one around them cares?  Have you read most
of the time-wasting, ticket-punching SUI and CI reports?  I have.  One big cluster of no one really
cares as long as we know where the planes are and the money is.

How about we >not< make every conversation where you run out of gas about the two people
talking and address the actual subject?

I don't know >why< a significant part of our leadership, including wing, region, and national
staffers choose to forgo enforcement and just let things go.  I didn't.  I don't.  I can't fix the whole organization,
not that I haven't tried.

The response you get is everything from "Lighten up" to "Why do you care?" Tinged with "mind your own business."
and the cherry on top of "Who made you king?"  I fixed the things I could and watched around me as the
foundations I laid were eroded by people with personal agendas and nearsightedness.

That doesn't address the issue, nor does deflection fix anything.

The only thing that fixes a systemic problem is someone with the authority putting a stake in the ground
and saying "no mas!", followed up by reminders and reminders and reminders and reminders.

What CAP needs are stake holders becoming stake drivers^®.

"stake holders becoming stake drivers^®" is a registered trademark of eClipseco Mining and Heavy Machinery Consortium.  All Rights Reserved.  Let eClipseco service all of your rhetoric and propaganda needs!

[abdsp51]

Which is why I have the items listed that that I do.  It would provide written policy and give commanders written grounds to take action.  You don't want to weigh in, you DON'T wear AF style uniforms and you DON'T fly if your A/C.  You won't meet a suspense with a uniform recommendation then you'll be noticed.  A CC at any level doesn't want to enforce policy you're gone period. 

While we are all volunteers yes and time, dedication and effort should be recognized and appreciated if you can't or won't adhere to simple guidelines and standards, you don't need to be flying, being a commander etc. 

Putting policy out in clear speak, get rid of the excess, and giving commanders and memtbership something solid to stand on will go a long way to fixing our issues.  Also by taking action on those who don't comply will go along way to improving our image and our credibility with other agencies.

[Alaric]

if a Wing Commander is at a Wing conference and sees someone outside the guidelines, he needs to correct it, then and there and have the person change or go home. 

We mostly agree on this (assuming you can accept a woman as wing commander and the notion that there may be other options besides "fix it or go home.")

Again, commanders at all level share the responsibility with individual members to ensure the proper wearing of the uniform.  As a practical matter, that means that local commanders have the lion's share of work to do, since something like 95% of the members are at the squadron level.

I know that when my uniform has a glitch, I genuinely appreciate someone quietly touching my elbow and giving me a clue.  For some reason, not all the members apparently feel the same way.

He is commonly accepted as including both as you well know.  I do not agree however that there is an option other than fix it (wear a uniform your are within requirements for) or leave

Leadership comes from the top down for this sort of thing; if the CEO acts unethically in a company, generally speaking he (or she) is encouraging an unethical corporate environment.  If the most senior leaders (Nat/CC; Region Commanders; Wing Commanders) are not enforcing and demonstrating at every opportunity obedience to the uniform regulations, they are encouraging a similar environment in their subordinates.

[Eclipse]

This needs a direct response.

As a practical matter, that means that local commanders have the lion's share of work to do, since something like 95% of the members are at the squadron level.

And what does >any< viable organization do when their directives are ignored by their subordinate managers?

Saying this is a squadron CC's problem is like an "Answer" from Microsoft Support.  It's technically correct, and of
no value to the fix whatsoever.

The Unit CC's have clearly abdicated their responsibility in this regard, so the fix needs to come from on high, and
further who's responsibility is it to fix the other, much more visible "5%"?

[Ned]

Seriously?  You're going to assert that people >don't< emulate the example? 

Seriously? You're going to assert that people don't emulate your good example?   


Bob, you can't have it both ways.

You were a good commander, and enforced the standards. 

Just like hundreds of other good commanders out there.  It's not easy, of course, and often a thankless job.


But unless you are making yourself out to be some sort of uber-commander, there is no reason to expect that other commanders are not able to do what you did -- have the difficult conversations when necessary.


Obviously, not everyone will have a successful command tour.  But almost all of our commanders do.

And for the sake of argument (is there any other reason here on CT?) what percentage of members are walking around today who are (to use your terminology) "clearly, from 50k feet, not even close to being in weight?"

2%?  5%?

(remember, only a minority of members are too large for AF-style to begin with, and a sizeable majority of them follow the rules - with or without help from their commanders.)

95% compliance with h/w is not exactly "Unit CC's clearly abdicating their responsibility in this regard."  We can and should aim a little higher, but it is important to keep the issue in perspective.

[Alaric]

I went to this link, scrolled not even a third of the way down I saw at least a half a dozen seniors that didn't look like they made height weight and they certainly don't make a military, well groomed appearance.

https://www.google.com/search?q=civil+air+patrol+california+wing+conference+2013+pictures&espv=2&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=dKC8U8mUG8yzyASP1YLICQ&ved=0CBwQsAQ&biw=1093&bih=515

[Eclipse]

Bob, you can't have it both ways.

I don't want it both ways, but NHQ apparently does.

But unless you are making yourself out to be some sort of uber-commander, there is no reason to expect that other commanders are not able to do what you did -- have the difficult conversations when necessary.

Able?  Sure.  Willing?

Nope.

And why should they be?
"Jim's a good guy, and he helps out a lot.  I know he's put on a few and his jacket's a little tight, but what's the big deal?
Besides, he was at the Wing Conference last month and got an award and no one said anything.  I don't need the
hassle. I don't like to discourage people or cost them money, and I can't afford to lose Jim, so I'm not going to say anything...."

Etc. Etc.

And for the sake of argument (is there any other reason here on CT?) what percentage of members are walking around today who are (to use your terminology) "clearly, from 50k feet, not even close to being in weight?"

2%?  5%?

95% compliance with h/w is not exactly "Unit CC's clearly abdicating their responsibility in this regard."  We can and should aim a little higher, but it is important to keep the issue in perspective.

95%? 

No.

Way.

95% was your number of how many members are the responsibility of a Unit CC for compliance (because apparently Group and Wing CCs
are absolved of the collective responsibility for those under their command).

(remember, only a minority of members are too large for AF-style to begin with, and a sizeable majority of them follow the rules - with or without help from their commanders.)

I will continue to assert that at >least< 50% of the adult membership is too heavy to wear the USAF-Style uniforms.

As to the percentage of members wearing USAF-Style uniforms out of compliance?
I would hazard at >least< 20-30% of the adult membership are wearing a uniform out of compliance.
Remember "compliance", contrary to popular belief, is not "looks good" or "pulls it off" it's based on a number
on a scale.

There are plenty "pulling it off" who would be non-compliant if forced to reveal that number, and far too many
who needn't bother with the scale.

You've said it yourself, when NHQ tried to restrict photos to compliance only, they couldn't do it.

You've also said there was a "wailing and gnashing of teeth" for the idea of weigh-ins being codified in 39-1,
and yet you want to assert that a single-digit percentage of members are non-compliant?

Google Image search, not to mention the NHQ Flicker pool, disagrees.

[Panache]

Then what more "evidence" does anyone need that this is a serious problem?

Oh, I quite agree.  When nitpicking on uniforms clouds proper recognition of members' successes and takes focus from our missions, clearly things have gone too far.  It is indeed a serious problem.

Reflected right here on CT where we spend far more time discussing uniforms than missions or members.

(That's what you meant, right?)

So, Colonel, what I'm taking away here is "if I do my CAP job well, and my CC doesn't make a stink about it, I can pretty much wear whatever uniform I want."

After all, hey, it's not really a big deal.  As long as the mission is accomplished.

[Panache]

Years ago, the first sergeant of the Combat Support Squadron at my AF Reserve base was redlined at a drill and then processed for retirement because he didn't meet the weight standard.

As pointed out many, many times, we are not military personnel.  We are civilians.  Unpaid civilian volunteers.  As such, this is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

[Eclipse]

Then what more "evidence" does anyone need that this is a serious problem?

Oh, I quite agree.  When nitpicking on uniforms clouds proper recognition of members' successes and takes focus from our missions, clearly things have gone too far.  It is indeed a serious problem.

Reflected right here on CT where we spend far more time discussing uniforms than missions or members.

(That's what you meant, right?)

So, Colonel, what I'm taking away here is "if I do my CAP job well, and my CC doesn't make a stink about it, I can pretty much wear whatever uniform I want."

After all, hey, it's not really a big deal.  As long as the mission is accomplished.

Excellent point, also, to the bold above.

Perhaps we don't have enough of either of those, so therefore what's left to discuss?

[PHall]

Years ago, the first sergeant of the Combat Support Squadron at my AF Reserve base was redlined at a drill and then processed for retirement because he didn't meet the weight standard.

As pointed out many, many times, we are not military personnel.  We are civilians.  Unpaid civilian volunteers.  As such, this is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

The point is that everybody responsible for meeting standards, especially the folks responsible for enforcing the standards.
Which is very relevant to badly led, unpaid, civilian volunteers.

[Panache]

Years ago, the first sergeant of the Combat Support Squadron at my AF Reserve base was redlined at a drill and then processed for retirement because he didn't meet the weight standard.

As pointed out many, many times, we are not military personnel.  We are civilians.  Unpaid civilian volunteers.  As such, this is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

The point is that everybody responsible for meeting standards, especially the folks responsible for enforcing the standards.
Which is very relevant to badly led, unpaid, civilian volunteers.

Not contesting that.  Just pointing out that his story about the first sergeant has no relevance to us.

[Shuman 14]

No uniformity is possible if cadets are wearing one uniform and senior members another!!!!!!!!

D'uh!!!!!!!!!!!!

Really? Let's see at all the US Military Academies, most State and Private Military Institutes and almost every police academy the students are in one uniform and the instructors are in another. The analogy between CAP Senior Members and Cadet Members applies.

It kinda of one quick way to tell who's in charge.

[Shuman 14]

No uniformity is possible if cadets are wearing one uniform and senior members another!!!!!!!!

D'uh!!!!!!!!!!!!

But it's a whole lot closer than what we have now.

Exactly.

[Shuman 14]

A fallacy. We are not the US Military Academy.

We are also not RealMilitary™, so that point is moot.

Some would argue that West Point isn't either.

They're drawing pay and benefits and are issued a CAC that states otherwise.