Gray slacks/white shirt uniform

[RiverAux]

It seems to me that with the development of the corporate service uniform there is no longer a need for the gray slacks/white aviator shirt uniform.  They seem to be redundant.  Without the coat, the blue slacks and white shirt would seem to fill the same semi-formal office uniform niche as teh gray slacks/white shirt uniform. 

So, why not just eliminate this uniform alternative? 

[lordmonar]

I vote to can it....that is assuming we change the rules about grooming standards in the new corporate uniform.

[Eclipse]

I voted yes, but we have to be aware of the grooming issues for hair and beards.

[Al Sayre]

I vote to can it with the same caveats about grooming standards.

[RiverAux]

Well shoot, I forgot about the CSU grooming rules.  Since those are CAP rules that aren't imposed by the AF, we should be able to drop them.  I think the advantages of eliminating a uniform option would be obvious, but this is CAP after all. 

[Always Ready]

Ditto...I voted to get rid of the gray/white combo, but they HAVE get rid of the grooming standards on the CSU. We'll all look more uniform and everyone still gets to be fuzzy whenever they want to too

[capchiro]

My biggest concern is that I can buy gray slacks almost anywhere and that is also what we wear with the polo shirt.  Blue pants are a little harder to come by.  I hate to buy from Vanguard, as I can't try them on for sizing.  

[sparks]

Vanguard would be thrilled to have it banned, more business buying the alternative. If cost savings is the goal we could all wear business suits with CAP lapel pins!

I've never felt the need to order a corporate uniform or the Air Force uniform. The Grey slacks, polo shirt, white shirt and blazer suit me just fine. Some new members already own a pair of grey slacks and blazer or can find one cheaper than the Corporate or Air Force uniforms. Those who want to wear something else are welcome to it just don't reduce my options.  

[Eclipse]

My biggest concern is that I can buy gray slacks almost anywhere and that is also what we wear with the polo shirt.  Blue pants are a little harder to come by.  I hate to buy from Vanguard, as I can't try them on for sizing.  

AAFES is my vendor of choice for standard USAF uniform items, though granted the larger sizes are not available there.

The points about the whites are salient.  I've always believed that the whole point of them was to utilize existing clothing that members may already own, and/or leverage standard commercial sources.

[SoCalCAPOfficer]

Drop the gray pants altogether.  Let the Polo shirt be worn with the blue AF pants.

Or Not!!

[EMT-83]

My beef is that the AF blue pants need to be dry cleaned. I wear gray because they can be washed at home. I never wear hats, so the no cover required is okay with me as well.

[RiverAux]

Personally, I couldnt care less which one of these two uniforms that we go with as an alternative, I just don't think we need two of them.  So, since the CSU is brand new and many members have spent a lot of money on it, I really don't see us getting rid of it, so that makes the gray slacks/white shirt vulnerable in my book. 

[Gunner C]

My problem with the grays is that they're just butt-ugly.  To me it just looks washed out - no color.  Give the grays a five year wear-out date along with beards and long hair.  That'll give the fuzzies five years to figure out how much more their beards mean to them than their CAP membership. That's about what it's all about IMO.

Anyone can shave, meeting physical requirements is a bit more problematic.

[Hawk200]

Drop the gray pants altogether.  Let the Polo shirt be worn with the blue AF pants.

Or Not!!

That just wouldn't look right, and it's not really an appropirate mix. If you're gonna buy the pants, buy the rest of it too.

My beef is that the AF blue pants need to be dry cleaned. I wear gray because they can be washed at home. ....

While I was active Air Force, there was an all polyester set of pants available that could be machine washed. They were not authorized for wear with the service coat, but were encouraged for people that wore blues short of service dress regularly. Are those no longer available? If I was wearing alternates, I'd certainly grab a set of those.

As to wear with the polo, I say we should allow khaki's. I worked a job where the "uniform" was a navy blue polo identical to ours, and we had to wear khaki pants with it. It looked pretty good. How many people here don't have some kind of khakis? Plus, they're cheap. You can get some at Wally World for $10 or less.

Personally, I couldnt care less which one of these two uniforms that we go with as an alternative, I just don't think we need two of them.  So, since the CSU is brand new and many members have spent a lot of money on it, I really don't see us getting rid of it, so that makes the gray slacks/white shirt vulnerable in my book. 

I would agree. I really didn't like the CSU initially, but I have to admit it is composed of uniform (uniform as an adjective, not as a noun) components. Everyone is wearing the same pants, same shoes, mostly the same shirts, same hats.  I think the shirts should be the same pattern as the blue ones, with the same kind of pockets, other than that, it's good. White/greys can be a hodge podge of colors.. Even khaki is pretty consistent.

[RADIOMAN015]

I think this entire uniform issue gets down to COST.  It's just cheaper for grey pants & the white aviator shirt.  You don't have to wear a hat, you don't have to wear special outer gear jackets, you don't have to buy a special belt, etc..  

The only thing I don't like is that white shirts can get dirty pretty easy, and with me I only wear it when absolutely necessary.  I prefer to wear one of the Golf Shirts (and recently purchased the long sleeve one), so I can at least be warm.   I personally think we should be able to wear our rank on the pocket of the shirt  

However, my undertanding was at the latest MA Wing Conference I've been told that it looked like a good 75% of the senior members were actually wearing the AF light blue shirt & associated pants, etc.
RM    

[Hawk200]

My problem with the grays is that they're just butt-ugly.  To me it just looks washed out - no color.  Give the grays a five year wear-out date along with beards and long hair.  That'll give the fuzzies five years to figure out how much more their beards mean to them than their CAP membership. That's about what it's all about IMO.

Anyone can shave, meeting physical requirements is a bit more problematic.

I would disagree. Personally, I don't see the "no beards" rule as a legitimate issue. There's really no reason that a neatly trimmed beard or well groomed long hair couldn't really be worn.

When it comes to shaving there are people with legitimate shaving problems, but they're capable of neatly trimming beards. The military disallows beards for many reasons, none of which apply to us. Enforcing a rule for non existent, or non legitimate reasons is pointless, a waste of time, and could be considered unethical. Yes, I said unethical. If you can't legitimately justify it, any excuse is a lie. "Because I don't think anyone should have a beard in uniform" doesn't work either.

[RiverAux]

This is not a golf shirt thread.  We are talking about what is basically a formal uniform worn when we need to look halfway decent.  Neither uniform is equivalent to the golf shirt. 

[Hawk200]

This is not a golf shirt thread.  We are talking about what is basically a formal uniform worn when we need to look halfway decent.  Neither uniform is equivalent to the golf shirt. 

Point taken. On topic, let's lose the white/greys. It's a "good enough" ensemble with a few insignia on it. No real need to have it. The CSU is more uniform in appearance.

[SaBeR33]

My problem with the grays is that they're just butt-ugly.  To me it just looks washed out - no color.  Give the grays a five year wear-out date along with beards and long hair.  That'll give the fuzzies five years to figure out how much more their beards mean to them than their CAP membership. That's about what it's all about IMO.

Anyone can shave, meeting physical requirements is a bit more problematic.

I would disagree. Personally, I don't see the "no beards" rule as a legitimate issue. There's really no reason that a neatly trimmed beard or well groomed long hair couldn't really be worn.

When it comes to shaving there are people with legitimate shaving problems, but they're capable of neatly trimming beards. The military disallows beards for many reasons, none of which apply to us. Enforcing a rule for non existent, or non legitimate reasons is pointless, a waste of time, and could be considered unethical. Yes, I said unethical. If you can't legitimately justify it, any excuse is a lie. "Because I don't think anyone should have a beard in uniform" doesn't work either.

I agree with your disagreeing, Hawk. For seven of the eight years I spent on active duty I was on a shaving waiver because of PFB (ingrown hairs), so I simply had to keep my facial hairs no longer than 1/4 inch in length. I just used (and still use) fine tooth clippers to keep the hairs short, even though now I just wear a well-groomed beard. Getting rid of the grays would be a real problem for people in my position who, medically speaking, would have a problem with the grooming standards required with the CSU and any of the AF-style uniforms, which I seldom ever wear anymore. I'll keep my white shirts and polos with the gray slacks thank you.

[Major Carrales]

Convert the shoulder mark color, to grey, and it will be a deal.