Resubmission Requirements for Disapproved Promotion and/or Award Requests

[DNall]

While not unreasonable, I think a pretty strong case can be made that such a narrative is not required by regs for duty performance promotion & is in fact an added requirement. It is the responsibility of the review board to inform themselves by either already knowing the people being recommended or doing their homework to find out. It is not the responsibility of the member or their command to justify a promotion that is already justified by regs based on their record of service/performance.

Now special appointments, those should basically not be happening almost ever, and those do, by reg, require an extensive justification narrative/package.

It is my understanding from PM's and emails received today that duty performance promotions are being denied outright the first time through. I was told today there are members with 20 years plus in the organization that have been denied duty performance promotions. I was even informed about RSC graduates that have been denied duty performance promotions because it is not what you have done while making yourself eligibile for promotion that matters, it is what have you done since you became eligible. If the clock on exemplary performance/ TIG  is only being started once you are eligible for promotions than there is a really big problem.

That is outright violation of regs and clearly an addition to the reqs. That's a very good way to be removed as region commander & possibly disciplined further. I would strongly recommend whoever is executing that policy seriously reconsider their tactics. I have no doubt they have the best interest of the org in mind, but they are making very poor choices in the execution if that's true.

[Cecil DP]

If the promotions are returned without documentation of why the promotion was denied it is an IG matter. Several years ago we had a Captain whose promotion to Major was repeatedly submitted and mysteriously lost in transit. When the unit formally asked what was going on the CAPF2 was returned without comment and denied. The Captain immediately submitted an IG complaint to Region which told the Wing Commander to not only approve it, but to send it up to Region where it was already approved for Major.

[heliodoc]

The above shows a clear case of someone not doing their JOB and if this had to be handled by the IG,
well you know how I feel being from the Real Military this definitelywould have been done in a MORE PROFESSIONAL manner.

And for those "professional CAP officers"  there's plenty of templates and real military documents that are online on how to write promo packets.  WUZZA matter, you SLS, UCC, RSC types do not know how to write professional promos or other award packets??? Time to repeat a course

For an IG and a volunteer one at that to have to handle this........ you know the deal!!!!!!

[arajca]

SLS and UCC do not cover how to write an award or promotion packet. I don't know about RSC since I haven't taken it.

Keep in mind that even the most well written and justified award/promotion packet will get shot down if the approving authority doesn't like (it, the unit, the submitter, the member, take your pick). Is this right? Of course not. But it happens.

We all have heard of the wing commander who has decided no one in the wing will get anything above a Comm Comm, or addes extra "unwritten" promotion requirements, regardless of how well deserved it is.

[heliodoc]

True  but there wer reference made to what CAPM/F/P out there to assist the "commander"

It's a pretty sad deal if these "unwriiten rules" are out there and causing consternation

It's NO wonder CAP is a laughing stock at times for this very reason and if I was looking for professionalism...... well I may have to to NASAR.

They seem to have no "RANK" and "BLING" problems like some little Napolean commanders doo.. whether they be Sqdn, Wing , or Region CC's

And those unwritten rules and GOB operations should be the things IG'd... BUT I forgot... Can't IG a perception, huh???

[ctrossen]

Promotion standards to Lt Col in Great Lakes Region have definitely tightened up, but it's not impossible to do.

Back at the end of last year (actually, in the fourth quarter of last year), I submitted three members for duty performance promotions to Lt Col. I'd heard through the grapevine that it would be "tougher" to get these promotions, but hadn't seen word one on what the standards were or what the Region Promotion Board expected to see in the promotion packet (one of those promotion requests was for our Wing Personnel Officer, and since he hadn't seen or heard anything official, that made it even more frustrating).

So we wrote up the CAPF2s, and I worked up brief writeups to enter into the Remarks section on the backs for each of them. Then filled out the promotion request online and submitted paper copies as backups.

Of the three that we submitted, only the Wing DP's promotion was approved. One was denied right out (with no reason ever given), and for the final one the region board requested additional information.

So once more back to the drawing board, or in this case MS Word. I drafted a recommendation memo for the two of them and we resubmitted. And once those memos reached the board at the same time as the CAPF2s, they were both approved.

I don't have a problem with tightening the belts on promotions at all. The frustrating part is that the region board has apparently been operating like this for more than a year, but hasn't published one single word on the process, what criteria they will be judging promotions on, or what they expect to see.

All I can tell you is this: it seems to me that what they're looking for is the ability to function at a level commensurate with the increased grade and service at the wing or higher level (which doesn't necessarily require being on the wing staff, just that the candidate has contributed significantly to a major wing activity/project--the other two Lt Col promotions were based on 1.) organizing a new unit and serving as XO/Deputy of the encampment, and 2.) serving as Planning and/or Logistics Section Chief on numerous wing-level ES missions and training activities as well as Logistics Director for our encampment).

[lordmonar]

I'll buy that.....we have lamented on this board long and hard about CAP "rank" not meaning anything....so it appreas the GLR promotions board is looking for wing level ability/participation for the Lt Col promotion.  Sound good to me.

Granted.....it would be better for the board to communicate its standards to the field...to reduce work load on both ends of the pipe line.

[Eclipse]

I'll buy that.....we have lamented on this board long and hard about CAP "rank" not meaning anything....so it appears the GLR promotions board is looking for wing level ability/participation for the Lt Col promotion.  Sound good to me.

Granted.....it would be better for the board to communicate its standards to the field...to reduce work load on both ends of the pipe line.

Agreed. If you want to raise the bar, its going to hit a few people on the way up. This is unfortunate, but unless something changes, nothing will ever change. 

At the end of the day, it is a respective commander's right and responsibility to decide if a member is fit for promotion.  The entire last step is subjective.

There are 10's of thousands of people who retired from compensated services believing they deserved at least one more kick up but never got it.

Welcome to a paramilitary organization.

This effects me directly and I fully support it.  Kudos to Col. Charles.

[afgeo4]

The problem is... they can't create extra requirements for promotion on top of what's allowed by NHQ in the regs.

By regs, they cannot tighten things. That's WHY our grade means progression through the professional development grid and time in service/grade. That's WHY it doesn't mean who's capable of leadership on what level. That's why we have people in various grades being commanders of units, encampments, etc.

Promotion to LtCol should be automatic presuming all requirements set forth by NHQ have been met. How much respect and what command authority is given that member, regardless of grade is what should be considered by boards, not promotions.

Why? Because we're volunteers. Yes, we're not professionals. Those get paid for their work. We are solely volunteers. Although expectations of "professionalism" aren't out of bounds, please keep in mind that we aren't.

[Eclipse]

Promotion to LtCol should be automatic presuming all requirements set forth by NHQ have been met.

And there you have the fallacy...

Achievement of professional development levels is automatic, grade is not.

SECTION B - DUTY PERFORMANCE PROMOTIONS
11. Eligibility Requirements.
a. General Requirements. To be considered for this type promotion, the member must:
1) Be at least 21 years of age.
2) Be a high school graduate (or educational equivalent).
3) Complete Level I of the Senior Member Professional Development Program.
4) Complete Cadet Protection Program Training (CPPT).
5) Be performing in an exemplary manner meriting promotion to the grade recommended.
6) Be recommended by immediate superior and unit commander.

Like it or not, grade in CAP is still the subjective choice of someone you report to.  What little weight it has stems from the fact that in order to achieve it you had to do more than just check the boxes, you had to convince a superior that you deserve to wear the insignia.

You are correct that, by regs, a commander cannot put in place additional >objective< criteria for promotion, however the >subjective< nature of "commander's approval" is well within the regulations and is a cornerstone of a paramilitary grade system, CAP or otherwise.  Without that you might just as well get rid of the grade and/or change eServices to auto-promote people based on TIG.

That singular requirement of having to stay in the good graces of a superior is what sticks in a lot of craws, especially for those without any prior military experience. 

Again, welcome to a paramilitary environment.  I view it as "part of the game" - having to accept things I don't always agree with or like because I wear the uniform. 

Also, to circle-back on what this thread was actually about, all Col. Charles is directing us to do is complete the paperwork properly, and if a request is denied, wait 6 months for resubmission.  So warned, it is incumbent of us as commanders to "go find out" what that means, and to review documents that we have to approve "in turn" before sending them up.

[lordmonar]

No...the problem is that the de facto national standard for "be performing in an exemplary manner meriting promotion to the grade recommended" has been at a more or less low level.

While I may or may not like a heightening of that standard.....one region setting their own standard is NOT the way to do it.  Unequal promotions do not make for a more professional leadership.  You end up with a lot of pissed off Majors griping about how they are getting screwed while some dirt bags in the next region get promoted by the basket load.

[Eclipse]

No standard is being set, other than paperwork guidelines.  The rest is subjective, just like it always has been.

[Robert Hartigan]

, all Col. Charles is directing us to do is complete the paperwork properly, and if a request is denied, wait 6 months for resubmission. 

Kudos to Col. Charles.

Hello,
I hope you get a chuckle out of this. The topic is what it is, but the Region Commander is Col. Carr not Col Charles. Just to lighten things up a bit, let me tell you I did the same thing only in person. I was President of the Mess at Staff College and I had to introduced the head table. Without missing a beat I introduced Colonel Charles "Chuck" Carr as Colonel Bill Charles. A very Homer Simpson moment. "D'oh."  I have to believe my promotion will wait until Col. Carr retires for that one regulation or no regulation.

You may return to your debate after you remember to keep your a sense of humor. Have faith in our core values and things will sort themselves out for the best of the organization. :angel:

RPH

[Eclipse]

This effects me directly and I fully support it.  Kudos to Col. Charles Carr.

Lord, I'm an idiot.

[davidsinn]

This effects me directly and I fully support it.  Kudos to Col. Charles Carr.

Lord, I'm an idiot.

Don't feel too bad. My safety officer once introduced our state director Mike Moran [Mor-Ran] as Mike [Mor-Ron] if front of a large gathering at another unit.

[afgeo4]

Promotion to LtCol should be automatic presuming all requirements set forth by NHQ have been met.

And there you have the fallacy...

Achievement of professional development levels is automatic, grade is not.

SECTION B - DUTY PERFORMANCE PROMOTIONS
11. Eligibility Requirements.
a. General Requirements. To be considered for this type promotion, the member must:
1) Be at least 21 years of age.
2) Be a high school graduate (or educational equivalent).
3) Complete Level I of the Senior Member Professional Development Program.
4) Complete Cadet Protection Program Training (CPPT).
5) Be performing in an exemplary manner meriting promotion to the grade recommended.
6) Be recommended by immediate superior and unit commander.

Like it or not, grade in CAP is still the subjective choice of someone you report to.  What little weight it has stems from the fact that in order to achieve it you had to do more than just check the boxes, you had to convince a superior that you deserve to wear the insignia.

You are correct that, by regs, a commander cannot put in place additional >objective< criteria for promotion, however the >subjective< nature of "commander's approval" is well within the regulations and is a cornerstone of a paramilitary grade system, CAP or otherwise.  Without that you might just as well get rid of the grade and/or change eServices to auto-promote people based on TIG.

That singular requirement of having to stay in the good graces of a superior is what sticks in a lot of craws, especially for those without any prior military experience. 

Again, welcome to a paramilitary environment.  I view it as "part of the game" - having to accept things I don't always agree with or like because I wear the uniform. 

Also, to circle-back on what this thread was actually about, all Col. Charles is directing us to do is complete the paperwork properly, and if a request is denied, wait 6 months for resubmission.  So warned, it is incumbent of us as commanders to "go find out" what that means, and to review documents that we have to approve "in turn" before sending them up.

Not a complete fallacy. I did state that the requirements are clearly stated in the NHQ regs, which you stated. Yes, there is some subjectivity on the issue of what is fitting a Major or LtCol... (actually no one knows for sure what is and THAT is the problem).

Can someone please fill us in on how field grade promotions are decided on in the military? I believe it is mostly the person's record, in black on white that counts.

I don't think that's so in CAP. From what I've seen, friends promote friends.

[RiverAux]

5) Be performing in an exemplary manner meriting promotion to the grade recommended.

Yes, thats probably been there forever, but where have we defined what this means?  Where have we said what sort of performance merits promotion to various grades?  Where are we told what the is the difference between satisfactory performance in a particular rank vs exemplary performance that merits a promotion? 

As we have discussed many times on this board we do not in any way define what level of performance is expected out of any of the officer ranks in CAP.  Lacking that, just how are commanders supposed to fairly follow that guideline? 

Granted, you're not ever going to remove all the subjectivity out of this basic criteria, but if CAP expects its commanders to really make sound judgements on that issue, they need to provide some more guidance on how to implement it. 

[Cecil DP]

Can someone please fill us in on how field grade promotions are decided on in the military? I believe it is mostly the person's record, in black on white that counts.

All promotions in the military Captain and above and senior NCO's are through centralized promotion boards. The board is given the records of all soldiers meeting the minimum requirements TIG/TIS and review them against each other. If there is a need for 100 officers in a particular grade they will select at least 90 from the primary zone.  5% can be promoted from below the zone. Anyone who is not selected gets one more chance. After being passed over for a second time, they are told that their career will be over on a certain date. 

[lordmonar]

Let me tell you how the SNCO boards work.

The board's definition of promotion readiness is completely subjective.  The board members talk among themselves about what they feel are important aspects and then the do test runs on old sanitized records to see how they are rating individuals in relation to the other board members.

Once the board goes active....each member rates the individual with out discussion with other board members.   If there is no gross point discrepancy (any score more than .5 off any other board members score)....then the scores are added together and that becomes the board score.

If there is a big discrepancy between members...they hold that record for later.  They as a group look at the record and discuss the merits of the individual and then re-score the record.

But the basic subjective criteria is not set in stone.  No one know what the board members are looking for in a record.  Is education good?  I community service?  Deployments?  Staff Jobs?  Jobs at Group/Wing/NAF/MAJCOM carry more or less weight?

We usually have some consistency because of our corporate knowledge....anyone with a major agenda or some off the wall ideas of "what a good promotee" should be are usually suppress or controlled by the other board members.

Now what is happening in GLR is not necessarily a bad thing.......if it were applied across all the regions.  That is my only gripe with this situation.

[RiverAux]

I suppose what I'm saying is that if CAP really, really wants commanders to be more subjective in approving or disproving promotions for those that have met all the objective criteria, they're going to need to stress a bit more in the regulations exactly what sort of performance they expect out of people at different ranks. 

Since what CAP members actually do has nothing to do with their rank you can have a 2nd Lt. and Maj. doing the exact same jobs both within the squadron administration and perhaps both could have the same ES qualifications, pilot ratings, etc.  What more would be expected of the Maj. to get promoted to Lt. Col. than it would take the 2nd Lt. to get promoted to 1st Lt.? 

In the actual military, even though the actual jobs of 100 2nd Lts. might be radically different, they are usually going to involve roughly the same degree of complexity, but that isn't our case where that 2nd Lt. could be doing absolutely nothing but going to meetings, he could be serving in a minor squadron position, deputy squadron commander, squadron commander, or serving on group or wing staff overseeing programs in multiple units.  Which of those 2nd Lts deserve the promotion and which don't assuming that all other requirements have been met?

At best you could be on safe ground in not promoting the guy who has done nothing other than fill the other checkboxes.