In other words, can a commander adjust how can members assign themselves or remove themselves from a position?
My commander told me that "there are too many people making changes on their own," and he has no control.
In other words, is there any other application that he can implement so that, for example, a member can not get in, click on "Duty Assignment," and remove themselves as Admin Officer, or add themselves as ES Officer...? Because as it is now, all senior members can click on "Duty Assignment," and add or delete themselves. He wants more control over that.
Members cannot assign or remove themselves from staff positions, that's reserved for commanders and a few staff like PDO. However, once assigned, members can do whatever is within the lane of that assignment.
What can cause problems at units is when a member has assignments at multiple levels, for example a unit DOS who is also the Group DOS can bypass the commander on all ES tasking approvals. This is why many commanders no longer allow their people to be assigned at levels above their home unit.
Again, the average rank and file member cannot just arbitrarily assign themselves to anything. The only way that would be possible is if something is broken, or the commander or his CDs have been playing fast and loose with CD assignments or "Asst to the CC" assignments.
The eservices help desk can provide a report of who has done what in this regard if you open a ticket on the issue.
Huh? What you describe "too many" is scary. Only few positions have the privilege of assigning duty positions. Regular members can't change their duty assignments at all.
Edit: Disregard, Eclipse beat me to it with a better answer.
There is one exception. If someone has WSA permissions, he/she can change assignments on anyone else in the unit.
Quote from: SarDragon on August 12, 2012, 10:32:03 PM
There is one exception. If someone has WSA permissions, he/she can change assignments on anyone else in the unit.
I believe that is correct, but even that has to be manually assigned, and can be revoked easily.
It is probably time for Flyer's CC to run some reports and start unchecking boxes.
Well, that is not the case in my unit. I have access to all the modules that appear on the right of my sign-on screen. So does every other senior in my unit. I am Admin and Personnel for my unit, ES Training Officer, and Asst Safety Officer.
From what I am reading here, and from CAP Knowledge Base, is that maybe a former commander may have changed all WSA authorizations to allow everyone approval to all modules. And I can suggest my current commander to work with my unit WSA to restore these restrictions.
The unit PDO was Asst/DA and Asst/DP. Last night she removed herself from all the Asst positions she had. My current cdr stated it was too much for her to do, he wants more control.
For example, should the PDO have access to "Duty Assignment," or can this be set so that the PDO can look, but not assign or delete?
Similar to "Material Orders," can be set so me as "Admin Officer" can initiate orders, and have my commander to approve my order or disapprove it?
The people in question have exactly the rights which allow them to make and change assignments. An admin officer or PDO will be able to unassign themselves, but without those permissions, there's no point in them being assigned at all.
Run the reports and yank things he doesn't like.
There are some micro level things you can change, but by design some at going to come with the job. A DOS for example, with no OPs Quas rights is useless.
As to the approval chain, no. That defeats the purpose of the assignment and delegation of authority.
The Commander, Vice Commander, Deputy Commander, Director of Personnel, Personnel Officer, Administrative Officer and assistants have duty assignment privileges by virtue of their positions. They cannot be restricted as far as I know.
In addition, the commander or the WSA may assign or unassign duty assignment permissions for any senior member.
Perhaps your commander should remove all WSA assigned permissions and then start fresh.
Thank you all.
That is precisely what I am suggesting to my commander.
Make sure my WSA talk to the Group WSA to 1) check every senior's WSA authorization, and yank all that are assigned except for him and the WSA; then 2) run the reports. Start fresh...
Quote from: Eclipse on August 12, 2012, 10:26:02 PM
What can cause problems at units is when a member has assignments at multiple levels, for example a unit DOS who is also the Group DOS can bypass the commander on all ES tasking approvals. This is why many commanders no longer allow their people to be assigned at levels above their home unit.
Emphasis Mine.
Um...how do they go about denying a higher echelon commander's authority to appoint someone to the job? Do they tell their boss, or their boss's boss 'You can't do that he's MINE MINE MINE? People cannot be in my unit and assigned to a higher echelon'
Were I a higher echelon commander and had a commander pulling that stunt...I'd probably find a nice staff job on my echelon to promote him to. >:D Solve that problem in a hurry.
It's as simple as having the commander that put them in the spot above the squadron transfer them to their unit, not yours.
It's never a good idea to have the same person in the same position at multiple levels. It leaves the door open for a bad situation. I was in a unit once where the squadron DCC was also the Group DCP and Wing DCP. It just created a situation where he could look the other way at the shortcomings at any of the echelons because there wasn't anyone to really call him out on it.
Being a commander comes with a certain level of ability and need to "control" the direction of things. Someone who is assigned to your unit, but actually reports to someone above you is just a bad idea and subverts the local commander's authority.
Quote from: flyer333555 on August 12, 2012, 10:13:51 PM
My commander told me that "there are too many people making changes on their own," and he has no control. In other words, is there any other application that he can implement so that, for example, a member can not get in, click on "Duty Assignment," and remove themselves as Admin Officer, or add themselves as ES Officer...? Because as it is now, all senior members can click on "Duty Assignment," and add or delete themselves. He wants more control over that.
If I'm reading this right perhaps there are members holding restricted permissions outside of their duty assignments. For the most part it shouldn't be necessary for commanders or WSA's to even get into the WSA application as almost all duty assignments are automatically granted permissions as relates to their position. As stated duty assignments cannot be assigned other than by commanders or personnel officers.
Quote from: ßτε on August 12, 2012, 11:32:16 PM
In addition, the commander or the WSA may assign or unassign duty assignment permissions for any senior member. Perhaps your commander should remove all WSA assigned permissions and then start fresh.
This is a great idea. Commanders and WSA's should occasionally go into the WSA application and remove permissions from members who really don't need them. Why would a cadet programs officer need OpsQuals permissions as an example.
If we didn't have a bunch of people wearing two hats, we'd have a lot of unfilled positions.
I hold a wing job, and the same job in my local unit, along with a couple of other local hats. It's that ever-elusive "integrity" thing. When I am doing things within my local unit, I work for my local unit commander. I keep him in the loop, I do things he wants done. When I am working within the scope of my wing position, I work for the wing commander. You have to build a firewall between the two. It's not that hard.
If that freaks you out, how about this: within the local unit, I work for my unit commander. At the wing level he is my assistant. Woo-hoo, mind-blowing, right? Not so much. Stay in your lane, be professional, not so hard.
It's not that much different in my day job - I work at Hickam, PACAF pays me, but most of the work I do is on behalf of TACC at Scott. Sometimes PACAF's and TACC's goals don't coincide (really, I know it's hard to believe). That's when we look up, and do what's right for the Air Force, because that's who we all work for!
Same with CAP. Everyone should be doing the correct, ethical thing, regardless of how many multiple-level hats they wear. If they are not, then they are failing as members, and that should be addressed through appropriate channels.
Quote from: AirDX on August 13, 2012, 05:43:45 AM
If that freaks you out, how about this: within the local unit, I work for my unit commander. At the wing level he is my assistant. Woo-hoo, mind-blowing, right? Not so much. Stay in your lane, be professional, not so hard.
I'd rather see a squadron cc as a group / wing assistant than primary. If your cc has the bandwith to command a squadron and do anything at wing, can you get me his secret for picking Powerball numbers. ;)
Someone as Squadron/CDC and Group/CPO and/or Wing/DCP is more worrisome. The higher echelon cc most likely counts on his Cadet Programs staffer to monitor CP in his AOR. Self monitoring is not a sound management strategy.
Not having enough heads to fill all the hats is nothing new. In "Starship Troopers" Heinlein has a great section describing dual and beyond hatting in the Mobile Infantry in the distant future and the was written in the 50's
Quote from: phirons on August 13, 2012, 04:23:31 PM
Someone as Squadron/CDC and Group/CPO and/or Wing/DCP is more worrisome. The higher echelon cc most likely counts on his Cadet Programs staffer to monitor CP in his AOR. Self monitoring is not a sound management strategy.
I'll agree with that one. It's a bit of a conundrum: if the workload is such that he can be both the group and the wing DCP, then why is there a group structure at all?
Quote from: AirDX on August 13, 2012, 08:05:21 PM
Quote from: phirons on August 13, 2012, 04:23:31 PM
Someone as Squadron/CDC and Group/CPO and/or Wing/DCP is more worrisome. The higher echelon cc most likely counts on his Cadet Programs staffer to monitor CP in his AOR. Self monitoring is not a sound management strategy.
I'll agree with that one. It's a bit of a conundrum: if the workload is such that he can be both the group and the wing DCP, then why is there a group structure at all?
Group structure within a wing, in general, has to do with span of control issues, or geographic considerations, or, in most cases, both. That doesn't necessarily mean that, on a local basis, that one person cannot perform a group function and a squadron function at the same time.
Quote from: flyer333555 on August 12, 2012, 11:59:45 PM
Thank you all.
That is precisely what I am suggesting to my commander.
Make sure my WSA talk to the Group WSA to 1) check every senior's WSA authorization, and yank all that are assigned except for him and the WSA; then 2) run the reports. Start fresh...
You an print out a report in E-services which lists all members in the unit who have WSA permissions.
One of the presentations from the NB has a good set of slides showing many of the permissions and who gets them. I forget which one at the moment.
Quote from: arajca on September 01, 2012, 05:35:23 PM
One of the presentations from the NB has a good set of slides showing many of the permissions and who gets them. I forget which one at the moment.
There's a full list available in eServices, maybe at the bottom of the homepage.
Quote from: arajca on September 01, 2012, 05:35:23 PM
One of the presentations from the NB has a good set of slides showing many of the permissions and who gets them. I forget which one at the moment.
It was the IT admin seminar