I joined CAP this year and have worked very hard to get where I am today. Last summer, I attended my first encampment, and am now friends on Facebook with some of my flight mates.
Scrolling through the news feed, I saw a flight mate was commenting on a post related to CAP. He was talking about how he is a C/SSgt , and such. Which is completely false in a number of ways. How would you react to someone posing as a higher rank than they are?
What I did was point out how he is not, and how it is disrespectful and unprofessional to pose as a higher grade than you have earned. and clearly he doesn't deserve the grade of C/A1C like he is. I looked him up on wing intranet, and he is an A1C. He's clearly too young to be using the JROTC speed promotions.
Was this right? Am I just being a troll?
PS didn't really know what topic to put this in.
In situations like this you're almost always going to be better off by going through the chain of command and letting the proper people know about it rather than making any comment yourself.
Quote from: RiverAux on September 24, 2012, 08:59:57 PM
In situations like this you're almost always going to be better off by going through the chain of command and letting the proper people know about it rather than making any comment yourself.
+1
Is it worth being taken up the chain..?
Quote from: Danger on September 24, 2012, 09:10:43 PM
Is it worth being taken up the chain..?
If that's the case, why comment on facebook to him...you know...that way is the proper way, your way is not.
True.. Thanks.
Always let the hammer fall from where it matters. While "everyone" is the Safety Officer, not everyone is the commander.
Is this really an issue? He can claim whatever he wants on facebook, but the first time he shows up at an event someone else from his facebook circle of friends is at, they'll be asking him what happened to his grade. What's he going to say? Undercover? Got busted down?
It's not like he's reaping some secret C/SSgt benefits by claiming it.
Good point.
Quote from: usafaux2004 on September 25, 2012, 06:05:31 PM
It's not like he's reaping some secret C/SSgt benefits by claiming it.
WHAT! Didn't you get that big pay check from NHQ when you put on C/SSgt!?! Dude! You got ripped off! >:D
Didn't even get a certificate, just a number a year or so later.
And just as an FYI........................ You are referring to his GRADE, not his RANK. Your 'grade' is C/SSGT or C/TSgt. etc.etc. Your 'rank' is your position by date of achievement within that grade in comparison to others of a similar grade.
Quote from: capmaj on September 26, 2012, 02:57:26 AM
And just as an FYI........................ You are referring to his GRADE, not his RANK. Your 'grade' is C/SSGT or C/TSgt. etc.etc. Your 'rank' is your position by date of achievement within that grade in comparison to others of a similar grade.
Keep in mind that much of the rest of the military world calls it rank, and you'll find many forum members, including myself, doing so. This is one of those fights you should choose not to pursue. There's no winner.
Quote from: lordmonar on September 25, 2012, 08:48:37 PM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on September 25, 2012, 06:05:31 PM
It's not like he's reaping some secret C/SSgt benefits by claiming it.
WHAT! Didn't you get that big pay check from NHQ when you put on C/SSgt!?! Dude! You got ripped off! >:D
I think I got ripped off too.... >:D :o
I think this calls for law suits >:(...I didn't get anything either
Quote from: SarDragon on September 26, 2012, 03:42:12 AM
Quote from: capmaj on September 26, 2012, 02:57:26 AM
And just as an FYI........................ You are referring to his GRADE, not his RANK. Your 'grade' is C/SSGT or C/TSgt. etc.etc. Your 'rank' is your position by date of achievement within that grade in comparison to others of a similar grade.
Keep in mind that much of the rest of the military world calls it rank, and you'll find many forum members, including myself, doing so. This is one of those fights you should choose not to pursue. There's no winner.
I'm not sure that I agree with the idea that, because something is being incorrectly stated, that it is OK to not correct it because, "much of the rest of the military world" is doing it. And I would probably also challenge that statement. Their is a reason that the term 'Time-in-Grade' exists in the military enviroment. Simply pointing out the proper way to state something doesn't necessarily constitue a "fight".
Quote from: SarDragon on September 26, 2012, 03:42:12 AM
Quote from: capmaj on September 26, 2012, 02:57:26 AM
And just as an FYI........................ You are referring to his GRADE, not his RANK. Your 'grade' is C/SSGT or C/TSgt. etc.etc. Your 'rank' is your position by date of achievement within that grade in comparison to others of a similar grade.
Keep in mind that much of the rest of the military world calls it rank, and you'll find many forum members, including myself, doing so. This is one of those fights you should choose not to pursue. There's no winner.
We already have an issue with Military-on-TV cadet experts who say nothing BUT Rank.
Grade = your insignia.
Rank = Position.
TIG Seniority= your position within a grade compared to someone else of the same grade.
^ Beg to differ:
Quote from: Leadership 2000 and Beyond, Volume 1 (page 14, 3rd para.)The term "grade" and "rank" often are confused. Grade is a major step in the
promotion structure or program while rank is grade adjusted for time. "Captain"
or "major" are examples of grade; several individuals can have the same grade.
Rank normally shows seniority; no two persons in a grade have the same rank –
one is always senior to the other.
I'm aware of the rank within the grade, but that just seems to confuse the cadets. WIWAC, the Leadership for 2000 and Beyond had a nice graphic of this (a shorter, ranking cadet on a step next to an older, lower grade cadet). Today I don't think it's there, and by throwing in rank as rank within a grade and positions, it just seems to make most cadets get blurry vision.
Quote from: usafaux2004 on September 26, 2012, 03:17:14 PM
I'm aware of the rank within the grade, but that just seems to confuse the cadets. WIWAC, the Leadership for 2000 and Beyond had a nice graphic of this (a shorter, ranking cadet on a step next to an older, lower grade cadet). Today I don't think it's there, and by throwing in rank as rank within a grade and positions, it just seems to make most cadets get blurry vision.
The way I was always taught was this:
2 cadets have the same
grade of C/MSGT. Cadet A was promoted three weeks before Cadet B, therefore Cadet A
outranks Cadet B by 3 weeks.
Outranking has become a throwaway term used by senior NCOs to cadet airmen, at least in my experience. "I outrank you so you're going to go clean the latrine because I am a tech sergeant and you're just a senior airman". There's no such thing as "outgrading" and it sounds just...dumb. Cadet officers don't really do that much anymore. Their grade is more explicit in its division. And seniors don't do it at all ::)
Quote from: capmaj on September 26, 2012, 01:20:52 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on September 26, 2012, 03:42:12 AM
Quote from: capmaj on September 26, 2012, 02:57:26 AM
And just as an FYI........................ You are referring to his GRADE, not his RANK. Your 'grade' is C/SSGT or C/TSgt. etc.etc. Your 'rank' is your position by date of achievement within that grade in comparison to others of a similar grade.
Keep in mind that much of the rest of the military world calls it rank, and you'll find many forum members, including myself, doing so. This is one of those fights you should choose not to pursue. There's no winner.
I'm not sure that I agree with the idea that, because something is being incorrectly stated, that it is OK to not correct it because, "much of the rest of the military world" is doing it. And I would probably also challenge that statement. Their is a reason that the term 'Time-in-Grade' exists in the military enviroment. Simply pointing out the proper way to state something doesn't necessarily constitue a "fight".
Even TIG is not uniform. The Navy uses Time-in-Rate.
Quote from: SarDragon on September 26, 2012, 03:42:12 AM
Quote from: capmaj on September 26, 2012, 02:57:26 AM
And just as an FYI........................ You are referring to his GRADE, not his RANK. Your 'grade' is C/SSGT or C/TSgt. etc.etc. Your 'rank' is your position by date of achievement within that grade in comparison to others of a similar grade.
Keep in mind that much of the rest of the military world calls it rank, and you'll find many forum members, including myself, doing so. This is one of those fights you should choose not to pursue. There's no winner.
Unless of course you are trying to determine the SOPA...Then Rank makes a difference.
Where I come from (the Afloat world), we call that seniority, determined by date of rank, and line number.
Also from the Afloat world there shipmate...Rank can also be their class ranking based on commissioning dates....promotion dates..etc, etc. Not arguing just seems a lot of inconsistencies among services also.
The "A" in SOPA stands for Afloat BTW ;D
Quote from: SARDOC on September 27, 2012, 05:06:27 AM
Also from the Afloat world there shipmate...Rank can also be their class ranking based on commissioning dates....promotion dates..etc, etc. Not arguing just seems a lot of inconsistencies among services also.
The "A" in SOPA stands for Afloat BTW ;D
That's the line number. I have many friends in the "O" community, and got a thorough education in their promotion system as well as my ow, enlisted, system.
Even though it is GRADE, eservices makes the same mistake and calls it RANK.
I do understand the argument, I put down "grade" on a form once for cadets to fill out and got things like "7 and 8" written in the blank and I was thinking ??? but they were the new basics and figured out the mistake.
But isn't that exactly the point................. that we should ne teaching the cadets the proper way to do things, not necessarily the "way things have always been done"? I understand that different branches have different traditions, but as we are the USAF Aux, I think we should be instructing our cadets on USAF practices. Certainly the Sea Cadets or the Young Marines can teach along any lines that they so choose.
Quote from: capmaj on September 27, 2012, 12:06:52 PM
But isn't that exactly the point................. that we should ne teaching the cadets the proper way to do things, not necessarily the "way things have always been done"? I understand that different branches have different traditions, but as we are the USAF Aux, I think we should be instructing our cadets on USAF practices. Certainly the Sea Cadets or the Young Marines can teach along any lines that they so choose.
Yes :clap: :clap: :clap:
Grade: Haven't been in grade school for years.
Time in Grade: I spent 6, 8, or 12 years in grade school depending on your definition of grade school. *
Rank: None. Use deoderant and soap regularly and correctly.
Position: Currently sitting.
Seniority: Not eligible for the AARP for another two years.
* 6 years of elementary school, 2 of junior high, and 4 years of high schrool(spelling intentional).
Interesting aside: If you ask most cadets below the grade of c/SrAmn what their grade is out of the blue, they will say 6th, 7th, or 8th, etc. 95% of the time. See this a lot at summer encampment check-in.
Quote from: ol'fido on September 27, 2012, 08:11:07 PMInteresting aside: If you ask most cadets below the grade of c/SrAmn what their grade is out of the blue, they will say 6th, 7th, or 8th, etc. 95% of the time. See this a lot at summer encampment check-in.
..and the CAPF 23 when that was the primary testing method. Now, by the time many will first see one is the Wright Brothers test. They better know what that means by then.
Quote from: ol'fido on September 27, 2012, 08:11:07 PM
Interesting aside: If you ask most cadets below the grade of c/SrAmn what their grade is out of the blue, they will say 6th, 7th, or 8th, etc. 95% of the time. See this a lot at summer encampment check-in.
Sounds like me when I was checking into my basic encampment...the Command Chief asked me what my grade was and well I thought I answered him correctly...but I guess I didn't...8th grade?
Quote from: ol'fido on September 27, 2012, 08:11:07 PM
Grade: Haven't been in grade school for years.
Time in Grade: I spent 6, 8, or 12 years in grade school depending on your definition of grade school. *
Rank: None. Use deoderant and soap regularly and correctly.
Position: Currently sitting.
Seniority: Not eligible for the AARP for another two years.
* 6 years of elementary school, 2 of junior high, and 4 years of high schrool(spelling intentional).
Interesting aside: If you ask most cadets below the grade of c/SrAmn what their grade is out of the blue, they will say 6th, 7th, or 8th, etc. 95% of the time. See this a lot at summer encampment check-in.
Thanks, I needed that