My question will be simple. Have wing commanders been relieved from their position for their failureship instead of leadership of the wing?
Once again, this time in English.
Quote from: Eclipse on February 07, 2013, 03:59:05 AM
Once again, this time in English.
Yeah, I really don't understand his question either. Probably just a One Post Wonder.
For fun, let's chart this out.
1) Drive-by poster drops bizarre, loaded question about wing CC.
2) We warn about what a bad idea this is if you value your CAP membership and that there are proper channels for complaints.
3) Drive-by returns and starts dropping hints about who it is, and the "Armageddon-level nature" of the wrongs committed by this Wing CC.
4) We repeat #2, and then indicate that there is no way to actually discuss the situation in a coherent manner if for no other reason then
we only have the aggrieved side of the story, and these things are rarely as heinous as alleged.
5) The Drive-by escalates the rhetoric, fills in more of the "details" to insure that there can't possibly be justification for the Wing CC's actions (or inaction).
6) We again repeat #2 and #4.
7) Drive-by then says that our lack of concern and "call to action" is indicative of all that is wrong with:
CAP
Society
The Schools
The Government
Life
The Universe
Everything else.
8)(ish) The Drive-by's identity is revealed, either through his own words or Google-Fu.
9) The thread is locked.
10) We go back to discussing the digitals.
Did I miss anything?
^ :clap:
EDIT: Also, I think "failureship" should be added to the CAP lexicon. It's kind of poetic >:D
Sir, your leadership in failureship has been quite extraordinary. Here is your CAPF2B Award for your uncomplishments.
OK, I >really< like "uncomplishments". That'll get used.
Did Radioman just dive bomb us again?
Quote from: spaatzmom on February 07, 2013, 05:18:35 AM
Did Radioman just dive bomb us again?
No one saw the direct hit, so it's an unconfirmed hit. Either way, this is the CIVIL air patrol, and everyone knows we shouldn't have bombs.
Quote from: Need2know on February 07, 2013, 03:49:07 AM
My question will be simple. Have wing commanders been relieved from their position for their failureship instead of leadership of the wing?
To answer your question, probably not, and whatever reason you have to be angry with your Wing commander, I highly doubt that your wing commander has done something so heinous, so flagrant that it gives those above him/her no choice but to remove him/her. I feel that you should be warned that only in an
EXTREME case will someone be removed from their positon, as it would look badly on Cap, and more specifically those who put said Wing commander in the position.
Also, whatever angry letters, emails, and posts on CAPTALK that you write, I highly doubt that it would make the slightest difference, except for the fact that you will be in poor graces with your wing, probably for quite some time. My advice in short: Drop it, its probably not worth it.
Quote from: usafaux2004 on February 07, 2013, 05:24:48 AM
Quote from: spaatzmom on February 07, 2013, 05:18:35 AM
Did Radioman just dive bomb us again?
No one saw the direct hit, so it's an unconfirmed hit. Either way, this is the CIVIL air patrol, and everyone knows we shouldn't have bombs.
FTFY, Mikey.... ::)
Quote from: usafaux2004 on February 07, 2013, 05:24:48 AM
Quote from: spaatzmom on February 07, 2013, 05:18:35 AM
Did Radioman just dive bomb us again?
No one saw the direct hit, so it's an unconfirmed hit. Either way, this is the CIVIL air patrol, and everyone knows we shouldn't have bombs.
I prefer having dual phenomenology before launching an attack on warning. That being said...I'm all for waking up my crew partner and getting ready to launch retaliatory strikes.
Sky King, Sky King, this is Crystal Place with an EAM message........:)
So... If I've had a failureship in one of my unaccomplishments, does this mean that I've had a success?
You, my friend, are a victim of disorganized thinking. You are under the unfortunate impression that just because you run away you have no courage; you're confusing courage with wisdom.
Quote from: Need2know on February 07, 2013, 03:49:07 AM
My question will be simple. Have wing commanders been relieved from their position for their failureship instead of leadership of the wing?
When you are finish texting, welcome aboard newbie >:D
Quote from: Need2know on February 07, 2013, 03:49:07 AM
My question will be simple. Have wing commanders been relieved from their position for their failureship instead of leadership of the wing?
That's need to know, Need2know. And you have no NEED TO KNOW. >:D
Quote from: lordmonar on February 07, 2013, 08:29:00 AM
Sky King, Sky King, this is Crystal Place with an EAM message........:)
Watch War Games much? (And they got it wrong too.)
It would take something really egregious...open violation of CAP regs or of Federal/State/County/Municipal Laws.
That, I think, would count as "failureship," and that's the truthiness.
See DJN245's post above, relax and take a deep breath. I don't think I've ever heard of a wing commander being relieved for a failure of leadership.
On the other hand, it happens in the real military all the time. But that's an entirely different animal...
Quote from: lordmonar on February 07, 2013, 08:29:00 AM
Sky King, Sky King, this is Crystal Place with an EAM message........:)
Sir, we have a properly formatted emergency action message, permission to authenticate?
The white zone is for immediate loading and unloading of passengers only. There is no stopping in the red zone.
No matter where you go, there you are.
Jack
Quote from: usafaux2004 on February 07, 2013, 05:24:48 AM
No one saw the direct hit, so it's an unconfirmed hit. Either way, this is the CIVIL air patrol, and everyone knows we shouldn't have bombs.
We are only allowed weapons of mass distraction.
I enjoyed some of the comments, some are quite hilarious.
Researching CAP regulations, there isn't much on relieving a Wing Commander, just allowing the member to retain their CAP rank if they performed well. Also, to alleviate any concerns, I have no vendetta, and I have no anger towards our current Wing Commander. The person is just out of his element to effectively lead. He has no goals or plans to accomplish any of our missions. He has been cited by National Headquarters for "lack of leadership", but still remains in the position. He shuts people down; doesn't motivate his staff to excel; a hostile environment exists; he retaliates against members. Basically he is the poster child for the "Peter Principle".
When I used to write NCO and Officer Evaluations, I always looked at leadership versus failureship based upon the goals and accomplishments set forth. The Wing is leaderless under his command, thus my comment on his "failureship". Many event execution planning is "JIT", just in time, usually, within the week of the event even though subordinates mention them in staff meetings. He does not allow prior planning.
He normally rejects assist him to become a better commander (I am a former Air Force Wing Commander), but he refused any assistance.
In my business, he would be considered a "toxic leader", and I would have fired him.
So, going back to my original post, has there been a successful firing of a Wing Commander?
I do know that, during the reign of HWSRN, Wing Commanders became something of an endangered species, since he could (and would) pressure Region CCs to dismiss any that weren't doing things the way he wanted them done. Were these dismissals for cause? That depends on who you ask, I suppose.
But the prevailing sentiment is that HWSRN was pretty blatant about using his National CC position to influence and punish whenever he felt like it.
Apart from his tenure, however ... I don't know.
Jack
There have been plenty of instances of Wing Commanders being fired. I can't really think of one that resulted solely from varying thoughts on the person's leadership style.
However, the toxic leaders that you talk about usually do something that violates our regulations. They mishandle IG complaints, get put on logistics freeze, have their Wing shrink and almost collapse, etc. Many times in those situations (bad leadership), the Region Commander will suggest that they resign.
They aren't going to fire them simply because some members may disagree with their leadership style, but if it has tangible results that can be tied to that leadership style, sure, Wing Commanders quietly leave all the time.
The short timer of a couple commanders back, in CAWG may be such an example..
Quote from: Need2know on February 08, 2013, 03:19:41 PMSo, going back to my original post, has there been a successful firing of a Wing Commander?
Yes.
Quote from: Need2know on February 08, 2013, 03:19:41 PM
I enjoyed some of the comments, some are quite hilarious.
Researching CAP regulations, there isn't much on relieving a Wing Commander, just allowing the member to retain their CAP rank if they performed well. Also, to alleviate any concerns, I have no vendetta, and I have no anger towards our current Wing Commander. The person is just out of his element to effectively lead. He has no goals or plans to accomplish any of our missions. He has been cited by National Headquarters for "lack of leadership", but still remains in the position. He shuts people down; doesn't motivate his staff to excel; a hostile environment exists; he retaliates against members. Basically he is the poster child for the "Peter Principle".
When I used to write NCO and Officer Evaluations, I always looked at leadership versus failureship based upon the goals and accomplishments set forth. The Wing is leaderless under his command, thus my comment on his "failureship". Many event execution planning is "JIT", just in time, usually, within the week of the event even though subordinates mention them in staff meetings. He does not allow prior planning.
He normally rejects assist him to become a better commander (I am a former Air Force Wing Commander), but he refused any assistance.
In my business, he would be considered a "toxic leader", and I would have fired him.
So, going back to my original post, has there been a successful firing of a Wing Commander?
My friend, I had an experience very much like yours, except it involved a squadron commander--a retired AF major. I was a 21yo SM 2/Lt back then.
Very difficult situation since I was raised to respect my elders and those in authority. He was given to rants which usually involved profanity and personal degredation of his target of choice. Since I was the youngest, it seemed I was his most frequent victim.
The cadets hated him. Since I was close to the age of the cadets, they often brought their complaints to me. No one dared bring their gripes to him personally for fear of being eaten alive.
It ended up he was relieved by tje Group CO based on numerous incidents and complaints.
Bottom line, I always felt bad about the entire affair. It was a learning experience in dealing with difficult people. I wished I'd handled the matter differently than I did. I doubt I could have made a difference in the long run. He'd amassed a good number of enemies in his tenure. His downfall was inevitable.
The Group cdr interviewed me as part of the investigation. I told the truth. My CO was relieved of command prior to the next meeting. He blamed me saying that I had been disloyal to him. Maybe I was. But just the same I had to be honest with the Group commander in what I saw during the sq cdrs tenure.
Unless you have something which could be a sustained complaint, the odds are there's little recourse.
Generally, the only way wing, and even unit CC's can be removed is for clear, objective violations of regulations, multiple poor CI's, or malfeasance / negligence in regards to CAP funds or property. Barring those, which generally have to be habitual and serious, NHQ will not generally consider removing a Wing CC early.
"Failure of leadership" is not a sustainable complaint, nor is it likely to have any significant meaning to Region or NHQ. Issues like this presuppose that
no one else is aware or cares enough about a wing CC except the person making the allegations.
Your wing CC reports to a Region CC and has to interact directly with CAP-USAF. These people have eyes, ears, and opinions, and if they don't see an issue, there likely isn't one.
My view has been that NHQ is very conservative in regards to things "rocking the boat", and are much happier with a Wing CC who quietly maintains
the ship, while changing very little (including long-term "issues"), then someone who will be a "Leader!", implement radical change and risk alienating the quiet majority.