Question...
For SQTRs, I assume family members cannot sign off other family members, or spouse to spouse sign-offs for SQTR Qualifications. I can possibly see situations for GTM3 happening with "sure you have the stuff" but when you start getting into the high level agency quals, GBD, Air Ops, Planning, Logistics, etc... it seems it could be more critical.
Could this be regarded as a conflict of interest, if this occuring?
I know, personally, as the ESO I will take into question if I recognize IDs that match up with people who are related, and what is being signed off. But for others, it may not be so obvious.
I'm just looking for some feedback as to what others are doing/not doing.
Brian
PAWG
No rule specifically forbidding this type of action.....of course the ESO and Commander have the duty to make sure everyone is really qualified.
While there might be a conflict....just because the trainer is a spouce/father/brother/son of the traineed does not mean the training and qualification is not valid.
Nothing in CAPR 60-3 precludes qualifying a family member, only that you can't certify your own training. When I conduct training, my cadet son isn't excluded. After all, Integrity is one of our Core Values.
Yes, I agree that integrity is a core value, but I have been involved in the past where the TCO for a unit had resigned the position since his daughter was a cadet. This would at least reduce the chances of "well she only passed because her father is the TCO..." type of allegations.
I didn't find anything in 50-4, either.
Just curious... has anyone seen cases of pencil-whipping and subsqently got burned by it? Not as in a direct reprimand, but in the instance when you asked someone to do something and the "deer in headlights" look followed?
Brian
PAWG
The only time I have ever been in this position is when I was asked to signoff someone's son so that there WAS no appearance of impropriety.
My wife and I avoid the problem by training together. Somebody else signs our SQTRs.
Quote from: Rangercap on October 07, 2008, 03:48:46 PMJust curious... has anyone seen cases of pencil-whipping and subsqently got burned by it? Not as in a direct reprimand, but in the instance when you asked someone to do something and the "deer in headlights" look followed?
Oh...pencil-whipping happens all the time...and it does not require a familial relaltionship. Usually just friends "helping" each other out.....and not just in ES.
Quote from: JoeTomasone on October 07, 2008, 06:14:59 PM
The only time I have ever been in this position is when I was asked to signoff someone's son so that there WAS no appearance of impropriety.
If possible, this is the best way to do it, as you say, to avoid any appearance of bias.
While there don' t appear to be any regulations that specifically prohibit what you are suggesting, I would suggest that it not be done.
The mere suggestion of impropriety is enough to set off all sorts of bells and alarms. You might not be guilty, but you certainly would have a hard time explaining your actions. There are things called "ethics" and I think that this falls into that category. It is very hard to impossible to legislate against or for every possibility, so caution is always a good way to go in cases like this.
Quote from: bosshawk on October 07, 2008, 07:47:02 PM
While there don' t appear to be any regulations that specifically prohibit what you are suggesting, I would suggest that it not be done.
The mere suggestion of impropriety is enough to set off all sorts of bells and alarms. You might not be guilty, but you certainly would have a hard time explaining your actions. There are things called "ethics" and I think that this falls into that category. It is very hard to impossible to legislate against or for every possibility, so caution is always a good way to go in cases like this.
Was that at me? I don't think I made myself clear. We train for something at the same time with someone else as the trainer/evaluator.
Quote from: Rangercap on October 07, 2008, 03:48:46 PM
Yes, I agree that integrity is a core value...
Uh, pal, I don't think you have any choice but to agree -- since it actually IS one of the core values.
;D
Davidsinn: no, my post was in response to the original post. It wasn't aimed at anyone in particular: a philosophical response to a philosophical question. With over 30 years as an Army officer and another 16 in CAP, I have seen just about anything that anyone can dream up.
It sounds like you are doing just what I suggested: don't sign off a relative for anything.
Quote from: bosshawk on October 08, 2008, 12:15:19 AM
Davidsinn: no, my post was in response to the original post. It wasn't aimed at anyone in particular: a philosophical response to a philosophical question. With over 30 years as an Army officer and another 16 in CAP, I have seen just about anything that anyone can dream up.
It sounds like you are doing just what I suggested: don't sign off a relative for anything.
And I would add to this that if you need to sign off a family member because there's no alternative (you're the only qualified person, for example), then have someone else observe the evaluation.
I agree that it is better to have someone that is not related sign you off. I know if one of my family members in CAP signed me of someone would probably BS about it and say I don't know what I'm talking about even though I know if one of my family members signed me of they'd make sure I know what to do.
I don't think I would personally have a problem with a family member signing off task training as long as someone else verified the person actually met all the criteria and deserved the ops qual - very delicate situation, but strive for checks and balances. Preferable, of course, to avoid the situation, but not always possible.
Quote from: davidsinn on October 07, 2008, 06:20:27 PM
My wife and I avoid the problem by training together. Somebody else signs our SQTRs.
A [CAP] family that trains together, remains together!!! :clap:
WIWAC we had a CAP family in my unit. The commander, his wife was deputy commander, and the cadet commander was their son. Oddly enough, they were the only seniors we had. Then we had a couple AD soldiers join, and suddenly the commander and company left. For some reason, I vaguely remember hearing the word "misappriation of funds." :o
Quote from: LtCol057 on October 11, 2008, 02:36:30 AM
WIWAC we had a CAP family in my unit. The commander, his wife was deputy commander, and the cadet commander was their son. Oddly enough, they were the only seniors we had. Then we had a couple AD soldiers join, and suddenly the commander and company left. For some reason, I vaguely remember hearing the word "misappriation of funds." :o
Having a squadron run by one family was a bad idea on the group commanders part. I don't have a problem with a squadron commander having family within in the unit but when no one else is their I can forsee problems.
I don't think we had groups back then. Might have, don't remember, cause it was way back in 1970. Lots of things have changed since then.
Quote from: LtCol057 on October 12, 2008, 05:51:07 AM
I don't think we had groups back then. Might have, don't remember, cause it was way back in 1970. Lots of things have changed since then.
We, as in your wing, or we, as in CAP in general. NJWG had 5 groups when I joined in'64, and still has 4 now.
We had discussed this at Civil Air Portal two year ago. The topic was originally about "paying the piper" with family and CAP. Some folks suggested that the best course of action was to involve spouses.
In Texas, we have lots of Husband and Wife teams (some altogehter families), since they are well trained in the proper manner, it is unlikely that there is inpropriety.
I assume it all depends on if these people are doing things in the correct way, or if they are using a form of neoptism. I have only known the prior, well trained couples in the service of CAP. I'm sure the latter exists somewhere, but I've never seen it to any notable extent.