CAP Talk

 was thinking again (UH-OH) about our 'empty shirt' comments.  How many actual people we have actual carrying out our missions versus how many on our books.

This got me thinking about all the positions that need to be filled in a unit.  Being undermanned implies that people are filling in more than one spot.  Spots that realistically could be filled by other people.

My unit has a big senior presence and many jobs are filled, but most of them are still really new, getting up to speed, etc. 

So, I am the Wing CAC Advisor, Squadron DCC, Leadership Officer, Logistics/Supply/Transportation, Ground ES Officer and fill in MLO in a unit with 40+ seniors.  95% of them are active, but again, they're for the most part still really green.

I also notice that even with a lot of people, it is hard to transition a job position over and properly do OJT, etc when you have so many hats.  What do y'all do to remedy that?

So with that, how many hats are you wearing currently?  What do you think is the real cause?  Have you ever actually been in a unit that people only have one duty assignment?

 I really don't have one yet (need to go through phase one first), but when I talk about what possibilities there are, it turns into a "What do you want to do", and a "Well, what do you need me to do, and I can learn others later" type of thing untill we can figure it out....There's still plenty of time.

I currently have only one, Wing Plans and Programs, but I am also the Project Director for our encampment.

Before I left the unit, I had several (5+) when I first came on board as commander.  Over my tenure, I was able to recruit and train people to take over most of my hats.

Acting DCC, Activities Officer, PAO when we need it, basically the Recruiting Officer, the only one that can make the computer, eServices and our website work which I guess makes me the IT Officer and help the CC out with anything else he needs help with. Usually end up helping with supply and random ES paperwork.

We have about 15 active seniors but when you ask if they want to actually do work they all kind of disappear or find some other excuse about why they don't have the time.

Quote from: edmo1 on March 20, 2009, 04:11:45 PM
Acting DCC, Activities Officer, PAO when we need it, basically the Recruiting Officer, the only one that can make the computer, eServices and our website work which I guess makes me the IT Officer and help the CC out with anything else he needs help with. Usually end up helping with supply and random ES paperwork.

We have about 15 active seniors but when you ask if they want to actually do work they all kind of disappear or find some other excuse about why they don't have the time.

Hmm, you belong to that club too.

Quote from: edmo1 on March 20, 2009, 04:11:45 PM
We have about 15 active seniors but when you ask if they want to actually do work they all kind of disappear or find some other excuse about why they don't have the time.

Ground them, no staff assignment...no flying, ground team or the like.  That is only a suggestion.  The key to a surviving unit is staffing.  Failure to distribute the load will cruch the backs of the others, and that is bad for morale.

Major Carrales,

I'm kind of surprised by your response, taking the 'punishment' road.  It seems to me that approach would more than likely leave you with an open staff assignment and one less person flying.

I mentioned that I have quite a few positions currently, but it doesn't necessarily mean that people aren't working toward taking them over.  I think that many/most of our members joining a volunteer org would understand the need to help.  Often, just saying, "I can't do this alone, I need help" will get many of those spots filled.

Perhaps this is one case where being "less AFAUX' and more '501(c)(3)" is more beneficial.  Tapping that human side of our members and asking them to help, to me would be a better approach.  I think when many of our units say they "ask for help." It more of the "I'm looking for volunteers to fill these spots, if you want to, let me know."  Instead of, "Jim,  I could really use your help in running supply.  It should only take about an hour a month and would really help the unit."

In the first case you give people an open ended choice.  In the second, you're tapping them personally and appealing to their emotional/human side.

Quote from: jimmydeanno on March 20, 2009, 06:32:20 PM
Major Carrales,

I'm kind of surprised by your response, taking the 'punishment' road.  It seems to me that approach would more than likely leave you with an open staff assignment and one less person flying.

I mentioned that I have quite a few positions currently, but it doesn't necessarily mean that people aren't working toward taking them over.  I think that many/most of our members joining a volunteer org would understand the need to help.  Often, just saying, "I can't do this alone, I need help" will get many of those spots filled.

Perhaps this is one case where being "less AFAUX' and more '501(c)(3)" is more beneficial.  Tapping that human side of our members and asking them to help, to me would be a better approach.  I think when many of our units say they "ask for help." It more of the "I'm looking for volunteers to fill these spots, if you want to, let me know."  Instead of, "Jim,  I could really use your help in running supply.  It should only take about an hour a month and would really help the unit."

In the first case you give people an open ended choice.  In the second, you're tapping them personally and appealing to their emotional/human side.

I didn't mean for that to be taken so seriously, in re-reading it an implied tone might see it as such.  Many people accuse me of the use of too much hyperbole, this is one of those occasions.

However, recall the parable of the RED HEN that desired to plant corn and bake bread. She asked for help countless times an was given none, however, there were plenty of mouths ready when the time came to eat.

I likely should have said it in my usual (above) sage like tone. ;)

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 20, 2009, 07:47:44 PM

Quote from: jimmydeanno
I'm kind of surprised by your response, taking the 'punishment' road.  It seems to me that approach would more than likely leave you with an open staff assignment and one less person flying.

I didn't mean for that to be taken so seriously, in re-reading it an implied tone might see it as such.  Many people accuse me of the use of too much hyperbole, this is one of those occasions.

I wasn't taking it too seriously, I was just surprised that it came from you (who typically gives sage like advice).  Other respondents here I would assume that course of action would come first :)

Three official "titles" but I also help out with Admin and Cadet programs. In ES I'm MRO and MSA

PAO and Communications Officer. 

On the ES side:
CUL-T
IO-T
MRO
MS-T
MSA
SET
UDF-T

Five wing positions - director of professional development, personnel officer, communications licensing officer, testing officer and web security administrator. In time I may back off a bit as others should be given the opportunity to serve at these various assignments. In ES I'm MRO and MSA qualified - that's it!

Well, I'm my squadron's AE Officer. When I'm not doing that, I'm usually helping out the cadets or I'm doing odd jobs on the SM side of the house (filing papers, helping out with ES, etc.)

Up until recently, I was one of a handful of Senior Members who had experience in Cadet Programs and that could show up. Now we have a few more that can help out. The Deputy Commander for Cadets and the Cadet Commander (father and son) can't show up to all the meetings due to activities they are involved in and work. So we have to pick up the slack in some areas.

On the senior side, we have a bunch of pilots that had no idea that there was anything more to CAP than flying. That is slowly changing.

The cause of most of my headaches here are the redundancies. There are too many different sets of rules (National, Region, Wing, Local, unspoken, State stuff that has nothing to do with us but my SQ/CC insists on following none the less...read wing/local politics) that we need to follow. Most of our SMs don't want to deal with that so they limit their participation to simple things that don't have to deal with local/wing politics. I transfered to this unit six months ago so I'm still adjusting to everything.

I can't count that high...  I'm a Squadron CC and have a Wing job as well.  If nobody else is doing it, it falls on me by default...  man I could use some sleep!

Most of our regular members, meaning they make it to more than one meeting a month, wear at least two hats, and some of us have more.

Just check out the signature. ;D

Probably anyone interested enough in CAP to participate in this board is probably wearing multiple hats.  Your average member ain't going to be on CAPTalk. 

I lost count years ago, although it it getting better these days. I have one at Wing, Only one at Group now (usta be two), and probably only three at the squadron now actually listed on the PA. I still assist in a couple of areas without a specific assignment there.

I run a group with 3 active staff.....

I wear a lot of hats

So far, ~80% of respondents have said they have more than one job.  I find this rather intriguing.

What are we talking about here?

1) As RiverAux pointed out, CAPTalkers are more active in CAP anyway.

2) An actual shortage of people to fill the positions?

3) Y'all being unwilling to give up some spots?

4) Some other underlying cause?

It just seems to me that we're setting ourselves up for some serious burnout.  Honestly, depending on what exactly it is we're doing, it could take some serious time. 

Someone doing Logistics (supply, transportation and maintenance) in a small squadron might not be as burdened as someone that is doing those three at the wing level.  I know that sometimes I find it difficult to do all of my positions or focus 100% on each area.  But, I'm also one of the more active CAPers I know and do CAP as one of my hobbies.

I currently hold no jobs because I am in the process of transfering from a Group Headquarters  to Jacksonville Composite Squadron do to a move with the financee to St Augustine FL from St Petersburg FL.

When I was at group I held

Group Administration Officer, Personnel Officer, Testing Officer. ADY to FL-445 as Administration Officer, Personnel Officer, and Testing Officer and ADY to FL-066 as Emergency Services Officer.

I just gave up DCC. I am now the Deputy for Seniors, Operations Officer and I coordinate the Orientation Flights for my group and my squadron.

We just went through this subject a week or two ago.