I recently came across a CAP Times from June 1960 in which they were announcing the new senior member training program. Evidently, it was one of the earliest attempts to standardize this training across CAP.
It was primarily based on completion of various modules in a correspondence course program (which could be waived for those with various types of military training), combined with time-in-grade, a minimum 75% regular meeting attendance record, and having to obtain a certain number of points based on participation in various CAP activities and/or obtaining certain other CAP qualifications. All of which are ideas that have been floated around here a lot.
Probably the most astonishing thing to me was the short length of the TIG requirements.
To become a Warrant Officer: 6 months
To become 2nd Lt: 6 months as a CAP member or 6 months as a Warrant Officer (same today)
To become 1st Lt: 6 months as a 2nd Lt. (now 12 months)
To become Capt: 8 months as 1st Lt. (now 18 months)
To become Maj: 12 months as Capt. (now 36 months)
To become Lt. Col.: 18 months as Maj. (now 48 months)
So, a hard charger could become a Lt. Col. in less than 5 years.
So, I'd say that the program has tightened up since then. About the only thing they were doing then that it would really be practical to do now is return to a minimum meeting attendance rate and since NHQ announced somewhere recently (don't remember where) that there would soon be an attendance tracking option in eservices, perhaps it would even be possible.
Quote from: RiverAux on September 27, 2009, 05:01:55 PM
I recently came across a CAP Times from June 1960 in which they were announcing the new senior member training program. Evidently, it was one of the earliest attempts to standardize this training across CAP.
It was primarily based on completion of various modules in a correspondence course program (which could be waived for those with various types of military training), combined with time-in-grade, a minimum 75% regular meeting attendance record, and having to obtain a certain number of points based on participation in various CAP activities and/or obtaining certain other CAP qualifications. All of which are ideas that have been floated around here a lot.
Probably the most astonishing thing to me was the short length of the TIG requirements.
To become a Warrant Officer: 6 months
To become 2nd Lt: 6 months as a CAP member or 6 months as a Warrant Officer (same today)
To become 1st Lt: 6 months as a 2nd Lt. (now 12 months)
To become Capt: 8 months as 1st Lt. (now 18 months)
To become Maj: 12 months as Capt. (now 36 months)
To become Lt. Col.: 18 months as Maj. (now 48 months)
So, a hard charger could become a Lt. Col. in less than 5 years.
So, I'd say that the program has tightened up since then. About the only thing they were doing then that it would really be practical to do now is return to a minimum meeting attendance rate and since NHQ announced somewhere recently (don't remember where) that there would soon be an attendance tracking option in eservices, perhaps it would even be possible.
But here's where your "Hard Charger" would get messed up.
Back in the 60's there were "grade authorizations" in the 20-1.
IIRC (SarDragon chime in anytime), if you were in a Flight, the highest grade allowed was 1st Lt.
A Squadron with 25 or less was authorized one (1) Captain and the rest were Warrant Officers/Lieutenants.
A Squadron with 50 or less was authorized a couple of Majors.
If you wanted Lieutenant Colonel then you had to be in a big squadron (100+ members) or at Group / Wing.
This why you rarely saw anybody above the grade of Captain at most squadrons.
IIRC, the Grade Authorizations went away around 1971/72 or so.
I was really focusing on the individual aspect of the program which would allow for incredibly fast promotions. Given that none of the senior member training requirements at that time were based on anything that had anything to do with squadron size, no wonder the grade limitations were dumped. Its not like the senior members in the large units were doing anything different than those in the smaller units, all the promotion requirements were the same.
To go one step further, one could join CAP at Group or Wing level and thereby have "slots" immediately available to them that would never exist at the Squadron level. Another reason this failed.
Non concur - the administrative and coordination requirements of a large unit are significantly different than a small unit.
One or two people cannot successfully manage 100 people in a composite unit, that requires proficient staff which in turn are managed. In ye olde CAP grade was a recognition of that, and also incentive to keep you numbers up.
The Canadian Cadet Instructor Cadre does something similar today, including reduction of grade when numbers drop.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 27, 2009, 05:59:22 PM
Non concur - the administrative and coordination requirements of a large unit are significantly different than a small unit.
True, but that had absolutely nothing to do with the CAP senior member promotion process at the time. As I said, the only requirements were a correspondence course and general program participation. I could show up at meetings and do a few other things in that large unit and get promoted whether I had a staff job or any other type of leadership role or not whereas if I did the exact same thing at a smaller unit, I would not have (apparently).
Quote from: RiverAux on September 27, 2009, 06:02:08 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on September 27, 2009, 05:59:22 PM
Non concur - the administrative and coordination requirements of a large unit are significantly different than a small unit.
True, but that had absolutely nothing to do with the CAP senior member promotion process at the time. As I said, the only requirements were a correspondence course and general program participation. I could show up at meetings and do a few other things in that large unit and get promoted whether I had a staff job or any other type of leadership role or not whereas if I did the exact same thing at a smaller unit, I would not have (apparently).
No, you couldn't - the minimums for a respective grade may have been lower, but there were actual billets based on size, so you couldn't even be considered for promotion unless your unit met those requirements as well.
Same with the cadets.
Quote from: PHall on September 27, 2009, 05:39:47 PM
IIRC, the Grade Authorizations went away around 1971/72 or so.
My CAPF2 for Capt (1977) still has the data filled in for Squadron, Group, and Wing personnel in the grade of Capt vs Authorized. The data is there, even though I was a mission related skills appointment.
I'm really interested in seeing this dinosaur.
Care to black out the personal stuff and put that doc up here?
Quote from: Eclipse on September 27, 2009, 05:59:22 PM
The Canadian Cadet Instructor Cadre does something similar today, including reduction of grade when numbers drop.
Slight differences.
The CIC of Royal Canadian Army/Navy/Sea Cadets are not civilians like we are. They are officers in the Canadian Reserves and hold a Queen's Commission. They are also subject to Queen's Regulations for the Armed Forces.
Non-prior service has to pass a 10-day Basic Officer Training Course and serve a year as Officer Cadet (kind of like a SM, except they have a grade and insignia), before being eligible for their commissioning as 2nd Lieutenant (Army/Air)/Acting Sub-Lieutenant (Navy), of course pronounced
lef-tenant. They are also not eligible for grade higher than Lieutenant-Colonel/Commander.
They wear the same uniforms as their regular military counterparts, with just a different cap badge and "CIC" on their rank slides.
They are also paid.
^ That's all very interesting but doesn't have bearing on the connection Eclipse was making.
Paid, unpaid, commissioned, appointed whatever.
Doesn't change the fact that if the unit size changes or they accept a billet that doesn't allow for their current rank they get dropped down to an appropriate one. T
Quote from: CyBorg on September 28, 2009, 04:42:35 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on September 27, 2009, 05:59:22 PM
The Canadian Cadet Instructor Cadre does something similar today, including reduction of grade when numbers drop.
Slight differences. (snip)
Yes, we know that, however none of that has anything to do with this discussion, but excellent use of Google, though!
The only salient fact is that the CIC's grade structure is based primarily on the number of cadets in the unit.
Concerning our Canadian colleagues, I understand that the authorized grade billets may drop if the membership in a given unit drops.
But does that really mean that officers holding a Queen's commission are actually demoted?
(As opposed to being overgrade in a slot or transferred to another unit, or a holding unit. Or whatever.)
That would seem odd.
Does anybody really know?
They are actually demoted.
The Gent we enjoyed a "cup of tea" with was a Major in the CIC for his position as the equivilent of a Region DCP.
He assumed command of a unit that didn't have the appropriate number to maintain the rank.
He accepted a deduction to captain until he could produce the required numbers.
Per CAPM 20-1 - 1 June 1982
Squadron Strength Over 50 Senior Members
LTC 2
MAJ 4
CPT 15
1LT 10
Squadron Strength of 21 to 50 Senior Members
LTC 1
MAJ 1
CPT 4
1LT 15
2LT 5
Squadron Strength of Less Than 21 Senior Members
MAJ 1
CPT 1
1LT 12
2LT 7
Composite Squadrons
LTC 1
MAJ 2
CPT 4
1LT 19
2LT 5
Quote from: PHall on September 27, 2009, 05:39:47 PM
But here's where your "Hard Charger" would get messed up.
Back in the 60's there were "grade authorizations" in the 20-1.
IIRC (SarDragon chime in anytime), if you were in a Flight, the highest grade allowed was 1st Lt.
A Squadron with 25 or less was authorized one (1) Captain and the rest were Warrant Officers/Lieutenants.
A Squadron with 50 or less was authorized a couple of Majors.
If you wanted Lieutenant Colonel then you had to be in a big squadron (100+ members) or at Group / Wing.
This why you rarely saw anybody above the grade of Captain at most squadrons.
IIRC, the Grade Authorizations went away around 1971/72 or so.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 28, 2009, 04:57:00 AM
Yes, we know that, however none of that has anything to do with this discussion, but excellent use of Google, though!
Thank you, but not just use of Google. I'm a border rat. There are quite a few cadet groups of all three services not far from me. I've had the pleasure of interacting with their very disciplined young people and dedicated CIC staff.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 28, 2009, 04:57:00 AM
The only salient fact is that the CIC's grade structure is based primarily on the number of cadets in the unit.
Actually the point I was trying to make is that comparing CAP officers and Canadian CIC officers is kind of apples-and-oranges. They are Real Military, we're not. If their DND sets down rules for officer allocation, they have little choice but to salute and execute, unless they want to apply for release (they can't just quit). With us, if National instituted officer staffing levels, we have the option of taking our toys and going home. Not that I would want that (I wouldn't), but I think there are (hopefully few) people who would say "no way am I taking a demotion" and indeed bug out.
Quote from: IceNine on September 28, 2009, 05:30:20 AM
They are actually demoted.
The Gent we enjoyed a "cup of tea" with was a Major in the CIC for his position as the equivilent of a Region DCP.
He assumed command of a unit that didn't have the appropriate number to maintain the rank.
He accepted a deduction to captain until he could produce the required numbers.
Since he is actually a commissioned officer, wouldn't the reduction in rank be some sort of red flag in his personnel record? And, when he got his unit up to strength again, was his grade of Major reinstated?
And, for the record, not that it would ever happen, I would not at all mind seeing warrant grades reinstated, for members who are just going to focus on their specialty track and don't really have much of an interest in command.
^ In the CIC program this is a completely normal thing.
Rank Captain and above IIRC are positional. You can retire in a rank but you cannot remain active in that rank unless your unit meets the requirements.