The Commander's Dashboard application in eservices is actually a pretty handy tool for commanders to see key statistics about their wing. Among the things it tracks are the number of incident commanders (at all levels) mission pilots, observers, scanners, and ground team leaders.
I think this is a recent change, but now they are also tracking the number of mission chaplains.
I find this somewhat curious. I'm not sure that I can say this without denigrating the service of mission chaplains, but when it comes right down to it they are not a critical component of CAP ES missions. They are rarely used in that capacitiy, except on the largest missions and even then are not key to the success of the mission.
Now, if the dashboard listed ALL the ES specialties, of course they should be included. But, since the decision has apparently been made to limit the number of specialties tracked to those that are most key to the mission, I just don't see Mission Chaplain making the cut.
For example, are we really saying that its more important to know how many mission chaplains you have than ground team members? Many would argue that Public Information Officers are probably a bit more important. Heck, what about Mission Safety Officers (though I'm not a big fan of this position, given our safety kick it wouldn't shock me if it was there)?
Now, I'm actually not surprised that Mission Chaplains are there because as a group they seem to have an inordinate amount of influence at the national level that doesn't really correlate with their numbers in CAP. They usually seem to get what they want. Its not that what they want is "bad", just that the NB and others seem to spend a lot more time on chaplain issues than is probably warranted based on their actual importance to our missions (of all types). So, I suspect that in this case a high ranking chaplain probably got somebody's ear and convinced them that this was a very important statistic to track.
And?
Is this a "problem/solution" type post where you have not posted a solution or is this just a "I hate chaplains" post where you find some obscure data and point to and say "See they are the evil Illuminati!"
Okay....Mission Chaplains are tracked and Ground Team Members/IOs/MSA/FLS/et al are not....where is the problem?
If there is a problem what is the solution?
If this is not a problem/solution thread can we change the subject line to more accuratly state what you are really trying to say.
I think he's talking about a matter of focus rather than anything else. Is it a matter of "low hanging fruit" being taken care of first or is it someone's pet project. I agree with RiverAux - if there's limited time to accomplish these projects, then that time may have been better used with tracking GTLs, etc.
Quote from: Gunner C on October 28, 2009, 02:43:35 PM
I think he's talking about a matter of focus rather than anything else. Is it a matter of "low hanging fruit" being taken care of first or is it someone's pet project. I agree with RiverAux - if there's limited time to accomplish these projects, then that time may have been better used with tracking GTLs, etc.
This, but I also see lordmonar's point. A lot of Chaplain topics lately.
Quote from: RiverAux on October 28, 2009, 12:46:09 PMFor example, are we really saying that its more important to know how many mission chaplains you have than ground team members? Many would argue that Public Information Officers are probably a bit more important. Heck, what about Mission Safety Officers (though I'm not a big fan of this position, given our safety kick it wouldn't shock me if it was there)?
It's not necessarily more important. It could be a simple matter of tracking a less utilized resource, and then determining if it's more or less effective, if it's needed at all, or a means of determining additional training is necessary for it. Yeah, the report looks at the other specialties, but those are common specialties and are a given at any mission or SAREX. Chaplains are not.
Quote from: RiverAux on October 28, 2009, 12:46:09 PMNow, I'm actually not surprised that Mission Chaplains are there because as a group they seem to have an inordinate amount of influence at the national level that doesn't really correlate with their numbers in CAP. They usually seem to get what they want. Its not that what they want is "bad", just that the NB and others seem to spend a lot more time on chaplain issues than is probably warranted based on their actual importance to our missions (of all types). So, I suspect that in this case a high ranking chaplain probably got somebody's ear and convinced them that this was a very important statistic to track.
This looks like pure supposition on your part. What is defined as "inordinate amount of time" or "usually seem to get what they want"? What are they "getting" out of it?
As to the "a high ranking chaplain probably got someone's ear", what real proof do you have of that? Or is there any?
I don't think it's very logical to assume special treatment just because something is being tracked.
Quoteis this just a "I hate chaplains" post where you find some obscure data and point to and say "See they are the evil Illuminati!"
I guess my hate for chaplains was demonstrated by the thread I started in which I said that they should be allowed to be squadron commanders....
QuoteI think he's talking about a matter of focus rather than anything else.
Correct.
QuoteWhat is defined as "inordinate amount of time" or "usually seem to get what they want"?
I have noticed over the years that it seems like very few National Board meetings go by without some Chaplain-related topic on the agenda. Given that they comprise 1-2% of our membership, that seems inordinate. I believe I've said similar things about the even small "NCO Corps" and their issues.
QuoteA lot of Chaplain topics lately.
As I said in another thread, the new Chaplain reg came out very recently and not having read it before, there seemed to be several potentially interesting things to discuss. Hard to talk about anything relating to Chaplains on CAPTalk though since a lot of times it leads to religious arguments and the topic gets locked.
QuoteIt's not necessarily more important. It could be a simple matter of tracking a less utilized resource, and then determining if it's more or less effective, if it's needed at all, or a means of determining additional training is necessary for it.
Pretty much by definition, anything chosen to be on the Commanders Dashboard is considered to be important and anything not being tracked is less important. Yes, if the commander wished to find out a lot of this information he could dig through various parts of e-services to try to find it, but the dashboard has the stuff that NHQ obviously thinks is most important for Wing CCs to keep their eyes on.
And, yes I was speculating as to the reasons it was there, which is why I used the word "suspect".
It seems to me that the recent items concerning the Chaplain Corps that has come before the NEC and NB has been the result of criticisms that have been spelled out in posts on this board. The new Chaplain Specialty Track and Professional Development rules has taken seriously the criticism that Chaplains were treated "differently" than other Senior Members. I applaud the Chaplain Corps leaders for taking this criticism seriously and going through the correct processes to make the necessary adjustments.
Now, as to the tracking of Mission Chaplain numbers in ES, I don't know exactly what the controversy is? However, the importance of any mission level specialty is directly related to need. Does every mission require a mission chaplain? Probably not. When a chaplain is needed, is it important to know who has the training and can respond? Absolutely.