Coast Guard Auxiliary members pay for all of their own uniforms and insignia the same as CAP. Trust me, I just got appointed as National Director for the Vessel Exam and RBS Partner Visitation Directorate and spent $200+ updating my uniforms with 4 stripes and eagles.

Being top-heavy is a given in any organization that lacks an "up or out" policy. It seems disingenuous to promote members, and then demote them, on a regular basis.

I think the CG Auxies are provided with their rank insignia, while CAP members usually have to buy theirs. That makes the changes simpler, and avoids a bit of sewing for those with uniforms requiring it.

Quote from: CAP9907 on December 11, 2025, 06:53:27 PMPerhaps decades in CAP has left me a bit jaded about our top-heavy appearance.

One of the reasons given by National for making it harder to make Lt Col now. The Level V requirement will definitely thin the herd.

Quote from: CAP9907 on December 11, 2025, 06:53:27 PMI fear that you took my post as a personal attack, and it wasn't. My comment was not aimed at you as I have no idea who you are IRL, it was a response to the forum in general. I do not believe that anyone is advocating reverting to some rank after command either.

Be an outsider and walk into a room with 6 CAP LtCol's, ranging from 33 to 70 y/o and try to figure out who the Group Commander is and who the local squadron IT bubba is. Perhaps decades in CAP has left me a bit jaded about our top-heavy appearance.

And perhaps my temper and lack of tact got me this morning. Apologies. At risk of derailing this thread (not really much to derail though) I do see your point on the top-heavy appearance.  It's the artifact of having an organization that didn't equate grade with responsibility, but rather with individual achievements.  We went in a somewhat correct direction when we equated Lt Col to Level 5 instead of level 4, but then made level 5 easier to achieve with Vol U. So not sure that solved anything in that department. Not to say Level 5 is an easy achievement now as it still is not and worthy of recognition. 

I'm not sure what the solution here would be though other than a complete overhaul of our education training program and/or adding significantly more barriers to promotions. Make Grades reflective of duty assignment?  Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the CGAUX does this?  Must be at least a Unit Commander to promote to Lt Col and it's rescinded upon completion of your term unless you complete level 5 and move up to a higher command or specific Group/Wing assignment? and continue to do this to keep grade or get bumped down to captain or Major?

Quote from: biomed441 on December 11, 2025, 03:04:22 PM

Quote from: CAP9907 on December 09, 2025, 06:16:18 PMAnother solution searching for a problem, just like the NCO program. Our rank structure is already warped with random Col's and way too many Lt Col's running around with no command responsibilities. Just no.

Not trying to solve anything. I said I had no opinion either way and could see more reasons to not have them come back than to come back.

And sorry for being one of those Lt Col's with no command responsibilities... Having been in multiple command assignments, many of which I didn't want because other members can't or wont step up to fill those roles. Maybe I'm a little tired of doing all the work and think some of the newer members need to step up and I can sit back and provide mentorship.  Or you can force me into retirement, but I'd like to see what happens when suddenly all of our Cols and Lt Cols are told they can't be in CAP anymore because they're not holding a command or that they're going to be demoted unless they're commanders again.  Let me know how that works out for the organization.

I fear that you took my post as a personal attack, and it wasn't. My comment was not aimed at you as I have no idea who you are IRL, it was a response to the forum in general. I do not believe that anyone is advocating reverting to some rank after command either.

Be an outsider and walk into a room with 6 CAP LtCol's, ranging from 33 to 70 y/o and try to figure out who the Group Commander is and who the local squadron IT bubba is. Perhaps decades in CAP has left me a bit jaded about our top-heavy appearance.

Quote from: PHall on December 10, 2025, 06:16:08 PMWell if you want to bring Warrant Officers back to CAP you'll have to convince the Air Force it's a good idea since the Air Force controls the officer grades in CAP.

I have no care one way or another. Just an observation that I thought might be worth having a chat about.  Jury is still out on if starting a discussion on "gasp" a discussion board was a good idea. 

Quote from: CAP9907 on December 09, 2025, 06:16:18 PMAnother solution searching for a problem, just like the NCO program. Our rank structure is already warped with random Col's and way too many Lt Col's running around with no command responsibilities. Just no.

Not trying to solve anything. I said I had no opinion either way and could see more reasons to not have them come back than to come back.

And sorry for being one of those Lt Col's with no command responsibilities... Having been in multiple command assignments, many of which I didn't want because other members can't or wont step up to fill those roles. Maybe I'm a little tired of doing all the work and think some of the newer members need to step up and I can sit back and provide mentorship.  Or you can force me into retirement, but I'd like to see what happens when suddenly all of our Cols and Lt Cols are told they can't be in CAP anymore because they're not holding a command or that they're going to be demoted unless they're commanders again.  Let me know how that works out for the organization.

Well if you want to bring Warrant Officers back to CAP you'll have to convince the Air Force it's a good idea since the Air Force controls the officer grades in CAP.

CAPR 35-5, 22 Nov 2016, Para 1.5.10.  Changes to CAP Grade Structure.  The Air Force has authority over the CAP grade structure. Requests for changes to the CAP General Officer Grade Structure must be approved by the Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Requests for changes to the CAP Grade Structure for Colonels and below will be approved by the CAP-USAF/CC.

Our version of Warrant Officers already exist...FO, TFO, and SFO. Those grades are reserved for senior members under the age of 21. As it is, a good portion of our membership doesn't even know what they are. I remember attending a Vermont Wing SLS back in the early 90s as a 20 year old Senior Flight Officer. I kept being told I was in the wrong classroom and that the Cadet Advisory Council meeting was down the hall. Current and former military Warrant Officers can already receive an equivalent regular officer grade. No reason to make things more complex than they already are.

As far as I'm concerned, warrant officers in CAP can stay gone. I was one many moons ago, and there wasn't much functional difference from regular officers. It wasn't even a 21 and under thing. When I joined, I knew a couple of WOs in their 40s.