Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 21, 2019, 07:46:04 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: "...up to Lt. Col....." Insulting and discriminatory
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  All Send this topic Print
Author Topic: "...up to Lt. Col....." Insulting and discriminatory  (Read 17391 times)
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,694

« Reply #20 on: April 13, 2007, 11:45:53 PM »

We need to link rank to billet instead of PD. If we make it tougher to make rank, and only allow promotion through certain ranks unless billeted, we can get a better handle on this whole situation. It's nice to have prior service rank, and maybe that experience needs to be considered but... how difficult is it to have a General walking around while a 1st Lt is running the show.

Just food for thought

Well now....lets look at that then.  First to link rank with billets we need to link billets with mission.

Say....if you have 1 plane you need 10 pilots, 10 observers, 10 Scanners, and 30 mission base personnel.  If you have 1 van you need 5 GTLs, and 15 GTM.  Every unit  will be on task to provide x number of flight line marshalers, x number of radio operators.

Once you have that you then create your billets. 1 Major to command, etc and so forth.

but what happens to the squadron across the street?  The one with twice as many people as your squadron but they don't have a plane?  No plane, no billets, no billets no rank.

Yes it sounds nice to say you are going to tie rank to billets.....but it is a whole lot more complicated than that.  Can you imagine the personnel night mare managing this at a wing level?
Report to moderator   Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
RiverAux
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,978

« Reply #21 on: April 14, 2007, 12:04:49 AM »

I am against all special appointments to any grade within CAP for whatever reason -- prior service, civilian skills, pilot skills, etc.  CAP is its own unique organization and while many of those receiving special appointments can offer a lot of great experience to CAP in very narrow areas they are no different than most of our other senior members in that regard.

CAP grade should only be based on CAP experience and training just as a new person joining most any other paramilitary organization (police for example) would face. 
Report to moderator   Logged
jimmydeanno
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,155
Unit: ǝnƃoɹ

« Reply #22 on: April 14, 2007, 12:13:53 AM »

Whew...this "dilema" is really making me think, and I think I've come around full circle to the original starting point...here's my thought process.

1. If you link grade to position i.e. squadron commander = major and everyone else below them is of a lower grade eventually, the squadron commander is going to be changed.  Now, unlike the AF, where you either move up or out, you can stay in the squadron should you chose not to be squadron commander anymore.  It would be bad form to tell a volunteer to either move up or move out.  This leaves you in the same position you are in now, a major working for a captain.

2. If the grade was temporary, then there would be no point in it exept to show your current level of responsibility.  So you would end up with former wing commanders wearing 2d Lt if they just wanted to be someones assistant at a squadron.  So really, it makes the "grade system" useless.

So does that mean we should abandon the grade system all together and just have "positions?"  "Hi I'm Jim, Squadron Commander" or "Hi I'm Jim, Leadership Officer."

The recognition for holding command positions would be denoted on the ribbon rack with the command service ribbon for "commanders."
Report to moderator   Logged
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill
RiverAux
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,978

« Reply #23 on: April 14, 2007, 12:42:28 AM »

Quote
So does that mean we should abandon the grade system all together and just have "positions?"  "Hi I'm Jim, Squadron Commander" or "Hi I'm Jim, Leadership Officer."

Works great for CG Aux and they even have rank insignia linked with the position, though they don't use the name of that rank and they get to keep the insignia for the highest position they've held even after it is gone. 

You know, I've been on the CG Aux board at military.com for about 3 years and I don't recall hearing one complaint about that particular aspect of the program.  Whereas on CAP boards it is always a topic of discussion every few months. 

I know some will say, well thats CG Aux and they're different....well, that may be, but they are exactly the same in that the rank insignia hold exactly the same amount of weight as CAP insignia (none) and that the important fact is who holds a position within the administrative structure at any one point.   

Heres how it breaks down in my view:  The CG Aux doesn't even pretend to have rank and elects all its leaders and gets to work extremely closely with their parent service and wears almost identical uniforms while many CAP members place a great deal of importance on rank, there is a a very undemocratic structure, and the result is an organization that hardly ever really interacts with its parent service, which ensures that only a small number of CAP members can wear a uniform even remotely like the AF's.   
Report to moderator   Logged
Major Carrales
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,106

« Reply #24 on: April 14, 2007, 12:48:25 AM »

Hold a second, many of you are talking as if every unit is "staffed" to the ideal and that people are hitting their head on the ceiling  jumping up for command.  Let's just be sure to include the realities of CAP.

In our unit, we took a two pronged attack 1) Staff the squadron...once people are comfortable with the idea of CAP and have taken a position,2)  we rotate command positions (if possible, viable and if staff officers are willing.)  The idea is to prevent burnouts.

I am afraid I must echo the sentiments of some others who maintain that the CAP rank and training system is pretty much its own and different animal.  Save for certain courses from the military that transfer (likely due to the fact their their CAP counterparts are designed to fill certain military requirements that non-priors do not have), everything about CAP is totally different.

There will always be a "precarious" issue with CAP rank since CAP is made up of Volunteers that don't leave or change out when they have moved up.

I look at the inactive and active Lt Cols and the like as having rank reflecting of their CAP training, skills or military service.

Just to stir the pot for discussion...suppose one promotes former military on a scale similar to the professional appointments.  Thus... enlisted bump up to 1st Lt, NCOs to Captains, Company Grade officers to Majors and Senior Officers to Lt Colonel.  Disgusted?  Yes?  So am I,   But beware, this is an example of how bad things can get if one fiddles with something like this and is subject to the likeliest of compromises.

BEWARE!!!
Report to moderator   Logged
"We have been given the power to change CAP, let's keep the momentum going!"

Major Joe Ely "Sparky" Carrales, CAP
Commander
Coastal Bend Cadet Squadron
SWR-TX-454
ZigZag911
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,987

« Reply #25 on: April 14, 2007, 05:26:27 AM »


So you're saying that prior military Colonels shouldn't be allowed to be a member of a local squadron as a Colonel unless they take a "bust", which puts them in the same position that they're in now.  What if they don't want to be a member of a "National HQ Squadron?

You are basically saying what I posted above, that if they are doing something "worthy" of the grade, they shouldn't wear it in CAP.  Which then goes to the position based grades...

TAGS - jimmy

Either I expressed it poorly or you misunderstood me:

1) Colonels & above are absolutely worthy of the grade they've earned in their years of service and sacrifice for our nation

2) The idea behind having such officers 'belong' to National is to place them outside the chain of command of the wing, group & region....it really would be awkward to have a squadron commanded by a CAP 1 Lt with a CAP Lt Gen as a member! But with that general officer as a mentor/advisor/instructor, formally assigned to another command, it could work

3) The CAP National CC is a Maj Gen now, and could live with a general officer (even a senior one) on National staff, or as region commander....however, i think it's a lot to ask a region or wing commander (normally a CAP colonel) to have a subordinate commander who was a general officer....so yes, I think if that general wants to exercise command of a CAP wing or subordinate unit, he or she needs to do so as a CAP colonel,,,,no disrespect intended for the officer's achievements, just trying to maintain some sense to the way things work.
Report to moderator   Logged
oldrugged
Recruit

Posts: 9

« Reply #26 on: April 14, 2007, 12:36:07 PM »

I'm disappointed.  Most of the replies have to do with ways to get around the current system the way it is.  What I'm saying is change the system and disassociate totally the grade from the CAP job.  I don't want to be a Wing or National anything.  I just want to be able to hold the same grade in CAP that I earned in the military.  No other job in CAP is tied to grade except at a Wing or National level.  Nothing in the squadron or group is tied to grade.  Why do the Wing and National jobs have to be the only ones tied to the 0-6 and above positions.  I don't personally care how many 2-stars there are in CAP.  There will be only ONE national commander.  I don't care if colonels abound in CAP, there will still be only one wing commander.  In a squadron, there certainly does not have to be only one officer of the grade that a squadron commander holds.  Why does it have to be so at the wing or national levels?  What I'm saying is have a CONSISTENT policy, no matter what it is.  Don't make it accepting of military grade at SOME levels, and deny it at others.  I can see how CAP might want to cut off accepting grades above those allowed at the top.  For example, I can understand a policy that caps the CAP grades at 2-stars, because CAP isn't allowed to have Lieutentant Generals, Generals, and 5-star Generals of the CAP (??equivalent of General of the Army?).  But why does there have to be a very limited number of Colonels, Bridagier Generals, and Major Generals??  Frankly put, EGO is the only reason that makes sense to me from what I've been told so far.  The reasons I've received so far from command levels amounts to nonsense excuses, not reasons.  Like far too many other excuses in Corporate America, and believe me, the heirarchy of the CAP resembles Corporate America far more than Military America, it's basically, "We do it that way because we do it that way, and don't confuse us with facts."

Someone made a comment about my being badly treated in my home squadron.  Not so.  I've been well treated and well-received in my home squadron.  My beef is with CAP policy from the top, and the attitudes I've had expressed to me about my asking questions and stating my opinions regarding this issue, as well as the lack of involvement of the heatlhcare personnel in CAP.  It's a "don't ask, because we don't tell" kind of policy.
Report to moderator   Logged
oldrugged
Recruit

Posts: 9

« Reply #27 on: April 14, 2007, 12:45:05 PM »

By the way, does anyone know how to change my "position" on this site?  I've gone in and tried to change my "position " from "recruit," but, although it lists it on my profile, I can't find any place in the "change" options that will allow me to change, or even list, my "position."  I don't even know where it came from as it is now.  For the record, I'm far from being a "recruit."
Report to moderator   Logged
MIKE
Super Moderator

Posts: 5,461
Unit: LANTAREA

« Reply #28 on: April 14, 2007, 12:57:50 PM »

Post more.  It's a post based ranking system.
Report to moderator   Logged
Mike Johnston
SJFedor
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,689

« Reply #29 on: April 14, 2007, 01:07:18 PM »

Echoing what Mike said. It's absolutely not a reflection of anyone's experience, qualification, or maturity level. Only a reflection of how many times you've contributed to the forum via posts.


However, I bet we could start a thread about the unfair practices of the ranking system here.  >:D
Report to moderator   Logged
Steven Fedor, NREMT-P
Master Ambulance Driver
Former Capt, MP, MCPE, MO, MS, GTL, and various other 3-and-4 letter combinations
NESA MAS Instructor, 2008-2010 (#479)
jimmydeanno
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,155
Unit: ǝnƃoɹ

« Reply #30 on: April 14, 2007, 02:38:17 PM »

Quote
I don't want to be a Wing or National anything.  I just want to be able to hold the same grade in CAP that I earned in the military.

Quote
Why do the Wing and National jobs have to be the only ones tied to the 0-6 and above positions.

Quote
What I'm saying is have a CONSISTENT policy, no matter what it is... Don't make it accepting of military grade at SOME levels, and deny it at others.  I can see how CAP might want to cut off accepting grades above those allowed at the top.  For example, I can understand a policy that caps the CAP grades at 2-stars, because CAP isn't allowed to have Lieutentant Generals, Generals, and 5-star Generals of the CAP (??equivalent of General of the Army?).  But why does there have to be a very limited number of Colonels, Bridagier Generals, and Major Generals??
So as long as the policy included the grade you want to be?  "Don't make it accepting of military grade as SOME levels, and deny it at others..." - Sorry Lt. Gen So and so, you can't be one...see my point?

Quote
Frankly put, EGO is the only reason that makes sense to me from what I've been told so far.

Quote
By the way, does anyone know how to change my "position" on this site?  For the record, I'm far from being a "recruit."
apparantly...

Quote
Like far too many other excuses in Corporate America, and believe me, the heirarchy of the CAP resembles Corporate America far more than Military America, it's basically, "We do it that way because we do it that way, and don't confuse us with facts."
For a military man, you seem to have a problem with our "regulations."  You do what they say because they say so.  What would you say to one of your Airman that told you that your policies and procedures were bogus and too corporate...LOR?

It's probably a good thing that CAP (a non-profit CORPORATION) is somewhat corporate.

Again, drawing on your experience in the military, I'm sure that you can agree that the amount of responsibility on an O-5 compared to an O-6 is great.  Being promoted to O-6 in any military branch is a BIG deal, as it should be as well in CAP, as it doesn't represent what PME courses you've passed, or what support functions you've held, but rather that significant step into taking a true Command position, with actual responsibilities to the corporation.  You've already stated that you don't want to do anything near that responsibility level. Why is it so "insulting" to be a Lt Col?
Report to moderator   Logged
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill
JohnKachenmeister
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,352

« Reply #31 on: April 14, 2007, 03:03:50 PM »

For what its worth, I agree with DNall.  Rank earned should be transfered to CAP.  Active duty colonels and generals whose rank transfers over can be placed in a special, nationwide unit and their duty can be to advise the National Commander and wing kings, and to serve as special project officers.

I am sure the USAF would agree to such an arrangement.
Report to moderator   Logged
Another former CAP officer
ZigZag911
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,987

« Reply #32 on: April 14, 2007, 05:45:44 PM »

   Why do the Wing and National jobs have to be the only ones tied to the 0-6 and above positions. 

A similar (though by no means equivalent) question has been raised on other threads on this board, questioning why cadets completing their training program (earning the Spaatz) are promoted to cadet colonel, but seniors earning the Wilson can not similarly be promoted to CAP colonel.

We're told the AF wants to limit the number of colonels.

I wonder.....if I read my CAP history correctly, during WWII wing commanders (and no one  else!) were CAP majors....that certainly changed.

Personally, I tend to agree with you....let members wear the grade they've earned...as you say, no one is looking to supplant the established leadership.
Report to moderator   Logged
Flying Pig
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,043

« Reply #33 on: April 14, 2007, 06:32:25 PM »

CAP members are always talking about being more like the military.  Where in the military do you have senior officers in units with a lower ranking commander? You dont.  In the miltary, like we all know, you either move up or move out.  The rank of Colonel is to denote someone who is the Wing or Region Command staff correct?  And stars denote the National Command.  Leave it that way.  If someone is so insulted by "starting over" maybe you should have joined CAP when you were a young 2Lt. 

Now what if your a military 1Lt. Pilot/CFI?  CAP regs allow for you to come in as a Capt.  So Im sure you support coming in as your military rank of 1Lt right?  Not accepting CAP Capt?  If you come in as a CAP Lt Col would you support a time frame to meet all the quals of a CAP Lt Col or be faced with reduction?

Im sorry, but in CAP, who cares what rank you have on your shoulder.  If your the Sq Commander, then we all know it and respect that.  Just like in the business world of being a manager.  Its not because some member has a gold oak leaf.  Our rank system denotes positions and qualifications.  Our promotion system is a reward for completing steps in the program.  There is really no "authority" that goes with it as in the military.  Ive said this before, the only authority CAP commanders have is that their subordinates want to be there.  As soon as they want to leave, your authority is over.  And with CAP, just because you were to have four stars on your shoulder doesnt mean you'll ever even be placed to run a squadron.  Nothing says we even have to give you a job in the Sq.

People are always making comments that CAP officers are NOT military officers.   Thats exactly right.  But in the same sense, military officers arent CAP officers.  Join the program, promote though CAP's established criteria and enjoy the path and let your reputation and experience speak for who you are.  There is already advanced promotion criteria set up for people with special quals.  Maybe we can develope another badge that denotes someone who used to be a military officer, aside from your blue DoD sticker.  If thats not enough, wear your blues with ribbons every meeting night.

As far as having Generals as some sort of National Advisor???  Come on!  Thats what I would want.  A think tank of retired generals with no authority.  If they are advisors, then the national Commander still makes the decision.  More meetings?  Thats great!

Report to moderator   Logged
JC004
[Insert Cool Title Here]
Global Moderator

Posts: 4,516

« Reply #34 on: April 14, 2007, 06:39:55 PM »

Orrrrr, we could kill rank names altogether and have more of a Coast Guard Auxiliary system.   :o

::ducks::
« Last Edit: April 14, 2007, 07:17:13 PM by JC004 » Report to moderator   Logged
MIKE
Super Moderator

Posts: 5,461
Unit: LANTAREA

« Reply #35 on: April 14, 2007, 07:32:18 PM »

Orrrrr, we could kill rank names altogether and have more of a Coast Guard Auxiliary system.   :o

I don't think that solves the problem.  I happen to be a Flotilla Staff Officer (FSO)... butter bar.  At the end of the year if I don't get appointed again I don't loose my bars, I can keep wearing 'em as long as I wear the Past Officer Device on my pocket flap.  Same deal for someone who has  held a much higher office in the past.
Report to moderator   Logged
Mike Johnston
JC004
[Insert Cool Title Here]
Global Moderator

Posts: 4,516

« Reply #36 on: April 14, 2007, 07:43:44 PM »

Orrrrr, we could kill rank names altogether and have more of a Coast Guard Auxiliary system.   :o

I don't think that solves the problem.  I happen to be a Flotilla Staff Officer (FSO)... butter bar.  At the end of the year if I don't get appointed again I don't loose my bars, I can keep wearing 'em as long as I wear the Past Officer Device on my pocket flap.  Same deal for someone who has  held a much higher office in the past.

I just like the lack "Colonel [captain]," etc...encourages a different mindset, I think.

How about this...we have little donut insignia for different levels? 
Report to moderator   Logged
Monty
Seasoned Member

Posts: 276

« Reply #37 on: April 14, 2007, 10:08:56 PM »

Perhaps, if we could *ahem* set egos aside, we should consult with Lt Col George Harrison, CAP.

Aside from having served as the National Staff College Provost in (at least) 2005, he goes by another moniker; and he has NO problem being a CAP Lt Col, so if he has no problem with it, nobody else should.

Oh....about that "other" moniker of CAP Lt Col Harrison's: http://www.af.mil/bios/bio.asp?bioID=5726
Report to moderator   Logged
acarlson
Member

Posts: 85

CAP, Doylestown Composite Squadron 907, Doylestown PA
« Reply #38 on: April 14, 2007, 10:23:15 PM »

I just want to be able to hold the same grade in CAP that I earned in the military.

Ok ... here's real fuel for you flammers...

If I were in the Army... and earned Maj... honorably discharged and
then joined the Air Force ...   would I be able to be a Maj in the Air Force because I was a Maj in the Army?
Report to moderator   Logged
Annette Carlson, 1Lt CAP
PDO, PAO, Pers, & Historian
Doylestown Composite Squadron 907
Doylestown PA
JC004
[Insert Cool Title Here]
Global Moderator

Posts: 4,516

« Reply #39 on: April 14, 2007, 10:41:26 PM »

Perhaps, if we could *ahem* set egos aside, we should consult with Lt Col George Harrison, CAP.

Aside from having served as the National Staff College Provost in (at least) 2005, he goes by another moniker; and he has NO problem being a CAP Lt Col, so if he has no problem with it, nobody else should.

Oh....about that "other" moniker of CAP Lt Col Harrison's: http://www.af.mil/bios/bio.asp?bioID=5726

But he has all those cool ribbons!   >:D
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  All Send this topic Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: "...up to Lt. Col....." Insulting and discriminatory
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.105 seconds with 27 queries.
click here to email me