Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 24, 2019, 05:45:09 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: NCO
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 21 Send this topic Print
Author Topic: NCO  (Read 112055 times)
Storm Chaser
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,680

« Reply #320 on: April 22, 2015, 12:13:07 AM »


Whats this got to do with the USAF?   In CAP we would.  Because at the end of the day... the job falls to pretty much anyone and everyone capable.

Yet your post implied it was a big deal. If it's not (and it shouldn't be), then why post the comment at all?
Report to moderator   Logged
Storm Chaser
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,680

« Reply #321 on: April 22, 2015, 12:33:16 AM »

In CAP we are all equals.  Our authority is derived based on our positions held not our ranks. I was a squadron commander of a fairly large unit as a 1Lt and stocked the fridge, manned the snack bar and spent time on my hands and knees with a green scratch pad during squadron clean up day.  Right next to my deputy commander who was a Major and our safety officer who was a retired LTC and USAF F4 pilot.  We did not assign jobs based on ranks.  We were volunteers getting done what needed to get done.  Not worry about customs and courtesies based on patches we wear.

And yet we insist in having military-style grades, titles and uniforms. We like being called captain, major and colonel for some things, but for others we through the "grade means nothing in CAP" line (and yes, I know you didn't say that on this post, but I've heard it said many times by many members). Why is it ok for a new member to be appointed as a 2d Lt after 6 months of membership, but when we talk about the possibility of that same member coming in as an enlisted, we raise hell?

After hearing all the debates about uniforms, awards, insignias and grades, I'm convinced CAP would be a better organization without them. The military doesn't spend as much time talking about these as CAP members do. Why? Didn't we join CAP to serve? If we're all equal, then why spend time criticizing this program and those working on it? Whether we like it or not, we have NCOs.

The new regulation didn't add NCOs; only provided a way for them to get promoted. Most of us like getting promoted, right? I still remember the uproar when the officer promotion requirements where made more difficult by adding additional TIG and an extra PD Level for each grade.

Maybe one day, new members will be able to join as airmen or go the NCO route. Maybe not. But why are we spending so much time and effort arguing about these things now? How does it affect us? We don't even know what the full plan or proposal is? We don't know if it will be approved? All we know is that some members would like to expand the NCO program. That's it.
Report to moderator   Logged
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,653
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #322 on: April 22, 2015, 12:48:50 AM »

Why is it ok for a new member to be appointed as a 2d Lt after 6 months of membership, but when we talk about the possibility of that same member coming in as an enlisted, we raise hell?

Because 2Lt is the bottom of the heap, and NCO isn't. 2Lt is the starting point for an officer, and implies a beginner. The same is not true for NCOs, who are advanced doers, and supervisors.
Report to moderator   Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
Storm Chaser
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,680

« Reply #323 on: April 22, 2015, 12:52:40 AM »

Why is it ok for a new member to be appointed as a 2d Lt after 6 months of membership, but when we talk about the possibility of that same member coming in as an enlisted, we raise hell?

Because 2Lt is the bottom of the heap, and NCO isn't. 2Lt is the starting point for an officer, and implies a beginner.

That is true of the military, but the selection, training and time it takes doesn't compare with CAP, not even a little. We require so little for someone to be a 2d Lt in CAP, so why do we require so much for someone to be a SSgt instead? By the way, I've been both so I can relate.

The same is not true for NCOs, who are advanced doers, and supervisors.

Perhaps we should start new members as Airman Basic and move from there.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2015, 12:57:14 AM by Storm Chaser » Report to moderator   Logged
Holding Pattern
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,373
Unit: Worry

« Reply #324 on: April 22, 2015, 02:11:19 AM »

We require so little for someone to be a 2d Lt in CAP, so why do we require so much for someone to be a SSgt instead?

Because officers say "do this!" and then NCOs make it happen.  ;D

As an aside, has anyone else wished that we could make new senior members "Temporary Third Lieutenants?" Or do I just read too much Heinlein?
Report to moderator   Logged
ColonelJack
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,371
Unit: SER-GA-153

« Reply #325 on: April 22, 2015, 09:52:20 AM »

We require so little for someone to be a 2d Lt in CAP, so why do we require so much for someone to be a SSgt instead?

Because officers say "do this!" and then NCOs make it happen.  ;D

As an aside, has anyone else wished that we could make new senior members "Temporary Third Lieutenants?" Or do I just read too much Heinlein?

There is no such thing as "too much Heinlein."

Jack
Report to moderator   Logged
Jack Bagley, Ed. D.
Lt. Col., Civil Air Patrol
Gill Robb Wilson Award No. 1366, 29 Nov 1991
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
Flying Pig
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,043

« Reply #326 on: April 22, 2015, 02:25:56 PM »


Whats this got to do with the USAF?   In CAP we would.  Because at the end of the day... the job falls to pretty much anyone and everyone capable.

Yet your post implied it was a big deal. If it's not (and it shouldn't be), then why post the comment at all?

My post depicts how CAP works in real life.  In the end, the job just gets done with no relevance to what rank you decided to wear. Officer or enlisted.   
Report to moderator   Logged
ZigZag911
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,987

« Reply #327 on: April 22, 2015, 03:43:33 PM »

Great "Starship Troopers" reference!...hell, yes, let's make new SMs "Temporary 3rd LTs" -- and let them SATY there till completion of Level 2!
Report to moderator   Logged
THRAWN
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,915

« Reply #328 on: April 23, 2015, 12:01:51 AM »

Great "Starship Troopers" reference!...hell, yes, let's make new SMs "Temporary 3rd LTs" -- and let them SATY there till completion of Level 2!

The only down side to the idea is that none of us are supernumerary....
Report to moderator   Logged
Strup
"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
ColonelJack
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,371
Unit: SER-GA-153

« Reply #329 on: April 23, 2015, 09:53:50 AM »

Great "Starship Troopers" reference!...hell, yes, let's make new SMs "Temporary 3rd LTs" -- and let them SATY there till completion of Level 2!

The only down side to the idea is that none of us are supernumerary....

"Come on, you apes!  You want to live forever?"

Jack
Report to moderator   Logged
Jack Bagley, Ed. D.
Lt. Col., Civil Air Patrol
Gill Robb Wilson Award No. 1366, 29 Nov 1991
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
Panache
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,060
Unit: PAWG

« Reply #330 on: April 23, 2015, 10:13:56 AM »

As much as many of us don't want to believe it, I think the unspoken but real conflict the AF has with us as "officers" is that often we don't share the same cultural underpinning. Look at LSTHiker's post with the degree stats: the fewer experiences we have in common with AF officers, the less likely we are to be accepted as peers...and when we wear blues with officer grade on them, we are outwardly claiming, at some level, that we're "peers."

Until that point when they start paying CAP officers and give them authority and responsibilities under UCMJ, CAP officers won't be close to being peers with AF officers, no matter how many degrees CAP officers have.

So, basically, never.

Sad that you have such a low opinion of yourself and CAP.  :-\

Sad that you feel the need to project your opinion onto myself.
Report to moderator   Logged
NIN
Administrator

Posts: 5,213
Unit: of issue

« Reply #331 on: April 23, 2015, 10:38:57 AM »

The only down side to the idea is that none of us are supernumerary....

I've been supernumerary a few times. It was kind of cool :)
Report to moderator   Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2007-2019 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
ZigZag911
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,987

« Reply #332 on: April 23, 2015, 09:24:35 PM »

Great "Starship Troopers" reference!...hell, yes, let's make new SMs "Temporary 3rd LTs" -- and let them SATY there till completion of Level 2!

The only down side to the idea is that none of us are supernumerary....

True...but we don't need to tell them so!
Report to moderator   Logged
MSgt Van
Seasoned Member

Posts: 336
Unit: NCR-MN-001

« Reply #333 on: April 25, 2015, 01:50:05 AM »

I find it sad that civilian volunteers, although dedicated to their volunteer organization, would ever consider themselves peers to a military officer. I think that's the best argument to get rid of the NCO program, and the use of military uniforms and rank insignia altogether in CAP.
Report to moderator   Logged
SMSgt John D. Vanderhoof, CAP
NCR-MN-001
Minnesota Wing Command NCO
Holding Pattern
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,373
Unit: Worry

« Reply #334 on: April 25, 2015, 02:30:40 AM »

I find it sad that civilian volunteers, although dedicated to their volunteer organization, would ever consider themselves peers to a military officer. I think that's the best argument to get rid of the NCO program, and the use of military uniforms and rank insignia altogether in CAP.

Why don't you ask to can the CAP at the same time while you are at it.

The actions of one or some is not a valid reason to attack all.
Report to moderator   Logged
Ned
Resident Philosopher

Posts: 2,217

« Reply #335 on: April 25, 2015, 02:34:34 AM »

Msgt Van,

This isn't some sort of contest about whether civilians are "peers" to folks serving in the military.  No one could win such a contest.  This, for better or worse, is America, and nobody is inherently better than anyone one else simply because of their military status.

CAP and our colleagues in the US armed forces have a great deal in common:  both are volunteering to serve their communities, states, and nation.


Let's focus on what we have in common, and less on who is better than whom.

Respectfully,

Ned Lee
Retired Army officer, and Current CAP volunteer
Report to moderator   Logged
MSgt Van
Seasoned Member

Posts: 336
Unit: NCR-MN-001

« Reply #336 on: April 25, 2015, 04:03:36 AM »

I didn't mean to imply that military veterans are better than anybody else, it just seems to me that CAP is trying to create an officer /enlisted tiered system where I really don't see the benefit.
Report to moderator   Logged
SMSgt John D. Vanderhoof, CAP
NCR-MN-001
Minnesota Wing Command NCO
Ned
Resident Philosopher

Posts: 2,217

« Reply #337 on: April 25, 2015, 04:29:41 AM »

CAP has had officers and NCOs since before there was a United States Air Force.

No one is trying to "create" anything.

We are tweaking our NCO system to allow for promotions and possibly some initial appointments beyond what we have now.  We've tweaked both the officer and NCO systems before, and will likely do so again in the future.  Kinda like each of the military services.

Really not all that much to talk about really.  It's still a minor work in progress.

But is worth remembering that every single military and military-like organization since the Roman legions have had officers and NCOs.  We would be unusual if we did not.

Peace, sir, and thank you for your service.
Report to moderator   Logged
Alaric
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 785

« Reply #338 on: April 25, 2015, 02:36:50 PM »

CAP has had officers and NCOs since before there was a United States Air Force.

No one is trying to "create" anything.

We are tweaking our NCO system to allow for promotions and possibly some initial appointments beyond what we have now.  We've tweaked both the officer and NCO systems before, and will likely do so again in the future.  Kinda like each of the military services.

Really not all that much to talk about really.  It's still a minor work in progress.

But is worth remembering that every single military and military-like organization since the Roman legions have had officers and NCOs.  We would be unusual if we did not.

Peace, sir, and thank you for your service.

Col. Lee,

  Whereas I agree that every military organization has had NCOs as well as officers, however, these were generally full time organizations.  I have no dog in the hunt of whether to have NCOs but every active duty military person I've ever spoken to has told me that NCOs are the specialists of the military as well as the people who make sure the work gets done by the men in the field.  Officers provide overall leadership and guidance.  NCOs in these organizations outnumber the officers significantly.  What will be the role of NCOs in our part time, volunteer organization where they will be far outnumbered by officers?

Report to moderator   Logged
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,694

« Reply #339 on: April 25, 2015, 03:32:25 PM »

The same as all those other organizations.

Report to moderator   Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 21 Send this topic Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: NCO
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.104 seconds with 27 queries.
click here to email me