Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 24, 2019, 08:29:07 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Safety  |  Topic: CAP safety meetings & safety paperwork
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] Send this topic Print
Author Topic: CAP safety meetings & safety paperwork  (Read 2731 times)
RiverAux
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,978

« on: December 21, 2006, 02:21:05 AM »

Are your CAP flight safety meetings useful or does your safety officer just go through the motions and have people sign the list saying they were there? 

Is your Wing focused on documenting that safety meetings are held or focused on making sure they were done right? 

Are you seeing penalties applied to squadrons that don't turn in their safety paperwork or to squadrons that turn in paperwork but only give the topic lip service? 
Report to moderator   Logged
DNall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,721

« Reply #1 on: December 21, 2006, 08:21:44 AM »

um... I hate to say this, but almost every Sq in CAP is so massively undermanned that just about everything we do is like that. You can even go to a Sq that does very well w/ cadet programs & take a look at their Test Control log or Cadet Paperwork & not think they're so hot.

This is again the same conversation we were having about the MML being highly misleading of reality but being the only hard numbers the next level has to look at.

The fact is a lot of reports go up in a lot of areas that are somewhere btwn lip service & flat BS. There's almost nothing you can do about it though cause there's just not the capability in 75+% of units to actually do everything they're supposed to up to the stated standards, much less to excel.

You really have to have a minimum of 20 hard working adult officers with at least a year or two in a specialty to get close, & then retention creates continuity problems. Like I said, I really hate to say it, but it's just bad mgmt that flows from bad structure.

I'd go with that plan I've been talking... Most Sqs become Flts, 3-5 Flts focused on the job in front of them share a single combined Sq staff - that is sorta like the Iowa version of lifting the burden up off Sqs, but putting it w/ what amounts to a micro-group & then lifting it on to the Gp/Wg level we're used to. I know that sounds like a hassle, but it seems like the best way to me.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2006, 08:51:47 AM by DNall » Report to moderator   Logged
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,630
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #2 on: December 21, 2006, 08:26:21 AM »

um... I hate to say this, but almost every Sq in CAP is so massivle undermanned that just about everything we do is like that. You can even go to a Sq that does very well w/ cadet programs & take a look at tehir Test Control log or Cadet Paperwork & not think they're so hot. This is again the same conversation we were having about the MML being highly misleading of reality but being the only hard numbers the next level has to look at. The fact is a lot of reports go up in a lot of areas that are somewhere btwn lip serivce & flat BS. There's almost nothing you can do about it though cause there's just not the capability in 75+% of units to actually do everything they're supposed to up to the stated standards, much less to excel. You really have to have a minimum of 20 hard working adult officers with at least a year or two in a specialty to get close, & then retention creates continuity problems. Like I said, I really hate to say it, but it's just bad mgmt that flows from bad structure. I'd go with that plan I've been talking... Most Sqs become Flts, 3-5 Flts focused on the job in front of them share a single combined Sq staff - that is sorta like the Iowa version of lifting the burden up off Sqs, but putting it w/ what amounts to a micro-group & then lifting it on to the Gp/Wg level we're used to. I know that sounds like a hassle, but it seems like the best way to me.

Did you really expect someone to read that?

Is the Return key on your keyboard broken?
Report to moderator   Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
DNall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,721

« Reply #3 on: December 21, 2006, 08:52:19 AM »

There, sorry. Even spell checked it.
Report to moderator   Logged
RiverAux
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,978

« Reply #4 on: December 21, 2006, 03:00:44 PM »

Unlike test control logs and other technical requirements, CAP, on occassion, actually does seem to care about safety.  Personally, I think they're placing a little too much emphasis on documenting that we've had safety meetings over actually making sure the meetings are worthwhile. 
Report to moderator   Logged
DNall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,721

« Reply #5 on: December 21, 2006, 11:29:36 PM »

Well no, I mean there's reporting requirements for finance & a range of thigns reall. There's even the chart to show due dates for regular reports. It's all the same & stacks up over the head so fast it all ends up lip service to look okay on paper to the next level up, cause in teh real world you're busting your but to run thsi aspect or that. You just aren't getting everything really done the way regs say it should be, and you can't cause there's not people to do it.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: [1] Send this topic Print 
CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Safety  |  Topic: CAP safety meetings & safety paperwork
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.068 seconds with 26 queries.
click here to email me