Uniforms: Things never change...gotta love consistancy

[NCRblues]

I really enjoy it when people talk about forcing everyone over the BBDU because its not AF.

Oh wait yes it is... The blue bdu is used in missile wings and missile support wings.

After the stand up of global strike command, the nuclear capable bases have teams called T.R.F's ( tactical response teams), and C.R.F's (convoy response teams). Both of the teams are transported by helicopter and wear blue flight suits with SF insignia...

Even on some nonnuclear bases, bbdus are used. The fire department is authorized to wear them on incirlick AB turkey and several others.  Some SF E.S.T (read swat) use the bbdu.

At an air show this past year, one of our SM's had on the BBDU. A man approached him and asked him why he was wearing his nuke tactical response uniform outside the base. Turned out this man that approached him was a missile wing E-7 and had no clue who we were....

BBDU or bdu's. It does not matter, someone has had them before we did....

[RVT]

http://www.uniformswarehouse.com/prostores/servlet/-strse-1212/EMT-Short-Sleeve-White/Detail

Here you go 5XL.  Its what I usually wear even though I don't even rate a single X, I'm just an L.

[RVT]

Sorry - quotes landed in the wrong place.  Point was you CAN get the aviator shirt that large, just not from Vanguard.

[jimmydeanno]

Decisions are always easy when you are not the person who has to make them . . . . 

So, does that mean that it's also easy to ignore when you are?  Ned,  my quote wasn't a dig at you, the NB, National Commander, or the BoG.  It just seems to me, and apparently thousands of others of our members, that our uniform situation is a giant mess.  As an organization, we can continue to ignore that it is a mess (like many other things), or it can be addressed.  There is no operational need to have two separate equivalents of all of our uniforms. I can not think of a single organization, other than ours, that have two separate chains of uniforms with the same operational purpose.

Other than showing a relationship to the Air Force with our Blues, what other purpose does wearing AF style uniforms serve? 

Great question.  What are your thoughts as to the answer? 

1) A visual representation of our association with the Air Force and visual representation of our heritage.

2) Marketing to youth (they like uniforms).

3) Potential cost savings and supply lines using an already existing uniform combination.

4) Perpetuation of our "military-esque" culture, which plays nicely into the whole "Auxiliary of the AF" thing.

5) Provide some sort of sense of legitimacy based on visual appearance.

However, none of that can truly be accomplished when a large portion of our membership can't wear them in the first place.  So, in one hand, we market (well, we don't really market, so I'll just use the word generically) ourselves as an organization in which a person of any "race, sex, age, color, religion, national origin or disability" can join. 

We do this, but then we segregate them based on weight and whether or not they have facial hair.  So, someone joins the Air Force Auxiliary, but then can't wear an Air Force style uniform.  Or, they are standing next to someone wearing an AF Style Uniform at a recruiting booth and someone asks, "Why aren't you wearing the same thing?" "Well, because they weigh too much to wear this one."  It's just bad business, really.

Do you honestly think the answer is "none" or, worse yet, some sort of bad faith on the part of our leadership who only seek to embarass our larger and differently-groomed members?

Really?

Nope.  I don't assume some sort of bad faith, and can appreciate the difficulty of the decision.  I don't think that any of the leadership intends to embarrass our membership, but I can speak from experience that in a room full of CAP members in Mess Dress, the CAP member wearing the blazer combo or the civilian attire often feels out of place.  I also know quite a few members who won't go to CAP functions that are more formal in nature because of it.

I get that.  You don't understand the USAF's decision.  You have successfully communicated that.

I'm not sure that the AF understands their decision 

But that doesn't mean that CAP simply has to sit back and take it.  I'd imagine the conversation could go something like this.

CAP - "AF, we'd like all of our members to be able to wear the AF style uniforms."

AF - "We don't want the members who are overweight or don't meet grooming standards to wear them."

CAP - "Ok, thanks for the decision." Followed by, "All CAP senior members wear the corporate uniforms."

Just because they say no doesn't mean that we need to wear AF style uniforms AND create a different set for those who aren't covered.

But you don't need to.  I don't need to.  It's not my decision or your decision to make.

I don't really care why the General or his predecessors made the decision, because it is their decision to make.  Again, however, CAP doesn't/didn't have to take the route that it did.  So, it must have something to do with how the members that can wear the AF style uniform feel about the uniform itself, because from my perspective (as limited as it may be) it certainly isn't the most efficient, or beneficial avenue to take based on the AF's decision.

I'm sorry if you feel that Gen Schwartz has not adequately briefed you on the USAF take on this issue.  It's not my job to explain his decision to you.  It would be impudent for me to even try.

I wasn't asking you to, and I don't feel that way.  Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

there is a genuine lack of data suggesting that an actual "problem" exists with our uniform set.  Let alone that arbitrarily discarding all the  USAF-style uniforms would "fix" anything.

Kind of like that governance issue that we seem to be spending money on, eh?  I haven't seen any "real data" that shows that our governance model is bad - other than a large portion of our membership saying that "this looks really messed up."  So, what did you (The BoG) do?  Oh yeah, you decided to investigate it.

If our uniforms are truly a tool to get the mission done, then shouldn't we investigate the best tools to do it?  Perhaps, the organization could look at uniforms strategically and see how they play into marketing and public awareness, esprit de corps, retention, and even into our core values. 

Lot's of strong opinons on both sides, of course.

But not much else.

Apparently people care enough to bring it up routinely, try to create different uniform combinations, etc.  One of our former National Commanders even went so far as to create a whole different uniform.  Politics aside, it was adopted quickly because those that weren't able to wear the AF style uniform didn't have a uniform that made them feel like they were part of our organization.  People do feel as though they are discriminated against, they do feel that they are treated as second rate members, etc.  You have members on this board who have said those very things - yet you say that there isn't any data suggesting that there is a problem.

We'll send out a "polite letter" to the membership about some random internet post with no evidence to back it up, but when actual members repeatedly bring up the issue of us having so many darn uniforms, there is no reaction, whatsoever.

[NCRblues]

Jimmy,

maybe there is no reaction, because its over reaction...

So, in your CAP fantasy world, you say kill all the AF style uniforms and go corporate.

But what are you going to say to the members, when a vast majority of SM's cry out the same thing that was yelled when the CSU got killed? That cry will be "i spent a ton of money on this, now I'm being forced out of it, not fair".

( because i have spent A LOT of money on my AF style and i wont give it up just because you feel bad for those that wont shave)

So what will be your response to them? To bad, its better we tend  to the small minority of those who have facial hair, or those that are over weight?

Or, its not fair that the AF is making us do something I don't like?

Another question, other than you saying "the fat/fuzzies feel discriminated against" (which i do not believe anyway) do you have any evidence our uniforms don't work? and if so please share...

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I think a lot of this aggro stems from the 800-pound-gorilla in the room I mentioned some time back.

It's not necessarily "trolling for salutes" that causes NHQ to "walk on eggshells," I think...it's the broader question of "what is our raison d'etre vis-a-vis the USAF," or do we even have one?  Was John McCain right back in 1994-95?

As has been pointed out, we do not have a monopoly on air SAR...many police agencies and fire departments do it, with helicopters carrying paramedics that can land at the crash site.

Attitudes toward drug use are changing in some quarters...which may eventually affect our DDR functions.

Aerospace education...I wonder if the Internet is rendering our AE approach obsolete.

Cadets...I think that is the only area where one could get near-unanimous approval from USAF on what we do, because it provides warm bodies through the gates of Lackland, and in many cases educated enough about the military that they get through BMT relatively easier than someone without that experience.  However, JROTC serves a similar function.

How does this relate to uniforms?  Identity.  Who we are.  What we are.  CAP as it stands today is very schizoid about that.

When I first joined in '93, I joined a unit that wore AF-only uniforms.  Period.  When I asked about the pictures of the Guyabera shirt and other stuff in the CAPMart catalogue, I was told "those are for members who don't meet weight/grooming requirements."  The implication was that if you did meet those requirements, you wore the USAF uniform...albeit with the recently-imposed scarlet letter berry boards.

It wasn't until later, when going to wing functions and interacting with other squadrons, that I even saw the other uniform styles, and then they were still very much a minority.  It wasn't until I moved and had an ill-fated membership in a flying club senior squadron where virtually everyone wore polos or flight suits (insignia optional) and the other members looked at me aghast when I showed up in my blues that I became aware of the uniform divide.

I don't know General Schwartz, have never met him and am not likely to do so.  However, I believe he probably has more pressing issues on his plate than CAP uniforms.

I don't know the exact reasons we got the blue shoulder marks and metal grade taken from us.  Of course, I've heard varying stories.  The one I don't buy is the semi-official "the AF wanted us to look more distinctive."  I've heard that for 18 years and it's still Bravo Sierra.  CAP cutouts on the lapels, three-line nameplate, embroidered "CAP" on the shoulder marks, different flight/service cap badges and (then) wing patches on virtually all garments, blue nametapes...those were quite distinctive.

But I do know that in an organisation like ours uniforms matter, again because of identity.

In Canada (hi, JeffDG!), when they unified their armed forces in 1968, took away the individual service uniforms (as well as naval and air force ranks) and forced everyone to wear a green uniform (you could only tell the service branch by the cap/collar badges), there was a big exodus of senior generals/admirals/air marshals who refused to wear the new uniform (they called it "Revolt Of The Admirals," detailed very well by author Jack Granatstein).  It wasn't until the mid-80s that distinctive (that word again) uniforms were re-introduced (and even then the "air force" didn't get its ranks back).  That was in an actual military service.

We are either a part of the Air Force or we are not.  If we are, we wear their uniforms.  If we aren't, we go completely "corporate," junk the rank structure, cadets and probably lose a chunk of our membership in the process (me for sure).

I think this is a question that needs to be addressed before stewing in our own juices any more about uniforms.

[James Shaw]

Personally I wish we could keep the CSU and just add the CAP Distinctive Epaulets and change the braid color on the sleeves. The members I have talked to about this have generally said the same thing. I would say atleast 90% of them like the uniform.

I like it for a couple of different reasons.

1) It is easier to find current shades of the uniform that match the AF pants.
2) Trying to get an AF jacket and pants that match right is difficult because of the age and availability. (The Colors/Shades that is). This is just been my experience and may not be common.

If CAP were to keep the CSU I would buy one asap.

[RVT]

If CAP were to keep the CSU I would buy one asap.

I would add one minor change in the design if it were brought back.  Since it is tailor made for us, there is no reason it couldn't come with grey epaulettes already on it and use pin on hard rank.   Also change the sleeve braid from bright silver to the same grey as the slide on ranks - distinctive enough but it doesn't jump out at you as gaudy, and it would be a 2 color uniform instead of 3.   The existing uniforms would still be good until worn out as they wouldn't look all that different, it would be like the USAF adopting a new shade of something.

[manfredvonrichthofen]

If CAP were to keep the CSU I would buy one asap.

I would add one minor change in the design if it were brought back.  Since it is tailor made for us, there is no reason it couldn't come with grey epaulettes already on it and use pin on hard rank.   Also change the sleeve braid from bright silver to the same grey as the slide on ranks - distinctive enough but it doesn't jump out at you as gaudy, and it would be a 2 color uniform instead of 3.   The existing uniforms would still be good until worn out as they wouldn't look all that different, it would be like the USAF adopting a new shade of something.

I think having two color uniforms looks a little off, I can imagine pretty well what it would look like that way, and I prefer the epaulets to stay blue and use the slide rank. I would also prefer to use a blue braid instead of using a gray one. I don't know about you, but I have noticed that VG is not very acute on colors. I am pretty sure that the regulations says that the 1st Lt and CAPT and LT Col and Col and General grades are supposed to be white, however most of the time I have noticed that they were made silver. So I would imagine that they would do the same to the braid and just try to pass it off so they don't have to stock another thing for us. Not to mention I have seen the silver braid on the service jacket and I have the blue braid on mine, and I prefer the less noticeable blue over the silver. Just my opinion.

[Eclipse]

...there is no reason it couldn't come with grey epaulettes already on it and use pin on hard rank.

What is the fixation with CAP members and metal grade insignia?

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

What is the fixation with CAP members and metal grade insignia?

I would also ask: What is the fixation with CAP members and GREY?

[manfredvonrichthofen]

What is the fixation with CAP members and metal grade insignia?

I would also ask: What is the fixation with CAP members and GREY?

I am not sure about everyone else, but I understand that it may be here to stay, so lets just deal with it and move out. I guess for some it would be it is as close to silver as they can get.

[Bluelakes 13]

We have grey, we do not have metal rank.  Bob's question is still valid.

[jimmydeanno]

So, in your CAP fantasy world, you say kill all the AF style uniforms and go corporate.

That's not what I'm saying.  My previous comments have been to examine the role of our uniforms in our organization and whether or not they meet our need, or are the most efficient, most logical method of meeting that need.

Uniforms play an important role in the visual identification of an organization.  So, if we have members at the same function, doing the same job, people aren't going to recognize instinctively that those members are part of the same organization.  Here's an excerpt from one company executive about having uniforms:

Why does everyone wear the same uniform?  The company's General Manager of Property and Procurement, Rhonda McSweeney, says uniforms are a stamp of a company culture, branding and professionalism, as well as employee satisfaction and egalitarianism.

"No-one is any different, we're all equal, and that goes for the office fit-outs too – we all occupy 10 square metres. Even our founder and Managing Director Skroo Turner.  But the uniforms are the most tangible aspect of the egalitarian culture. It helps convey professionalism."

McSweeney says the uniform also helps to reinforce the company's brand. "Our brand is well known and trusted. World brand consultancy Interbrand has ranked Flight Centre's brand recognition as 14th best in Australia", just behind Myer and Australia Post. "When you think of our brand equity and recognition, you cannot equate a tangible dollar value to uniforms. Ditto turnover and revenue – it would only be anecdotal and our Managing Director would cringe if anyone tried to quantify that. But we've had the uniform since inception and it's not just our brand, it's our culture. The GFC presented a challenge – it was a time of cost constraints, but not once did the subject of uniforms come up when we were looking to trim costs."

So having everyone in the same uniform is critical to their culture, branding, professionalism, satisfaction, sense of equality (in the sense that everyone is on the same team).  All things that I think that we [CAP] are also interested in.

"The mere fact of wearing a presentable uniform, especially one with our logo, has a big impact. Our survey suggested that merely wearing a uniform adds around 15 percent to the price that can be quoted."

It seems to me that brand recognition can also have an effect on our bottom line.

Another franchise where uniforms matter is Domino's Pizza, whose Chief Operating Officer Andrew Rennie spent time in the military and therefore believes: "No matter what the uniform, there is a sense of pride, and what it stands for. In the military, a uniform is part of your kit and has to be treated with respect. It also links the organisation; it shows everyone is in the same team."

"At Domino's, we find wearing a uniform is a large return on investment as it creates a greater brand presence. Employees have a sense of pride when wearing the uniform and it enables Domino's to set a unified standard of dress nationally and internationally across our group."

That would lead me to believe that have more uniforms would:

Undermine the culture that CAP is professing to have.

Dilute our branding efforts.

Give a lesser sense of professionalism.

Reduce member satisfaction.

Reduce our member's sense of equality.

All of which, ultimately, could affect our organization's bottom line.

But what are you going to say to the members, when a vast majority of SM's cry out the same thing that was yelled when the CSU got killed? That cry will be "i spent a ton of money on this, now I'm being forced out of it, not fair".

I imagine it might be roughly the same as "The Air Force has decided that our overweight members can't wear the AF uniforms anymore, so you have to wear this now."  Or maybe the, "The Air Force has switched uniforms, so we are too." Conversations.  Except this time it would be a decision that our organization made, instead of a "Don't blame us, we don't have a say in the matter."

( because i have spent A LOT of money on my AF style and i wont give it up just because you feel bad for those that wont shave)

See, strong feeling towards the AF style uniform, from someone who wears it.  Unfortunately for you, if "the leadership" changed our uniforms you'd have to give it up, just like the CSU people have to give their up, just like those who bought a 4-button service coat had to give their up, just like people with the blueberry suit, guyabera, pickle suits, khakis, and potentially the bdus, had or are going to have to do.

I have a significant investment in my uniforms too, but I am at least open to the possibility that our uniform setup is a mess and could possibly be detrimental to the fulfillment of our mission.  In reality, it really has nothing to do with "those who won't shave, or those who won't lose weight.  It has to do with the importance of uniform solidarity and the success of our organization.

Or, its not fair that the AF is making us do something I don't like?

The Air Force isn't making us do anything, CAP is deciding to just go along with it.  They are an outside influence.  There is a desire for our members to wear the AF style uniforms.  The Air Force says we can, but with stipulations.  At that point, what is more important?  To have some of our members in one uniform and the rest in others, and yet a third for others?  Or is it more important to have solidarity and all of our members in a single set of uniforms?

Another question, other than you saying "the fat/fuzzies feel discriminated against" (which i do not believe anyway)

You have disabled veterans on this board who are disappointed that they can't wear their military ribbons on the corporate uniform because they are overweight.  We have members who choose not to attend CAP social functions because they feel out of place.  I can only speak from my personal experience, but I get comments all the time about "how nice it must be to be able to wear the AF style uniform."  We have members on this board who actively work to lose weight so they can wear them.  My last squadron commander was thrilled when the CSU came out because, "[he] finally had a uniform he actually looked like a CAP member in."  So, while it may be anecdotal, in my experience - given the option - our members would prefer to all be in the same uniforms.

do you have any evidence our uniforms don't work? and if so please share...

Our uniforms work operationally because they are functional equivalents.  However, so would a suit and tie, and shorts and a t-shirt.  The intangible stuff is a bit difficult to get actual evidence on.  How do you measure "patriotism" or "esprit de corps"? 

[Ned]

It just seems to me, and apparently thousands of others of our members, that our uniform situation is a giant mess. 

Well, we certainly spend a lot of time talking about it.

But what makes you say it is a "giant mess?"

Are there missions not being performed because of the clothes that some of us wear?

Are there cadets that refuse to join because not all seniors wear the same uniform?

Are there AE students who refuse to attend class because the clothes the teacher is wearing?

If so, I'm not seeing it.

Don't get me wrong.  We certainly need a new 39-1.  Way overdue, in fact.  And I'm glad I'm not on that committee - talk about a horrific and thankless job.  But the slight confusion and wide variety in the clothes we wear does not (or at least should not) affect how we perform our missions.

So, I'd go as far as "little mess," but I think it distorts and overstates things to call it a "giant mess." 

There is no operational need to have two separate equivalents of all of our uniforms.

Yeah, we've already agreed on that.  But things other than "operational needs" drive our uniform requirements.  Things like member cost, external factors like our USAF colleagues, etc.

Other than showing a relationship to the Air Force with our Blues, what other purpose does wearing AF style uniforms serve? 

1) A visual representation of our association with the Air Force and visual representation of our heritage.

2) Marketing to youth (they like uniforms).

3) Potential cost savings and supply lines using an already existing uniform combination.

4) Perpetuation of our "military-esque" culture, which plays nicely into the whole "Auxiliary of the AF" thing.

5) Provide some sort of sense of legitimacy based on visual appearance.

Nicely done.

However, none of that can truly be accomplished when a large portion of our membership can't wear them in the first place. 

Forgive me for being a little dense, but every member through a 5XL apparently can wear our uniforms.

On a side note, what is your estimate of the percentage of our membership that is restricted to corporate uniforms based on existing size and grooming factors?  I'm not sure, but it would be an interesting factoid for this discussion.

So, in one hand, we market (well, we don't really market, so I'll just use the word generically) ourselves as an organization in which a person of any "race, sex, age, color, religion, national origin or disability" can join. 

We do this, but then we segregate them based on weight and whether or not they have facial hair.  So, someone joins the Air Force Auxiliary, but then can't wear an Air Force style uniform.  Or, they are standing next to someone wearing an AF Style Uniform at a recruiting booth and someone asks, "Why aren't you wearing the same thing?" "Well, because they weigh too much to wear this one."  It's just bad business, really.

Yup, I  don't think anyone would have designed the current setup from scratch - because as with so many things in life - it is the result of experience and compromise.  It is rare when everyone is pleased with the result of a compromise.  But it lets us get our job done.

But that doesn't mean that CAP simply has to sit back and take it.  I'd imagine the conversation could go something like this.

CAP - "AF, we'd like all of our members to be able to wear the AF style uniforms."

AF - "We don't want the members who are overweight or don't meet grooming standards to wear them."

CAP - "Ok, thanks for the decision." Followed by, "All CAP senior members wear the corporate uniforms."

Of course it could go that way.

Unless, of course, the CAP leaders in question actually respected their members and the heritage of the organization.

As others have pointed out, this "solution" would by definition result in the waste of several million dollars worth of uniforms purchased by our volunteers.  And result in untold millions in increased costs down the road as we move away from cheap USAF uniforms and the supply system as close as any military base.

I don't really care why the General or his predecessors made the decision, because it is their decision to make. 

And yet you keep publicly questioning it.  Odd for someone who doesn't care about it.

Kind of like that governance issue that we seem to be spending money on, eh?  I haven't seen any "real data" that shows that our governance model is bad - other than a large portion of our membership saying that "this looks really messed up."  So, what did you (The BoG) do?  Oh yeah, you decided to investigate it.

Bit of a non-sequitor, but since you asked:  1) we haven't (yet) spent a dime on the governance study, 2) just because you haven't seen any data on governance doesn't mean the BoG hasn't, and 3) if the BoG doesn't see the need to get involved in uniforms, perhaps that may suggest that the issue is not yet one that affects the actual day-to-day work of our volunteers in the field.

If our uniforms are truly a tool to get the mission done, then shouldn't we investigate the best tools to do it?  Perhaps, the organization could look at uniforms strategically and see how they play into marketing and public awareness, esprit de corps, retention, and even into our core values. 

Now, there you go.  That's a good idea.  Gather actual data to support your thesis that there is a "giant mess" that somehow affects the organization.  Even a simple survey of the membership would be a good place to start.  I'd be very interested in the results.

Lot's of strong opinions on both sides, of course.

But not much else.

Apparently people care enough to bring it up routinely, try to create different uniform combinations, etc.  One of our former National Commanders even went so far as to create a whole different uniform.  Politics aside, it was adopted quickly because those that weren't able to wear the AF style uniform didn't have a uniform that made them feel like they were part of our organization.  People do feel as though they are discriminated against, they do feel that they are treated as second rate members, etc.  You have members on this board who have said those very things - yet you say that there isn't any data suggesting that there is a problem.

We'll send out a "polite letter" to the membership about some random internet post with no evidence to back it up, but when actual members repeatedly bring up the issue of us having so many darn uniforms, there is no reaction, whatsoever.

I'm still having a little trouble connecting uniform issues to internet issues, but more importantly your premise is incorrect.  There is a national-level "reaction" to the concerns expressed by you and others.  A committee composed of volunteers like yourself have been charged with taking a fresh look at CAP uniforms and re-drafting the 39-1.  IIRC, their work is to be presented at the summer NBs.

Cadets...I think that is the only area where one could get near-unanimous approval from USAF on what we do, because it provides warm bodies through the gates of Lackland, and in many cases educated enough about the military that they get through BMT relatively easier than someone without that experience.  However, JROTC serves a similar function.

We are not a recruiting tool for the USAF.  The last time I checked, less than 20% of our cadets enter military service, and of those, most enter the Army.

But having said that, we are vastly more cost-efficient per accession to the USAF than is AFJROTC.  Something on the order of 5-1.  Mostly because JROTC has multiple paid employees at each unit, whereas CAP has volunteers.  But the AF tracks this kind of date pretty closely.  The whole JROTC program is being examined, and may be restructured or even eliminated in the current cost-cutting environment.  For the USAF, the CAP CP is a great bargain.

[TCMajor]

This thread has taken a pretty wild journey.  I don't have a dog in the hunt as far as a uniform type.  I do definitely like the CSU and would love to see it stay.  That said, the basic inequality still needs to be addressed.  There should be no difference to what military badges and awards you can wear between the Air Force style uniform and the CSU/Distinctive (white pilot shirt) uniform.  As far as I can see that is where the true inequality arrives on scene.  If you take two veterans in CAP stand them side by side, one in CSU and the other in AF type, I challenge you to determine the service resume of the veteran in the CSU without them telling you.  You can't, because they are forbidden from wearing their service history on their uniform by CAP.  None of the Air Force's sister services has issue with the diplaying of veterans awards on civilian clothing.  In fact, they encourage it.  If the Air Force does not want its service veterans wearing their service awards on civilian clothing, so be it.  Just make a new rule "military awards given in writing by competent military authority can be worn on CSU/Distinctive uniform IAW the awarding services permission and policies.  They will be displayed using CAP's order of precedence."  Well that is my two cents.  I will wear a potato sack if that is what CAP wants.  Just let me wear my resume when I am in a formal environment, wearing my dinner dress potato sack.   

[BradM]

At Ned,
I have been buying a separate set of uniforms so I can wear my goatee for as long as I want to. I bought the Blue BDUs and the white aviator shirt (long and short) and grays slacks combo. And when I buy a flight suit I'll have to spend the $258.50 for the blue one instead of buying a cheaper used sage green one on eBay. But to me having my goatee for as long as I want to is worth having these alternate uniforms. I also have the woodland BDUs set up and the AF blues uniform. I wouldnt want the AF uniforms to be cancelled just because the overweight people and us fuzzy people can't wear them. If a special event comes up and I want to wear my AF blues I'll go back to just the mustache for the event then grow my goatee back starting the next day. Or, wait a month or two... But it would be great if the AF allowed nicely trimmed beards and goatees with their uniforms then I wouldnt have had to spend all this extra money for the second set of uniforms.

[jimmydeanno]

what other purpose does wearing AF style uniforms serve? 

However, none of that can truly be accomplished when a large portion of our membership can't wear them in the first place. 

Forgive me for being a little dense, but every member through a 5XL apparently can wear our uniforms.

I thought we were talking about AF Style Uniforms.

On a side note, what is your estimate of the percentage of our membership that is restricted to corporate uniforms based on existing size and grooming factors?  I'm not sure, but it would be an interesting factoid for this discussion.

I would estimate that 20-30%, if the representation I have at my local unit and other units I've been a member of hold true.  I would presume that we could probably capture a more accurate representation (minus facial hair), but grabbing the weight and height data we have in eServices. 

Yup, I  don't think anyone would have designed the current setup from scratch - because as with so many things in life - it is the result of experience and compromise.  It is rare when everyone is pleased with the result of a compromise.  But it lets us get our job done.

I agree.  However, sometimes opportunities present themselves to take a different course without such a huge effect.  For example, if the Air Force says that we could switch to ABUs, we could approach the subject again.  Since the AF style uniform wearers would be in a situation to have to change uniforms again, anyway, we could opt to remain in BDUs and transition the BBDU wearers into it - or switch everyone into the BBDUs.  Either way would cost money for the member, if we decided to move over to the ABUs or move someone else into a different uniform.

As others have pointed out, this "solution" would by definition result in the waste of several million dollars worth of uniforms purchased by our volunteers.

As will a switch to any new uniform adopted by the Air Force.  ABUs cost more than BDUs and I have three sets, a few pair of boots, etc.  So, I can see myself being out $600-$700 if we switch to ABUs.  So, if the majority of our members wear the AF Style Uniforms, isn't the cost greater to follow the Air Force than to put everyone in BDUs?

And result in untold millions in increased costs down the road as we move away from cheap USAF uniforms and the supply system as close as any military base.

As I noted above, AF Uniforms aren't exactly cheap.  Certainly not cheaper than our Aviator combination, unless we're talking about the hand-me-downs that many of our units rely on. Currently though, for a new member to outfit themselves with BDUs from Vanguard, it will cost them approximately $225.00. Also, how many of our units are within a reasonable driving distance to an Air Force Base?   

And yet you keep publicly questioning it.  Odd for someone who doesn't care about it.

I am not questioning the "Air Force's" decision.  What I am calling into question is the CAP leaderships decision to consistently pursue the path of separate but equal uniforms for its membership.

2) just because you haven't seen any data on governance doesn't mean the BoG hasn't

How does one get data without a request for data?  That's all I'm talking about, getting data.  Unless the data is just a group of people saying "we think that our governance model is messed up, other successful non-profits don't have a model like ours, let's look into it because it appears to be a problem."  Which sounds coincidentally like our uniform debate occurring here.

I don't have the ability to see the national picture, but my experience in CAP so far from local to national level events has exposed me, frequently, to people talking about how "messed up" our uniform system is.

Now, there you go.  That's a good idea.  Gather actual data to support your thesis that there is a "giant mess" that somehow affects the organization.  Even a simple survey of the membership would be a good place to start.  I'd be very interested in the results.

Great, if only there were someone that had national level influence/access to get something like that done...  I'd be interested in the results too.  Locally, I have gathered my data and this is why I bring it up.

I'm still having a little trouble connecting uniform issues to internet issues, but more importantly your premise is incorrect.  There is a national-level "reaction" to the concerns expressed by you and others.  A committee composed of volunteers like yourself have been charged with taking a fresh look at CAP uniforms and re-drafting the 39-1.

So the issue has been identified and is being looked at already?  Weren't you just saying that it isn't a problem that requires attention, other than a rewrite of 39-1?

[Ned]

A thought experiment to ponder over lunch:

Suppose the USAF removed the height/weight standards for the wearing of USAF-style uniforms.

(a loud huzzah! was heard throughout the nation)

Now anyone can wear the blues and (for the sake of argument) ABUs.

What will we do for members who cannot wear the largest sizes the AF stocks?

(Quick research on aafes.com suggest that blues shirts top out at size 19 and ABUs at size 50.)

Now what?

[BradM]

A thought experiment to ponder over lunch:

Suppose the USAF removed the height/weight standards for the wearing of USAF-style uniforms.

(a loud huzzah! was heard throughout the nation)

Now anyone can wear the blues and (for the sake of argument) ABUs.

And grooming standards?



and



I was told even my mustache here was too wide. I didnt like having to shorten it further. One of the reasons why I went back to the goatee This was the way I looked at the CA Wing Conference.