New Nat/CC agenda

[NCRblues]

In a little under 2 weeks we will have a new Nat/CC.

Lets put politics of the current and former administrations aside for a few minutes.

What is the one thing/things you would like to see the new Nat/CC do right off the bat?

I know we have had this sort of thing before, but id like to see other ideas updated, or new ones floated.

[ol'fido]

Offhand, figure out where the update button is on the regs and manuals server.

[AirDX]

Just shooting from the hip:  I think we need a 360 review of CAP.  Take an honest snapshot of where we are, find out what the membership thinks/wants, find out what our customers think/want, find out what the USAF thinks/wants.  See if we can align all that, find new missions, drop old ones.  Don't be constrained by what IS, imagine what can BE  and turn the ship (if that's what needs to be done).

Pretty much come at CAP with an open mind and a willingness to change the status quo, wherever it may need changing.

[DakRadz]

Just shooting from the hip:  I think we need a 360 review of CAP.  Take an honest snapshot of where we are, find out what the membership thinks/wants, find out what our customers think/want, find out what the USAF thinks/wants.  See if we can align all that, find new missions, drop old ones.  Don't be constrained by what IS, imagine what can BE  and turn the ship (if that's what needs to be done).

Pretty much come at CAP with an open mind and a willingness to change the status quo, wherever it may need changing.

Airpower!
Really, though- I've seen and heard of well-to-do companies doing this from time to time. The latest one I was given a tour of that mentioned doing this was started a a group of WWII/Korea United States Air Force Generals and is now Berkshire Hathaway-owned.

[Al Sayre]

I'd like to see a coherent policy on who's supposed to pay whom on missions involving multiple Wings/Regions.  I've got some issues right now that are way too much for Excedrin...

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

First, thank Major General Amy Courter, CAP, for stepping into a hornet's nest of a thankless job and making the best of it.  At least she will be a past National CC whom we can talk about by name and not acronym.

Go to whoever needs to be gone to in the Air Force and see what needs to be done to repair a relationship that has been fractious since at least the mid-1990s.

Do something, I don't know what, to reverse the stupid AUX ON/AUX OFF status and make us the sole, full-time Auxiliary of the Air Force.

Increase awareness of CAP in the Air Force.  I don't care where it's done, BMT, FTAC, wherever, just as long as the trend of Airmen not knowing who we are, or only knowing of us through inflated tales of salute-trolling or outright falsehood is reversed.

Initiate an immediate, full overhaul of CAP regulations.  Eliminate duplication and consolidate where necessary.  Ask for input from the Air Force.

Require fingerprint check renewal every two years.  Who knows how many in CAP there are who have done illegal things but have managed to hide it?

Extend promotion time for a new member to one year, with testing before handing out the bars.  The NSCC has a similar requirement; their new adult members are enrolled as "Instructors" for their first year before being commissioned as Ensign.

http://resources.seacadets.org/administration/appendix1_officerpromotionchart.pdf

Perhaps change the SMWOG designation to "Instructor?"

Allow promotions within CAP NCO grades.

And finally...the U word...

A thorough revision of 39-1, with Air Force input.

Request changes to AF type uniform:
H/W standards
Replacement of grey epaulettes with blue epaulettes with "CAP" embroidery to also be used on blue service coat
Replacement of grey nameplate with blue
Replacement of brushed silver nameplate with "Civil Air Patrol" nameplate used on CSU
Replacement of "U.S." collar brass with "CAP"

Request changes to "CAP-distinctive" uniform:
Replacement of white aviator shirt with blue aviator shirt
Allow grey BDU/"tactical" trousers
Institute purpose-designed headgear and service coat to replace blazer

Other:
Replacement of all ultramarine blue insignia with dark (navy) blue
Discontinue plastic-encased rank insignia for dark blue (as on current utility jumpsuit)
Request privilege of wearing flight cap with dark blue jumpsuit
Optional wear of CAP "overseas" patch in lieu of wing patch
Replace epaulettes on outergarments with navy blue grade insignia and CAP cloth insignia

Don't do anything unilaterally without AF input!

[JC004]

The current Civil Air Patrol regulation, policy, paperwork, and IT system looks like this. 

I wish to change all that.

[spacecommand]

So you a call new SMWOG "Instructor" even if they aren't instructors?  That just creates even more confusion then it needs to be.

[SarDragon]

"SMWOG" is an invention. It does not appear ANYWHERE in the regs. NOWHERE!

"Senior member without grade" does appear, as a description of the group of adult members that have no grade. Since most paperwork has a grade block, which must be filled in, these members get to put SM in that block.

I thought we covered this pretty well last year.

I don't think "Instructor" fits our org chart, since there is no function within CAP similar to the one in USAC.

[AirDX]

First, thank Major General Amy Courter, CAP, for stepping into a hornet's nest of a thankless job and making the best of it.  At least she will be a past National CC whom we can talk about by name and not acronym.

...

There's some good stuff here (though a fingerprint check every 2 years, really?), but I think we need first to define what our problems are, and then prioritize accordingly.  The blue or grey epaulet debate is just rearranging chairs on the Titanic.  So is what we call someone who joins CAP but is not yet in a traditional officer grade.

We seriously need an internal review to see where we are and where we want to go - once goals are updated and defined, then we can look at the specific changes we need to make in our programs to attain our goals.  Anything else is premature. 

[jeders]

First, thank Major General Amy Courter, CAP, for stepping into a hornet's nest of a thankless job and making the best of it.  At least she will be a past National CC whom we can talk about by name and not acronym.

Go to whoever needs to be gone to in the Air Force and see what needs to be done to repair a relationship that has been fractious since at least the mid-1990s.

Do something, I don't know what, to reverse the stupid AUX ON/AUX OFF status and make us the sole, full-time Auxiliary of the Air Force.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

If this much is done, then I think that most of the other things, especially the blue vs. grey stuff, will fall out with ease.

[JC004]

If people want full-time auxiliary, people better come up with a mighty compelling reason to a Congress that already can't pay for anything.  The CAP/CC can't do this.

[Major Lord]

I thought the official title for SMWOG was "Hey, new guy!" ?

Major Lord

[Briski]

First, thank Major General Amy Courter, CAP, for stepping into a hornet's nest of a thankless job and making the best of it.  At least she will be a past National CC whom we can talk about by name and not acronym.

Go to whoever needs to be gone to in the Air Force and see what needs to be done to repair a relationship that has been fractious since at least the mid-1990s.

For what it's worth, Maj Gen Courter has been working on this. But things like this take time, and there's only so much that one CAP/CC can accomplish, when you consider the reputation--justified or not--that CAP has to overcome.

At this point, CAP, as an organization, needs to establish a track record of consistency in integrity and professionalism organization-wide. The vast majority of CAP members are volunteer professionals who donate their time, money, and energy to a high standard of excellence.

Unfortunately, the day-to-day excellence typically does not become as high profile as a member-elected CAP/CC who cheats on USAF PME courses while systematically eliminating high-level leaders who speak out against his ethically questionable policies.

Perhaps it is not fair for the entire organization to be judged by incidents like the one mentioned above, and another former CAP/CC who intentionally set out to impersonate a USAF general officer, and the myriad smaller issues like CAP officers demanding salutes from Air Force personnel and wearing USAF-style uniforms improperly on active duty Air Force bases.

Fair or not, the fact remains that we all live under this shadow, and it will take consistency for us to earn back any level of trust, as an organization.

CyBorg's statement that Maj Gen Courter stepped into a "hornet's nest" is probably more accurate than any of us at the local level understand. But I think Maj Gen Courter's strategy was to connect with the right people in the USAF on a personal level, so she could then focus on communicating CAP's mission and what we can do to support USAF missions.

None of these meetings were readily apparent to the boots on the ground rank-and-file membership, and it has been easy for detractors and cynics to jump to conclusions and declare these meetings to be based on personal agendas and backdoor politics. Because, frankly, Maj Gen Courter walked into a situation where many CAP members in addition to USAF personnel had lost faith in the position of the CAP/CC.

Just as we as an organization have been judged unjustly by the unethical actions of others, so too has Maj Gen Courter, by virtue of stepping into a leadership role that had been tainted. Add to it the fact that leaders at the highest levels are subject to the greatest scrutiny and often end up facing the greatest personal attacks (Leadership lessons from the movie The Incredibles: "Behold, the Underminer! I'm always beneath you, but nothing is beneath me!"), and you get some of the conversations we've seen even here in these forums.

But if we can continue the conversation Maj Gen Courter started with the Air Force over the next 5-10 years and back it up with unmistakable professionalism and indisputable results, we can earn back organizational trust and repair the relationship.

None of us knows for sure, but my guess is that this process of redefining ourselves in the eyes of others will take at least 5-10 years, and the memory of past transgressions will always haunt us.

Hopefully the next two or three CAP/CCs will continue working to gradually rebuild the relationship, while bringing their own strengths and strategies to the table so we can continue to improve upon the long-term course Maj Gen Courter has set us on.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

^^Captain Briski:

First of all, props to your sig line from a fellow Tolkien-ite. :clap:

I have never met General Courter, unfortunately, though I did meet her predecessor one time.

Those I have talked to who have met her say that she is very dedicated and approachable.  No disrespect to the incoming National CC, but I will be sorry to see her step down because of the hard work at being a stable influence she has been.

I'm not sure how long you've been in CAP, but I'm going on 18 years, and the relationship was souring long before His Generalship wrought havoc with both us and the Air Force.  When I came in the atmosphere was one of walking on eggshells because of the former CAP/CC who "promoted" himself, which led to the imposition of the "berry boards," which led to very bad morale, which led to a rat's nest of other problems that were starting to be resolved when the Generalissimo pulled his little stunts.  That was a case of two steps forward and a light-year backward.

The cases of trolling for salutes, as odious as they are, are so few and far between (especially in recent years; it was driven home to me from the getgo in 1993 that I was not entitled to a salute from military personnel) as to be virtually insignificant.  How many documented cases of that have happened in recent years, and how many are apocryphal (Airman Snuffy told Sergeant Zillionstripes told Lieutenant Goldbar told the Air Force Times...)?

I would also lay odds that it hasn't just happened with us...what about the NSCC, CGAUX and even SDF's (who do hold commissions that are State but not Federally recognised and only applicable within their State) wearing officer brass that have done similar things?

I think that, to a large extent, the "shadow" you mentioned that we live under viz. the AF is largely self-flagellation for incidents that happened a long time ago that many in the AF today aren't even aware of.

[FW]

Well, at the risk of sounding self serving, you can easily download my agenda to see what I would like to do.  And, I do plan to thank Gen Courter for her years of dedicated service...

Contrary to the conventional wisdom on CT, I truly believe our relationship with the Air Force is pretty good however, IMO, it does need to be improved.  Even though we have shot ourselves in the foot many times in the last 30 years, we have consistently rose to the occasion when asked to fix things.  To harp on a couple of self inflicted wounds does not mean the Air Force is pouring salt on them.  The Air Force is obligated to provide the oversite needed to do business in accordance with certain rules and regulations; as well as public law. It is (basically) the National Commander's duty to lead Civil Air Patrol in accordance to the rules and regulations of the Corporation and, serve as the prime example of professionalism for the membership. Everything else is staff work.  National Commanders have worked with the SECAF/CSAF for many years.  They fight for our interests and, they work for the betterment of CAP.  And, except for the one who betrayed the trust of the membership (and Board of Governors), all have done an admirable job under thankless conditions. 

As to our relationships with our National Commanders, well, I'm taking meds to thicken my skin as we speak....just in case

[AirDX]

Contrary to the conventional wisdom on CT, I truly believe our relationship with the Air Force is pretty good however, IMO, it does need to be improved. 

Fred, I don't presume to know what level you are working with the AF on, but I'm sure at the NHQ/CAP-USAF level it's pretty congenial.  However, out here in the field, things are a little more complex.

I participate with a squadron that meets on the air force base (joint base, now, I guess), and the attitude is one of semi-benign neglect.  They provide a place to meet, but they don't make it very easy to get folks on base.  A CAP ID works, but only on meeting nights.  There are no ties between the CAP and any organizations on base, other than informal person-to-person ties, and those vaporize when folks rotate out.

We seem to get along better with the Marines on the other side of the island than we do our own host base - the Marines host our encampment every year.

Some of it is doubtless our own fault for not reaching out, but the squadron CC is a retired E-9 who seems to know everybody and talks to everybody on base.  The attitude from the AF here seems to be not antipathy, but apathy.  I'd like to see a concerted effort to remedy that across the board.  I know some bases are different, but there's no standard expectation of what the CAP<-->USAF relationship is or should be.  It's all a little puzzling to me.

Again, it needs to be prioritized as part of a 360 review of CAP and CAP's missions.

[RiverAux]

Contrary to the conventional wisdom on CT, I truly believe our relationship with the Air Force is pretty good however, IMO, it does need to be improved. 

I don't think we have a bad relationship, just not much of a relationship at all.  Sort of like how most people are with their cousins spouse - we know each by name and face but don't know each other very well. 

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Either way, the relationship, whether antipathy or apathy, is not healthy.

My unit is on an ANG installation, and except for drill weekends, pretty much the only military personnel there are the AGR's who keep the place running, and due to the nature of Guard and Reserve units where people stay for years and years, many of them know who we are.  However, there are no formal links.

The lack of relationship cited by RiverAux is borne of ignorance...and again the USAF has to bear a certain amount of responsibility for that for not informing Airmen who we are.

The status quo might be good for those who just want to be a flying club, but I don't think it's good for CAP or the AF as a whole.

[FW]

Yes, I'm speaking of our relationship with the Air Force at the Organizational level (National, Corporate or, whatever you wish to label it).

If we have issues at the squadron level I would have to say it is because of a lack of proper instructions, guidelines, understanding and, training.  The question in this case, IMO, is not what the National Commander can do; it is how we fix the problems at the local level.  Do we change our training?  Do we need more State Director Involvement?  Does CAP-USAF need more authority?

I personally have not been witness to the problems at a base.  I was always treated well and with no problems at the gate.  My old squadron is at an Army Reserve Center whose personnel give it great support. The Former state Adjutant General is an active member of the wing. My old wing HQ is at the state NG training site and has given the wing great support over the years. However, I understand there are problems which need to be addressed. A 360 review is a good idea.  I'll add it to the "Task Force" list.