Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 24, 2019, 09:52:45 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  The Lobby  |  Topic: Group CC and Squadron CC term limits
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6 Send this topic Print
Author Topic: Group CC and Squadron CC term limits  (Read 17104 times)
luscioman
Recruit

Posts: 7

« on: March 26, 2012, 04:53:19 PM »

Does anyone know what the status with this is at the national level? The rumor is that it will be 3 years for both positions but i have not heard much else on it. I know that Florida Wing has already started this since 2011. It appears that some squadrons are having a hard time dealing with this situation. Below is the link for the FLorida Wing posting on it.



http://www.flwg.us/cap-resources/publications/oi.aspx
FLWGOI 11-04 | Term Limits for Group and Squadron Commanders | Effective: 29 SEP 2011
Download | Details | Category: Uncategorized
Report to moderator   Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,657

« Reply #1 on: March 26, 2012, 05:11:24 PM »

There's no national standard, but the trend is growing.

My region has been a three year term with a 1 year extension, for nearly 10 years.
When the limits were originally imposed we had CC's who had been in place for anywhere from 17-30 years.

Any unit that cannot find a replacement commander is not fulfilling its mission of senior progression and recruiting.
No unit should be at risk for disappearing overnight because the commander leaves CAP or finds a different job within the organization, nor
should any commander feel locked into the job.

It stifles change, reduces the opportunities for others, and propagates the GOBC.
Report to moderator   Logged


luscioman
Recruit

Posts: 7

« Reply #2 on: March 26, 2012, 05:32:30 PM »

There's no national standard, but the trend is growing.

My region has been a three year term with a 1 year extension, for nearly 10 years.
When the limits were originally imposed we had CC's who had been in place for anywhere from 17-30 years.

Any unit that cannot find a replacement commander is not fulfilling its mission of senior progression and recruiting.
No unit should be at risk for disappearing overnight because the commander leaves CAP or finds a different job within the organization, nor
should any commander feel locked into the job.

It stifles change, reduces the opportunities for others, and propagates the GOBC.

I have noticed that many seniors in general just dont want to be the CC which is fine also. I agree in some cases that some need to change in other cases the commander is doing a great job and should be left to stay. It can be hard to develop or move a squadron in 2 or 3 years. The unit i am in has over a 115 members and has increased 20% in the past year.

I took a look at the former group commanders for the past 12 years of my group and this is the result of them.

1. 1998-2000 Went to another Wing to be Wing CC then was forced to step down. Not active now
2. 2000-2002 Went on to a wing position and is not active now
3. 2002-2004 Is a patron member
4. 2004-2005 Is a patron member
5. 2005-2006 Is not a member of CAP
6. 2006-2008 Is not a member of CAP
7. 2008-2010 Is a patron member
8. 2010-2012 Current commander
Report to moderator   Logged
Spaceman3750
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,677

« Reply #3 on: March 26, 2012, 05:36:11 PM »

Personally I can't imagine being a commander for longer than 3 years. There's way too many responsibilities with that role (I know squadron and group commanders who sometimes spend 20-30 hours a week on CAP things). I could keep it up for a couple of years, but not 20!
Report to moderator   Logged
The moment any commander or staff member considers themselves a gatekeeper, instead of a facilitator, they have failed at their job.
I can't fix all of CAP's problems, but I can lead from the bottom by building my squadron as a center of excellence to serve as an example of what every unit can be.
Extremepredjudice
Banned

Posts: 1,452
Unit: Freebooter

« Reply #4 on: March 26, 2012, 06:04:37 PM »

The unit i am in has over a 115 members and has increased 20% in the past year.
:o :o :o

That is a lot of people.
Report to moderator   Logged
I love the moderators here. <3

Hanlon's Razor
Occam's Razor
"Flight make chant; I good leader"
Grumpy
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 896

« Reply #5 on: March 26, 2012, 06:26:24 PM »

There's no national standard, but the trend is growing.

My region has been a three year term with a 1 year extension, for nearly 10 years.
When the limits were originally imposed we had CC's who had been in place for anywhere from 17-30 years.

Any unit that cannot find a replacement commander is not fulfilling its mission of senior progression and recruiting.
No unit should be at risk for disappearing overnight because the commander leaves CAP or finds a different job within the organization, nor
should any commander feel locked into the job.

It stifles change, reduces the opportunities for others, and propagates the GOBC.

Heck, we already have one of those in our wing.  I thought everybody did.
Report to moderator   Logged
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,680

« Reply #6 on: March 26, 2012, 06:49:58 PM »

As a rule of thumb I like it.....but it is a little stupid as a real hard and fast rule.

Bottom line.....if a wing/group commander thinks that a squadron commander is not being effective....he has the power to make the change.
Why make a change just because the clock ticked over at three years?

Report to moderator   Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
Extremepredjudice
Banned

Posts: 1,452
Unit: Freebooter

« Reply #7 on: March 26, 2012, 06:56:11 PM »


Why make a change just because the clock ticked over at three years?
it gives someone else a chance to be a CC. If all the positions are locked up, how do you gain leadership experience?
Report to moderator   Logged
I love the moderators here. <3

Hanlon's Razor
Occam's Razor
"Flight make chant; I good leader"
bosshawk
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,585

« Reply #8 on: March 26, 2012, 06:57:41 PM »

On another hand, if there is a three year policy and you know it going in, you work towards having a trained and qualified replacement at the three year point.  When I was in CAP, I constantly saw absolutely no effort at training and selecting replacements for any CAP command or staff position.  It seemed far more likely to be an "oh crap" situation when a commander or key staff officer moved on.

Yes, there are situations whereby a person can effectively remain in a position for more than three years: those should be exceptions rather than the rule.  There is entirely too much of "winging it" exercised by those in responsible positions.
Report to moderator   Logged
Paul M. Reed
Col, USA(ret)
Former CAP Lt Col
Wilson #2777
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,680

« Reply #9 on: March 26, 2012, 07:11:39 PM »


Why make a change just because the clock ticked over at three years?
it gives someone else a chance to be a CC. If all the positions are locked up, how do you gain leadership experience?
Okay I'll buy that....but this is just splitting hairs.....what is there is no one ready/willing/able to take the position?

That is my point....as a rule of thumb it is a good idea....spreads the wealth, shares the pain, prevents burn out, gets in new blood, breaks up the cult of personality...etc, et al.   But we can do all that with out a "you can only serve a three year tour" rule.

Lt Col Oldguy has been commander for two years or ten years......if you have an up and commer who needs command time....you talk to oldguy and make the change.  Oldguy is doing well....don't make any changes.  If you think he is stagnating....make the changes.....but simply because it has been XX years you got to go is just too clerkish to me.

YMMV
Report to moderator   Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
davedove
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 964
Unit: MER-MD-003

« Reply #10 on: March 26, 2012, 07:57:52 PM »

Most people seem to be fixated on the Squadron King problem.  I have no doubt some of these exist, but what about the other side of this issue?  Many may be reluctant to take the job because they fear getting stuck in it.

Captain Sam Somebody is the current commander.  Senior member Joe Blow would like to try his hand at command.  However, he sees that many commanders have been in the position of umpteen years because no one else has volunteered to take command.  Because of this, Joe is reluctant to take command because he fears getting stuck in the same situation.  Since Joe doesn't volunteer, the Sam is stuck with no one to take his place until he burns out, maybe quits CAP, and CAP is forced to find another commander in a short time frame.

I don't know that official term limits are the solution, but they would be a way to address both sides of the problem.
Report to moderator   Logged
David W. Dove, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander for Seniors
Personnel/PD/Asst. Testing Officer
Ground Team Leader
Frederick Composite Squadron
MER-MD-003
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,657

« Reply #11 on: March 26, 2012, 08:09:36 PM »

...what is there is no one ready/willing/able to take the position?

Then the entire chain has failed, since progression and transition is one of the tenants of the senior program - either your people aren't progressing, or you're having them do work for nothing.  Either is a failure.

If there's only one person on the roster willing or able to be the commander, then it's time to start recruiting or working on PD.
Commander's should have the option for an occasional week off, or to stand down and continue to serve in other capacities without the
unit collapsing or even feeling guilty.

Further, the good commanders should have the opportunity to expand their scope and bring their experience to a broader audience, and the bad CC's should know that the clock is ticking, whether they succeed or not.

Report to moderator   Logged


lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,680

« Reply #12 on: March 26, 2012, 08:23:55 PM »

I think you definition of good and bad are all off kilter.

Bad commanders should know that they clock is always ticking.....no one should be waiting for a 3 year mark to start doing their job.

Having said all that.....again......if no one is ready or willing to take over.......firiing the effictive commander is not the answer.

And again.....like I said before......as a rule of thumb it is a good idea.....let's not tire our hands with just more regulations for regulations sake.
Report to moderator   Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
RiverAux
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,978

« Reply #13 on: March 26, 2012, 08:37:45 PM »

We definitely need it.   One year terms with the chance for a one year extension works really well in CG Aux.  However, having run both CAP squadrons and Aux flotillas, leading a CAP unit is much more complex and it takes longer to get up to speed, so a 3 year term limit would be just about right. 

The term limit will actually make it much more likely for someone to accept that position since they know there is a deadline and that they're not getting themselves sucked into a 5+ year commitment. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,657

« Reply #14 on: March 26, 2012, 08:37:48 PM »

It's not just for "regulations sake" - how much really gets done in CAP that isn't absolutely mandated by regs?

In most cases, the ineffective commanders are running the least visible unit, which means that absent "badness", they fly under
the radar of the wing, and maybe even the Group CC, and just limp along for years and years with no one really noticing.

At least a mandatory change of command every "x" forces some attention.

The relevantly recent change to the way Lt. Cols are handled is a good example of this.  They changed the rules to make the grade provisional the first year - the debate over the how's and why's is irrelevant, for the first couple years, this was basically ignored, since there was no systemic mandate to do a review.  Now there is, and I can promise you that this has the attention of those who value their silver oaks.
Report to moderator   Logged


manfredvonrichthofen
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,881

« Reply #15 on: March 26, 2012, 10:57:35 PM »

I wouldn't say x number of years and you have to pass the flag, but there should be something in addition to the UIs just for the CC, where maybe four of the squadron members are interviewed at random by the Group CC asking about the commander and how things are getting along in the squadron. Also taking into account the progression of all the members of the unit, seniors and cadets as applicable. If the unit as a whole is moving foreward, and there are no major issues, then the squadron CC stays where he is and the unit is allowed to keep their CC. If there are enough major issues, then someone new can take the reigns.

I know if our CC were to come up on a x number of years and now you are out, we would lose a great CC that should be able to keep his position, because our unit is doing great and is moving foreward very steadily.
Report to moderator   Logged
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,680

« Reply #16 on: March 26, 2012, 11:56:58 PM »

I still have not seen any really compelling evidence that a term limit must be implemented.

As a rule of thumb....yes....it all makes sense....and I agree with it.

But I ask.....how many squadrons/groups have commanders that have gone over the 3 year mark?
Of those.....how many are ineffective...how many other potential commanders have gotten their professional development stunted because of it?
IF THERE IS A PROBLEM.....then by all means wing and group commanders need to step in and take care of it.
But making a manditory 3 year mark.....is just another adminstrative point that will get visibility during the CI and then be ignored the rest of the time.

Wing and Group PD officers and commanders should be enganged with their subordinate unit leaders all the time.
Making BS regulations just to make them....will not make better group/wing officers....it will just make more problems at the squadron level.

Report to moderator   Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
RiverAux
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,978

« Reply #17 on: March 27, 2012, 12:13:54 AM »

Well, that is evidence that would be impossible to collect without full-access to the membership database and some basic database query skills.  Not something that is going to be available to us here on CAPTalk. 
Report to moderator   Logged
manfredvonrichthofen
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,881

« Reply #18 on: March 27, 2012, 12:56:19 AM »

My growth has been supported by my CC, and I know our squadron owes him a lot. If he were taken away from his position, our unit would suffer, just because of a technicality.
Report to moderator   Logged
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,596
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #19 on: March 27, 2012, 01:39:58 AM »

But one of his responsibilities is to train a replacement. If he hasn't done that, then he has done the unit a disservice.
Report to moderator   Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6 Send this topic Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  The Lobby  |  Topic: Group CC and Squadron CC term limits
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.055 seconds with 26 queries.