Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 17, 2018, 05:50:47 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 4 ... 6 Print
Author Topic: Group CC and Squadron CC term limits  (Read 16606 times)
manfredvonrichthofen
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,881

« Reply #20 on: March 26, 2012, 09:43:26 PM »

But one of his responsibilities is to train a replacement. If he hasn't done that, then he has done the unit a disservice.
While I do see a lot of truth to that, I would think the best replacement would be someone who has taken the effort to try to learn his job Oslo that he can be the rellacement on his own... As in taking the initiative to learn from the CC and not the CC saying hey I want you to be my replacement... Shadow me and learn the job. Plus if it is a composite squadron, I would think the DCC would be the next replacement.
Logged
bosshawk
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,585

« Reply #21 on: March 26, 2012, 09:56:48 PM »

And if he has helped you as much as you say, there is no reason why he can't continue to help you once he leaves the CC position: he isn't leaving the unit, is he?  I have mentored one of my friends for something like 15 years and he still asks me for my guidance or opinions on some things.

And I am not a CAP member any longer.
Logged
Paul M. Reed
Col, USA(ret)
Former CAP Lt Col
Wilson #2777
Private Investigator
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,158

« Reply #22 on: March 26, 2012, 11:16:49 PM »

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.

That is ridiculous. If he/she was an exceptional Squadron Commander it will not be a problem. Remember it is an Civil Air Patrol Squadron not John Doe's Squadron. At the end of his term, give them an award, a plaque and a great change of command ceremony. 
Logged
manfredvonrichthofen
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,881

« Reply #23 on: March 26, 2012, 11:20:12 PM »

I believe it is a matter of dedication. He is more dedicated than anyone that I have seen to the squadron.
Logged
Private Investigator
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,158

« Reply #24 on: March 26, 2012, 11:38:40 PM »

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

That is the trend I expect. Most Wing Commanders have 23 months before they step down. Similar to Group Commanders. Now Squadron Commanders tend to last longer due to their kingdom mentality. I am for term limits.

 
Logged
Private Investigator
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,158

« Reply #25 on: March 26, 2012, 11:46:10 PM »

I believe it is a matter of dedication. He is more dedicated than anyone that I have seen to the squadron.

Thats good. BUT it depends on how long you have been in CAP and how many other Squadrons you have been into. Some people think Petticoat Junction Composite Squadron (XX-012) is the greatest ever because they got a plane AND a van.

I am not downing anyone but don't you want to be a Squadron Commander one day? 
Logged
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,654

« Reply #26 on: March 27, 2012, 12:25:49 AM »

And if he has helped you as much as you say, there is no reason why he can't continue to help you once he leaves the CC position: he isn't leaving the unit, is he?  I have mentored one of my friends for something like 15 years and he still asks me for my guidance or opinions on some things.

And I am not a CAP member any longer.
An old commander hanging around....especially one who did not want to quit but was forced out......is not some one you want hovering over your shoulder.  The temptation to just step in and run things anyway can be very strong.
Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
bosshawk
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,585

« Reply #27 on: March 27, 2012, 02:21:35 AM »

Pat: you completely missed the point of my post.  What you say is correct, it just doesn't fit the point which I was trying to make to the young Lt.  The guy doesn't have to be the CC to provide guidance.  In fact, senior members in any position can and should provide guidance to anyone who asks for it.  A former CC who hangs around trying to influence a unit is a problem: he should move on to other things, either in the unit or outside it.
Logged
Paul M. Reed
Col, USA(ret)
Former CAP Lt Col
Wilson #2777
Nathan
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 685

« Reply #28 on: March 27, 2012, 09:36:37 AM »

It doesn't force us to find a good commander every three years, it forces us to find ANY commander every three years. So let's break it down.

Good unit with limits: good commander is trained and takes over
Good unit without limits: good commander is trained and takes over, OR good commander stays in place
Bad unit with limits: bad commander doesn't train, inexperienced one takes over (and probably can't train)
Bad unit without limits: bad commander stays

So in a bad unit, chances seem high that we're going to end up with a bad commander, or at least one that is too inexperienced to train the replacement effectively. In a good unit, it doesn't matter what we do, either. Without term limits, though, even a unit with a poor commander in charge still allows the random intuitively good commander who eventually takes over to have enough time to gain experience AND train a suitable replacement. It could take more than three years to undo the damage a bad commander can cause, but it certainly doesn't take that long for a bad commander to ruin the squadron in the first place.

Term limits look reasonable superficially, but don't really seem to have any bite when you look at it this way. Seems better to me to just let the wing commanders retain the authority to move ineffective commanders out when they feel there is a suitable replacement, and not force them to do so when a replacement isn't available. Because we have absolutely no reason to believe that the deadline to replace a commander would result in an increased work ethic in training a replacement rather than simply a pressure to put anyone with a pulse in command, which doesn't solve our problem in the least.
Logged
Nathan Scalia

The post beneath this one is a lie.
bflynn
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 748

« Reply #29 on: March 27, 2012, 09:45:07 AM »

Good unit with limits: good commander is trained and takes over
Good unit without limits: good commander is trained and takes over, OR good commander stays in place
Bad unit with limits: bad commander doesn't train, inexperienced one takes over (and probably can't train)
Bad unit without limits: bad commander stays

I'm not sure that this makes any sense - you're stating that good commanders, good replacements and good units all go togther while bad commanders, bad units and bad replacements all go togther.

Isn't that self defining?  The unit and replacement are bad because the commander is bad.

I reject that the process is locked in a self sustaining cycle.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,249

« Reply #30 on: March 27, 2012, 10:09:09 AM »

Nathan,

You're assuming the replacements will come from within the unit - that's not always the case, and if the unit's CC were that bad,
probably not a good idea.
Logged


luscioman
Recruit

Posts: 7

« Reply #31 on: March 27, 2012, 11:03:31 AM »

I am aware of 2 or 3 units in the wing that will be shut down due to  not finding a replacement. There are qualified people that could take it they just choose not to due to personal issues such as work or family. I am not for term limits at all.

If everyone must "move up" and be given a chance to lead where do the former squadron cc's go? They cant all be a group commander at the same time.

I think that if a squadron is doing very well they commander should be given a chance to stay and do what they like to do.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,249

« Reply #32 on: March 27, 2012, 11:24:33 AM »

I am aware of 2 or 3 units in the wing that will be shut down due to  not finding a replacement.
Which means they are a heartbeat or personal circumstance change of the CC from retirement - hardly a way to staff what is supposed to
be an ongoing ES response resource, or a comfort and stability to a cadet or other members.

You are outlining the problem, and one solved only by the "we need more people" issue. 

If everyone must "move up" and be given a chance to lead where do the former squadron cc's go? They cant all be a group commander at the same time.
There are plenty of other options beyond CC-to-CC transitions.  Every echelon needs qualified, experienced staffers, every wing has a multitude of
larger-scale activities, and few will not be desperate for qualified staff.  NESA, NCSA's, Group, Wing, Region, and national professional development activities.  And then there's the option of "just being a member for a while" and doing your bit for God and country and going home, while letting
someone else worry about the hots and cots.

Further, a good commander is fostering a sense of teamwork, and actually building a team, meaning that beyond the practical responsibility of
having to make the final decisions, there should not be an issue of stepping aside and working with/for someone you've personally trained and mentored.  My most recent successor is the perfect example, after being relieved, I did everything I could to support him and work with him
on endeavors which needed completion or that were team efforts we all wanted to complete.  I have moved on to new challenges, but
have worked with him a number of times, and look forward to working for him in he future, I only stepped back for a bit to insure there
was no confusion as to who was running the show.

That's how it's supposed to work.

I think that if a squadron is doing very well they commander should be given a chance to stay and do what they like to do.
Again, a squadron with only one person who is willing to run things is no "doing well".
Logged


Nathan
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 685

« Reply #33 on: March 27, 2012, 11:49:26 AM »

Good unit with limits: good commander is trained and takes over
Good unit without limits: good commander is trained and takes over, OR good commander stays in place
Bad unit with limits: bad commander doesn't train, inexperienced one takes over (and probably can't train)
Bad unit without limits: bad commander stays

I'm not sure that this makes any sense - you're stating that good commanders, good replacements and good units all go togther while bad commanders, bad units and bad replacements all go togther.

Isn't that self defining?  The unit and replacement are bad because the commander is bad.

I reject that the process is locked in a self sustaining cycle.

No, read it again.

Good commanders don't need to be told to look for and train replacements. That's part of being a good commander. If there isn't anyone around, then a good commander will go on commanding... goodly. If there is, then a good commander trains that person to take over. That's just the name of the game.

A bad commander doesn't do these things, or if he/she does, it is done poorly. These are the guys we're trying to throw out using term limits, but we have to realize that bad commanders haven't necessarily trained a replacement that makes switching him out a good idea. Even an eager, well-meaning replacement will have little experience from a bad commander, and so he/she will be spending the vast majority of the three years LEARNING THE JOB. That doesn't leave much time to adequately train a replacement, which just cycles the problem over again and again.

It's pretty simple. We cannot expect that a bad commander is going to train someone to be an excellent commander replacement. And we cannot expect that an untrained commander taking over from a bad commander can fix a bad commander's unit within a limited three years while at the same time gaining enough experience to train a suitable replacement.

Without term limits, we can at least give the rookie commander inheriting a unit from a bad commander enough time to learn the game, gain experience, and THEN worry about training a competant replacement. Three years is simply not enough time. Hell, I wish I could have had three years as a CADET COMMANDER to do these things.

And Eclipse, you make a good point about bringing people in from the outside, but in my own experience, at least, this isn't necessarily a common practice. It is certainly not common enough to encompass all the units that could get stuck in an "amateur loop" due to term limits. Term limits are rarely going to have more benefits than they will create problems.
Logged
Nathan Scalia

The post beneath this one is a lie.
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,249

« Reply #34 on: March 27, 2012, 12:31:33 PM »

And Eclipse, you make a good point about bringing people in from the outside, but in my own experience, at least, this isn't necessarily a common practice. It is certainly not common enough to encompass all the units that could get stuck in an "amateur loop" due to term limits. Term limits are rarely going to have more benefits than they will create problems.

Well, then we need to change the paradigm.

You'd be surprised the result that can occur when you hold a mandatory meeting of all the seniors and parents and say, "so and so's term is up in 6 months", we've got two choices, a lot more of you step up and start training up so we can implement a smooth transition, or there's a good chance the unit will not be here this time next year...".

Those that see value in the program will step up, and if they don't, then everyone is probably kidding themselves about why a handful show up on
a random Tuesday.

As to the "amateur loop", I agree it's a risk, but at least it's a different amateur, and instills the culture of change that CAP so desperately needs to start
recognizing.  We have hundreds of units who have been walking in the same circular rut for years, if not decades - bare-minimum performance (or worse), members just kind of shuffling in, out, and around, seeing others do "cool stuff" and never being able to reach for it themselves, and all the while not realizing that it is their beloved CC who is holding everyone back.

I'll grant that this is a higher HQ failing in letting units struggle, but admitting that doesn't change things.  The reality is that, just a unit are the heart of CAP, so is the initiative of those units' members - and if they are "happy" to just languish, how much mental attention are they going to get from a
group or wing CC who has 6-50 other units to worry about?  Especially in the all-too-common situation where help is provided, and then nothing is
done until the higher HQ guys come back again in 6 months.  BTDT.

If for no other reason than because we are a volunteer organization, we need to embrace this, because volunteers especially, with inconsistent training, divided attention, and no real press for performance beyond self-actualization, are inclined to fall into comfortable ruts that "feel good" and accomplish little.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2012, 12:36:02 PM by Eclipse » Logged


RiverAux
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,974

« Reply #35 on: March 27, 2012, 02:11:49 PM »

And if he has helped you as much as you say, there is no reason why he can't continue to help you once he leaves the CC position: he isn't leaving the unit, is he?  I have mentored one of my friends for something like 15 years and he still asks me for my guidance or opinions on some things.

And I am not a CAP member any longer.
An old commander hanging around....especially one who did not want to quit but was forced out......is not some one you want hovering over your shoulder.  The temptation to just step in and run things anyway can be very strong.
Who says?  My CG Aux unit has at least 6 former flotilla commanders in it, all of whom are still active.  Why, because they served their term with honor and kept with the organization.  You almost never see a former CAP squadron commander still active in the squadron because  they don't serve a term, they get fired by the group/wing commander for whatever reason or they quit after getting burnt out being stuck in a job with no relief in sight. 
Logged
FW
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,182

« Reply #36 on: March 27, 2012, 02:57:06 PM »

Being a former squadron commander and still active in the squadron is something of an oxymoron in CAP.  The difference between us and "them" is elections vs. selections.   I belong to a few orgainizations where I once was the president (elected) and now am a "past president" still active and participating.  I served a successful term and moved to other endevours.  In CAP, I was appointed to each command slot; moving up and out until there was no where else to go.  When I ask to help, I get "sure sir" and, they go to someone else; worried I'll just get in the way.  I've become the 900 lb gorilla in the room.  Go figure...
Logged
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,654

« Reply #37 on: March 27, 2012, 03:04:57 PM »

Nathan,

You're assuming the replacements will come from within the unit - that's not always the case, and if the unit's CC were that bad,
probably not a good idea.
Where else would a replacement come from?   
Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,249

« Reply #38 on: March 27, 2012, 03:13:42 PM »

Nathan,

You're assuming the replacements will come from within the unit - that's not always the case, and if the unit's CC were that bad,
probably not a good idea.
Where else would a replacement come from?

Outside the unit.
Logged


lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,654

« Reply #39 on: March 27, 2012, 03:18:33 PM »

Nathan,

You're assuming the replacements will come from within the unit - that's not always the case, and if the unit's CC were that bad,
probably not a good idea.
Where else would a replacement come from?

Outside the unit.
Where?  Are you suggesting someone drive 100 miles everyweek to take over a squadron? 
Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6 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 0.115 seconds with 25 queries.
click here to email me