Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 22, 2019, 01:54:05 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  The Lobby  |  Topic: Out ranking
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  All Send this topic Print
Author Topic: Out ranking  (Read 13337 times)
bflynn
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 748

« Reply #20 on: April 12, 2012, 12:13:13 AM »

I see that but I am still going to have to disagree.

Well, Ok.  Good Luck if you're in that situation.

The number of leaders that have run in trouble over this issue is long.  From a pure leadership standpoint, it's a mistake no matter where or who you're leading.
Report to moderator   Logged
whatevah
Administrator

Posts: 1,029

my personal website, yo!
« Reply #21 on: April 12, 2012, 12:18:53 AM »

I can see his point, I've been in units where things were blatantly against regulations, like giving out "practice tests" that consisted of the cadet leadership/AE tests with a fill-in-the-blank instead of the multiple choice answers.  By continuing to let something like that go on for 3 months, you're risking serious trouble from higher headquarters.
Report to moderator   Logged
Jerry Horn
CAPTalk Co-Admin
Major Lord
Suspended

Posts: 1,817

« Reply #22 on: April 12, 2012, 12:41:20 AM »

Its vitally important to know who is ranking just in case the President walks in someone has to report, or if a SMWOG has to get into the back of the car before or after a SM......or God forbid, what if two SM's are saluted by an AF Air Person, and they, not knowing who is senior in time and service fail to return the salute? It chills my blood to consider.

Major Lord
Report to moderator   Logged
"The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he, who in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who would attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee."
abdsp51
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,613
Unit: Classified

« Reply #23 on: April 12, 2012, 01:04:11 AM »

I see that but I am still going to have to disagree.

Well, Ok.  Good Luck if you're in that situation.

The number of leaders that have run in trouble over this issue is long.  From a pure leadership standpoint, it's a mistake no matter where or who you're leading.

Again from personal experience I will have to disagree with that statement from a pure leadership standpoint.  If you will look back at what was said I said never change from the get go unless absolutely necessary.  If things are up to par and within standards set down then you improve the process.  I will again refer to the example of Gen LeMay who took over as the Army Air Corp CO in the Pacific region for the bombing raids on Japan.  The day he took office the bombing strategy and policy changed, and it was for the better. 

We can heam and haw on it all day long I have examples and my own experience to stand on with my viewpoint. 
Report to moderator   Logged
FW
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,186

« Reply #24 on: April 12, 2012, 01:48:23 AM »

I'm pretty sure I'm the highest ranking CAP Colonel contributing on CAPTalk.  :)  From a leadership standpoint, my grade or rank is meaningless here.  From an experience standpoint; you can take it for what it's worth. From a C&C standpoint; you guys can salute my posts any time you feel like it.... >:D
 
Since we conduct ourselves in CAP in a military manner, military C&C's are supposed to be followed.  When in uniform, members should render proper courtesy; instructions which can be found in numerous publications. Cadets learn this early on.  SM's usually learn this in Level 1 of the PD program however, I guess it's not stressed when the coffee and donuts are being served...
 
The most most important points to remember were explained very well by Eclipse.  His discription of authority and grade/rank in CAP is spot on. :clap:
Report to moderator   Logged
spacecommand
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 545

« Reply #25 on: April 12, 2012, 01:50:51 AM »

Who out ranks who? A cadet who just crossed over and became a Flight Officer or a Senior Member who has been in for a very very VERY long time.

Depends on what position that Flight Officer holds vs the Senior member who has been in for a very very VERY long time.

As mentioned, authority in CAP is based on the position a person holds rather then grade.  (Example): If you have a 1st Lt Squadron Commander who's been in CAP for two years and never cadet, their position (Squadron Commander) trumps the operations officer of the squadron who might be a former Spaatz cadet and a Lt Col who has been in for a very very long time. 

However, that 1st Lt would still render proper customs and courtesies to that Lt Col (and anyone in higher grade to the 1st Lt).
Report to moderator   Logged
ol'fido
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,889
Unit: DOTCOTE.

« Reply #26 on: April 12, 2012, 02:00:36 AM »

Grade: What you wear on your collar or sleeve. Higher grade trumps lower grade for customs and courtesies.

Rank: Your seniority within your grade. Major with DOR of 2001 outranks major with DOR in 2007.

Position: The job you hold within the staff or chain of command. Position trumps grade or rank with regard to authority.

There are probably exceptions and ambiguities to these guidelines as the next few posters will probably want to point out but that's basically how it works.

Report to moderator   Logged
Lt. Col. Randy L. Mitchell
Historian, Group 1, IL-006
EMT-83
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,896

« Reply #27 on: April 12, 2012, 02:57:40 AM »

There is a certain Captain in my squadron. He’s the same grade as me, but outranks me due to seniority. As Deputy Commander, my position trumps his Operations Officer gig. When we fly, his MP beats my MO.

Does any of this matter? Nope.
Report to moderator   Logged
Major Carrales
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,106

« Reply #28 on: April 12, 2012, 02:59:51 AM »

Let's look at this from a different angle starting with the last post I read from ol'fido.

The only "authority" in CAP is command authority.  Rank is indicated in terms of position.  I am a squadron commander, so I rank above those that are staff officers in my unit.  The Group Commander is in command of the echelon above me and, thus, he out ranks us at the Squadron Level.  Then there is the WING COMMANDER and REGION COMMANDERS, they...as corporate officers....out rank us all.  The National Commander has RANK over all those in some command function.

They are where orders, information and policy are directed downward.

Grade is what were wear on our collars, shoulders and sleeves.  And, while there is a respect there, let us not forget what CAP GRADE indicates.

1) Progression through the CAP SENIOR MEMBER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.  So, I am a Major...my grade and ribbons reflect my progress in CAP.  I have been in CAP more than 6 months and finished LEVEL I.  Have a tech and senior rating in a specialty track, taken SLS and CLC, completed the OLD ECI 13, attended wing conferences and so on and so forth that show what it means to be a MAJOR in CAP.

Thus, you can assume...if I have been active in CAP continually, that I have earned this rank over the course of over 10 years and might know a bit about CAP and how it works.

So, if I see a 1st Lt with a leadership ribbon, I can make a judgement about what they have done and develop the professional development focus of my unit to include that officers needs.

2) Mission Related Skill-  If I see wings and a CAP railroad tracks I might assume that this person achieved their rank via being some level of aviator.  There is something to be respected there.

3) Professional Achievement- If I see a CAP or Major with no CAP ribbons, or maybe a MEMBERSHIP RIBBON...I might assume they earned this rank for achievements in their professional careers.  A master school administrator or Chaplain.  There is a respect factor in that as well.  A busy professional takes time to volunteer for CAP.

4) Military Rank- A Lt Col with lots of Active Duty Ribbons and few CAP ones could very well be a retired General who wants to continue to serve with CAP.

5) COMMAND SERVICE- Any Cols, Brig Gen or Maj Generals took a Wing, region or whole ball of wax for a while.  Also worthy of the respect of Military Courtesy.


I find it to be, unless it is some sort of situation where it is done for humor, a bad things when a CAP Officer "pulls rank" over some junior CAP officer.  If it is out or arrogance or as an abuse, it diminishes us all.  We offer the customs and courtesies out of respect, in my case, for those listed above and for those reasons.   Pulling rank destroys the integrity of that and is, thus, questionable.

Now...Flight Officers are often misunderstood sorts.  I have seen CAP Officers treat them like cadets and deny them participation and respect because they see the Flight Officers as an arrogant over reaching cadet needing to be "put in their place."  I have corrected this when I have seen it.

In fact, one of the first things I ever took such notice of occurred to the this year's TEXAS WING SENIOR MEMBER of the YEAR.  He was an outstanding cadet who transitioned to SENIOR MEMBER.  He was a TFO and a 1st Lt from another Squadron was very condescending to him thinking he was a cadet.  It was somewhat uncalled for and I spoke to this person showing that CAP member was a Senior Member.

Incidentally, this same member was the one who recruited me when I was in college.
Report to moderator   Logged
"We have been given the power to change CAP, let's keep the momentum going!"

Major Joe Ely "Sparky" Carrales, CAP
Commander
Coastal Bend Cadet Squadron
SWR-TX-454
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,680

« Reply #29 on: April 12, 2012, 04:50:39 AM »

I disagree that the ONLY authority is "command" authority.

There are more then one type of authority then just the ability to kick someone out of CAP.

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

Posts: 4,106

« Reply #30 on: April 12, 2012, 05:12:15 AM »

I disagree that the ONLY authority is "command" authority.

There are more then one type of authority then just the ability to kick someone out of CAP.

Don't misunderstand...the context here is that one CAP Officer "orders" another as in the case of "pulling rank."

I get the vision of some CAP major ordering a 1st Lt out of a chair so they, themselves, can sit...or other metaphors related to that such "abuse."

I juxtapose this to Commander's authority...an order comes down from Wing to Groups and Squadrons and it is implemented from the top down with attached warnings of Transfers to "GHOST" squadrons or being GROUNDED from CAP activities in air and ground.

The WING commander can say "Such and Such policy must be implemented by 32 of OCTEMBER 20X6 for you will be transferred," that carries the weight of a CORPORATE MANDATE.

There is no authority in CAP that allows some random CAP Captain, for example, to use a lieutenant as a "lackey" or  otherwise throw their weight around.
Report to moderator   Logged
"We have been given the power to change CAP, let's keep the momentum going!"

Major Joe Ely "Sparky" Carrales, CAP
Commander
Coastal Bend Cadet Squadron
SWR-TX-454
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,680

« Reply #31 on: April 12, 2012, 05:34:15 AM »

With in the context of our core values......yes there is.

All things can be abused....but that does not mean that the authority is still not there.
Report to moderator   Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
Major Carrales
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,106

« Reply #32 on: April 12, 2012, 05:40:18 AM »

With in the context of our core values......yes there is.

All things can be abused....but that does not mean that the authority is still not there.

Don't over analyze...I am not in a fighting mood... ;)  I've not indicated that there is no "authority" beyond command...only that it is there that it is the most visible.  We are discussing the "abuse" of "pulling rank..."

Unless you believe that a Major could haphazardly order around Lieutenants on meaningless whims?  I can't see you supporting that.  Also, I think you would agree that taking advantage of a "grade superiority" for tasks of questionable relevance to any missions does nothing but 1) build ego in the Senior officer and 2) diminish the structure due to abuse of power.

Also, my main point was on the nature of Grade and how it is attained in CAP in relation to why it should be respected.  You have not really addressed that in favor of a point I don't think I made.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2012, 05:43:58 AM by Major Carrales » Report to moderator   Logged
"We have been given the power to change CAP, let's keep the momentum going!"

Major Joe Ely "Sparky" Carrales, CAP
Commander
Coastal Bend Cadet Squadron
SWR-TX-454
ColonelJack
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,369
Unit: SER-GA-153

« Reply #33 on: April 12, 2012, 09:46:33 AM »

From a C&C standpoint; you guys can salute my posts any time you feel like it.... >:D

By ... your ... command ...

Jack
Report to moderator   Logged
Jack Bagley, Ed. D.
Lt. Col., Civil Air Patrol
Gill Robb Wilson Award No. 1366, 29 Nov 1991
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,653

« Reply #34 on: April 12, 2012, 12:12:25 PM »

With in the context of our core values......yes there is.

Explain, please.

There are no "shades" of authority in CAP, you either have it, through posting or delegation, or you don't, and for those who have it through delegation, the lane is generally defined pretty specifically, and neither is based on, or connected to, grade or PD level.
Report to moderator   Logged


bflynn
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 748

« Reply #35 on: April 12, 2012, 01:51:42 PM »

There are different theories on authority.  Max Weber is a recognized authority on...well...authority.  He states there are three kinds of authority:
Rational-legal - that which comes from your position
Traditional - that which comes from establish customs
Charismatic - what you can convince others of by virtue of your ability to convince.

I'd say there are more, but that's quibbling.  For example, Weber doesn't recognize expertise authority as a seperate apsect, he lumps it under charisma.

Traditional authority comes from the military rank structure - you grant a general certain authority because they are a general, even if they are not in a position.  Therefore, in CAP, it would be accurate to say that because we voluntarily accept the military structure with integrity, our core values give someone authority.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2012, 02:09:50 PM by bflynn » Report to moderator   Logged
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,680

« Reply #36 on: April 12, 2012, 02:57:00 PM »

With in the context of our core values......yes there is.

Explain, please.

Here is what the Navy says about Authority and Power.  The USAF uses similar language...or at least it did when I went to the NCO Academy.

http://navyadvancement.tpub.com/14144/css/14144_67.htm

Quote
AUTHORITY  AND  POWER

With  authority  comes  power.  Power  is  the ability to influence people toward organizational objectives.  However,  you  have  limits  on  your authority  and  power.  View  your  authority  and power as a funnel, broad at the top and narrow at the bottom. Always assume you have enough authority  and  power  to  meet  your  obligations,  but do  not  exceed  that  limit. Authority Authority   only   exists   when   subordinates accept the idea that the supervisor has authority over  them.  Subordinates  can  fail  to  recognize authority  through  disobedience,  denial,  or  work delays.   Subordinates   usually   accept   authority readily;  however,  abusing  your  authority  as  a supervisor  can  make  you  ineffective. Although most authority in the Navy results from  a  member’s  rank  or  position  in  the  chain of command, many types of authority exist. Most authority in the Navy is delegated.

LINE AUTHORITY.  —Line authority is the authority  you  have  over  subordinates  in  your chain  of  command.  This  type  of  authority corresponds directly to your place within the chain of command and does not exist outside the chain of  command.

STAFF  AUTHORITY.  —Staff  authority  is the  right  of  staff  to  counsel,  advise,  or  make recommendations to line personnel. This type of authority does not give staff the right to give line personnel orders that affect the mission of the line organization. A chief from another work center or division could, by virtue of his or her rank, exercise staff authority  over  a  person  in  your  work  center  or division by counseling or advising him or her to get  a  haircut.  Failure  to  follow  the  advice  or counsel  may  result  in  nonjudicial  punishment (NJP) for the subordinate. The other chief would not,  however,  have  the  authority  to  enter  your work  center  or  division  and  make  changes  that only  you  and  your  superiors  have  the  authority to  make.

FUNCTIONAL AUTHORITY. —Certain  staff organizations are granted functional authority to direct  line  units  within  the  area  of  the  staff's specialty.  Examples  of  staff  organizations  with functional  authority  include  the  Legal,  Equal Opportunity,  and  Safety  Departments.

Power

In  conjunction  with  your  authority,  you  use power to influence others toward the accomplish- ment  of  command  goals.  You  can  use  power  for personal gain or for the good of the organization. However,  if  your  subordinates  believe  you  use power for personal gain, you will soon suffer an erosion  of  that  power.  On  the  other  hand,  if subordinates  believe  you  use  power  to  accomplish the organizational goals, your power to influence them will become stronger. Your power will also become  stronger  when  you  share  it  through delegation  of  authority. Of the six types of power—reward, coercive, legitimate, informational, referent, and expert— you may use one or more in various combinations. Each  situation  will  determine  the  one  or  ones  you use.

REWARD  POWER.  —Reward  power  stems from  your  use  of  positive  and  negative  rewards to influence subordinates. Positive rewards range from  a  smile  or  kind  word  to  recommendations for  awards.  Negative  rewards  range  from  corrective- type  counseling  to  placing  a  person  on  report. You will find one of the best ways to influence your  subordinates  is  through  the  use  of  your reward power. As a chief, you are responsible for starting the positive reward process. First, write a  recommendation  for  the  award.  Once  the recommendation   is   typed   in   the   command’s standard award letter format, forward it up the chain  of  command  for  approval.  Your  job  does not end here. Always follow-up on the recommen- dation,  using  your  influence  and  persuasion  to  get the  award  to  the  proper  command  level. Frequent use of positive rewards will amplify the  effect  of  a  negative  reward.  Give  positive rewards freely, but use restraint in giving negative rewards. If you use negative rewards frequently, subordinates   will   begin   to   expect   a   negative reward.  Their  expectation  of  a  negative  reward will  lessen  your  power.

COERCIVE   POWER.   —Coercive  power results from the expectation of a negative reward if   your   wishes   are   not   obeyed.   For   example, suppose you have counseled a subordinate twice for minor infractions of regulations. At the third counseling session, you threaten the subordinate with  NJP.  At  the  next  occurrence  of  the  un- desirable behavior, you place the subordinate on report. Coercive  power  works,  but  is  not  the  preferred method of leading subordinates. It works best if used when all else fails and you feel sure you can carry  through  with  a  threat.  Before  giving  a threat,  you  should  have  some  insight  as  to  how the CO will handle the case. You do not want to recommend  maximum  punishment  only  to  have the CO dismiss the case at mast.

LEGITIMATE POWER. —Legitimate power comes   from   the   authority   of   your   rate   and position  in  the  chain  of  command.  You  use  this power  in  day-to-day  business.  Although  legitimate power increases with added responsibilities, you can decrease that power if you fail to meet all of your  responsibilities. To  increase  your  legitimate  power,  assume some of the division officer’s responsibilities. At first, the division officer will be glad to have the help.  In  time,  the  division  officer  will  view  the responsibilities  as  yours  and  formally  delegate additional authority to you. That would increase your  legitimate  power  without  diminishing  the power  of  the  division  officer. Just as you can increase your legitimate power by  assuming  more  responsibility,  you  can  decrease that power by losing responsibility. For example, if you permit the division officer to assume some of  your  responsibilities,  the  division  officer  will eventually begin to view your responsibilities as his  or  hers.  You  will  then  have  less  legitimate power.  However,  when  a  subordinate  wishes  to assume  some  of  your  responsibilities,  formally delegate  those  responsibilities  to  the  subordinate. That makes the subordinate accountable to you. You then increase the subordinate’s power while retaining  your  power.

INFORMATIONAL  POWER.  —Informational power depends on your giving or withholding of information or having knowledge that others do not have. Use informational power when giving orders  to  subordinates.  Give  orders  in  such  a manner  that  your  subordinates  presume  the  order originated at your level. When forced to comply with  orders  you  do  not  agree  with,  don’t  introduce the  order  by  saying    "The   division   officer said.   .   ."   Phrase  and  present  the  order  in  a manner  that  leaves  no  doubt  you  initiated  it. Rely on your own resources to stay fully informed instead  of  depending  on  others.  Subordinates  may present unreliable information in a manner that makes it appear to be true. Superiors may become so involved with projects they forget to keep you informed  of  tasks  being  assigned  or  upcoming inspections.  Information  is  power.  Stay  informed!

REFERENT  POWER.   —Referent   power derives from your subordinates’ identification or association  with  you.  You  have  this  power  by simply being "the chief." People identify with the ideals  you  stand  for. The chief has a pre-established image. You can enhance  that  image  by  exhibiting  charisma, courage,  and  charm.  An  improved  image  increases your  referent  power.  Always  be  aware  of  how others will perceive your actions. A negative image in the eyes of others will lessen your power and render  you  ineffective.  Maintain  a  positive  image!

EXPERT  POWER.  —Expert  power  comes from  your  knowledge  in  a  specific  area  through which  you  influence  others.  You  have  expert power because your subordinates regard you as an expert in your rating. Subordinates may also have   this   type   of   power.   When   you   combine expert power with other types of power, you will find  it  an  effective  tool  in  influencing  others. However, when you use it by itself, you will find it  ineffective.

So....keeping in mind the core values of CAP....a Lt Col can order around a 2d Lt...because he is a Lt Col.  Does that mean I can make them be my lackies and do stupid stuff?  No because that would violate the core value of respect.  But a Lt Col can order anyone to follow the regulations.  Failure to do so would be cause for that member's commander to discipline the individual for not following orders.  So in CAP....... RANK and GRADE give us legitmate power but no Coercive power.  Position gives us both legitmate and coercive power as well as reward power.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2012, 03:01:38 PM by lordmonar » Report to moderator   Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,653

« Reply #37 on: April 12, 2012, 04:53:56 PM »

So....keeping in mind the core values of CAP....a Lt Col can order around a 2d Lt...because he is a Lt Col. Does that mean I can make them be my lackies and do stupid stuff?  No because that would violate the core value of respect.  But a Lt Col can order anyone to follow the regulations.  Failure to do so would be cause for that member's commander to discipline the individual for not following orders.  So in CAP....... RANK and GRADE give us legitmate power but no Coercive power.  Position gives us both legitmate and coercive power as well as reward power.

This is not how CAP works.

Rank isn't even calculated in CAP, nor posted in any way where anyone would even be aware of it, and grade does not confer any authority whatsoever.
A Lt. Col. can not order around a 2d Lt., nor anyone else, absent a command posting or the delegated authority of a commander.

I don't see where you're connecting "core values" to this.  The only connection is in respect, which means you say "Sir" after "no", and salute if appropriate.
Report to moderator   Logged


Nathan
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 685

« Reply #38 on: April 12, 2012, 06:34:08 PM »

Eclipse, I think you're right in all cases except the ones where two people from different chains of command are interacting. Which does happen quite a bit.

I don't agree that rank is useless. Instead, I think that whenever a member is carrying out an order, that order comes from someone higher up than you are with an authority stronger than yours. So I, as a Capt, cannot tell a 1st Lt CDC how to run his program in another squadron, because his authority is derived from the squadron commander, who has his authority derived from the wing commander, who will almost always outrank everyone at the unit level. There are situations where this may not NECESSARILY apply, but for the most part, the authority of a position is derived from the person above, who holds a rank that prevents someone from just shrugging and saying, "Nah."

This means that if I wander across a 2d Lt sitting around doing nothing, and I need help on a project, then I expect my request for his help to be accepted. If he says he can't, it had better be because he already has orders from his chain of command that conflict with my own. But the fact that a chain of command exists doesn't necessarily prevent one from taking command of a subordinate in situations that do not conflict with the initial order.

Really, the same concept applies with cadet and senior interactions. If I tell a cadet to do something, I expect it to be done so long as the order doesn't conflict with the orders the cadet already has. As the highest ranking member in a situation where authority is not otherwise assigned, it is my responsibility to use the resources to accomplish a mission, and if there are no other orders preventing me from doing so, then I am fully EXPECTED to take command of the situation.

And if it helps, look at it from the reverse. Say that you and a bunch of other members from different chains of command at an event find yourselves in a situation that needs immediate addressing. You are the highest ranking member, and if the issue doesn't get addressed, someone's going to get chewed out. Guess who it's going to be?
Report to moderator   Logged
Nathan Scalia

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

Posts: 10,680

« Reply #39 on: April 12, 2012, 06:47:52 PM »

We choose to use the military model for our organisation we are required to show miliatry customs and courtesies to those with more grade.  We have a whole section in the cadets manuals explaining the differences between rank and grade (even on AD there is no where rank is calculated and posted...if you need to know you have to ask TIG date and TIS dates).

But beyond that....I whole heartedly disagree with you assumption that grade carries no authority what so ever.

Granted postional authority (i.e. Line authory) outweights staff authority....as it does in the AD military.....and with CAP's promotion system (i.e. no billet limitations, no HYT (High Year Tenure) and inability to move people around) we have a very disjointed system.  However, again that does not negate the fact that grade and rank does confer authority.....just less then position does.
Report to moderator   Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  All Send this topic Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  The Lobby  |  Topic: Out ranking
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.071 seconds with 26 queries.