Main Menu

Pamphlet updates?

Started by DMinick, December 01, 2013, 08:00:34 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

DMinick

A little while back I had asked a question concerning my Personnel pamphlet. I was told that it was way out of date and I agree. Now my question is this. How do I go about getting it updated? Who do I speak to about doing it or is it something I just do and submit to NHQ? I am attempting to work towards taking initiative and perhaps this may be a bit to much!

Debby Minick, 1st Lt, CAP
Civil Air Patrol
United States Air Force Auxiliary
Personnel Officer, Administration Officer, Finance Officer
Stillwater Composite Squadron OK-103

a2capt


DMinick

Sorry!! The Personnel pamphlet. That's the one I'm focusing on at the moment, although I have two other jobs as well.
Debby Minick, 1st Lt, CAP
Civil Air Patrol
United States Air Force Auxiliary
Personnel Officer, Administration Officer, Finance Officer
Stillwater Composite Squadron OK-103

a2capt

Chances are that NHQ is well aware of it.

However .. you could write up a summary of sections, cite page/paragraph and send it to your next inline, in hopes that it eventually makes NHQ, since there does not appear to be a publications contact point at NHQ.

http://www.capmembers.com/cap_national_hq/nhq-contacts/

Closest otherwise, I'd figure would be Professional Development: prodev@capnhq.gov Bobbie Tourville (877) 227-9142 x405

Luis R. Ramos

You can write to National Headquarters, but NHQ will still update the pamphlet at their own leisure... If they would be that responsive to members views about outdated regulations, 39-1 would have been updated as of 5 years ago!

Flyer
Squadron Safety Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer

DMinick

So it's pretty much a waste of time to attempt to do any of that is what I'm getting. :(
Debby Minick, 1st Lt, CAP
Civil Air Patrol
United States Air Force Auxiliary
Personnel Officer, Administration Officer, Finance Officer
Stillwater Composite Squadron OK-103

Luis R. Ramos

Just keep the changes written for yourself and for any assistant you get or your replacement.

:P

Flyer
Squadron Safety Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer

lordmonar

Quote from: DMinick on December 01, 2013, 09:04:21 PM
So it's pretty much a waste of time to attempt to do any of that is what I'm getting. :(
No absolutely not.

If the pamphlet needs to be updated......write up the fixes...forward them to your wing commander (through channels) who should send them up the chain.

The problem with updating regs and pamplets is that there is no Air Staff like they have in DC who have nothing to do but take care of one small area of competence. (and even then they usually have 2-3 areas to worry about and 3 fires to deal with today :) ).

Maybe your suggestions will spark the CSAG (is that what the NEC/NB is called now?) to staff it. 

In the mean time share your updates with your peers and with wing/group personnel officer.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

DMinick

Thank you all!! I will see what I can do about updating the information. It may take me a year! LOL  :P
Debby Minick, 1st Lt, CAP
Civil Air Patrol
United States Air Force Auxiliary
Personnel Officer, Administration Officer, Finance Officer
Stillwater Composite Squadron OK-103

Eclipse

Quote from: lordmonar on December 01, 2013, 09:32:38 PM
Quote from: DMinick on December 01, 2013, 09:04:21 PM
So it's pretty much a waste of time to attempt to do any of that is what I'm getting. :(
No absolutely not.

It really is.

If someone wants to write up the issues with a pamphlet or regulation for local use, so be it,
but no one is going to care about a downstream personnel officer writing up changes
unless they've been asked to do it.

Why?  Because either there's a person whose job it is who isn't doing it already and won't be interested,
or because there isn't a person whose job it is, in which case, it sits on a vacant desk.

And that assumes it ever gets past the wing CC to start with.

"That Others May Zoom"

lordmonar

Like I said....maybe it might spark those who need to make the fixes.....to do their job.

If we don't try....it will never get fixed.  Yes, the likelihood of something getting done is low....but if we don't try then that likelihood is even lower.

YMMV.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

Private Investigator

^ +1

I concur. What makes the pamphlet unuseable? If you are the Squadron DP ask questions to your Group DP, if your Wing does not have Groups go directly to Wing DP.  8)

SarDragon

Quote from: Private Investigator on December 02, 2013, 01:04:45 AM
^ +1

I concur. What makes the pamphlet unuseable? If you are the Squadron DP ask questions to your Group DP, if your Wing does not have Groups go directly to Wing DP.  8)

The issue is with the test for the Senior rating. The references are badly outdated, and in some cases, nonexistent. The answer key is mostly unusable for that reason. Several answers have changed in just the last few months, with the governance changes.

Taking the test, and answering the intent of the questions, rather than the letter, is a longer than needs to be process.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
55 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

Private Investigator

Why a test for Senior rating and not for Tech or Master?

The other pamphlets that has been recently revised has been good work. Hopefully it would be good work instead of flawed from day #1.  8)

SarDragon

Quote from: Private Investigator on December 02, 2013, 01:26:34 AM
Why a test for Senior rating and not for Tech or Master?

The other pamphlets that has been recently revised has been good work. Hopefully it would be good work instead of flawed from day #1.  8)

The "meat" of the specialty occurs at the Senior level. Technician level is mostly "paper pushing", while the Senior level gets much more into being an administrator/supervisor, and requires the expert level knowledge. At least that's what I'm getting from the pamphlet. I just took the test a few months ago, and my commander kicked it back because of recent changes. I'm not complaining, because this is where I prove my knowledge of how personnel functions work.

YMMV.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
55 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

RiverAux

Seems to me that an easy work-around for NHQ would be to just change the test a bit and get rid of the questions that refer to now-changed policy. 

Obviously it would be better to change the pamphlet and the test, but changing the test probably wouldn't require the same administrative burden and may be able to be done quicker.   

MSG Mac

#16
An easier thing is to rule out the expired questions and grade the test without them. as stated by others, You can print out a "Local" Personnel Guide for use in your unit. This would go hand in hand with establishing a continuity book for your successors, if there is none existing now. 

If you've ever been to National HQ, you will find out that they are aware of the problems, but are generally understaffed in every office, with a large layoff several months ago. The fix for most of them is that every section has a "volunteer" group consisting of subject matter experts who are asked to assist in correcting these problems, by writing new manuals, regs, etc. But each publication requires   several months to write and discuss among that group, distribution to the appropriate staff section for any updates, reading by the Senior Commanders, putting it out to the field for comment, and finally an authorized publication.
Michael P. McEleney
Lt Col CAP
MSG USA (Retired)
50 Year Member

SarDragon

Quote from: RiverAux on December 02, 2013, 03:23:53 AM
Seems to me that an easy work-around for NHQ would be to just change the test a bit and get rid of the questions that refer to now-changed policy. 

Obviously it would be better to change the pamphlet and the test, but changing the test probably wouldn't require the same administrative burden and may be able to be done quicker.

The test is part of the pamphlet. The issue isn't so much the Qs, as it is the references, and occasionally the answers to perfectly good Qs.

Here's a fer'instance: The National Board is the governing body of CAP. List the officers which comprise this body.

This is a perfectly good bit of info to ask about - Who runs the show? - but the BoG is that body now. It needs fixed.

Another: When a member transfers to a new membership unit, who initiates the CAPF 2a requesting reassignment?

Since a 2a isn't the only method now, the new process needs to be incorporated into the Q. It's still something valid to ask.

Quote from: MSG Mac on December 02, 2013, 04:34:26 AM
An easier thing is to rule out the expired questions and grade the test without them. as stated by others, You can print out a "Local" Personnel Guide for use in your unit. This would go hand in hand with establishing a continuity book for your successors, if there is none existing now.

There are so many Qs that need revised, that taking the test without them, IMHO, degrades the value of the test, and is a waste of time. I counted at least 20, with several others that need updated references.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
55 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

Alaric

I called National on this and their suggestion was to give the correct answers (not the answers supplied) and grade the entire test.  At some point next year an upgraded test will be available online.


DMinick

Since my problem was mainly with the test, it sounds like it may not be worth the time to work on this since there is supposed to be the updated one next year.

A couple of you mentioned that it was online now. Is that under learning management or some where else? Or perhaps I'm completely misunderstanding, which is a possibility!
Debby Minick, 1st Lt, CAP
Civil Air Patrol
United States Air Force Auxiliary
Personnel Officer, Administration Officer, Finance Officer
Stillwater Composite Squadron OK-103