Most Basic CAP Uniform for New Member

[Eclipse]

Since being properly equipped is...

...required...

...why wouldn't they have it?

And since they are required to have it, why wouldn't they want to wear it?

When a member joins, comes to a few meetings and sees everyone in a golf shirt, it doesn't take a genius to figure out the golf shirt is all you need. Some might even ask about the required uniform and if their commander is honest, they'll be told yes you are required to own it but hold off on buying it until you actually need it. Then you notice everyone at mission base or in the airplane are in golf shirts and the annual conference most folks are in golf shirts and someone might start to think they don't need to spend the money at all.

If the commander is good, they won't see that, will they?

[Eclipse]

Since being properly equipped is...

...required...

...why wouldn't they have it?

And since they are required to have it, why wouldn't they want to wear it?

When a member joins, comes to a few meetings and sees everyone in a golf shirt, it doesn't take a genius to figure out the golf shirt is all you need. Some might even ask about the required uniform and if their commander is honest, they'll be told yes you are required to own it but hold off on buying it until you actually need it. Then you notice everyone at mission base or in the airplane are in golf shirts and the annual conference most folks are in golf shirts and someone might start to think they don't need to spend the money at all.

That's supported by the fact that there is no suspense date for when you "must equip yourself" with the minimum basic uniform.

If you're a member for 50 years, and don't buy the G/W for 49 of them, you're still compliant with the letter of the reg.

That could also be interpreted to mean immediately, but it certainly means lack of having the proper equipment
cannot be used as an excuse for not wearing the proper uniform.

[JeffDG]

If the commander is good, they won't see that, will they?

So, you define the quality of the commander by the fact that they arbitrarily limit the uniforms of members at meetings?

If there's no particular reason to require a uniform other that Polo, why is it a sign of a high-quality commander that they would just say "No Polos" with no particular reason?

[JeffDG]

That could also be interpreted to mean immediately, but it certainly means lack of having the proper equipment
cannot be used as an excuse for not wearing the proper uniform.

If they'd meant "immediately" they would have said so.

Things that have required dates state them, they don't just require that they be inferred.

[Luis R. Ramos]

...until you actually need it.

If the commander would require it for, lets say, that members third meeting, the member would need it by then...

Flyer

[Eclipse]

If the commander is good, they won't see that, will they?

So, you define the quality of the commander by the fact that they arbitrarily limit the uniforms of members at meetings?

If there's no particular reason to require a uniform other that Polo, why is it a sign of a high-quality commander that they would just say "No Polos" with no particular reason?

Good commanders are defined by their actions and their examples, not to mention their attention to detail.

People who ignore details and treat regs like a menu tend to be haphazard with other important things as well.

No one said "no golf shirts", but "only golf shirts" is a problem, because for starters, that means a commander
or member has self-selected to ignore components of the program.

Again, these baseline issues of "what do I wear?" shouldn't' even be discussion items, but because of how
messed up the regs are, coupled with apathy and confrontational avoidance, they become more important.

Uniforms are not the core of CAP, but they are a major component which is not mutually exclusive to other parts,
nor is good performance in mission areas an excuse to ignore the uniform or treat it as secondary.

[JeffDG]

No one said "no golf shirts", but "only golf shirts" is a problem, because for starters, that means a commander
or member has self-selected to ignore components of the program.

In the absence of a "No Polo" UOD declaration by a commander, then if the unit all shows up in polos, that's an entirely acceptable situation, and does not demonstrate any kind of lack of leadership, or poor quality of commander.  There's no ignoring components of the program.  The polo is a valid uniform fulling IAW applicable regulations. 

A member who comes and sees everyone in polos and equips himself equivalently also shows no lack of leadership, lack of commitment to the program, or anything else.

[JeffDG]

...until you actually need it.

If the commander would require it for, lets say, that members third meeting, the member would need it by then...

Flyer

That seems like a rather arbitrary decision.  Why not the second meeting, or the fifth?  What specific purpose is served by having this order issued?

[Eclipse]

...until you actually need it.

If the commander would require it for, lets say, that members third meeting, the member would need it by then...

Flyer

Exactly, and this lack of consistency is what kills the culture in a lot of units.

CCs try to get things on track, have promotion nights and formations, they get a lot of guff from
members, and give up.

None of that would be an issue if we had one consistent uniform for all, expectation of wearing it properly
and commanders willing to enforce the rules.  No one should be able or allowed to sit back in the side of the
room, back in CAP opportunities and benefits, and yet make side-comments about other members
"Military wannabeism" or "choice of one uniform over another".

Because everyone should be dressed the same.  That's something that other similar organizations,
not to mention NGOs, SAR agencies, etc., realize is important enough to decide and move on, instead of leaving a mess
that is constantly in flux.

Just like any business plan you can't summarize in 1-2 sentences is either a scam or doomed to fail,
if you can't tell a new member what they are expected and required to wear in two sentences,
you're done.

It then sets the "do whatever / self-actualization" tone from day one.

[Eclipse]

...until you actually need it.

If the commander would require it for, lets say, that members third meeting, the member would need it by then...

Flyer

That seems like a rather arbitrary decision.  Why not the second meeting, or the fifth?  What specific purpose is served by having this order issued?

Why not?   All are valid choices.  It's part of a successful unit's calendar rotation of meeting activities.

On promotion night where do you put the grade an ribbons?  Their pocket?

How can you instruct a cadet with a straight face, or any other member for that matter, how to properly
wear a uniform you've never even touched yourself and expect to have an credibility?

[Eclipse]

Also - to the "which parts are they ignoring?" question.

How many times have we seen people on here trying to sell the "I'm not wearing the golf shirt so I can ignore customs and courtesies..." nonsense?

These are people who have simply "decided" to ignore a core competent of CAP's structure in their own whim.
That impacts discipline, respect, and negates a critical attention to detail that is supposed to help frame
the serious mindset we're in and negate the GOB.

In far to many cases, the GOBs just want to fly cheap outside a mission environment and treat CAP
like an FBO, to the detriment of the organization and especially the unit they are in.  This isn't exclusive
to pilots by any means, they are just a handy, too-prevalent example.  There's plenty to go around.

[Luis R. Ramos]

That seems like a rather arbitrary decision.  Why not the second meeting, or the fifth?  What specific purpose is served by having this order issued?

That allows the new member time to order the uniform, either the G/W or Blues, and have everything sewed, etc. In my opinion, it is better for the new member to have the commander tell him as I said "Show up in G/W or Blues by your third meeting."

Or would you rather have the commander tell the prospective member "You should bring the FBI card, membership application, dues, and be in uniform?"

[Luis R. Ramos]

And what it serves for the commander is to demonstrate he is willing he will follow the rules.

But if you think that the new member can get the G/W and/or Blues in the time it takes to process his application, then the commander should state "Wear the Blues or G/W by your first meeting."

The quote I did initially was by Fubar, not Jeff, I apologize.

Again, he stated "Hold wearing it until you actually need it." If the commander says "Start wearing it by X meeting, the uniform becomes needed by that time!

Flyer

[Eclipse]

Again, he stated "Hold wearing it until you actually need it." If the commander says "Start wearing it by X meeting, the uniform becomes needed by that time!

And after reading it again, you need it the day you become a member,

It's essentially an "if/then statement".  "Members will". Are you a member? Then you will.

No date is necessary because everyone in the status of "member", will.  There's plenty of other similar statements with
assumed compliance and no specific date or delta.

The very fact that a member could conceivably shop for a unit based on which uniform they wear is so ridiculous and counterproductive
as to be a Duffle Blog article if it wasn't sadly true.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Eclipse-

Here is the situation.

Just because every adult applies to a unit, he/she is not guaranteed acceptance by NHQ. The FBI may have some issues with that person.

I was answering Fubar's post, which seems to indicate he was not aware that commanders could indicate the uniform is "actually needed" (his words, my sarcasm) for squadron meetings.

When I stated "by the third meeting" a little leeway is given for the members to acquire the uniforms after being accepted by NHQ. Since if NHQ denies such membership that person would not have wasted their money. The alternative is telling them they cannot attend any meeting immediately after their application is accepted.

You say you "need it the day you become a member." But mail order companies do not have a transporter that can have the uniform in your house seconds after it is ordered.

Flyer

[Eclipse]

We're all getting wrapped into the quotes, I was supporting you but really responding to Jeffdg's assertion that there's no clock on the MBU,
when in fact it's an assumed part of the term "member".

Obviously no one should be investing in a uniform until they are approved, which is fine, since until Level 1 is complete,
you can't do anything anyway.

But the first uniform a member buys should be the MBU, and CC's should be stressing that during L1 training, and
also through their own behavior and the unit's schedule.  Those same CC's should be providing and stressing the
opportunities to wear not only the MBU, but other formal uniforms as well, and pushing their members to participate
in outside activities like conferences and PD which also should be mandating a more formal, professional appearance

The "well, what do we need that for anyway crowd" can find something better to do with their free time.  The reality is that
much of life is unnecessary, but we add to the "required" either for flavor, spirit, good order, etc., etc.  As it stands, it
doesn't matter why it's required, it just is.  Push to change that, but comply until it's changed.

Why do you need an MBU?  Because you joined the Air Force Auxiliary, not a YMCA youth league or "Mom's Sar Team",
the uniform, the courtesies, and the accouterments are part of the deal, for a number of very good reasons.

When we start insisting that our commanders understand and reinforce that idea, CAP will be pointed back in the right direction.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Eclipse-

My sentiments exactly...

Flyer

[RiverAux]

We all agree that under current regulations everyone is required to own it and commanders do have the authority to require it be worn.

However, until such time that this uniform is mandated by regulation to be worn on a regular basis  (at every meeting unless training requiring other uniforms is taking place), you guys are just howling into the wind. 

There is absolutely no reason to rant and rave about people not owning it when we don't require them to wear it. 

It is obvious that the current regulations are not resulting in this uniform being owned by many.  This isn't the fault of regulation-defying members, but the fault of CAP which has failed to mandate that this uniform be worn.  So long as it is at the whim of a commander you are going to see most commanders decide not to require its wear because it is absolutely clear to me that most senior members prefer the golf shirt on almost all occasions and the regulations allow that uniform to be the defacto minimum uniform.   

This isn't a failure by the commanders either.  They have been given the authority to make the choice to NEVER require the minimum uniform be worn.  Are we surprised that many of them have made that decision? 

If you want people to own it and wear it, 39-1 clearly needs to state that this be the standard duty uniform for all CAP meetings unless another uniform is more appropriate for the purpose of the meeting or training session. 

[Eclipse]

Actually, as indicated in 39-1, the MBU is the standard uniform for all CAP activities, for both cadets and senior members.

[abdsp51]

[quote author=RiverAux link=topic=18321.msg332833#msg332833 date=1388457873. 

It is obvious that the current regulations are not resulting in this uniform being owned by many.  This isn't the fault of regulation-defying members, but the fault of CAP which has failed to mandate that this uniform be worn.  So long as it is at the whim of a commander you are going to see most commanders decide not to require its wear because it is absolutely clear to me that most senior members prefer the golf shirt on almost all occasions and the regulations allow that uniform to be the defacto minimum uniform.   

[/quote]

Cite and substantiate?  What regulation states this?