Uniform policies if NAT/CC

[Storm Chaser]

Unfortunately, we argue that we're not the military or the Air Force when we want to do things differently from our parent service, but then complain when we can't wear particular military uniforms, insignias or awards. We can't have it both ways.

[lordmonar]

A fallacy. We are not the US Military Academy.

We are also not RealMilitary™, so that point is moot.

Some would argue that West Point isn't either.

They're drawing pay and benefits and are issued a CAC that states otherwise.

He means that what happens at the West Point and Zoom U.....have very little resemblance to what happens in the "real military".   Just like Basic Training and Tech School are not the "real Air Force".

i.e. it was a joke.

Lighten up Frances.

[Shuman 14]

A fallacy. We are not the US Military Academy.

We are also not RealMilitary™, so that point is moot.

Some would argue that West Point isn't either.

They're drawing pay and benefits and are issued a CAC that states otherwise.

He means that what happens at the West Point and Zoom U.....have very little resemblance to what happens in the "real military".   Just like Basic Training and Tech School are not the "real Air Force".

i.e. it was a joke.

Lighten up Frances.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I know that when my uniform has a glitch, I genuinely appreciate someone quietly touching my elbow and giving me a clue.  For some reason, not all the members apparently feel the same way.

I don't mind it a bit; in fact, I welcome it, especially when I know that they are right.  I got corrected on a slight error on my uniform gently-but-firmly by a CMSgt and thanked him...if anyone knows what they're talking about, it would certainly be a CMSgt.

If, however, the person seems off base to me I respectfully ask them to show me in 39-1 where I am incorrect.

[Ned]

.  Willing?

Nope.

And why should they be?
"Jim's a good guy, and he helps out a lot.  I know he's put on a few and his jacket's a little tight, but what's the big deal?
Besides, he was at the Wing Conference last month and got an award and no one said anything.  I don't need the
hassle. I don't like to discourage people or cost them money, and I can't afford to lose Jim, so I'm not going to say anything...."

So your position is that no other commanders are "willing" to do what you yourself have done so successfully?

And as a group commander, you were lucky enough to have the only squadron commanders in CAP that would follow your lead in this area and step up?

Really?

You were able to do it, but no one else can / will?

Really?


Ummm.  OK, then.

I will continue to assert that at >least< 50% of the adult membership is too heavy to wear the USAF-Style uniforms.

As to the percentage of members wearing USAF-Style uniforms out of compliance?
I would hazard at >least< 20-30% of the adult membership are wearing a uniform out of compliance.
Remember "compliance", contrary to popular belief, is not "looks good" or "pulls it off" it's based on a number
on a scale.

OK, let's take a look at your "guesstimates" for a moment.

If you are correct in your unsubstantiated assertion that a majority of seniors are obese  (using the standards on the CDC's BMI website) such that they cannot wear the AF-style uniform, and of those, "20-30%" are improperly wearing the AF style uniform, let's look at how that breaks down.

As of 30 JUN, we had a little over 24k cadets and 34k seniors.

Assuming you are correct and 60% of seniors are obese, and of them, 30% improperly wear AF-style uniforms, then we are talking about a little over 6 thousand members out of 58k.

(34,000 *.60 *.30 = 6,120)

Or a hair over 10% of the membership.  So even using your "worst case scenario" numbers, we still have a 89 - 90% h/w compliance rate.  Which was sort my point.  We can and should do better, but 90% "worst case" compliance  sounds like commanders are working the issue with "the majority of obese seniors" some success.

(It bears repeating that the CDC numbers for adult males are not as pessimistic as your guesstimate, and show that "only" a minority of our adult male members are unable to wear the AF-style uniforms.  My own guesstimate based on the CDC numbers puts the rate at or under 40% and further estimate that the compliance rate for overweight members is more like 95%.   A problem, to be sure, but one that can be better addressed by local commanders rather than some new NHQ mandate that you seem to favor.)

You've said it yourself, when NHQ tried to restrict photos to compliance only, they couldn't do it.

True, but as I mentioned, it wasn't just h/w -- much of it had to do with badges, insignia, devices, and some of the othe details contained in the other 147 pages of the 39-1.

[arajca]

Even if it is only 5-10% of the membership, it's a very visible 5-10% and many are at wing and higher levels. Additionally, I have had member respond to polite reminders with "Why are you busting my chops when that region guy is doing the same thing." with said region guy obviously outside the h/w standards.

Makes it kind of hard to enforce the rules. Of course, a squadron commander has no authority to make a wing, region, or national staffer follow the rules. Which means the appropriate level of commander, which would be wing/region/national, would need to enforce the rules AT THEIR LEVEL to demonstrate the concept that the rules apply to ALL members regardless of level, which is what we don't see happening.

[Eclipse]

You were able to do it, but no one else can / will?

Really?

So we're dealing in absolutes now? 

No one?  Of course not.

Too may?  Yes, by a long shot.

And as a group commander, you were lucky enough to have the only squadron commanders in CAP that would follow your lead in this area and step up?

I had some great people working for me, and a few clinkers, as did / do many of the other Group CCs in my wing.
I set the tone, and did what I could, many times it was more then an uphill battle, including, I know,
people correcting things in my presence and going back to "SOP" when I left.

It didn't help, even a little, to have conversations where I was espousing the party line and have the
person being addressed point to local or national leaders, or wing+ activities and say "if they don't, why should we"?

You've said several times that NHQ was not capable of getting this done, but somehow a tired, poorly trained Unit CC at FLyover Composite is going to impact meaingful change that outlives his term?  How does that work, exactly?

As of 30 JUN, we had a little over 24k cadets and 34k seniors.

No, we don't.  we have 34k adults who have some form of ID card, not 34k members.
Not even by a long shot.

You have to filter out all the empty shirts, patrons, 000s, and legislative members, for starters.
That peels at least 15-20% off the 34K.

It's also, frankly, nearly impossible to do actual math as NHQ doesn't publish the numbers properly.

We don't know who is active, and we have no meaningful statistics on member height / weight.
Also, when you consider many wings are at a less then 50% participation rate, saying
"5% of total membership is out of compliance, when those are the only guys showing up, doesn't paint the proper picture,
nor does it address the impact having guys with two jackets sewn together as commanders or staff
has on CAP's external image and recruiting.

We can only look around at what we see in person and what is published by NHQ.

And it's a lot higher then 10%.

A lot.

Its very disappointing that you want to take the tack of "statistically this area doesn't flood much"
vs. accepting the reality of "the water in your basement".

Just looking in random photos around the web you'll find 2-3 people in just about every photo
that are out of weight.  Ignore it if you like.  That's apparently the solution.

It's against the policy of this site to be linking to photos of people with uniform issues,
but anyone with Google can do their own math on this.

A problem, to be sure, but one that can be better addressed by local commanders rather than some new NHQ mandate that you seem to favor.)

The mandate already exists, what doesn't exist is command imperative to enforce existing regulations.
That can and will only come from the top.

So then the question is why isn't it being addressed?

Also, and what about the highly visible, example-setting members assigned above the Group level?
Who fixes that?

[Ned]

So then the question is why isn't it being addressed?

Perhaps because

The mandate already exists,

And the great majority of members are in compliance.

what doesn't exist is command imperative to enforce existing regulations. That can and will only come from the top.

So we're back to the "we can't / won't enforce the existing regulations unless NHQ really, really tells us to do it, and they have to do it louder (or something.)"

Yeah, that'll fix it.   

"Command imperative" comes from commanders.  Like you and couple hundred other CAP leaders.  But most regulation compliance comes from members and subordinate leaders following the guidance contained in our publications.  It is just silly to suggest that you won't require compliance in your subordinates unless and until  your boss repeatedly tells you to do so.

Also, and what about the highly visible, example-setting members assigned above the Group level?
Who fixes that?

All of us.  By gently and professionally reminding each other about uniform infractions.  I've done it; you've done it.  It's not mysterious, it's just leadership.

[Eclipse]

"Command imperative" comes from commanders.  Like you and couple hundred other CAP leaders.  But most regulation compliance comes from members and subordinate leaders following the guidance contained in our publications.

Command imperative comes, first and foremost, from THE Commander, who sets the tone and the example, and then expects and demands compliance.

CAP is adrift on a sea of self-actualization instead of strategic planning and leadership, and until NHQ starts pressing the issue(s), no one else feels any
pressure to do anything but what they feel they need or want to, and making people "sad" about uniforms, or anything else for
that matter, clearly isn't something the average commander feels like doing.

It is just silly to suggest that you won't require compliance in your subordinates unless and until  your boss repeatedly tells you to do so.

And yet, they aren't demanding compliance.  >WHY?<
A: Because no one cares enough to press the issue to making anyone "sad".

It's called leading - setting a proper tone AND EXAMPLE and then expecting the same from your subordinates,
with ramifications for non compliance.

We get it, status quo is preferable to fixing things.

Message received.

[ZigZag911]

If your point was something to effect that "Although NHQ has clearly articulated the standards (39-1) and clearly fixed the responsibility on commanders (and members) to ensure the proper wear of the uniforms, they need to tell us again --  maybe louder or something --  to make us do our jobs.  'Cuz otherwise we won't.  And it's their fault that we are not doing our jobs here at the squadron," then I really don't have a response that will satisfy you.

I'm sure you're not surprised.

I suspect the point was that senior leadership needs to lead by personal example...which may mean those with the authority to do so tell some wing or region CCs to get out of USAF style and into corporate...no discussion!

BTW, for those who don't understand "analogy" I was comparing the senior/cadet roles in CAP with the service academies, where the service and dress uniforms (but not field, I realize that) differ vastly from the parent service.

It was a basis for comparison...never said it matched our situation precisely...just a starting point for conversation.

I absolutely agree that wearing the Air Force uniform is a privilege...but I still believe that it is one we, as an organization, should give up (for our seniors) because of the reality of our demographics not generally matching those of the active or reserve USAF personnel...doing this would unify our senior membership.

Certainly many will disagree...but I hope they will try to remain civil about, especially since none of us have the final word on the subject!

[abdsp51]

Seeing both sides of this view i can agree to both, but in the long change has to start somewhere.  In that aspect I agree with Eclipse that the change and enforcement needs to start from the top down.  This will send the message that regulations will be enforced period.  Lower membership can attempt to enforce things all day long but I'll bet that it falls on deaf ears 90% of the time. 

As I have stated if your 18 and above you weigh in and pending your weight you'll be allowed to wear the AF style uniform.  You don't weigh in and don't want to weigh in you're stuck in corp uniform and I as the CC will not allow you to participate in an activity where weight is an issue.  And don't cry about it being in eservices either.  How many people actually update their info there. 

I went to a Wg CC call shortly after I arrived in AZ and could not believe some of the uniform violations I saw.  Hard grade on a white long sleeve shirt with no tie, some folks in blues who were outside of H/W etc. 

Attended the Wg conference a couple of weeks ago and it was much better from what I saw.  At least there was more uniform appearance across the board. 

I have seen this in other avenues as well not just uniforms, but let's be honest it's that initial impression that people have that can and  often times make or break you.  Many members here cry and whine that we are not taking seriously as a legit SAR agency well how can we be if you have some people showing in in flight suits, some in bdus, some in bbdu and some in the golf shirt.  If I was a country sheriff and saw that I'd tell us to get to packing regardless of the capability we brought to the table.  One of my items as noted was to find a common uniform for all.  Now this would be an PIA and definitely have its struggles but it would go along way in establishing our identity.  Personally I do not wear anything AF related(US and nametag are not included) on my CAP uniform, not my blues, not my service dress the one time I wore it and not on my bdus and now bbdu.  Could I yes I don't because they are two separate entities. 

We talk about activities, I have made it known that if I as the activity director set a uniform of the day and it's not followed you can definitely expect to be packing especially if there was no prior coordination.  Would it be popular probably not but it would send a message that there are directors that will toe the line when it comes to policies and enforcement.

We start from the top down on enforcing our uniform issues and this will lend us more credibility with outside agencies and our own host service.

[Ned]

Command imperative comes [ . . .] from THE Commander, who sets the tone and the example,

I can only agree that command imperative comes from all commanders, including Gen Carr.  Are you saying he has somehow set an improper example in the uniform arena?

He actually managed to get a 39-1 published, which previous national commanders had struggled with.  This required significant emphasis and resource allocation.

Should he have not done that?

His uniforms have always been worn properly.  I have seen him wear both AF and corporate style uniforms, and he wears them well.

Should be doing something else besides setting a good example to "set a good example?"

I have seen him correct others' uniforms at national conferences, and heard him give guidance to the Command Chief to do so as well. 

Should he not be doing that?

CAP is adrift on a sea of self-actualization instead of strategic planning and leadership, and until NHQ starts pressing the issue(s), no one else feels any
pressure to do anything but what they feel they need or want to, and making people "sad" about uniforms, or anything else for
that matter, clearly isn't something the average commander feels like doing.

"Adrift on a sea of self-actualization."  I think you are trying a little too hard here.  CAP is not "them," it is you and me (and all the other volunteers).  If you are doing a little too much "self-actualization," by all means stop doing it.

And yet, they aren't demanding compliance.  >WHY?<

So, your theory is that Gen Carr and subordinate commanders have to "demand compliance" with each specific regulation or requirement, othewise that means they somehow "don't care" about that particular regulation and therefore non-compliance by local unit commanders is OK?

Bob, how many regulations does CAP have?  How many requirements are contained in each of them?

Should Gen Carr take each one in turn and say

This week, my command imperative is on CAPR 10-2.  I want to emphasize how important File Maintenance is and hereby demand compliance from each unit.  I know in the past I might have seemed to coddle some of the region headquarters on their file systems and that bred apathy and disrespect from the local unit commanders.  I've heard local units say "After all, if Region HQ dosen't have to maintain the records required by the regulation, why should I."  But now I am serious about this."

And then move through all the regulations in turn?

That seems a little . . . cumbersome.

[arajca]

Does he correct those who report to him when he sees them obviously out of h/w wearing the AF style uniforms? Does he have those "uncomfortable" conversations? If not, why should subordinate commanders do so when it is apparent the Nat/CC doesn't care about it?

[Storm Chaser]

Does he correct those who report to him when he sees them obviously out of h/w wearing the AF style uniforms? Does he have those "uncomfortable" conversations? If not, why should subordinate commanders do so when it is apparent the Nat/CC doesn't care about it?

Are you stating as a matter of fact that he doesn't? Or merely asking the question?

There's no question that many CAP members commit uniform violations. I've seen members do so at wing, region and national events with my own eyes. But I wouldn't go as far as to blame Maj Gen Carr for it, as I haven't seen him wear his uniform improperly and I don't know for a fact that he looks the other way when others do.

I firmly believe that the command imperative is there, although I've seen many commanders ignore it. So what is missing then? I would have to say 'consequences'. Without consequences, command imperatives can be easily ignored by those who either disagree with them or find then difficult or inconvenient.

The biggest problem, as I see it, is that because we're a volunteer organization, many are afraid of losing members by having those difficult conversations or sending then home for not complying. Very few commanders are willing to suspend or terminate a member based on uniform violations alone. So what do we do then?

I believe that most commanders and members do the best they can. It's certainly not an easy task; not when CAP has so many regulations and requirements to enforce. And let's not forget that we still have a mission to accomplish.

At the end, the most practical solution is to continue presenting a good example, educating our members, making corrections when needed, and recognizing those who make an effort to comply and present a professional image.

[arajca]

Does he correct those who report to him when he sees them obviously out of h/w wearing the AF style uniforms? Does he have those "uncomfortable" conversations? If not, why should subordinate commanders do so when it is apparent the Nat/CC doesn't care about it?

Are you stating as a matter of fact that he doesn't? Or merely asking the question?

There's no question that many CAP members commit uniform violations. I've seen members do so at wing, region and national events with my own eyes. But I wouldn't go as far as to blame Maj Gen Carr for it, as I haven't seen him wear his uniform improperly and I don't know for a fact that he looks the other way when others do.

I firmly believe that the command imperative is there, although I've seen many commanders ignore it. So what is missing then? I would have to say 'consequences'. Without consequences, command imperatives can be easily ignored by those who either disagree with them or find then difficult or inconvenient.

The biggest problem, as I see it, is that because we're a volunteer organization, many are afraid of losing members by having those difficult conversations or sending then home for not complying. Very few commanders are willing to suspend or terminate a member based on uniform violations alone. So what do we do then?

I believe that most commanders and members do the best they can. It's certainly not an easy task; not when CAP has so many regulations and requirements to enforce. And let's not forget that we still have a mission to accomplish.

At the end, the most practical solution is to continue presenting a good example, educating our members, making corrections when needed, and recognizing those who make an effort to comply and present a professional image.

It has been put forth that by merely wearing his uniform properly, he's doing what he needs to do about it. I don't know if has had those conversations or not, but when you see the same thing happening at those high levels time and time again, you have to wonder if the Nat/CC is taking any EFFECTIVE ACTIONS to correct the problem. It appears he is not, but I do not have the facts one way or the other. In an ideal world, merely setting the example would be sufficient, however, we do not live in an ideal world.

The problem is that part about making corrections when needed doesn't seem to happen above the squadron level.

[Eclipse]

Command imperative comes [ . . .] from THE Commander, who sets the tone and the example,

I can only agree that command imperative comes from all commanders, including Gen Carr.  Are you saying he has somehow set an improper example in the uniform arena?

He actually managed to get a 39-1 published, which previous national commanders had struggled with.  This required significant emphasis and resource allocation.

Should he have not done that?

His uniforms have always been worn properly.  I have seen him wear both AF and corporate style uniforms, and he wears them well.

Should be doing something else besides setting a good example to "set a good example?"

I have seen him correct others' uniforms at national conferences, and heard him give guidance to the Command Chief to do so as well. 

Should he not be doing that?

CAP is adrift on a sea of self-actualization instead of strategic planning and leadership, and until NHQ starts pressing the issue(s), no one else feels any
pressure to do anything but what they feel they need or want to, and making people "sad" about uniforms, or anything else for
that matter, clearly isn't something the average commander feels like doing.

"Adrift on a sea of self-actualization."  I think you are trying a little too hard here.  CAP is not "them," it is you and me (and all the other volunteers).  If you are doing a little too much "self-actualization," by all means stop doing it.

And yet, they aren't demanding compliance.  >WHY?<

So, your theory is that Gen Carr and subordinate commanders have to "demand compliance" with each specific regulation or requirement, othewise that means they somehow "don't care" about that particular regulation and therefore non-compliance by local unit commanders is OK?

Bob, how many regulations does CAP have?  How many requirements are contained in each of them?

Should Gen Carr take each one in turn and say

This week, my command imperative is on CAPR 10-2.  I want to emphasize how important File Maintenance is and hereby demand compliance from each unit.  I know in the past I might have seemed to coddle some of the region headquarters on their file systems and that bred apathy and disrespect from the local unit commanders.  I've heard local units say "After all, if Region HQ dosen't have to maintain the records required by the regulation, why should I."  But now I am serious about this."

And then move through all the regulations in turn?

That seems a little . . . cumbersome.

Ned, I'm sorry, but there is so much wrong with this I don't know how to start.  I understand you need to espouse the "half full" line,
but some of your responses are really starting to show that you are either disconnected from CAP reality, or just don't want to admit the
situation CAP is really in.

Proper uniform wear is >clearly< not a priority for the national command staff, if it was, it would be fixed.

Anything else is deflection, abdication, or just a poor excuse for not holding people accountable.

In a simple question.

When commanders, at all levels, abdicate or ignore their responsibilities, as they are clearly and demonstrably doing
in regards to proper uniform wear, who holds them accountable?

Last I checked, the actual chain is only 5 clicks deep, at the most.

[Eclipse]

Bob, how many regulations does CAP have?  How many requirements are contained in each of them?

If CAP has "too many" regulations, that would also be an NHQ problem to fix, however in the absence
of that fix, if you could point us to the table indicating which of the regulations are actually "suggestions"
that would really help the units.

Last I checked, compliance with 39-1 was mandatory.

In fact, last I checked, compliance with >all< regulations was mandatory.

[lordmonar]

Okay.....let's put this to the test.

Can anyone emphatically state an instance during Gen Carr's tenure that they saw an NHQ staffer or a regional commander NOT in uniform standards.....and that infraction was brought to the attention of the General and it was not fixed?


Likewise.....for any regional staffer or Wing commander who was out of regs and the regional commander was notified and it was not fixed?

Or a wing staffer and a squadron commander....brought to the attention of the wing commander....and it was not fixed?

and so on and so forth.

I as a squadron staffer.....police my squadron.   I encourage my peer in my squadron and in other squadrons to do the same.

COMMAND IMPERATIVE is already there.

Just because you may not see General Carr dressing down one of his staffers or a regional commander......or maybe even passing on to a regional commander that WING XYZ CC needs to look into getting some corporates.....does not mean it is not being done.

I can state from my point of view down here at a squadron staff position......we are keeping our people in compliance.   

I don't get bent out of shape when some cadet from another squadron is sporting a boonie or a cool ranger crush......I pass that information up the chain and let them take care of it.

And yes.......I whole heartily believe that uniform compliance is not on the top of most wing commander's and above's TO DO list. 
So I don't sweat it.

I do what I can do and move on.

Maybe if we had a corps of members who job it was to care.....really care about uniforms.....we may see a shift in this situation. 

[abdsp51]

Okay.....let's put this to the test.

Can anyone emphatically state an instance during Gen Carr's tenure that they saw an NHQ staffer or a regional commander NOT in uniform standards.....and that infraction was brought to the attention of the General and it was not fixed?

Or a wing staffer and a squadron commander....brought to the attention of the wing commander....and it was not fixed?

How about the wing admin officer in full view of area commanders, sq commanders and the wing commander wearing hard grade on a white long sleeve shirt and no tie. This occurred during the wing commanders call.  And this was an all day event. 

[lordmonar]

Okay.....let's put this to the test.

Can anyone emphatically state an instance during Gen Carr's tenure that they saw an NHQ staffer or a regional commander NOT in uniform standards.....and that infraction was brought to the attention of the General and it was not fixed?

Or a wing staffer and a squadron commander....brought to the attention of the wing commander....and it was not fixed?

How about the wing admin officer in full view of area commanders, sq commanders and the wing commander wearing hard grade on a white long sleeve shirt and no tie. This occurred during the wing commanders call.  And this was an all day event.

Did he do it again?

If not.....then I am going to assume that someone straighten him out. 

If he did do it again....then we have a failure of leadership.