What constitutes "active participation"?

[Eclipse]

You would want me to MANDATORY follow up on the individual.  Six months into the inactive status I would have to initiate paperwork to transfer him.  and then six months (or less) his membership expires, I move his files to the inactive file and five years later I destroy them.

It's not.  It's the CC's job. You also ignored where I indicated that all the status transfers are automatic, absent action.
Less. Work.  Forest / trees.

Unless you're telling me your unit doesn't track attendance and participation, I mean that would just be dereliction of duty, right?
No commander worth his pin would stand in front of a superior and tell him "I have no idea who my people are, when they have
participated last, or even if they intend to eve show up again..."

And absent a clear change in the entire organization, the solution is "more people", not less work.
You can nitpick about "this or that", but the majority of the defined duties of the respective departments
are important to a fully-functional organization.

[lordmonar]

You would want me to MANDATORY follow up on the individual.  Six months into the inactive status I would have to initiate paperwork to transfer him.  and then six months (or less) his membership expires, I move his files to the inactive file and five years later I destroy them.

It's not.  It's the CC's job.

And absent a clear change in the entire organization, the solution is "more people", not less work.
You can nitpick about "this or that", but the majority of the defined duties of the respective departments
are important to a fully-functional organization.

Okay...I agree with you.

The work is requuired.....so the only solution is more people.

Now.......how does kicking out our empty shirts get us more people.

Please have a solution that does not involve wishful thinking.

[Eclipse]

Now.......how does kicking out our empty shirts get us more people.

Asked and answered, about 4 times - it doesn't, in and of itself, any more then putting gas in a vehicle gets you to
your destination. It's the first step, but you can't get there without it.

It's a sad comment when one of CAP's most active and knowledgeable members thinks expecting the leadership to
employ proper, basic managerial principles is "wishful thinking".

[lordmonar]

Now.......how does kicking out our empty shirts get us more people.

Asked and answered, about 4 times - it doesn't, in and of itself, any more then putting gas in a vehicle gets you to
your destination. It's the first step, but you can't get there without it.

It's a sad comment when one of our most active and knowledgeable members thinks expecting the leadership to
employ proper, basic managerial principles is "wishful thinking".

Basic managerial principles.....adding work to your peers  that does nothing to fix the problem but maybe, might, possibly would "force" management into doing something about the original problem.  I don't know what management school you went to......but I would go get my money back.

When I went to school

Identify the Problem
Brainstorm Solutions
Pick Solution
Implement Solution
Review Results

Assuming we are at "pick a solution" your idea would be dropped due to cost/benifit and applicable to the problem.

[Storm Chaser]

Now.......how does kicking out our empty shirts get us more people.

Asked and answered, about 4 times - it doesn't, in and of itself, any more then putting gas in a vehicle gets you to
your destination. It's the first step, but you can't get there without it.

It's a sad comment when one of our most active and knowledgeable members thinks expecting the leadership to
employ proper, basic managerial principles is "wishful thinking".

Basic managerial principles.....adding work to your peers  that does nothing to fix the problem but maybe, might, possibly would "force" management into doing something about the original problem.  I don't know what management school you went to......but I would go get my money back.

When I went to school

Identify the Problem
Brainstorm Solutions
Pick Solution
Implement Solution
Review Results

Assuming we are at "pick a solution" your idea would be dropped due to cost/benifit and applicable to the problem.

I see your point, but I don't buy the "adding [extra] work" argument. Most personnel actions discussed here can be accomplished with a few clicks or by filling a simple form. Your personnel officer and commander may have to do a bit of work the first time, but after that it should be easy. Unless you're implying that dozens of members go inactive every month. If that was the case, those units would have bigger problems than cleaning up the books.

(edited for grammar)

[lordmonar]

It does not matter how easy it is.

Today there is no requirement to check your attendance records and see when the last time SM Noshow was there.
Today there is no requirement to do the transfer paperwork for SM Noshow if he has missed XX meetings.

So adding this requirement....adds work.

It is an additional admin burden on the squadron.  It is an additional admin burden on wing/group.

Every time I take 10 minutes of time away from someone to do Admin over head....that's 10 minutes of time they can't be doing ES, CP or AE.

[Eclipse]

Every time I take 10 minutes of time away from someone to do Admin over head....that's 10 minutes of time they can't be doing ES, CP or AE.

Your admin people aren't SUPPOSED TO BE DOING "ES, CP, or AE".

[lordmonar]

Every time I take 10 minutes of time away from someone to do Admin over head....that's 10 minutes of time they can't be doing ES, CP or AE.

Your admin people aren't SUPPOSED TO BE DOING "ES, CP, or AE".

But they are.  That is the reality of the situation.  That is the root problem that we are talking about here.

We got too much stuff to do and not enough people to do it.

[Alaric]

Every time I take 10 minutes of time away from someone to do Admin over head....that's 10 minutes of time they can't be doing ES, CP or AE.

Your admin people aren't SUPPOSED TO BE DOING "ES, CP, or AE".

That is the single dumbest thing I have ever heard, I am both an Admin and Personnel officer.  That does not, and should not prevent me from participating in SAREXs, being a scorekeeper at the color guard competition, working an encampment, or anything else.  The function of the staff is to do their jobs in support of the  missions.  I do my Admin/Personnel work and also participate in the missions, its all about how much time you want to give CAP. 

[Eclipse]

You missed the point running to disagree.

The reason members have to wear 12 hats is because CAP is woefully undermanned and understaffed, and the divided attention
is to the detriment of both, and allows for comments like "I don't have time for admin stuff because I have to ES more..."

A properly staffed CAP would still allow for people to participate where they want to, but it would' force people to have to make as
many time choices.

Bottom line, if you take a support job, you don't get to complain that the requirements, whatever they are, take you away from something else.

[FW]

Every time I take 10 minutes of time away from someone to do Admin over head....that's 10 minutes of time they can't be doing ES, CP or AE.

Your admin people aren't SUPPOSED TO BE DOING "ES, CP, or AE".

But they are.  That is the reality of the situation.  That is the root problem that we are talking about here.

We got too much stuff to do and not enough people to do it.

Yep, and that pretty much sums up the problem.  Why "patronize" senior members who don't want to participate? Keep them on the rolls to avoid further burnout of those who are already overworked? Keep hoping non participating members have a change of heart?

The idea, here, is to find a way to recruit and retain enough members to make it easier for everyone.  I know I state the obvious, however we aren't getting anywhere.  As JeffDG so aptly puts in his signature block; how long do we keep hitting our heads against the wall before we realize we need to go in a different direction....?

[lordmonar]

So that's a big "up yours" to all the support staff.

And one wonders why we can't fill support staff jobs.

But that is neither here nor there.

In TODAY's CAP we do have members wearing 2-3 hats.   In today's CAP we are undermanned.   In today's CAP there is no value added in moving all the empty shirts to patron status.

The fix is to recruit and train more personnel.  It is to get group/wing/national out there helping units recruit and train more personnel.
Kicking out/transferring/Patron-ing "empty shirts" does not get us any closer to having more personnel.

[Eclipse]

So that's a big "up yours" to all the support staff.

I can't begin to imagine how you could draw that line.

Kicking out/transferring/Patron-ing "empty shirts" does not get us any closer to having more personnel.

You're simply wrong here, sorry, that's just the fact of the matter.  If you can't see that, you need to take a hard
look at how you view "management" and why you can't see past a simple task that is part of a larger plan.

[lordmonar]

Okay....spell it out to me.

How does kicking out the empty shirts....get me more people or reduce my work load?

How does it help recruiting?
How does it help training?
How does it help retention?

As for the "up yours" comment.   

"Bottom line, if you take a support job, you don't get to complain that the requirements, whatever they are, take you away from something else."......so that's the up yours!  That is shut up and color.  so...the solution there is.....If I want to fly...I'm not going to volunteer to do any staff work.  If I want to do CP.....to hell with the staff work.  If I want do AE...to hell with the staff work.   

That's the result of your management attitudes. 

[Eclipse]

How does kicking out the empty shirts....get me more people or reduce my work load?

Asked and answered.

How does it help recruiting?
How does it help training?
How does it help retention?

Asked and answered.

As for the "up yours" comment.   

"Bottom line, if you take a support job, you don't get to complain that the requirements, whatever they are, take you away from something else."......so that's the up yours!  That is shut up and color.  so...the solution there is.....If I want to fly...I'm not going to volunteer to do any staff work.  If I want to do CP.....to hell with the staff work.  If I want do AE...to hell with the staff work.   

No one told you to take the staff job - you either do it right, or don't do it.  Anything else is intellectually dishonest.
Doing it 1/2-way actually causes many of the problems we're discussing, because >AGAIN< it gives people
a level of comfort that "X is handled", when in fact, it isn't. Checking the box for the SUI isn't doing the job.

Good management is insuring you have enough of the right people to properly fulfill the whole job, not just backfilling
the org chart with the same three names to get wing off your back.

CAP has this problem >HUGE< in the summer - commanders and key staff go off to encampments and NCSAs, and
basically ignore their home squadron for weeks and months at a time, complaining that they don't have time to address their
"real" CAP job because of the "fun" one they accepted.

Want to go to NESA, HMRS, COS, and staff a flight academy? Fine.  You don't get to let your eServices queue sit dormant
while you're gone, nor do you get to leave your unit to bump into each other for weeks at a time because you're overloaded.

[lordmonar]

Asked...but not answered.  You responded....but your "answer" makes no sense.

Forcing people out and closing units in the HOPE that NHQ notices.......something they already know...and then does "something" about....is not going to get more people in the units.




You are right no one told me to take the job.

But you are also telling me to shut up and color...when you want to add more work to my job.

That's where you are failing in leadership.

That is one reason why we can't get more people in the "hard" jobs.

And telling people who are doing the hard jobs...that they can't do the "fun" jobs.......that is again wrong.

[Eclipse]

I responded with pieces of what would be part of a comprehensive plan, some of which has been detailed in
other long beaten posts.

Your repeated assertions that tasks which are part and parcel of being a commander are somehow "extra work"
are simply incorrect, but at this point you're clearly focused on avoiding this non-existent extra work regardless of
the positive impact on the membership.

To the other point, that's just ridiculous - of course NHQ would "notice" - they are the ones implementing the
comprehensive plan.  If you choose to ignore the totality of the idea and focus on what is a very small first step,
you'll never get out of the station-keeping rut you're in.

But thank you for your continued, non-disruptive service to CAP.

[Alaric]

Bottom line, if you take a support job, you don't get to complain that the requirements, whatever they are, take you away from something else.

I totally agree with that point, but not with the idea that "Your admin people aren't SUPPOSED TO BE DOING "ES, CP, or AE"."

That statement implies its one or the other.  Even if we had enough people that every person had only one job, everyone is supposed to be doing ES, CP or AE

[JeffDG]

Bottom line, if you take a support job, you don't get to complain that the requirements, whatever they are, take you away from something else.

I totally agree with that point, but not with the idea that "Your admin people aren't SUPPOSED TO BE DOING "ES, CP, or AE"."

That statement implies its one or the other.  Even if we had enough people that every person had only one job, everyone is supposed to be doing ES, CP or AE

Yeah...looking forward to that nirvana when we're fully manned and nobody needs to wear multiple hats.

Someone comes in and wants to work on CP...you, as the commander, tell them "We'd love to have you, but we're full up on CP.  We could use an extra hand in Personnel, but you'll not be allowed to do anything in CP, becase our admin people aren't SUPPOSED TO BE DOING ES, CP or AE, so sayeth Bob, our National Commander."

[FW]

No one is saying you can't do the "fun" jobs; just do the "hard" jobs.  Just recruit and retain members willing to be part of a team. Encourage them to enjoy each others' company while engaged in all we do.  Make the "fun" stuff worth dealing with the "hard" stuff.  Maybe then, the "empty shirts" will come back to "play"...

Now, go enjoy the day.