Phase IV cadet retained for limited squadron attendance

[NIN]

I hate it when local people make stuff up, engrave it in stone and claim it is policy instead of local desire.

(What's he going to do with the 18 year old cadet who can't meet the "requirement" to wear the USAF type uniform?)

Doesn't take a lawyer to prove that 65% constitutes "most" if something. A fourth grader in math class can prove it.

Bernie, I don't disagree with you about making things up, but that website boilerplate is more or less what the requirements are for a cadet.

Now, an over-18 cadet who doesn't meet the height weight requirements? There are options there, they're just not spelled out in great and glorious detail on that page.

Don't forget: that site (and that page in particular) is designed to market CAP to non-members, not serve as a policy document.

Funny that page: http://oswegocap.org/cadet-programs/for-teens/
Sure looks like this page: http://www.concordcap.org/cadet-programs/for-teens/

[Robert Hartigan]

Granted we don't know the whole story, but what leadership lesson is being conveyed here by the squadron commander? The Cadet is old enough to be a Senior Member, right? What are the meeting attendance requirements for Senior Members? (<---that is a rhetorical question and does not require a comment or answer; it is there to illuminate my point)

Cadet Timmy no longer fits the mold of a perfect cadet. I bet Cadet Timmy has expressed his opinions a few times?  I bet Cadet Timmy has been branded a rabble rouser by some because dynamic aerospace leaders tend to be a tad disruptive to the status quo. I bet there is no local plan to help Cadet Timmy transition to Senior Member? So, the same standard used to inculcate a new cadet into CAP is being rigidly applied to de facto dismiss a cadet for achieving program goals and moderate success after years of loyal membership.

The Squadron Commander may have valid and unassailable reasons to retain the Cadet in grade, however; those reasons must be addressed and a plan of action put into place to overcome the deficencies least we all forget the cadet leadership laboratory is a safe place to learn and fail. Oh, and there is a core values scion there, too.

So, what leadership lesson is being conveyed. Maybe this is a solution to a hazardous attitude of anti-authority? Maybe Cadet Timmy has expressed other hazardous attitudes and this is all a means of correction? However, my experience leads me to believe Cadet Timmy is probably dealing with a situation where leadership is displaying a defense mechanism in response to Cadet Timmy's leadership acumen and age which are now viewed as threatening.

[Garibaldi]

That is the biggest danger to soliciting information through CAPTalk. We rarely, if ever, get the whole picture, and 99% of the time, the OP will give only the part of the story that will fit their needs. Not saying that's the case here, but it's historically a valid concern.

To answer Robert Hartigan's post, a cadet on the verge of completing the program may not want to turn senior until they get their Spaatz. I know I wouldn't, unless I was 20 and 7 months old. It's too big a carrot. At 18, even 19, it may not be that big a deal, they've done all they're going to do as a cadet, college is breaking their back, who has time to study for the comprehensive? Few can and few do. That's why the percentage of Spaatzen is so low.

Can a cadet transition to being a senior in the same unit? Sure. It can be done, but the failure rate is pretty high, from what I've personally witnessed. The new TFO or LT sees all the work that's involved and suddenly, leading a flight or being C/CDC isn't such a bad thing anymore. They can't run and play with their friends, at least on CAP time, and it's all sir/ma'am instead of buddy buddy. And resentment can build.

Just my .02

[Mitchell 1969]

I hate it when local people make stuff up, engrave it in stone and claim it is policy instead of local desire.

(What's he going to do with the 18 year old cadet who can't meet the "requirement" to wear the USAF type uniform?)

Doesn't take a lawyer to prove that 65% constitutes "most" if something. A fourth grader in math class can prove it.

Bernie, I don't disagree with you about making things up, but that website boilerplate is more or less what the requirements are for a cadet.

Now, an over-18 cadet who doesn't meet the height weight requirements? There are options there, they're just not spelled out in great and glorious detail on that page.

Don't forget: that site (and that page in particular) is designed to market CAP to non-members, not serve as a policy document.

Funny that page: http://oswegocap.org/cadet-programs/for-teens/
Sure looks like this page: http://www.concordcap.org/cadet-programs/for-teens/

Points taken. But...

Regardless of the completeness of the bullet list criteria posted on the website, (meaning, issue with cadets over 18 perhaps not being able to, nor required to, meet the uniform spec listed), there is still some "making it up" appearing to be in play.

Specifically, if the posted standard, regardless of source, is "attend most," then a cadet attending 65% is, indeed, attending "most" and zapping him for attendance is a hip-shooting "making it up" action.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I also go by the policy that "anything school related is excused". The only thing that ask is let me know. If we do not allow our Cadets to have balance, we will lose them quickly.

Balance, but not abuse.


Some kids always have something on a meeting night. Instead of giving them a pass, perhaps a conversation regarding priorities/membership are in order.

I was one of those "kids." When I was 19, I had a class that met on Wednesday nights - Squadrin meeting night. The class wasn't available any other time. I talked to the Squadron Commander, who said "Sorry, but if you can't make it to meetings, then you can't advance."

No, not really.

He was a realistic Squadron Commander. He simply said "Well, drop by when you can, try to keep up with weekend activities. And I'll talk to Captain Whatshisname at Squadron XX - maybe you can drop in there one Tuesday per month and teach a class."

He was a mensch. CAP would be well served by having a few more mensch officers.

Yea, I too was one of those cadets in college. I even tried to chart a path past my Earhart, but realized that college > progression, especially with 4 years of night classes and full work week during the day.

Part of being a cadet is demonstrating the learned skills. Teaching a class once in a while at a different squadron is nice, but doesn't give me any way to evaluate the cadet. Perhaps instead of trying to accuse me of not being a "human", looking back at your post you'd see that the solution was to transfer squadrons for the duration...

[NIN]

Yea, I too was one of those cadets in college. I even tried to chart a path past my Earhart, but realized that college > progression, especially with 4 years of night classes and full work week during the day.

Part of being a cadet is demonstrating the learned skills. Teaching a class once in a while at a different squadron is nice, but doesn't give me any way to evaluate the cadet. Perhaps instead of trying to accuse me of not being a "human", looking back at your post you'd see that the solution was to transfer squadrons for the duration...

Yes, because we all know that a C/Lt Col must be constantly and continuously evaluated.

Many years ago, before there was online testing, I ran into several circumstances where I had a cadet "out of town." Maybe they were at college or something like that.  I seem to recall one instance where a cadet, due to some weird family circumstances, wound up spending an extended period of the summer at his grammie's or aunt's house in Florida or Georgia or something.

In those cases, we contacted the local squadron and got him or her an opportunity to continue to participate while "away," but while still assigned to our unit.

Not entirely sure it was proper, but as far as testing went, we worked it out that the local unit would administer the cadet's test and mail the test header to us (me, actually) so we could incorporate it into the cadet's file.  The cadet went down with an introductory letter from me that basically said "please treat Cadet Goober like a member of your team.." or similar.  We never really had any kind of a problem, and I suspect that if I got 4 test headers in the mail over the course of the time those cadets were "away," that might be a high number.

But those cadets were able to continue to participate in CAP (even if they didn't specifically advance) and remain members of their home unit, which was important to them at the time.  Think of it like "TDY."

The more important issue was that we worked with the cadet to create a positive retention situation where he was able to continue his membership while away.

I mean yes, the ones off to college were only active (here) in the summer.  The might have gone to a handful of local meetings, and it wasn't like they were showing up at home on 1 June going "OK, need to be C/Lt Col by the time I head back to campus in August cuz I've been so active in Wisconsin!"  For the most part, those cadets were C/Capt or above and were coasting a bit, but we were able to retain them in CAP. One was actually our cadet encampment commander during one of those summers.

The solution isn't always to transfer people back and forth.

[Brit_in_CAP]

The solution isn't always to transfer people back and forth.

Agree.  We had a cadet on TDY, if you will, from another wing while they attended college locally.  Sadly it only lasted for one semester but both sides got a lot out of it, and we made friends in another wing, which has proved very useful.

The cadet approached it very sensibly, and there were emails, phone calls and letters of introduction that eased the path.

Personally, having had to work a long way from home for a while, I was glad to be able to attend the local squadron occasionally and a proper TDY system would be nice.  Then again, calling ahead and writing to the CC at the squadron worked just as well!

[FW]

^ I agree.  Back in the dark ages, when I was a cadet and started college, my home squadron/cc worked it out with the local unit at school to "let me" participate.  I met some new friends, and finished up my cadet career on a good note...

[THRAWN]

^ I agree.  Back in the dark ages, when I was a cadet and started college, my home squadron/cc worked it out with the local unit at school to "let me" participate.  I met some new friends, and finished up my cadet career on a good note...

Works in the modern age of electric light and cartomobiles as well. When I was going through the FAA Academy, I attended meetings in OK Wing. Got to see a different point of view and picked up some good best practices. I left them with the knowledge that cities in the NER are not islands in the middle of a sea of pine trees...

[TheSkyHornet]

Just had a lesson at the last meeting that included the importance of writing things out in quantitative, positive terms:

"Most," "as soon as possible," "what you can," etc. phrases are not standards that can be enforced.
"NLT 1200 on Wednesday," "80%," "At least 2 per month," etc. phrases provide you with measurable figures.

If you want to be able to sit someone down and say "You aren't meeting these standards," you need to have hard facts to go off of, not subjective interpretations.

Now, in the case of not being active, that's a subjective statement. What are they doing for the betterment of the squadron? Are they mentoring cadets? Are they in constant communication with the squadron? If they were to show up at a meeting at random, would they know what's been going on in a broad sense?

These are things you need to decide before punishing or promoting (in an academic/philosophical sense, not rank) them based on their service to CAP and their unit.

My suggestion:
Always have your SOPs written down. Know exactly what situations can be considered "exceptions" to those SOPs, not just "case by case" stuff, because then it's whatever the heck you feel like doing at the time. Also, give any cadet with a duty position a paper with CAP's expectations for that duty position and a list of your squadron expectations, including any weekly/monthly tasks they need to accomplish and those deadlines. Have them read it, discuss it, and sign it.

Hold your cadets accountable. Hold your superiors accountable.

[Mitchell 1969]

I also go by the policy that "anything school related is excused". The only thing that ask is let me know. If we do not allow our Cadets to have balance, we will lose them quickly.

Balance, but not abuse.


Some kids always have something on a meeting night. Instead of giving them a pass, perhaps a conversation regarding priorities/membership are in order.

I was one of those "kids." When I was 19, I had a class that met on Wednesday nights - Squadrin meeting night. The class wasn't available any other time. I talked to the Squadron Commander, who said "Sorry, but if you can't make it to meetings, then you can't advance."

No, not really.

He was a realistic Squadron Commander. He simply said "Well, drop by when you can, try to keep up with weekend activities. And I'll talk to Captain Whatshisname at Squadron XX - maybe you can drop in there one Tuesday per month and teach a class."

He was a mensch. CAP would be well served by having a few more mensch officers.

Yea, I too was one of those cadets in college. I even tried to chart a path past my Earhart, but realized that college > progression, especially with 4 years of night classes and full work week during the day.

Part of being a cadet is demonstrating the learned skills. Teaching a class once in a while at a different squadron is nice, but doesn't give me any way to evaluate the cadet. Perhaps instead of trying to accuse me of not being a "human", looking back at your post you'd see that the solution was to transfer squadrons for the duration...

"The duration" was one semester. The other squadron was considerably out of the way - it wasn't proximity that lent itself, it was meeting night. The solution worked well, I got to stay in my home unit, and didn't have to take on ever more time and expense. I probably would have ended up simply staying away from everything for a semester otherwise. (My experience with college aged cadets doing such "temporary" absences has not been good).

Sometimes these things are best handled case by case. Sorry yours couldn't be accommodated.

[BillB]

When I was FLWG DCP I set up Headquarters Cadet Squadron. It had two flights, one at the University of Florida and one at Florida State University. This allowed cadets from all over the state, plus out of state students to continue their CAP training. One advantage, all cadets in the Squadron were interacting with their own peer group without having the 13 year old cadets involved. These cadets mentored each other and provided support for each other, with little senior supervision. Cadets were transferred back to their home unit's only for the presentation of their Spaatz awards. Did having a college level squadron work? I'd say it did since this Squadron produced more Spaatz awards during an 18 month period than the rest of the Southeast Region combined during the 3 years it was in existence. It also produced a 100% retention rate since all members of the Squadron kept renewing memberships and didn't drop out due to college academic loads.

[Raikkonen]

"WILLING TO"... those two little words right there are a no go.  If your Squadron Commander has an expectation that he is going to hold someone accountable to then he needs to change the requirements to say "MUST ATTEND". 

Being willing to do something and having to do it are two different things.   We had a lot of Senior NCOs in Afghanistan that were "willing" to go on missions but if they didn't "have to" in order to receive a bronze star for their tour then they were going to sit their butts in their office the whole time where it was nice and safe.  See what I'm getting at here? 

[NIN]

"WILLING TO"... those two little words right there are a no go.  If your Squadron Commander has an expectation that he is going to hold someone accountable to then he needs to change the requirements to say "MUST ATTEND". 

Being willing to do something and having to do it are two different things.   We had a lot of Senior NCOs in Afghanistan that were "willing" to go on missions but if they didn't "have to" in order to receive a bronze star for their tour then they were going to sit their butts in their office the whole time where it was nice and safe.  See what I'm getting at here?

Yes, I see what you're getting at.

However, text found on a website doesn't automatically abrogate the Cadet Oath and the CAPF 15 text. 

Its not like cadet Timmy at a recruiting event saying "Yeah sure! You get to fly jets!" means thats entirely true.

[Raikkonen]

"WILLING TO"... those two little words right there are a no go.  If your Squadron Commander has an expectation that he is going to hold someone accountable to then he needs to change the requirements to say "MUST ATTEND". 

Being willing to do something and having to do it are two different things.   We had a lot of Senior NCOs in Afghanistan that were "willing" to go on missions but if they didn't "have to" in order to receive a bronze star for their tour then they were going to sit their butts in their office the whole time where it was nice and safe.  See what I'm getting at here?

Yes, I see what you're getting at.

However, text found on a website doesn't automatically abrogate the Cadet Oath and the CAPF 15 text. 

Its not like cadet Timmy at a recruiting event saying "Yeah sure! You get to fly jets!" means thats entirely true.

Very true.  ^      In all, we should refer to regulations when fighting these battles.


Thank you Sir for clarifying.