Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 28, 2018, 05:54:36 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Uniforms & Awards  |  Topic: Cadet Uniform -- Too Many Ribbons and Badges (A cadet perspective)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 [All] Print
Author Topic: Cadet Uniform -- Too Many Ribbons and Badges (A cadet perspective)  (Read 2459 times)
Starbird
Member

Posts: 70
Unit: NER-NH-056

« on: April 07, 2018, 12:22:28 PM »

Hello all, newly minted NHWG C/2lt here....  who is slightly annoyed that cadets have so many ribbons and badges authorized, for reasons I will attempt to explain.

I know this is a topic that has been discussed a number of times here on the board here, but this is still an issue that irks me.

I'll start with ribbons.  We cadets have too many meaningless promotion ribbons.  I get it, its nice for the younger cadets to feel accomplished after earning every stripe, but....

1)  We really don't need a ribbon for every promotion, that's what the shiny new stripe/circle/diamond on our collars/shoulders are for.  Adding a ribbon as well seems gaudy, and for most promotions (excluding milestones) is kind of meaningless.
2)  Short stacking is great, except.... most cadets refuse to do it.  I get the sense that many feel they will appear "inferior" should they only be wearing their short stack (aka meaningful ribbons), a notion which needs to be kicked in the tail.
3)  It looks kind of ridiculous.  Especially when a new cadet officer (2lt) is wearing as many ribbons as an actual Lt Col either in CAP or in the Air Force would be, while the actual SM/AF 2lt counterpart on average wears 3 ribbons, give or take.
4)  Which leads me to my next point... Not enough space on the uniform.  Especially for cadets who wear the old style uniform, any GT/Air Crew Badges, if worn with full stack, are ridiculously high up on the uniform.  I've even seen a cadet with his aircrew badge almost up to his epaulet/shoulder board.  It just looks wrong.  :o
5) Finally.... and this is my biggest biggest gripe... The "everyone is a winner by default mentality."  It seems that handing out ribbons like candy can be detrimental to cadet motivation and purpose.  It is my personal belief that worn awards should be reserved for significant achievements, not for simply doing what every other cadet is supposed to do anyway.  Ribbon racks become meaningless, in my mind anyway, when they are so overpopulated that nearly every rack is identical with mild variation.  I feel that focus should be on operational and excellence awards, and not so much "I passed two tests with an 80%, yay, another ribbon."

Maybe I'm raining on everyone's parade, but I just feel that there are too many cadet ribbons.  For this reason, unless I'm going in front of a board, I always short stack.  I feel more comfortable in uniform drawing less attention to myself, I guess.

Now on to the badges...

Maybe I'm not going to come across as fair or kind on this one.

I'd like to see the following go away:


- NRA Marksmanship Badge (Not really related to the CAP Mission, and also, the NRA is taking so much political heat right now and is also taking a pretty heavy political stance, and CAP is not supposed to associate politically.)

- Certain Specialty Track Badges (I'm referring to to the ones that are supposed to be issued to senior members who have held a operational duty position (Comms Badge, ES Badge) For some reason we give cadets a free pass to wear these even though they cannot meat the final requirement (serving in a senior member duty slot) That being said, I wouldn't mind so much if there were distinct cadet versions available for wear, without the final requirement to obtain a tech rating.  I just don't approve of cadets wearing badges that would otherwise require senior members to achieve a higher standard.  I'll point out that every other badge that CAP issues/wears that is available for cadets requires cadets to meet the exact same standard as our senior member counterparts.)

- Pre-Solo Badge (Admittedly conflicted on this one.  Yes, its nice to give a badge to the cadets that weren't eligible to solo at flight academy, but once again... the "everyone is a winner mentality" is bugging me here.)

I'm assuming there will be vast and varying opinions on this one.

I guess if it were up to me, I'd change the following:

- Stop awarding and phase out all cadet promotion ribbons except for the milestone achievements, and perhaps the Curry ribbon, for the new cadets sake
- De-authorize the NRA Marksmanship Badge
- De-authorize Specialty Track Badges for cadets that were originally intended for operational seniors
- De-authorize the Pre-Solo Badge (maybe)

+ If necessary (I go back and forth on this one) authorize DISTINCTIVE cadet specialty track badges that do not carry the same implied meaning as their SM specialty track counterparts
+ Only create new ribbons (for cadets) for any significant cadet activity that does not fall under the NCSA ribbon (the only ribbon that comes to mind at the moment would be the Cyber Competition Ribbon)
+ Encourage the simplification of the dress uniform accouterments (god forbid we end up looking like JROTC cadets, with their 20 billion awards) (example: http://schools.stlucie.k12.fl.us/npk/files/2014/02/IMG_2337.jpg )

What would this all accomplish?


It would be my hope that cadets would finally start caring more about operational and organizational proficiency and excellence, rather than going ribbon chasing.  Furthermore, it would return the meaning to (in my mind) more important awards cadets wear (Cadet Recruiter, Encampment Grad, Community Service, Red Service, NCSA Grad, SAR/Air SAR, Find Ribbon, and the various recognition/achievement awards, etc.)  Finally... maybe we could finally put the distraction of awards and uniform wear aside, and let us focus on what we need to be doing as cadets:  Learning leadership, preparing ES operational readiness, encouraging cadets to promote for the right reasons instead of for the ribbons, learning about aerospace, and generally being more of a team instead of worrying so much about the height of our ribbon racks.  I'm not sure if this is universal, but at my squadron, anyway, more emphasis tends to be put on drill and uniform inspections than leadership training, operations, and ES/AE education... something I am trying to work to change as the old cadet leadership ages out.

Just my two cents, I guess.  I'm sure plenty will disagree.  I apologize if anyone's feelings are hurt.

And yes, I realize this will probably never come to pass.... but a cadet can dream.


Respectfully,

C/2lt Starbird.

(Edit 1) - Spelling/Grammar Error
« Last Edit: April 07, 2018, 01:13:38 PM by Starbird » Logged
NIN
VIP

Posts: 4,839
Unit: of issue

« Reply #1 on: April 07, 2018, 12:46:58 PM »

Greetings fellow NH Wing member.

These are great points and you've done good work here.

The mechanism by which such changes can be promulgated and brought to the Command Council is via the CAC, or even a well-written staff study/position paper via your CC to the Wing Commander.

This has been discussed many times in the past but I doubt its been brought forth in an organized way via the CAC/NCAC or by members of the Command Council.
Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
kwe1009
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 889

« Reply #2 on: April 07, 2018, 01:06:28 PM »

Well thought out and I agree with you 100%.  There certainly is not need to have a ribbon for each cadet promotion.  If I see a C/MSgt I don't need to look at their ribbon rack to know that earned all of the achievements previous to that grade.  Getting rid of the promotion ribbons would certainly save money. 
Logged
abdsp51
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,518
Unit: Classified

« Reply #3 on: April 07, 2018, 03:46:26 PM »

On the same note when it comes to badges the same could be said for SMs. 

One thing ES is not a core part of cadet programs.
Logged
J2H
Forum Regular

Posts: 193
Unit: MER-MD-031

« Reply #4 on: April 07, 2018, 04:37:30 PM »

Remember that in the AF, a 2nd LT is about as new as an Airman Basic, so they won't have as many ribbons, they don't normally go from Enlisted up to LT like Cadets do.
Logged
SSgt Jeffrey Hughes, Squadron NCO
Glenn L. Martin Composite Squadron MD-031
#217169
OldGuy
Seasoned Member

Posts: 355
Unit: TBKS

« Reply #5 on: April 07, 2018, 04:59:56 PM »

I suggest that on milestones, the predecessor ribbons be made "optional" but not eliminated. They represent well over five decades of history and have served us well. Great to see such rational and cogent arguments presented by a cadet, well done!
Logged
LSThiker
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,804
Unit: Earth

« Reply #6 on: April 07, 2018, 05:20:08 PM »

As others have mentioned, there is a mechanism for you to suggest these.

However, a few things:

- NRA Marksmanship Badge (Not really related to the CAP Mission, and also, the NRA is taking so much political heat right now and is also taking a pretty heavy political stance, and CAP is not supposed to associate politically.)

CAP's use of the NRA Marksmanship Badge is in no way associating CAP politically with the NRA.  So this is a non-factor. 

Quote
- Certain Specialty Track Badges (I'm referring to to the ones that are supposed to be issued to senior members who have held a operational duty position (Comms Badge, ES Badge) For some reason we give cadets a free pass to wear these even though they cannot meat the final requirement (serving in a senior member duty slot) That being said, I wouldn't mind so much if there were distinct cadet versions available for wear, without the final requirement to obtain a tech rating.  I just don't approve of cadets wearing badges that would otherwise require senior members to achieve a higher standard.  I'll point out that every other badge that CAP issues/wears that is available for cadets requires cadets to meet the exact same standard as our senior member counterparts.)

For cadets to earn the specialty track badges (ES, IT, Com, and History are the only ones allowed to be earned by cadets), all the requirements are the same as for Senior Members as with Cadets.  There is, of course, the obvious exceptions in that Cadets cannot earn Level 1.  So again, a non-factor.  If Cadets are earning the badge without performing all the same work, then that Squadron Commander is in the wrong. 
Logged
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,062

« Reply #7 on: April 07, 2018, 06:11:25 PM »

I suggest that on milestones, the predecessor ribbons be made "optional" but not eliminated. They represent well over five decades of history and have served us well. Great to see such rational and cogent arguments presented by a cadet, well done!

Not the first time this idea has come up. We did this in about 1970, it didn't last long due to the large numbers of complaints.
Logged
Starbird
Member

Posts: 70
Unit: NER-NH-056

« Reply #8 on: April 08, 2018, 10:22:56 AM »

Dear all:

My sincere apologies for taking quite a while to get back to you all.  First of all, I would like to thank each and every one of you for your valuable insight, feedback, and opinions.  Now, without further ado:

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Greetings fellow NH Wing member.

These are great points and you've done good work here.

The mechanism by which such changes can be promulgated and brought to the Command Council is via the CAC, or even a well-written staff study/position paper via your CC to the Wing Commander.

This has been discussed many times in the past but I doubt its been brought forth in an organized way via the CAC/NCAC or by members of the Command Council.

 :grin: Thank you, Sir!  I'll bring this to my CC when I see him next, and hopefully we can figure this out.  Due to a recent staff change, I don't think we currently have a CAC representative.  Worth a shot anyway!


- - - - - - - - - - - -

Well thought out and I agree with you 100%.  There certainly is not need to have a ribbon for each cadet promotion.  If I see a C/MSgt I don't need to look at their ribbon rack to know that earned all of the achievements previous to that grade.  Getting rid of the promotion ribbons would certainly save money. 

  Yes, cost and availability is another issue I forgot to mention!  We often have to hold off on promotions due to ribbons arriving late, and as a cadet, buying replacements can get expensive (especially if you order from ultrathins, which I and many others I know do.) Thank you for raising the point, Sir!

- - - - - - - - - - - -

On the same note when it comes to badges the same could be said for SMs. 

Could you clarify what you mean by this, sir?  I am unsure.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

One thing ES is not a core part of cadet programs.

Maybe not, if you want to go by the regulation definition, but the fact remains that cadets can and should play a big role, especially on ground teams... another one of our missions is ES, which should apply to cadets as well.  Furthermore, the core value of Volunteer Service (in my interpretation, anyway, correct me if I'm wrong please), as it refers to cadets, means more than preforming exterior volunteer service to CAP, also including, where appropriate, being part of our operational mission force.  Feel free to set me straight if I have misinterpreted.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

I suggest that on milestones, the predecessor ribbons be made "optional" but not eliminated. They represent well over five decades of history and have served us well. Great to see such rational and cogent arguments presented by a cadet, well done!

Thank you, Sir!  When you refer to making predecessor ribbons optional, do you mean modifying short stack so that milestones can be included, whilst retaining the full stack option?  If I read that wrong, please correct me.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

As others have mentioned, there is a mechanism for you to suggest these.

However, a few things:

- NRA Marksmanship Badge (Not really related to the CAP Mission, and also, the NRA is taking so much political heat right now and is also taking a pretty heavy political stance, and CAP is not supposed to associate politically.)


CAP's use of the NRA Marksmanship Badge is in no way associating CAP politically with the NRA.  So this is a non-factor.

I know that it is not intended to convey any political affiliation, sir, merely signifying that the cadet wearing it is proficient and accurate in the use of firearms (which is a good thing, but I might add that weapons/combat training for cadets is not a priority in CAP), however, I fear that it could be perceived  the wrong way.  Who knows which cadet's parents might be offended when their cadet asks them to sign the activity waver and/or comes home wearing the badge, just because said parent takes issue with the NRA and is offended that Civil Air Patrol is involved with the organization in any way, even if it is just in the form of an awarded badge.  It sounds crazy, but, crazier things have happened.  I understand that everyone may not agree, but in this day and age with our turbulent political climate, personally, I would avoid wearing wearing anything with the letters 'NRA' on it whilst trying to remain politically neutral.  I agree, it should be a non-factor.  Maybe I'm being overly cautious...

Quote
- Certain Specialty Track Badges (I'm referring to to the ones that are supposed to be issued to senior members who have held a operational duty position (Comms Badge, ES Badge) For some reason we give cadets a free pass to wear these even though they cannot meat the final requirement (serving in a senior member duty slot) That being said, I wouldn't mind so much if there were distinct cadet versions available for wear, without the final requirement to obtain a tech rating.  I just don't approve of cadets wearing badges that would otherwise require senior members to achieve a higher standard.  I'll point out that every other badge that CAP issues/wears that is available for cadets requires cadets to meet the exact same standard as our senior member counterparts.)

For cadets to earn the specialty track badges (ES, IT, Com, and History are the only ones allowed to be earned by cadets), all the requirements are the same as for Senior Members as with Cadets.  There is, of course, the obvious exceptions in that Cadets cannot earn Level 1.  So again, a non-factor.  If Cadets are earning the badge without performing all the same work, then that Squadron Commander is in the wrong. 

I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you here, sir.  Yes, the training requirements are the same.  But the badge should represent the rating and the operational responsibilities to go along with that, which I will note not are not expected of cadets.  For example, the duties and responsibilities of an ES Tech, according to CAPP 70-3:

Quote
CAPP 70-3, Updated MAR 5 2018
Position Description -- ES Specialty Track

In general, a Technician level Emergency Services Officer should be able to:

1.  Develop a professional relationship with agencies responsible for search,
domestic emergencies, and civil defense;
2.  Develop and maintain members that can perform the requirements of emergency
service mission;
3.  Develop unit training programs to ensure that highly qualified ES personnel are
available for search
and rescue, disaster relief missions, etc.
4.  Implement plans and standard operating procedures to support the Wing’s
emergency services program;
5.  In cooperation with Logistics and Communications, maintain records to
determine the status of resources (personnel, vehicles, aircraft, radios, and other
emergency equipment) available for ES missions;
6.  Work with their Commander and with other unit staff functions (Communications,
Operations, Maintenance, Logistics, et cetera) to accomplish the administrative
and maintenance functions essential for ES resources.

I fail to see when it would be appropriate for a cadet, not a senior member who actually holds the tech rating, to preform duties 1, 4, and 5.  Such responsibilities should be left to the adult leader member.
The other duties are preformed under direct supervision from a SM ES Officer.  Such responsibilities should be left to the adult leader member.

Since cadets do not preform all of these duties, and none without supervision, and are not expected to, I honestly do not find it appropriate for them to wear the ES Tech badge.  The same can be said for the other Tech badges that are currently available to cadets.  In my opinion, if you do not officially have the tech rating, and all of the responsibility that comes along with it, you should not wear the badge.  As I mentioned above, there are no other badges, with these odd exceptions, that allow cadets to earn them without the full responsibility and qualification that comes along with them.  I'd have no problem if cadets could earn distinctive cadet versions of these badges that go along with cadet level duty positions, provided that they do not carry the same meaning as badges worn by actual technicians who are expected to preform the duties that cadets are not.  This, however, is just my opinion, and I know many disagree, and I respect that.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

I suggest that on milestones, the predecessor ribbons be made "optional" but not eliminated. They represent well over five decades of history and have served us well. Great to see such rational and cogent arguments presented by a cadet, well done!

Not the first time this idea has come up. We did this in about 1970, it didn't last long due to the large numbers of complaints.

I'd be interested to know exactly why all of the complaints arose, sir? Mostly cadets complaining about having a small ribbon rack?

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Once again, thank you to everyone who replied!  I look forward to further discussion and debate.

Very respectfully,

C/2lt Starbird

« Last Edit: April 08, 2018, 03:57:34 PM by SarDragon » Logged
Starbird
Member

Posts: 70
Unit: NER-NH-056

« Reply #9 on: April 08, 2018, 10:41:08 AM »

Remember that in the AF, a 2nd LT is about as new as an Airman Basic, so they won't have as many ribbons, they don't normally go from Enlisted up to LT like Cadets do.

Missed one!  Sorry, Sgt.

Yes, this is certainly true.  It still seems awkward that a cadet officer can walk around with potentially as many ribbons as a 4 star general.
Logged
Geber
Member

Posts: 68
Unit: NER-VT-009

« Reply #10 on: April 08, 2018, 12:14:52 PM »

Yes, this is certainly true.  It still seems awkward that a cadet officer can walk around with potentially as many ribbons as a 4 star general.

That's true, but not unusual.  Cadets at service academies get lots of ranks and insignia that seem to the uninitiated civilian like the ranks and insignia of actual military NCOs and officers. When young folks graduate from high school, those who did well academically get all kinds of decorations for their robes. But all of those disappear after graduation.
Logged
Phil Hirons, Jr.
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 801
Unit: NER-RI-033

« Reply #11 on: April 08, 2018, 12:16:03 PM »

As others have mentioned, there is a mechanism for you to suggest these.

However, a few things:

- NRA Marksmanship Badge (Not really related to the CAP Mission, and also, the NRA is taking so much political heat right now and is also taking a pretty heavy political stance, and CAP is not supposed to associate politically.)


CAP's use of the NRA Marksmanship Badge is in no way associating CAP politically with the NRA.  So this is a non-factor.

I know that it is not intended to convey any political affiliation, sir, merely signifying that the cadet wearing it is proficient and accurate in the use of firearms (which is a good thing, but I might add that weapons/combat training for cadets is not a priority in CAP), however, I fear that it could be perceived  the wrong way.  Who knows which cadet's parents might be offended when their cadet asks them to sign the activity waver and/or comes home wearing the badge, just because said parent takes issue with the NRA and is offended that Civil Air Patrol is involved with the organization in any way, even if it is just in the form of an awarded badge.  It sounds crazy, but, crazier things have happened.  I understand that everyone may not agree, but in this day and age with our turbulent political climate, personally, I would avoid wearing wearing anything with the letters 'NRA' on it whilst trying to remain politically neutral.  I agree, it should be a non-factor.  Maybe I'm being overly cautious...

Full Disclosure: I am RI Wing's Cadet Firearms Training (CFT) Project Officer, a Benefactor Life NRA Member, NRA Instructor (Rifle, Pistol & Shotgun), NRA / USA Shooting Rifle Coach and run the Junior Rifle Program for the Smithfield (RI) Sportsman's' Club (SSC).

Not everyone is going to love or even like you no matter what you do. So, yes, I think you are being overly cautious.

Like a lot of things in the Cadet Program, communication with the parents for CFT is essential. The letter I send out for the application process details what the program entails, the credentials and experience of the people running the program including the the connection to the SSC program that has taught marksmanship to over 500 children since 2000.

CAP Regulations on this issue treat this as a High Adventure Activity (HAA) and impose requirements beyond that. NRA Instructors are the largest group of people authorized to run these programs.

The Winchester / NRA Marksmanship Qualification Program sets a series of goals that get progressively harder to obtain. 
No one gets an award for showing up. (You raise this point a few times.)

Creating medals for CAP only would be cost-prohibitive. (You mention cost savings in other areas)

All of this to remove 3 little letters from a medal a small number of cadets might wear. See the PDF for a picture.

Logged
Thor3785
Newbie

Posts: 3

« Reply #12 on: April 08, 2018, 12:16:59 PM »

Quote
- Certain Specialty Track Badges (I'm referring to to the ones that are supposed to be issued to senior members who have held a operational duty position (Comms Badge, ES Badge) For some reason we give cadets a free pass to wear these even though they cannot meat the final requirement (serving in a senior member duty slot) That being said, I wouldn't mind so much if there were distinct cadet versions available for wear, without the final requirement to obtain a tech rating.  I just don't approve of cadets wearing badges that would otherwise require senior members to achieve a higher standard.  I'll point out that every other badge that CAP issues/wears that is available for cadets requires cadets to meet the exact same standard as our senior member counterparts.)

For cadets to earn the specialty track badges (ES, IT, Com, and History are the only ones allowed to be earned by cadets), all the requirements are the same as for Senior Members as with Cadets.  There is, of course, the obvious exceptions in that Cadets cannot earn Level 1.  So again, a non-factor.  If Cadets are earning the badge without performing all the same work, then that Squadron Commander is in the wrong. 

I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you here, sir.  Yes, the training requirements are the same.  But the badge should represent the rating and the operational responsibilities to go along with that, which I will note not are not expected of cadets.  For example, the duties and responsibilities of an ES Tech, according to CAPP 70-3:

Quote
CAPP 70-3, Updated MAR 5 2018
Position Description -- ES Specialty Track

In general, a Technician level Emergency Services Officer should be able to:

1.  Develop a professional relationship with agencies responsible for search,
domestic emergencies, and civil defense;
2.  Develop and maintain members that can perform the requirements of emergency
service mission;
3.  Develop unit training programs to ensure that highly qualified ES personnel are
available for search
and rescue, disaster relief missions, etc.
4.  Implement plans and standard operating procedures to support the Wing’s
emergency services program;
5.  In cooperation with Logistics and Communications, maintain records to
determine the status of resources (personnel, vehicles, aircraft, radios, and other
emergency equipment) available for ES missions;
6.  Work with their Commander and with other unit staff functions (Communications,
Operations, Maintenance, Logistics, et cetera) to accomplish the administrative
and maintenance functions essential for ES resources.

I fail to see when it would be appropriate for a cadet, not a senior member who actually holds the tech rating, to preform duties 1, 4, and 5.  Such responsibilities should be left to the adult leader member.
The other duties are preformed under direct supervision from a SM ES Officer.  Such responsibilities should be left to the adult leader member.

Since cadets do not preform all of these duties, and none without supervision, and are not expected to, I honestly do not find it appropriate for them to wear the ES Tech badge.  The same can be said for the other Tech badges that are currently available to cadets.  In my opinion, if you do not officially have the tech rating, and all of the responsibility that comes along with it, you should not wear the badge.  As I mentioned above, there are no other badges, with these odd exceptions, that allow cadets to earn them without the full responsibility and qualification that comes along with them.  I'd have no problem if cadets could earn distinctive cadet versions of these badges that go along with cadet level duty positions, provided that they do not carry the same meaning as badges worn by actual technicians who are expected to preform the duties that cadets are not.  This, however, is just my opinion, and I know many disagree, and I respect that.


- - - - - - - - - - - -
While I can get behind most of your points, I would have to disagree with you on specialty tracks. I actually wrote a proposal on the NCAC to the command council a couple years ago to open all specialty tracks, barring certain ones like legal, to cadets. Why would you limit cadets? I don't see why cadets can't do 1, 4, 5. For almost all ratings, the duty position for the technician level is only an assistant anyway. So working with the primary person in the duty position supervising you to do #1 would be totally fine, but I can see cadets doing it themselves. Also, every SM has a supervisor too, so it's not just cadets who would have one. #4 can be as simple as teaching ES classes and setting a goal to get cadets GES if that's the wing's goal. #5 Well, every cadet should learn how to manage and track resources. In addition, we have had a cadet working with comms on the national comm team which would have more responsibilities than your average unit comms officer. I earned all 4 tracks and have held 6 duty positions at the wing level.

Tell me what responsibilities you don't think a cadet can do in the other 3 tracks already permitted because ES is probably going to be the one you most think cadets can't do out of the 4. The reason why I'm such a proponent of cadets earning specialty track is that it lets cadets get off the "old beaten road" of the cadet program and let cadets learn life skills and something that may interest them. In addition, our cadet to SM rates as abysmal (Ran the stats last night and in my wing in the past 8 years, only 13 cadets who were Mitchell or above has transferred over to SM) and I'm hoping if more cadets get a foot in the door of becoming a SM through specialty tracks, then they are more likely to stay.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2018, 12:29:27 PM by Thor3785 » Logged
Geber
Member

Posts: 68
Unit: NER-VT-009

« Reply #13 on: April 08, 2018, 12:36:44 PM »


CAPP 70-3, Updated MAR 5 2018
Position Description -- ES Specialty Track

In general, a Technician level Emergency Services Officer should be able to:

1.  Develop a professional relationship with agencies responsible for search,
domestic emergencies, and civil defense;
.
.
.
4.  Implement plans and standard operating procedures to support the Wing’s
emergency services program;
5.  In cooperation with Logistics and Communications, maintain records to
determine the status of resources (personnel, vehicles, aircraft, radios, and other
emergency equipment) available for ES missions;

At least one cadet in my squadron has satisfied 1 by being a volunteer firefighter. Other possibilities are being a member of Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service or Citizen Emergency Response Team.

Notice that 4 just says "implement", not create. Things such as maintaining a radio log, calling names on a contact list during an actual mission, or sending out emails to the squadron with meeting agenda that include emergency services topics would all qualify.

Number 5 could involve helping people check in upon arrival at a mission base, call out property tag numbers to a senior member who is conducting an inventory. or the like.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2018, 04:59:55 PM by Geber » Logged
abdsp51
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,518
Unit: Classified

« Reply #14 on: April 08, 2018, 01:51:00 PM »

Since you actually think before you post I'll throw you a bone. 

One SMs have just as many badges that can be worn as cadets, and quite a few want to wear all their mil stuff on their uniform. 

ES may be one of the missions for CAP but it is not the main mission nor is it a core tenet of CP.  If cadets want to participate fine let them.  But it should not be pushed and forced because it's someone's opinion or viewpoint.  Cadets can be more productive and good volunteers in other aspects.
Logged
J2H
Forum Regular

Posts: 193
Unit: MER-MD-031

« Reply #15 on: April 08, 2018, 01:59:55 PM »

I wear my military ribbons (where height allows) and sometimes, I feel like a General
Logged
SSgt Jeffrey Hughes, Squadron NCO
Glenn L. Martin Composite Squadron MD-031
#217169
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,299
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #16 on: April 08, 2018, 04:16:08 PM »

The last time an effort was made to reduce the allowable number of ribbons, it lasted about nine months. The uproar was swift and very vocal. Attitudes may have changed since 1971, but I don't think the idea will fly any higher now than it did back then.
Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
CAPLTC
Forum Regular

Posts: 130
Unit: MER

« Reply #17 on: April 08, 2018, 05:13:22 PM »

TL/DR.
In a real sense:
Who cares?
All cadet programs issue many many many many ribbons. JROTC, ROTC, service academies, etc. Ribbons for everything.
One time I merged my AFJROTC and CAP ribbon racks (as was allowed) and ended up with 50+ ribbons, just to see what it looked like. It looked pretty funny! :)
The last thing I am concerned with is cadets wearing too many ribbons. So wear your ribbons and neck down the other stuff.
Everyone knows you're a cadet just by looking at your baby face and weird-looking rank insignia.
Not all cadets get to Mitchell, and what? 5% get to Earhart?
So for come cadets those first 3 ribbons are a BIG deal and they're very proud of them.

The USAF issued more silver stars and more bronze stars in the Iraq Campaign than the Army did ... should we be alarmed?

CAP follows the USAF lead and the USAF loves to hang stuff on uniforms.
Logged
"Find the enemy that wants to end this experiment (in American democracy) and kill every one of them until they’re so sick of the killing that they leave us and our freedoms intact." -- SECDEF Mattis
J2H
Forum Regular

Posts: 193
Unit: MER-MD-031

« Reply #18 on: April 08, 2018, 06:15:14 PM »

Amen to that!  I got SO many in 9 yrs as a cop
Logged
SSgt Jeffrey Hughes, Squadron NCO
Glenn L. Martin Composite Squadron MD-031
#217169
Starbird
Member

Posts: 70
Unit: NER-NH-056

« Reply #19 on: April 08, 2018, 08:14:35 PM »

Since you actually think before you post I'll throw you a bone. 


I'll try to take that as a compliment :P

Quote


One SMs have just as many badges that can be worn as cadets, and quite a few want to wear all their mil stuff on their uniform.


You raise a fair point.

Quote

ES may be one of the missions for CAP but it is not the main mission nor is it a core tenet of CP.  If cadets want to participate fine let them.  But it should not be pushed and forced because it's someone's opinion or viewpoint.  Cadets can be more productive and good volunteers in other aspects.


This is certainly true.  However, I suspect the average search line would be short a few without them! Lol.  Sorry if I over stressed that point.


TL/DR.
In a real sense:
Who cares?
All cadet programs issue many many many many ribbons. JROTC, ROTC, service academies, etc. Ribbons for everything.
One time I merged my AFJROTC and CAP ribbon racks (as was allowed) and ended up with 50+ ribbons, just to see what it looked like. It looked pretty funny! :)
The last thing I am concerned with is cadets wearing too many ribbons. So wear your ribbons and neck down the other stuff.
Everyone knows you're a cadet just by looking at your baby face and weird-looking rank insignia.
Not all cadets get to Mitchell, and what? 5% get to Earhart?
So for come cadets those first 3 ribbons are a BIG deal and they're very proud of them.

The USAF issued more silver stars and more bronze stars in the Iraq Campaign than the Army did ... should we be alarmed?

CAP follows the USAF lead and the USAF loves to hang stuff on uniforms.

That viewpoint works for some, such as yourself, and I have full respect for that! :)  As I said in my OP post, I realize it is very unlikely to change, but nonetheless, I still maintain we could do away with quite a few of them.

Quote
- Certain Specialty Track Badges (I'm referring to to the ones that are supposed to be issued to senior members who have held a operational duty position (Comms Badge, ES Badge) For some reason we give cadets a free pass to wear these even though they cannot meat the final requirement (serving in a senior member duty slot) That being said, I wouldn't mind so much if there were distinct cadet versions available for wear, without the final requirement to obtain a tech rating.  I just don't approve of cadets wearing badges that would otherwise require senior members to achieve a higher standard.  I'll point out that every other badge that CAP issues/wears that is available for cadets requires cadets to meet the exact same standard as our senior member counterparts.)

For cadets to earn the specialty track badges (ES, IT, Com, and History are the only ones allowed to be earned by cadets), all the requirements are the same as for Senior Members as with Cadets.  There is, of course, the obvious exceptions in that Cadets cannot earn Level 1.  So again, a non-factor.  If Cadets are earning the badge without performing all the same work, then that Squadron Commander is in the wrong. 

I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you here, sir.  Yes, the training requirements are the same.  But the badge should represent the rating and the operational responsibilities to go along with that, which I will note not are not expected of cadets.  For example, the duties and responsibilities of an ES Tech, according to CAPP 70-3:

Quote
CAPP 70-3, Updated MAR 5 2018
Position Description -- ES Specialty Track

In general, a Technician level Emergency Services Officer should be able to:

1.  Develop a professional relationship with agencies responsible for search,
domestic emergencies, and civil defense;
2.  Develop and maintain members that can perform the requirements of emergency
service mission;
3.  Develop unit training programs to ensure that highly qualified ES personnel are
available for search
and rescue, disaster relief missions, etc.
4.  Implement plans and standard operating procedures to support the Wing’s
emergency services program;
5.  In cooperation with Logistics and Communications, maintain records to
determine the status of resources (personnel, vehicles, aircraft, radios, and other
emergency equipment) available for ES missions;
6.  Work with their Commander and with other unit staff functions (Communications,
Operations, Maintenance, Logistics, et cetera) to accomplish the administrative
and maintenance functions essential for ES resources.

I fail to see when it would be appropriate for a cadet, not a senior member who actually holds the tech rating, to preform duties 1, 4, and 5.  Such responsibilities should be left to the adult leader member.
The other duties are preformed under direct supervision from a SM ES Officer.  Such responsibilities should be left to the adult leader member.

Since cadets do not preform all of these duties, and none without supervision, and are not expected to, I honestly do not find it appropriate for them to wear the ES Tech badge.  The same can be said for the other Tech badges that are currently available to cadets.  In my opinion, if you do not officially have the tech rating, and all of the responsibility that comes along with it, you should not wear the badge.  As I mentioned above, there are no other badges, with these odd exceptions, that allow cadets to earn them without the full responsibility and qualification that comes along with them.  I'd have no problem if cadets could earn distinctive cadet versions of these badges that go along with cadet level duty positions, provided that they do not carry the same meaning as badges worn by actual technicians who are expected to preform the duties that cadets are not.  This, however, is just my opinion, and I know many disagree, and I respect that.


- - - - - - - - - - - -
While I can get behind most of your points, I would have to disagree with you on specialty tracks. I actually wrote a proposal on the NCAC to the command council a couple years ago to open all specialty tracks, barring certain ones like legal, to cadets. Why would you limit cadets? I don't see why cadets can't do 1, 4, 5. For almost all ratings, the duty position for the technician level is only an assistant anyway. So working with the primary person in the duty position supervising you to do #1 would be totally fine, but I can see cadets doing it themselves. Also, every SM has a supervisor too, so it's not just cadets who would have one. #4 can be as simple as teaching ES classes and setting a goal to get cadets GES if that's the wing's goal. #5 Well, every cadet should learn how to manage and track resources. In addition, we have had a cadet working with comms on the national comm team which would have more responsibilities than your average unit comms officer. I earned all 4 tracks and have held 6 duty positions at the wing level.

Tell me what responsibilities you don't think a cadet can do in the other 3 tracks already permitted because ES is probably going to be the one you most think cadets can't do out of the 4. The reason why I'm such a proponent of cadets earning specialty track is that it lets cadets get off the "old beaten road" of the cadet program and let cadets learn life skills and something that may interest them. In addition, our cadet to SM rates as abysmal (Ran the stats last night and in my wing in the past 8 years, only 13 cadets who were Mitchell or above has transferred over to SM) and I'm hoping if more cadets get a foot in the door of becoming a SM through specialty tracks, then they are more likely to stay.

Maybe I've met a few too many unreliable cadets during my time in CAP.  But hey, for the ones who are mature enough, and have proven themselves dependable, I'd be fine with giving it a shot :) (Maybe a lower age requirement would be added, though, I'd say 16 or 17 plus)

As others have mentioned, there is a mechanism for you to suggest these.

However, a few things:

- NRA Marksmanship Badge (Not really related to the CAP Mission, and also, the NRA is taking so much political heat right now and is also taking a pretty heavy political stance, and CAP is not supposed to associate politically.)


CAP's use of the NRA Marksmanship Badge is in no way associating CAP politically with the NRA.  So this is a non-factor.

I know that it is not intended to convey any political affiliation, sir, merely signifying that the cadet wearing it is proficient and accurate in the use of firearms (which is a good thing, but I might add that weapons/combat training for cadets is not a priority in CAP), however, I fear that it could be perceived  the wrong way.  Who knows which cadet's parents might be offended when their cadet asks them to sign the activity waver and/or comes home wearing the badge, just because said parent takes issue with the NRA and is offended that Civil Air Patrol is involved with the organization in any way, even if it is just in the form of an awarded badge.  It sounds crazy, but, crazier things have happened.  I understand that everyone may not agree, but in this day and age with our turbulent political climate, personally, I would avoid wearing wearing anything with the letters 'NRA' on it whilst trying to remain politically neutral.  I agree, it should be a non-factor.  Maybe I'm being overly cautious...


Full Disclosure: I am RI Wing's Cadet Firearms Training (CFT) Project Officer, a Benefactor Life NRA Member, NRA Instructor (Rifle, Pistol & Shotgun), NRA / USA Shooting Rifle Coach and run the Junior Rifle Program for the Smithfield (RI) Sportsman's' Club (SSC).

Not everyone is going to love or even like you no matter what you do. So, yes, I think you are being overly cautious.

Like a lot of things in the Cadet Program, communication with the parents for CFT is essential. The letter I send out for the application process details what the program entails, the credentials and experience of the people running the program including the the connection to the SSC program that has taught marksmanship to over 500 children since 2000.

CAP Regulations on this issue treat this as a High Adventure Activity (HAA) and impose requirements beyond that. NRA Instructors are the largest group of people authorized to run these programs.

The Winchester / NRA Marksmanship Qualification Program sets a series of goals that get progressively harder to obtain. 
No one gets an award for showing up. (You raise this point a few times.)

Creating medals for CAP only would be cost-prohibitive. (You mention cost savings in other areas)

All of this to remove 3 little letters from a medal a small number of cadets might wear. See the PDF for a picture.



For the record, I personally have no issues with the NRA.  And, under further consideration.... on this point I'll admit I was probably making mountains out of molehills.  Also, I really am not very familiar with the CFT program, having never gone through it, so I'll defer to your expertise :-)

Yes, this is certainly true.  It still seems awkward that a cadet officer can walk around with potentially as many ribbons as a 4 star general.

That's true, but not unusual.  Cadets at service academies get lots of ranks and insignia that seem to the uninitiated civilian like the ranks and insignia of actual military NCOs and officers. When young folks graduate from high school, those who did well academically get all kinds of decorations for their robes. But all of those disappear after graduation.

Fair enough.  I still can't bring myself to appreciate the look, but it is what it is.

The last time an effort was made to reduce the allowable number of ribbons, it lasted about nine months. The uproar was swift and very vocal. Attitudes may have changed since 1971, but I don't think the idea will fly any higher now than it did back then.

I'm sorry to hear it.  I wish that that had succeeded.  If there is ever enough support, maybe it will go through again, permanently, but I hold no high hopes.

I wear my military ribbons (where height allows) and sometimes, I feel like a General

Amen to that!  I got SO many in 9 yrs as a cop

Lolz.

Anyway, I think I got back to everyone this time.  If I missed your post, let me know and I'll respond to it.  I'll get some more opinions from the cadets at my squadron on ribbons, and on the off chance I get support, I'll forward it to my CAC Rep (If we ever appoint one!  I think its been almost a year now since we've had one, either that or the new one isn't consulting with the cadets at squadron  ??? )  Upon reading your arguments, and some further consideration, I'm going to let my original ideas on badge reform go.  Y'all have raised some convincing points defending them, and it badges now to be a non-issue.  Funny what some rethinking can do.  I still maintain my points on ribbons, though  >:D  ;D

Also, sorry for causing drama!  We tend to get pretty heated discussing uniforms, haha.  8)

All the best,

C/ 2lt Starbird
Logged
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,062

« Reply #20 on: April 08, 2018, 08:18:12 PM »

CAP follows the USAF lead and the USAF loves to hang stuff on uniforms.

The Air Force has nothing on the Army in it's love of hanging a lot of stuff on their uniforms.
Logged
Thor3785
Newbie

Posts: 3

« Reply #21 on: April 08, 2018, 08:24:28 PM »

Maybe I've met a few too many unreliable cadets during my time in CAP.  But hey, for the ones who are mature enough, and have proven themselves dependable, I'd be fine with giving it a shot :) (Maybe a lower age requirement would be added, though, I'd say 16 or 17 plus)

Yeah, I thought about adding an age requirement on my proposal but realized that I shouldn't limit young, mature cadets. Their chain of command should be the gatekeepers anyway. There are a lot of great experiences I have had that people have proposed age restrictions on. Controversial and a different topic, but I got my Eaker when I was 15. People have proposed age restrictions on milestones. Again, if a cadet is promoting past his knowledge/maturity, then his/her CDC shouldn't let them promote.
Logged
Starbird
Member

Posts: 70
Unit: NER-NH-056

« Reply #22 on: April 08, 2018, 08:34:37 PM »

Maybe I've met a few too many unreliable cadets during my time in CAP.  But hey, for the ones who are mature enough, and have proven themselves dependable, I'd be fine with giving it a shot :) (Maybe a lower age requirement would be added, though, I'd say 16 or 17 plus)

Yeah, I thought about adding an age requirement on my proposal but realized that I shouldn't limit young, mature cadets. Their chain of command should be the gatekeepers anyway. There are a lot of great experiences I have had that people have proposed age restrictions on. Controversial and a different topic, but I got my Eaker when I was 15. People have proposed age restrictions on milestones. Again, if a cadet is promoting past his knowledge/maturity, then his/her CDC shouldn't let them promote.

That's true, said commander/CDC shouldn't let them promote.  But its not always the case, unfortunately, I've seen it happen a few times.  On the other note,  prehaps age limit --or-- special permission approved by the unit/group and wing commander for those cadets under the age limit?  Just to put a two layer protection on it.  I don't know, its a hard call.

Edit:  For clarification.
Logged
kwe1009
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 889

« Reply #23 on: April 08, 2018, 09:08:33 PM »

From what I have seen most squadrons promote people (cadets and SM) when the minimum requirements are met with no regard to if the person has the maturity, skill, leadership potential, etc to succeed at the next higher grade.
Logged
CAP9907
Member

Posts: 54
Unit: NER-000

« Reply #24 on: April 08, 2018, 09:33:24 PM »

Can you quantify those last criteria or is it entirely subjective?

From what I have seen most squadrons promote people (cadets and SM) when the minimum requirements are met with no regard to if the person has the maturity, skill, leadership potential, etc to succeed at the next higher grade.
Logged
16 yrs of service
Vegas1972
Member

Posts: 52
Unit: PCR-NV

« Reply #25 on: April 08, 2018, 09:44:19 PM »

On a side note, you might have a real good start on an advocacy paper for an SDA if you haven’t already done that one. 
Logged
"Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid.", Sgt. John M. Stryker.
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,619

« Reply #26 on: April 09, 2018, 03:00:03 AM »

From what I have seen most squadrons promote people (cadets and SM) when the minimum requirements are met with no regard to if the person has the maturity, skill, leadership potential, etc to succeed at the next higher grade.
If they are meeting the "minimums" then they are ready for promotion.  Maturity, skill, leadership potential, etc to succeed at the next higher level are all part of the minimums.

Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,619

« Reply #27 on: April 09, 2018, 03:11:10 AM »

Remember that in the AF, a 2nd LT is about as new as an Airman Basic, so they won't have as many ribbons, they don't normally go from Enlisted up to LT like Cadets do.

Missed one!  Sorry, Sgt.

Yes, this is certainly true.  It still seems awkward that a cadet officer can walk around with potentially as many ribbons as a 4 star general.

It is not the count....but what they are that matters.

While I agree with the original poster's sentiment...we could trim down the ribbons a bit.   At the end of the day they are just a resume of your CAP life and nothing else.   Comparing CAP members with AD service members.....why we should just as well as compare ourselves to California Highway Patrolmen or NYPD or the boy scouts....or any other organization that uses bling to denote BTDT/RANK/HONORS or what not.   

As someone pointed out.....at high school and university graduation the graduates have all sorts of cords, sashes and doo-dads on the gown to denote activities, honors and such.   Might as well as compare them to CAP.
Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
Starbird
Member

Posts: 70
Unit: NER-NH-056

« Reply #28 on: April 09, 2018, 09:34:38 AM »

Remember that in the AF, a 2nd LT is about as new as an Airman Basic, so they won't have as many ribbons, they don't normally go from Enlisted up to LT like Cadets do.

Missed one!  Sorry, Sgt.

Yes, this is certainly true.  It still seems awkward that a cadet officer can walk around with potentially as many ribbons as a 4 star general.

It is not the count....but what they are that matters.

While I agree with the original poster's sentiment...we could trim down the ribbons a bit.   At the end of the day they are just a resume of your CAP life and nothing else.   Comparing CAP members with AD service members.....why we should just as well as compare ourselves to California Highway Patrolmen or NYPD or the boy scouts....or any other organization that uses bling to denote BTDT/RANK/HONORS or what not.   

As someone pointed out.....at high school and university graduation the graduates have all sorts of cords, sashes and doo-dads on the gown to denote activities, honors and such.   Might as well as compare them to CAP.


Thank you for the support, Sgt.!  Yes, my main argument was that most of the promotion ribbons have no real meaning, since promotions come with stripes/circles/diamonds anyway (except curry and milestones) and only serve to inflate the size of cadet's ribbon racks (and sometimes, unfortunately, ego).  The argument of quantity and look on the uniform was intended to be secondary.
Logged
kwe1009
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 889

« Reply #29 on: April 09, 2018, 09:40:41 AM »

From what I have seen most squadrons promote people (cadets and SM) when the minimum requirements are met with no regard to if the person has the maturity, skill, leadership potential, etc to succeed at the next higher grade.
If they are meeting the "minimums" then they are ready for promotion.  Maturity, skill, leadership potential, etc to succeed at the next higher level are all part of the minimums.

While I agree with your comment that is not what I see in practice.  The minimums that I was referring to are just the check boxes like CPFT and testing. 

Can you quantify those last criteria or is it entirely subjective?

It is very difficult to quantify those things.  A good rule of thumb would be for example, if a cadet is struggling to be a flight sergeant then they probably are not ready to be a flight commander.
Logged
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,619

« Reply #30 on: April 09, 2018, 09:44:09 AM »

From what I have seen most squadrons promote people (cadets and SM) when the minimum requirements are met with no regard to if the person has the maturity, skill, leadership potential, etc to succeed at the next higher grade.
If they are meeting the "minimums" then they are ready for promotion.  Maturity, skill, leadership potential, etc to succeed at the next higher level are all part of the minimums.

While I agree with your comment that is not what I see in practice.  The minimums that I was referring to are just the check boxes like CPFT and testing. 

Can you quantify those last criteria or is it entirely subjective?

It is very difficult to quantify those things.  A good rule of thumb would be for example, if a cadet is struggling to be a flight sergeant then they probably are not ready to be a flight commander.
If you know of commanders who are cutting corners....then it is your duty to confront him/her and/or report them to next higher commander.
Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
Starbird
Member

Posts: 70
Unit: NER-NH-056

« Reply #31 on: April 09, 2018, 09:55:52 AM »

From what I have seen most squadrons promote people (cadets and SM) when the minimum requirements are met with no regard to if the person has the maturity, skill, leadership potential, etc to succeed at the next higher grade.
If they are meeting the "minimums" then they are ready for promotion.  Maturity, skill, leadership potential, etc to succeed at the next higher level are all part of the minimums.

While I agree with your comment that is not what I see in practice.  The minimums that I was referring to are just the check boxes like CPFT and testing. 

Can you quantify those last criteria or is it entirely subjective?

It is very difficult to quantify those things.  A good rule of thumb would be for example, if a cadet is struggling to be a flight sergeant then they probably are not ready to be a flight commander.
If you know of commanders who are cutting corners....then it is your duty to confront him/her and/or report them to next higher commander.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find a cadet who would be comfortable and confident enough confronting and/or in a very serious situation of mismanagement, reporting their unit commander to a group/wing commander or inspector general's office, if such corners were being cut.  Senior members might feel more comfortable executing that duty, and I'm assuming that you were referring to them, not cadets, but correct me if I'm wrong.

C/2lt Starbird
Logged
LSThiker
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,804
Unit: Earth

« Reply #32 on: April 09, 2018, 10:03:29 AM »

Before, I start this, I did want to point out that C/2lt, nor C/2LT is the correct abbreviation.  It should be C/2d Lt (without a period).


I know that it is not intended to convey any political affiliation, sir, merely signifying that the cadet wearing it is proficient and accurate in the use of firearms (which is a good thing, but I might add that weapons/combat training for cadets is not a priority in CAP),

The NRA training or any firearms activities are not priorities in the cadet program.  Which is why these activities are optional.  Many squadrons do not participate in either of these.  In addition, many encampments do not either.  Of course, there are some squadrons and encampments that do, but that does not make it a priority.  Just a fun optional activity. 


Quote
however, I fear that it could be perceived  the wrong way.  Who knows which cadet's parents might be offended when their cadet asks them to sign the activity waver and/or comes home wearing the badge, just because said parent takes issue with the NRA and is offended that Civil Air Patrol is involved with the organization in any way, even if it is just in the form of an awarded badge.  It sounds crazy, but, crazier things have happened.  I understand that everyone may not agree, but in this day and age with our turbulent political climate, personally, I would avoid wearing wearing anything with the letters 'NRA' on it whilst trying to remain politically neutral.  I agree, it should be a non-factor.  Maybe I'm being overly cautious...

You are most definitely being overly cautious.  If the parents are offended by the NRA activity or firearms training, in general, then so be it.  They have a few options.  The best of which is communication.  Both the Squadron and the parents should be communicating.  Something I did a lot of when organizing Firearms training for cadets as a Squadron Commander.  It cleared up a lot from the parents.  Of course, that does not mean that if the parents do not like it, then the squadron should not do it and vice versa.  Rather, it means that misconceptions should be cleared up.  If the parents are still "offended" by it, then they can either deny their child the ability to go or withdraw their child from the cadet program.  It is up to them.  But because a parent "might be offended" is a non-factor, in this case.  Should CAP cut their AmazonSmile because Amazon lobbys in Washington and that might offend a parent?  Or perhaps we should pull all CAP Facebook pages over the data misuse "#deletefacebook"?  These are all non-factors as they do not affiliate CAP politically to any of the company's lobbying or misuse practices.  And as full disclosure, I do not like the current form of the NRA, but I am a proud firearms user and owner.

https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/AmazonSmile_7673EC8F6DA2D.pdf
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/10/23/amazon-facebook-and-google-beef-up-lobbying-spending/?utm_term=.3c4b34c02e74
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-amazon-lobbying/
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/facebook-data-harvesting-scandal-widens-87-million-people-n862771


Quote
I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you here, sir.  Yes, the training requirements are the same. 

And realistically that is all that matters in this case.

Quote
But the badge should represent the rating and the operational responsibilities to go along with that, which I will note not are not expected of cadets. 

Fun fact, the USAF and the USA use the same badge to mean two different things.  The Parachutist badge, in the Army, means Airborne qualified, while the Parachutist badge in the USAF can mean either Airborne qualified or USAFA Skydive Free Fall school.  While I like to raz the Airman with the USAFA program, it is what it is and life moves forward.  In the end, I was Airborne qualified and he/she was not.

Also, while the Officer and Enlisted earn the same specialty badges, that does not mean their responsibilities and/or authorities are the same.  The officer has a different job from the enlisted, yet they earn the same badge.  Of course, there are some exceptions (pilot vs aircrew wings; missile badges, medical), but for most specialties (meteorology, history, etc) the badges are the same.

Quote
I fail to see when it would be appropriate for a cadet, not a senior member who actually holds the tech rating, to preform duties 1, 4, and 5.  Such responsibilities should be left to the adult leader member.
The other duties are preformed under direct supervision from a SM ES Officer.  Such responsibilities should be left to the adult leader member.

Since cadets do not preform all of these duties, and none without supervision, and are not expected to, I honestly do not find it appropriate for them to wear the ES Tech badge. 

The badges do not mean that the cadet should be doing these things unsupervised.  Rather the ES badge represents that the cadet has the ability to perform these items.  Of course, even a SM ES Officer will not be performing these duties unsupervised.  They too answer to the Squadron Commander and to Wing Commander, and by virtue of extension the Wing ES Officer.  Put Group in there if applicable. 

So, if the cadet is unable to perform such duties unsupervised, even if he/she will not actually be performing duties unsupervised, then that cadet should not earn the ES badge.

In regards to cadets performing duties 1, 4, and 5--yes, cadets should be performing these duties as an assistant to the ES Officer.  In #1, there is nothing that states that cadets cannot go with the ES Officer to develop a professional relationship with agencies.  A new SM working on his/her ES tech also needs to learn as well.  As such, they too will not be going without supervision to build new relationships with other agencies.  So, I do not see any issue with cadets performing this. 

As far as number 4, they are only implementing Wing's plan, not developing it.  So no issue with cadets performing this.  There are some duties that cadets can easily perform and some duties that need some supervision.  If that is the case, then the SM ES Officer will assist, as they would assist with a new SM learning the ES track.

As far as number 5--why cannot cadets maintain records with the help of the logistics and/or communications officer?

Interestingly, I performed essentially all of these duties when I was a cadet and working on the ES badge.  When I was working on the Communications badge, I also performed the same duties as the SM Comm Officer with his supervision.  Granted, I did not have any of the same authority, but had plenty of responsibility.  So I do not see any issue with cadets earning the specialty track badges.

Quote
As I mentioned above, there are no other badges, with these odd exceptions, that allow cadets to earn them without the full responsibility and qualification that comes along with them.

Ground Team.  Just because a cadet has earned the GT Badge does not mean they have full responsibility and qualification that comes with the badge.  They are still supervised by a GTL and by a SM (whom may or may not be GTL qualified).  Even if the SM is not a GTL, the SM is still responsible for that Ground Team.  Cadet ground teams with a cadet GTL cannot be dispatched without a SM to supervise.  Therefore, using your logic, cadets should not earn the GT badge either. 
« Last Edit: April 09, 2018, 10:15:23 AM by LSThiker » Logged
Nor'easter
Seasoned Member

Posts: 393

« Reply #33 on: April 09, 2018, 10:15:10 AM »

C/2d Lt Starbird,

I echo much of your sentiment and, like NIN, admire your points and the work that went into this post. Currently, NH-056 has no representatives to the Cadet Advisory Council (CAC), but an enthusiastic and well-read cadet like yourself would be a great asset to our team! To help make a difference and spearhead the improvements you want to see in our Cadet Program, I'd highly encourage you to talk to your leadership about the opportunity to be one of your unit's representatives to the CAC.

Feel free to private message me if you have any questions.

-Nor'easter, NHWG CAC Senior Advisor
Logged
With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right...
Starbird
Member

Posts: 70
Unit: NER-NH-056

« Reply #34 on: April 09, 2018, 11:57:18 AM »

Before, I start this, I did want to point out that C/2lt, nor C/2LT is the correct abbreviation.  It should be C/2d Lt (without a period).

Awkward... goes to show how long I've been a cadet officer.... although I should have known all the abbreviations, anyway.  Thank you for setting me straight.

Quote
I know that it is not intended to convey any political affiliation, sir, merely signifying that the cadet wearing it is proficient and accurate in the use of firearms (which is a good thing, but I might add that weapons/combat training for cadets is not a priority in CAP),

The NRA training or any firearms activities are not priorities in the cadet program.  Which is why these activities are optional.  Many squadrons do not participate in either of these.  In addition, many encampments do not either.  Of course, there are some squadrons and encampments that do, but that does not make it a priority.  Just a fun optional activity. 


Quote
however, I fear that it could be perceived  the wrong way.  Who knows which cadet's parents might be offended when their cadet asks them to sign the activity waver and/or comes home wearing the badge, just because said parent takes issue with the NRA and is offended that Civil Air Patrol is involved with the organization in any way, even if it is just in the form of an awarded badge.  It sounds crazy, but, crazier things have happened.  I understand that everyone may not agree, but in this day and age with our turbulent political climate, personally, I would avoid wearing anything with the letters 'NRA' on it whilst trying to remain politically neutral.  I agree, it should be a non-factor.  Maybe I'm being overly cautious...

You are most definitely being overly cautious.  If the parents are offended by the NRA activity or firearms training, in general, then so be it.  They have a few options.  The best of which is communication.  Both the Squadron and the parents should be communicating.  Something I did a lot of when organizing Firearms training for cadets as a Squadron Commander.  It cleared up a lot from the parents.  Of course, that does not mean that if the parents do not like it, then the squadron should not do it and vice versa.  Rather, it means that misconceptions should be cleared up.  If the parents are still "offended" by it, then they can either deny their child the ability to go or withdraw their child from the cadet program.  It is up to them.  But because a parent "might be offended" is a non-factor, in this case.  Should CAP cut their AmazonSmile because Amazon lobbys in Washington and that might offend a parent?  Or perhaps we should pull all CAP Facebook pages over the data misuse "#deletefacebook"?  These are all non-factors as they do not affiliate CAP politically to any of the company's lobbying or misuse practices.  And as full disclosure, I do not like the current form of the NRA, but I am a proud firearms user and owner.

https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/AmazonSmile_7673EC8F6DA2D.pdf
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/10/23/amazon-facebook-and-google-beef-up-lobbying-spending/?utm_term=.3c4b34c02e74
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-amazon-lobbying/
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/facebook-data-harvesting-scandal-widens-87-million-people-n862771

Yeah, you are right here.  I think in a previous post I mentioned that I'd backed away from my original stance.

Quote
Quote
I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you here, sir.  Yes, the training requirements are the same. 

And realistically that is all that matters in this case.

Quote
But the badge should represent the rating and the operational responsibilities to go along with that, which I will note are not expected of cadets. 

Fun fact, the USAF and the USA use the same badge to mean two different things.  The Parachutist badge, in the Army, means Airborne qualified, while the Parachutist badge in the USAF can mean either Airborne qualified or USAFA Skydive Free Fall school.  While I like to raz the Airman with the USAFA program, it is what it is and life moves forward.  In the end, I was Airborne qualified and he/she was not.



Interesting!  Thanks for informing me.  I've backed away from the specialty track badge stance that I had, too.  I'd be fine with cadets who are old enough and have demonstrated responsibility and reliability to serve in specialty tracks, my only concern is the number of unreliable cadets that there are out there (or that I have met, anyway).  There needs to be a hard filter.

Quote

Also, while the Officer and Enlisted earn the same specialty badges, that does not mean their responsibilities and/or authorities are the same.  The officer has a different job from the enlisted, yet they earn the same badge.  Of course, there are some exceptions (pilot vs aircrew wings; missile badges, medical), but for most specialties (meteorology, history, etc) the badges are the same.


I note that USAF air specialty badges have a shield wing center, whilst enlisted wear wings with a circular center (which I think is covered under the list of exceptions you noted).  But yes,  you certainly make a great point here!  I will admit that I did not know as much about quals badges as I thought I did before I make this post.  Good learning experience!

Quote
   

Quote
I fail to see when it would be appropriate for a cadet, not a senior member who actually holds the tech rating, to preform duties 1, 4, and 5.  Such responsibilities should be left to the adult leader member.
The other duties are preformed under direct supervision from a SM ES Officer.  Such responsibilities should be left to the adult leader member.

Since cadets do not preform all of these duties, and none without supervision, and are not expected to, I honestly do not find it appropriate for them to wear the ES Tech badge. 

The badges do not mean that the cadet should be doing these things unsupervised.  Rather the ES badge represents that the cadet has the ability to perform these items.  Of course, even a SM ES Officer will not be performing these duties unsupervised.  They too answer to the Squadron Commander and to Wing Commander, and by virtue of extension the Wing ES Officer.  Put Group in there if applicable. 

So, if the cadet is unable to perform such duties unsupervised, even if he/she will not actually be performing duties unsupervised, then that cadet should not earn the ES badge.

In regards to cadets performing duties 1, 4, and 5--yes, cadets should be performing these duties as an assistant to the ES Officer.  In #1, there is nothing that states that cadets cannot go with the ES Officer to develop a professional relationship with agencies.  A new SM working on his/her ES tech also needs to learn as well.  As such, they too will not be going without supervision to build new relationships with other agencies.  So, I do not see any issue with cadets performing this. 

As far as number 4, they are only implementing Wing's plan, not developing it.  So no issue with cadets performing this.  There are some duties that cadets can easily perform and some duties that need some supervision.  If that is the case, then the SM ES Officer will assist, as they would assist with a new SM learning the ES track.

As far as number 5--why cannot cadets maintain records with the help of the logistics and/or communications officer?

Interestingly, I performed essentially all of these duties when I was a cadet and working on the ES badge.  When I was working on the Communications badge, I also performed the same duties as the SM Comm Officer with his supervision.  Granted, I did not have any of the same authority, but had plenty of responsibility.  So I do not see any issue with cadets earning the specialty track badges.


I misunderstood the level of supervision that is involved,  I assumed that if cadets were granted these ratings that would mean they were doing the exact same job as a senior member,  and not being mentored under one.  And yes,  SMs are supervised by their superiors, just not as directly as cadets are.  Someone also pointed out to me that those tech rated most often serve as an assistant-in-training,  so you are correct, I had misunderstood here.

Quote

Quote
As I mentioned above, there are no other badges, with these odd exceptions, that allow cadets to earn them without the full responsibility and qualification that comes along with them.

Ground Team.  Just because a cadet has earned the GT Badge does not mean they have full responsibility and qualification that comes with the badge.  They are still supervised by a GTL and by a SM (whom may or may not be GTL qualified).  Even if the SM is not a GTL, the SM is still responsible for that Ground Team.  Cadet ground teams with a cadet GTL cannot be dispatched without a SM to supervise.  Therefore, using your logic, cadets should not earn the GT badge either.
[/quote]

Yes, this is true, a senior member has to accompany cadets on any GT mission.  I hadn't seen that as a change of duty responsibility,  as every member of any specific ground team level is qualified for the same duties, but from a safety standpoint, you are absolutely correct.  As far as cadet GTLs are concerned, I had been under the impression that said ground team was under the command of the qualified cadet, if a senior GTL is not present, however, the accompanying senior member could assume control in the case of a serious/endangering safety issue.

I've certainly learned a lot from this thread so far, and that's a good thing!

I apologize for my ignorance.

Respectfully,

C/2d Lt Starbird
Logged
Starbird
Member

Posts: 70
Unit: NER-NH-056

« Reply #35 on: April 09, 2018, 12:00:02 PM »

C/2d Lt Starbird,

I echo much of your sentiment and, like NIN, admire your points and the work that went into this post. Currently, NH-056 has no representatives to the Cadet Advisory Council (CAC), but an enthusiastic and well-read cadet like yourself would be a great asset to our team! To help make a difference and spearhead the improvements you want to see in our Cadet Program, I'd highly encourage you to talk to your leadership about the opportunity to be one of your unit's representatives to the CAC.

Feel free to private message me if you have any questions.

-Nor'easter, NHWG CAC Senior Advisor

Thank you, sir!  I'll enquire up my chain of command about the oppertunity, and hopefully things will go well from there!
Logged
Geber
Member

Posts: 68
Unit: NER-VT-009

« Reply #36 on: April 09, 2018, 01:14:00 PM »

Someone also pointed out to me that those tech rated most often serve as an assistant-in-training,  so you are correct, I had misunderstood here.

I wish that were true in my wing. I'm not a commuications tech yet, but just became squadron communications officer. I only have 5 months of CAP service, but 3 decades of ham radio experience and an electrical engineering degree. Several of our other squadron officers in charge of various activities are still working on the tech qualification, and most of us wear a few different hats.

It often isn't a question of the person not actually being fully qualified; more often it's things like a SM with lots of cadet experience who isn't 21 yet, or lack of members qualified to evaluate people on various tasks, and having to wait for a wing exercise to get signed off.
Logged
arajca
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,236

« Reply #37 on: April 09, 2018, 03:28:10 PM »

Someone also pointed out to me that those tech rated most often serve as an assistant-in-training,  so you are correct, I had misunderstood here.

I wish that were true in my wing. I'm not a commuications tech yet, but just became squadron communications officer. I only have 5 months of CAP service, but 3 decades of ham radio experience and an electrical engineering degree. Several of our other squadron officers in charge of various activities are still working on the tech qualification, and most of us wear a few different hats.
Like many of us do.

Quote
It often isn't a question of the person not actually being fully qualified; more often it's things like a SM with lots of cadet experience who isn't 21 yet, or lack of members qualified to evaluate people on various tasks, and having to wait for a wing exercise to get signed off.
Specialty track ratings and ES qualifications have different approvals. You don't need to go to a wing exercise to get a specialty track rating - except for those that require an ES qualification, but that's only for that 1 item in the list, not the entire rating. Your commander should be able to sign you off.
Logged
MSG Mac
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,849
Unit: MER-MD-071

« Reply #38 on: April 09, 2018, 08:42:50 PM »

As stated there are a lot of ribbons, badges, and paraphernalia in CAP. But we are merely echoing our USAF overseers. They even have the possibility to graduate from Boot Camp with 4 ribbons without ever having one day of prior service. Two different ribbons for overseas service and one for working with nuclear devices. Of course every AFQT has a different badge-none of which can be told apart from a distance of 5 feet.

Cadet Starbird, please put your proposal into the CAC so that the National CAC can ads their voice. I could see asking that Cadets with the Mitchell or higher  wear only their highest milestone Award and that we ditch the NRA badge. But remember these options are already available under CAPM 39-1. 
Logged
Michael P. McEleney
Lt Col CAP
MSG USA (Retired)
Starbird
Member

Posts: 70
Unit: NER-NH-056

« Reply #39 on: April 19, 2018, 06:49:04 PM »

Ones anonymity is very fragile, it would seem....

C/2d Lt Starbird (although the insignia have still not arrived... formal ceremony pending!)
)
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [All] Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Uniforms & Awards  |  Topic: Cadet Uniform -- Too Many Ribbons and Badges (A cadet perspective)
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.557 seconds with 25 queries.