Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 20, 2018, 06:31:22 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  The Lobby  |  Topic: record for longest running command of a squadron?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print
Author Topic: record for longest running command of a squadron?  (Read 8199 times)
Skyray
Banned

Posts: 576

Skyray.com
« Reply #20 on: June 29, 2005, 03:13:47 PM »

Florida, and Southeast Region, have been pioneering this thing called vindictive termination.  Since we got it, a squadron commander is lucky to last a whole year.

My personal opinion is that if it ain't broke, don't fix it.  That is not to say that Florida hasn't been broke for a very long time.  I remember meeting Major General Harwell at the Florida Wing Conference in 1988 I think it was.  I was amazed that the National Commander had the time available to spend several days at a wing conference.  My squadron commander, then having served for about five years in that position, told me--Bad as we are, we're the best he's got.  Then we got into a two faction war and destroyed the cohesiveness of the wing.  One faction would get in power, and throw everyone from the other faction out of office, then the tables would turn, and it was their turn to get thrown out of office.  Finally we got a wing commander who realized that if you terminated enemies, they didn't come back.  It brought peace of a sort, but it pretty much destroyed operational readiness.
Logged
Doug Johnson - Miami

Always Active-Sometimes a Member
Jerry
Member

Posts: 55

« Reply #21 on: July 12, 2005, 02:45:22 PM »

Term limits have positives and negatives. Considering that we are volunteers, term limits "can" have some  bad side effects. Four or five years *may* not be long enough to insure continuity of command and a smoothe transition, or flow of activity.  For example, a squadron embarks on a building program for their first headquarters bldg midway thru a commander's term.  If the unit is located on a municipally owned airport, lots of red tape must be cut thru in dealing with the city, both the city council and the city bureaucrats. Different cities have different methods and requirements for getting various approvals-each of which may take 2 years to complete (site survey, city council approval, presentations as to what and why CAP is, why such a facility is needed as opposed to a Boy Scout building.  So, if a unit changes command in mid-stream, it  can disrupt the process and cause the entire building program to be delayed. In one case, because a commander was caused to relinquish, this very thing happened. Mis-communications and such disruption caused the entire process to  have to begin from scratch.

I think there is nothing wrong with term limits--with some
exceptions. Commanders should accept command with the understanding that a general time limit is in place.  But that term limit should be tempered by situations that could cause difficulties in the future. (What do you do if nobody WANTS to be "the boss"?
What if the new commander actually is, for whatever reason, simply isn't qualified?)  Yes, commanders and staff officers are supposed to train their replacements, but, realistically, how many commanders get bogged down in just taking care of current business and don't get around to such training----even good commanders have flaws?)  Appointing commanders must be more than "Aw, he's a good ole Joe, he's been in CAP for umpteen years, yada, yada", but he may not be the man for the job. In my case, having been thru most of the gamut including unit command, after 42 years in CAP, I don't WANT command; I am enjoying my retirement from work and enjoying being a Communications Officer.
LOL!~   So, when a unit is faced with this, should the Wing arbitrarily decide, 'OK, that's it, he's OUT, AND YER it" without considering all the factors as to how it may affect the unit? I just don't think so.

JWO, Lt/Col, CAP
Logged
PWK-GT
Forum Regular

Posts: 199

« Reply #22 on: July 12, 2005, 08:57:45 PM »

But can you hold non-successive terms? You know...... serve the max years--sit out the next guy, and get back in??
It's the guardhouse lawyer in me.........Had to ask.
Logged
"Is it Friday yet"

Jerry
Member

Posts: 55

« Reply #23 on: July 12, 2005, 09:24:46 PM »

I would think...YES!  Unless there is some demonstrated reason not to hold unit command, term limits should be flexible. There are, indeed, IMHO, special circumstances unique to individual units that should be considered--like the example I cited.  The fact that one has held a command position shouldn't be held against him; you are throwing much valuable experience away.

Jerry
Logged
PWK-GT
Forum Regular

Posts: 199

« Reply #24 on: July 12, 2005, 11:31:34 PM »

Maybe the standard should be based on unit membership.
For example:
   If Sqdrn 'A'  has new SM's joining fairly often, and a decent percentage of them are involved with PD.......it seems to me that after a short time, you would have an appropriate "pool" to draw from--if the individual desires to be considered (let's face it, we all have enough stuff in our own lives that keep us running at times).  :P
    On the other hand, Sqdrn 'B' has under 5 ACTIVE SM's, and some of them are unable / unwilling to assume command. Fresh recruits have been slow to sign-up, or are way down on the lower rungs of PD. The squadron meets minimums for Charter needs, but hopes to grow with time. ::)
     Using either Squadron 'template', what is the best way to go? Apples and oranges....... :-\

     Here's another idea:
Perhaps a voluntary 'pool' of officers that meet the requirements for command.........say, on the Group level? "In-house" members get first crack at the top seat, followed by anyone opting into the pool from the Group. Or maybe the open-ended job description Acting Commander......until a few more butter-bars complete SLS. With recruiting in the chaos it is, and numbers being down.......do you want to lose trained talent for ANY reason when you don't have to?
Logged
"Is it Friday yet"

SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,422
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #25 on: July 13, 2005, 12:43:52 AM »

But can you hold non-successive terms? You know...... serve the max years--sit out the next guy, and get back in??
It's the guardhouse lawyer in me.........Had to ask.
The PCR rules cover that situation, and state that non-successive terms are ok.
Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
Skyray
Banned

Posts: 576

Skyray.com
« Reply #26 on: July 16, 2005, 12:13:19 PM »

Quote
.......do you want to lose trained talent for ANY reason when you don't have to?

You need to come down here and tell that thought to some of the "leadership" we supposedly have.  George Pringle, George Metz, Skip Munger, Cal Morton, Ken Massey, Jim and Lynne Puglise, Dennis and Adele Sparks--these are just a few of the highly talented and skilled leaders that we have lost because they didn't agree with or were a threat to ladder climbing leaders.  Truth is, I'm not sure Dwight Wheless doesn't belong on that list, but he claims not.
Logged
Doug Johnson - Miami

Always Active-Sometimes a Member
abysmal
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 520

« Reply #27 on: July 27, 2005, 07:59:54 PM »

Well, the TERM LIMIT that was impossed on us here in Arizaona kicked in on Monday night and our Squadron Commander was forced to step down and let a new man take over for him.

We lost a VERY VERY competent leader, one who had both the TIME and the knowlege for the job.

It will be interesting to watch the changes that will no doubt follow from the new commander, but it seems a real shame that our current commander was forced out simply because he had been there more than 4 years..
Logged
2LT Christopher M. Parrett
Deputy Commander of Cadets, Cadet Programs Officer
London Bridge Composite Squadron 501
SWR-AZ-112,  Lake Havasu City, Arizona
Bluelakes 13
Seasoned Member

Posts: 293

« Reply #28 on: August 25, 2005, 03:04:21 PM »

In IL, the next higher echelon selects the replacement.  The outgoing commander can only recommnd.  Usually a deputy or vice is next in line.

Not so in AZ?
Well, the TERM LIMIT that was impossed on us here in Arizaona kicked in on Monday night and our Squadron Commander was forced to step down and let a new man take over for him.

We lost a VERY VERY competent leader, one who had both the TIME and the knowlege for the job.

It will be interesting to watch the changes that will no doubt follow from the new commander, but it seems a real shame that our current commander was forced out simply because he had been there more than 4 years..
Logged
Westernslope
Banned

Posts: 114

« Reply #29 on: August 25, 2005, 07:45:48 PM »


We lost a VERY VERY competent leader, one who had both the TIME and the knowledge for the job.


Bummer.  Hopefully, your old commander will be able to remain as part of the staff.  Normally, I think it is best to step into the background and let the new commander lead but I have seen recent cases where the new commander welcomes the experiences of their predecessors.
Logged
shorning
Resident Philosopher

Posts: 973

« Reply #30 on: August 25, 2005, 08:32:05 PM »

Not so in AZ?

In my experience, no.  AZ isn't like that. 
Logged
alpha06
Recruit

Posts: 14

« Reply #31 on: September 21, 2005, 06:45:40 AM »

I think that ther eshould be limits on command time. First of all, it gives others a chance to command and one guy doesnt hogg it all tohimself. Secondly,it creates cronism when you have the same guy for a long time. It becomes his organization and not ours.
Logged
Lord, if I must have an engine failure, let it be the Hobbs meter.
dwb
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,342

« Reply #32 on: September 21, 2005, 09:21:57 AM »

I just wanted to point out that I did not break any records with my service as squadron commander!  Except for perhaps "most swear words uttered on the drive home"  :o  ;D

I have mixed feelings on term limits.  It's important to get new blood in, but it should be at the right time.

Let's say, for example, that squadron commanders are limited to four years.  Capt Snuffy has been commander for 3 1/2 years, and he just recruited a senior member that would make a fine commander some day.

The ideal scenario would be for the new senior member to be taken under Capt Snuffy's wing, shown the ropes, and in a couple years, assume command.

But if the term limit is a hard four years, this isn't possible.  So now you're either putting a less qualified candidate in (some other senior), or a less seasoned candidate (the new guy).  Neither of those seem like a very good idea.

Term limits are, to a certain extent, a solution that doesn't actually address the problems.  Training commanders, retaining talented senior members, and ensuring people are allowed to transition out of command before they burn out are all solutions that are much more effective than term limits.

If a commander can only serve two years, so be it.  If they can serve 10, well, that's great too.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,091

« Reply #33 on: November 19, 2005, 04:35:31 AM »

As a point to clarification for Illinois, at least, the Great Lakes Region CC issued an order about 3 years ago (I have held the letter in my hands and have it somewhere)
that the term limits would be such that Unit, Group, & Wing CC's would serve 4 years, no more than 6.

Those that were serving at the time the order was issued were allowed to start the clock from that point forward (my predecessor had been unit CC for at least 13 Years at that point).

Frankly leaders should be building a team that allows for transition or absence with little disturbance to the plan.   If that is in place, I can't imagine high HQ not accepting an outgoing recommendation.

Now, if you grab a name from your...rolodex and throw it at HQ.  That's different.
Logged


NIN
VIP

Posts: 4,956
Unit: of issue

« Reply #34 on: November 19, 2005, 01:32:05 PM »

As a point to clarification for Illinois, at least, the Great Lakes Region CC issued an order about 3 years ago (I have held the letter in my hands and have it somewhere)
that the term limits would be such that Unit, Group, & Wing CC's would serve 4 years, no more than 6.

Those that were serving at the time the order was issued were allowed to start the clock from that point forward (my predecessor had been unit CC for at least 13 Years at that point).

Frankly leaders should be building a team that allows for transition or absence with little disturbance to the plan.   If that is in place, I can't imagine high HQ not accepting an outgoing recommendation.

Now, if you grab a name from your...rolodex and throw it at HQ.  That's different.


I took a class recently on team building (a lot of stuff that was a repeat from all the CAP stuff I've had over the years) and one of the sailent points was that it takes 2-3 years to build a "good" team.

Having been a squadron commander *several* times, I can tell you that the old "six-month fixer-upper assignment" doesn't cut it when you're trying to rescue a unit. It takes a solid YEAR to straighten out a CAP squadron.  You can get on the road quicker, but to really do the job right takes time.

I took my last stint as a squadron commander as "fixer-upper" 90-day turn around assignment. Went to the wing commander at 90 days and said "hey, uh, this is gonna take a LOT longer.."

Five years later, I still had the job :)

But seriously, it takes a year just to figure out what the hell is going on (you're constantly playing catch-up), a year to start doing things "the right way" (you're on the ball or just a little ahead of it.) and by the start of that 3rd year, you're finally to the point where you can start doing things in advance, etc..



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 © 2007-2018 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  The Lobby  |  Topic: record for longest running command of a squadron?
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.351 seconds with 25 queries.