Professionalism in CAP

[RiverAux]

If one were to examine the threads of discussion on CAPTalk, throughout most of them you will find a basic disagreement about how professional an organization CAP should be and how high our standards in ES, officer development, and other areas should be. 

This is most obvious in threads about officer professional development, uniform regulation infractions, senior member physical fitness, and many emergency services threads.  They often quickly break down into arguments between those who think standards (for whatever we're talking about) need to be raised so that CAP can be, and be seen as, more professional and those that think that this would make us too exclusive.

So, I'm interested in your general views on this topic.

[JoeTomasone]

I think that our standards are mostly fine (and not followed) but could use some bolstering in some areas.   So I'm in between two of the vote selections.   However, in the spirit of the day, I voted.   Now I'm off to Chick-Fil-A for my free sandwich.   

[jeders]

Actually I would say that some of our rules (i.e. the number of hoops you have to jump through to do anything) are excessive, while our standards for performance and professionalism are a little low. But even though our standards are a little low, we mostly just don't follow them and would be much better if we just followed what's actually in place.

[MIKE]

Ditto on the last two choices.  Need to do 3 before attempting 4... And with better 3 there could be less hoops if done right.

[notaNCO forever]

 I think the standards are good but need to be enforced better.

[lordmonar]

I think the standards are good but need to be enforced better.

+1

[Stonewall]

I have found inconsistencies in professionalism at all levels, from squadron up to region.  I can can articulate actual experiences that affected me and fellow officers where some numbnuts had the ballz to put things in email, on paper or say such things in front of others.  I think if our appointed officers (squadron on up) were held accountable and told how it is to be rather than given such wide parameters, we'd be better off.

In the military, officers, for the most part, are trained the same at all levels.  While everyone is an individual, their training are virtually identical regardless if they were trained through ROTC or OTS.  But in CAP, officers sometimes are trained or indoctrinated appropriately and given way too much freedom to do as they choose with very little oversite.

I don't always think it's not enough training or even enough training, but inadequate.  I just don't think there is any one general, colonel, wing commander or region commander telling anyone THIS_IS_HOW_IT_IS_GOING_TO_BE, do it or ship out.

[GoofyOne]

I think is some cases this has gotten lost.  From leaders who are to arrogant to do their job and have a Napoleon complex to people who are given positions without qualifications and also don't do their jobs.

I think the cadet and aerospace program have gotten lost for the sake of Homeland Security. Yet we promote CAP to the youth as a great leadership training ground.  I have found that to be untrue.

I think that many leaders have forgotten this is a volunteer program and we don't get paid yet put the workerbees through hell should we make a suggestion in the hopes of attempting a new idea or even questioning what might be a better way.

Membership appears to be at a 1 for 1 rate. Gain 1 loose one.  Has anybody done anything to look at that.  There are many disgruntled members for many reasons.  Does anybody really care?

There are people who do really care and really do want to be a part of this program but in some cases if you don't have coat tails to hang onto you might as well give up unless you want to follow the same old tired path.

[JoeTomasone]

As far as professionalism goes, I generally find member's attitudes in one of a few camps:


1.  We have to make things relaxed so that we don't appear to be too hardass to the members, especially the cadets.  So if someone doesn't salute, wear the uniform properly, or address members properly, no big deal -- as long as they are on the MML, it's all good.

2.  We definitely need to observe C&C/uniform regs/etc - but if it gets in the way of someone staying...  We'll overlook it most of the time.

3.  C&C, uniforms, etc, are a major factor in unit esprit de corps - and mandating our regs/standards creates a core unit that people will want to strive to excel in - and those who don't eventually weed themselves out.   That's OK, I'll take a smaller MML filled with active, professional members.

[lordmonar]

Or all three at once.

[ol'fido]

Before we decide whether we have too much professionalism or not enough, I think we need a better definition of what professionalism is. Is it just following the rules, wearing the uniform right, or behaving in a "professional" manner? I have seen a lot of instances where a person was accused of not being professional becaused they disagreed with a superior or a peer and let them know about it. Accusations of "unprofessionalism" or not being a team player were used to stifle legitimate dissent and contrary views. Many times I see people who worry about form over function. These people know the 39-1 and customs and courtesies manual backwards and forwards, but can't pour water out of a boot unless the instructions are written on the heel and they have adult supervision.

I believe we need to wear our uniforms right and follow the customs of the service, but we need to avoid being overly "Mickey Mouse" about certain things as I believe that others will see this as being "unprofessional". We also need to conduct ourselves in a way that does not look like we are trying to live out our Walter Mitty-ish military, SuperRanger, Rescue Ricky fantasies.

[EMT-83]

Professionalism has little in common with rules and regulations - two different animals. I've met a good number of CAP members who, while wearing the proper uniform and following regulations, were unprofessional jerks.

[RiverAux]

Personally, I am extending the term to mean the standards by which we carry out our activities, not just the manner in which we do so.  For example, some see our current professional development system as inadequate to actually develop a well-trained professional volunteer force.