Squadron Commander Term Limits

[GoofyOne]

Is it true NHQ is looking at term limits for Squadron Commanders?

[BrandonKea]

Is it true NHQ is looking at term limits for Squadron Commanders?

I thought this thread title looked familiar...

http://forums.cadetstuff.org/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=12819

I've not seen anything to indicate that NHQ is looking at term limits. What has you asking?

I personally think this is a bad idea. Wing or Group Commanders should be in tune with their Squadron CC's that they'll know if they need to be pulled or not. YMMV

[Pumbaa]

Small units could suffer for sure.. Not enough folks..

[FW]

^exactly.  That's why there is no serious discussuion on this topic at any level above wing. 

[Flying Pig]

Term limits are good but can be a double edged sword.  They are good so one person doesnt end up running the unit for 20 years.  If  you have a bad commander, your not stuck with them and hav a way to get fresh blood in.  Also.....and more importantly, it gives the current commander a light at the end of the tunnel!!!

I thought we already had limits in place.  I was under the belief that it was 4 yrs? But there should also be a clause for extensions when necessary

[BrandonKea]

Term limits are good but can be a double edged sword.  They are good so one person doesnt end up running the unit for 20 years.  If  you have a bad commander, your not stuck with them and hav a way to get fresh blood in.  Also.....and more importantly, it gives the current commander a light at the end of the tunnel!!!

I thought we already had limits in place.  I was under the belief that it was 4 yrs? But there should also be a clause for extensions when necessary

No limits except for Wing Kings on up. Squadron commanders can be in as long as they want/are let to be.

[Larry Mangum]

It may have just been a Pacific Region directive, but I remeber term limits having been imposed on Squadron Commanders of 3 years, with an additional year with the wing commanders blessing, and an additional year, for a total of 5 with the region commanders approval.

[RiverAux]

It is an absolutely fantastic idea.  The CG Aux has them for their local leaders and it is absoultely wonderful at actually getting leaders developed within the unit since if you're in long enough, you'll probably be in charge.  It also limits the damage a bad commander can do since they'll be out of there real soon. 

The argument against it is going to be:  No one will take it.  Of course no one wants to be a squadron commander now because its an open-ended committment.  Who wants to take that responsibility when they know they might end up doing it for 10 years?  They've got enough committment to not want to let the unit die, so they soldier on because no one else wants to be stuck in their shoes. 

Believe me, if people knew that they would only be commander for 1 or 2 years, a lot more people would be interested.

Plus, in these situations you get a lot of the former commanders who still stick with the organization.  Usually in CAP former squadron commanders either quit CAP or move up leaving no one in the unit who can really help out the current commander and give them realistic advice. 

This would be a major change for the better in CAP and I believe we should go even further and elect our squadron commanders (subject to Group/Wing CC approval). 
 

[Flying Pig]

All Squadrons are different obviously.  Some squadrons can be very stressful to command.  Especially if you are large and active in all of the areas of CAP.  Being the commander is a full time job.  Budgets, training, Human Resources issues, scheduling, aircraft maintenance, internal fights.  Having a term limit can provide relief and make it a little more bearable know there is an end in sight.  In some cases, I know I would rather have a term limit to allow a Commander to call it a day, letting people know that I only have 1 yr left vs a commander becoming so stressed that they just quit.  I have a solid Deputy and a DCC.  So I just oversee some of the bigger ticket items.  I am the prime example of someone who was able to surround myself with people who are "better" than me.  But, I could see having an option for me and my unit to be abel to petition when the end comes to allow me to stay if necessary.  However, if I am doing my job right, and if my squadron really is solid, I should have people ready and willing to step in when my time comes. 

[DBlair]

I can see the good and bad side of term limits.

A possible good side could be in a situation where members want to be a Squadron Commander, but are in a unit where there appears to be no hope of that as the Commander and Deputy Commander are husband/wife and have been in command for what seems to be eternity. I've seen this in a few units. Thus, those members who want to step up to command can get their chance if term limits are in place.

On the other side to it, if you have a good leader, then term limits might limit the sustained long term success of the organization.

A perfect example is that I was the head of a 10,000 member non-profit organization and brought it to the highest point in its over 30 year history with daily events and all sorts of different initiatives. Long story short, I was term-limited and the person put in as my replacement really didn't know what they were doing and eventually after a decent amount of internal struggle and conflict, various upper staff members quit and the organization is now at a mere fraction of what it was and barely surviving. Moral of the story, the right leadership has the potential to make or break an organization.

Thus, term limits can be a double-edged sword.

[RiverAux]

Sure they can.  But democracy is also the worst form of government besides everything else.  People often vote for incompetent leaders, but its still the best alternative out there.  Same goes for CAP commanders. 

The military services rotate unit command regularly, perhaps even too regularly in some situations.  And CAP already does it at Wing level, so why not squadron level? 

Say you've got a great squadron commander who gets term limited out.  That person is now free to contribute to other areas of CAP where they might make an even more important contribution than where they were at. 

[BrandonKea]

Sure they can.  But democracy is also the worst form of government besides everything else.  People often vote for incompetent leaders, but its still the best alternative out there.  Same goes for CAP commanders. 

The military services rotate unit command regularly, perhaps even too regularly in some situations.  And CAP already does it at Wing level, so why not squadron level? 

Say you've got a great squadron commander who gets term limited out.  That person is now free to contribute to other areas of CAP where they might make an even more important contribution than where they were at.

CAP Wings and Air Force commands are often well established and fairly stable units. CAP Squadrons, on the other hand, aren't always the same. A unit commander with a level of expertise about his or her local area may know better how to manage a potential dwindling group of personnel, or other local oddities that make a Squadron command so challenging.

Also, I'm not sure I feel comfortable with the idea of voting for Commanders. I get the feeling a lot of people would be butt hurt if they didn't get voted in, or if someone supported a different candidate. That's not what we need, leave the politics to the level they're at now. Don't add fuel to the fire.

[Capt Rivera]

Instead of a vote, the selection could/should be made by the Wing Commander from applicants...

Maybe don't limit the number of terms... just put a limit on the length of term before the Wing Commander looks at the list of applicants again.

[I know I'm assuming there's a list. One can hope right?]

This would allow the Wing CC to pick the best person for the job at that time. This may be the same person, it may not...

[BrandonKea]

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it..."

[DBlair]

I know I'm assuming there's a list. One can hope right?

...I would like to add my name to this list if/when it becomes available. Can I pre-register for it? (my point is that I'm eager to have that opportunity)

There are some of us who eagerly want to step up into command roles, but would not be given the chance unless moving to another unit because of Commander/Deputy Commander husband/wife teams being in command for all of eternity with no upward mobility for other members as the Commander and Deputy Commander see it as their (read: ownership) Squadron. I've seen this a few times in different units.

[RiverAux]

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it..."

But it is broke.  Can anyone deny that squadrons are the most important level of organization within CAP?  They have the most direct impact on the individual member and their decision to stay with CAP and how active they will get with CAP.  Commanders that are more beholden to their Wing Commander than to their members are not in the best interests of CAP. 

Another thing that having term limits would solve is the tendency for Wing Commanders to relieve squadron commanders who get on their wrong side for some reason.  From what I've seen, these are usually the more outspoke folks who want to get things done.  If term limits were in place they would most likely let that person stay in position until the end of their term rather than going through the turmoil of firing them.  Sure, they would still have the option of firing folks, but it would be much more likely to only happen when there was some real cause, and not for purely political reasons. 

Also, I'm not sure I feel comfortable with the idea of voting for Commanders. I get the feeling a lot of people would be butt hurt if they didn't get voted in, or if someone supported a different candidate. That's not what we need, leave the politics to the level they're at now. Don't add fuel to the fire.

Believe me, before I joined the CG Aux I wouldn't have believed that it would work.  Our organizations are enough alike in this case for me to see it as an extremely good comparison.  Actually having voting at the local level takes the politics out of squadron command.  Right now the only way to get a change of command is to complain behind the back of your commander to his boss and try to backroom politic him out.  This puts whatever politics there are in the squadron out in the open and sunlight is always the best disinfectant. 

My experience in the Aux also tells me that you're not going to really see there be vigorous campaigns causing hurt feelings all that often.    Heck, a lot of the time in the Aux the election is by acclamation with only a single candidate.  Doesn't this defeat the democracy angle?  Not really since anyone with an interest in being the commander knows that if they express an interest and have demonstrated some competency, next time around they might be that single candidate. 

[BrandonKea]

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it..."

But it is broke.  Can anyone deny that squadrons are the most important level of organization within CAP?  They have the most direct impact on the individual member and their decision to stay with CAP and how active they will get with CAP.  Commanders that are more beholden to their Wing Commander than to their members are not in the best interests of CAP. 

Another thing that having term limits would solve is the tendency for Wing Commanders to relieve squadron commanders who get on their wrong side for some reason.  From what I've seen, these are usually the more outspoke folks who want to get things done.  If term limits were in place they would most likely let that person stay in position until the end of their term rather than going through the turmoil of firing them.  Sure, they would still have the option of firing folks, but it would be much more likely to only happen when there was some real cause, and not for purely political reasons. 

Also, I'm not sure I feel comfortable with the idea of voting for Commanders. I get the feeling a lot of people would be butt hurt if they didn't get voted in, or if someone supported a different candidate. That's not what we need, leave the politics to the level they're at now. Don't add fuel to the fire.

Believe me, before I joined the CG Aux I wouldn't have believed that it would work.  Our organizations are enough alike in this case for me to see it as an extremely good comparison.  Actually having voting at the local level takes the politics out of squadron command.  Right now the only way to get a change of command is to complain behind the back of your commander to his boss and try to backroom politic him out.  This puts whatever politics there are in the squadron out in the open and sunlight is always the best disinfectant. 

My experience in the Aux also tells me that you're not going to really see there be vigorous campaigns causing hurt feelings all that often.    Heck, a lot of the time in the Aux the election is by acclamation with only a single candidate.  Doesn't this defeat the democracy angle?  Not really since anyone with an interest in being the commander knows that if they express an interest and have demonstrated some competency, next time around they might be that single candidate.

Ok, you have some good points. Having a stagnant Squadron Commander would be hard to get rid of without some potentially shady practicies, although I can remember on another thread a Cadet who aspired to be a Cadet Commander was lamenting becaus his competition was a Cadet Officer who was somewhat of a slacker and the Cadet thought nobody knew the Cadet Officer was a slacker. We all told him that it's wrong to assume that the CP staff in his unit didn't know that either.

Same thing here; if you have a squadron commander that's not shaping up, the Wing or Group CC likely sees that.

....but then, yes, you have the problem of the Good 'ol Boys Network. If the Wing or Group CC wants a squadron commander there, they aren't going anywhere. I get that. Maybe the election thing would work. Our National Commander is elected, so there is a precedence...

[davidsinn]

....but then, yes, you have the problem of the Good 'ol Boys Network. If the Wing or Group CC wants a squadron commander there, they aren't going anywhere. I get that. Maybe the election thing would work. Our National Commander is elected, so there is a precedence...

I'd rather see wing commanders and region commanders elected than squadron commanders. The NB is quite incestuous if you sit and think about it

[RADIOMAN015]

Members aren't exactly standing in line to apply for being  squadron commanders.   Frankly some of those that have an interest couldn't command a shovel in a sandbox anyways  

What also can be a problem is if someone is appointed as the CO and isn't from the local area, commuting 40/50+ miles  and basically not a toll free call away for the membership or anyone else that needs to talk with the commander.  Since squadrons are based in communities, it's reasonable to have somone as the commander who resides in the local geographic area where the squadron is established. 

Even the Air Force doesn't have term limits on squadron commanders, First Sergeants, etc.  why should CAP

RM

[Short Field]

^^^ Sqdn Command tour = two years unless there are exceptional circumstances, then it might get extended one year.  That is field grade command, not a 2Lt Squadron Commander posiition.