Senior Member Grade

[Fuzzy]

Gentlemen and Ladies,

I've been considering the rank structure of the Senior Officers and a thought occurred to me that believe might be worth discussing. I would like your opinion on the idea.

In regards to Senior Officer Rank I have noticed that grade below Colonel (o-6) does not denote command authority. Ranks up to Lieutenant Colonel instead reflect progression in training and organizational seniority. This system in itself is not necessarily bad but it does lead to some confusion between Senior Officers over authority. In my mind it also departs from the intention of military grade which is to denote leadership.

A possible alternate system would be to place a limit or cap on the number and grades attainable at each level of organization. The basis of the system would be on unit membership. A squadron with fifteen members for example might only warrant 'billets' for a First Lieutenant and two second lieutenants. The grade and number of these billets would increase with 'milestones' in membership. This would also act as an incentive for recruitment and maintain the relationship between grade and command authority.

Several questions arise of course when you look at a system such as this. Obviously there will be more members in any squadron then there are 'billets' available. For this reason I believe that in this system members should begin in the Flight Officer grades. This would allow all Senior Officers to remain Officers but remove the possible contradiction between grade and individual responsibility. An unlimited number of Flight Officers would be allowed in this system.  Flight Officers would in this system be similar to the Army Warrant Officer, technical experts in their respective areas. A system for progression based off time in grade and professional development would allow Senior Officers to progress in the Flight Officer grade.

The system would also be based on permanent and temporary rank. Members would have a permanent grade, usually of Flight Officer, and when the member occupies a billet they would carry the grade of the position.

This is just an idea for a possible alternate method of assigning grade in CAP. I don't think it will solve every problem we have, and it surely has some inherently to it. However I think it has some merit on its own, but is probably impossible to implement even if someone thought it was a good idea. Keep in mind however that I do have the upmost respect for the Senior Officers that take the time to volunteer their time and money. My intention was not to suggest taking away one of the few rewards members receive.

Respectfully,
C/Capt Semko

[Seabee219]

In respect to all that make the grade, I have to say in a way you are correct, but you can not hold back someone from getting promoted when working in the guidelines of CAP. Do all deserve there rank, NO!!!! some do not, but most do.  I look at rank like this. the more you learn and do, then make the next rank, you earned it.  I am a capt, if a major askes me to do something I woulld do it, if there were any questions I had, I would ask first as well.  I have a major as my commander, and a major as the deputy commander, but I am DCC and was told that I have the final say on the cadets, no questions asked, as long as the commander approved of it.  He lets me run the show, and I like that. He provides guidence and help when needed.

  I think that every senior member should start out as a flight officer so we can spread the ranks out a little and have advancement based off of performance and knowledge.  Hope this helps some what

[Strick]

We should apply the same thing to the cadet program as well.

[lordmonar]

This subject has already been debated ad nausium.

[BillB]

Patrick.

You are correct there has been a lot of previous posts on this subject. However, if you'll notice the poswt and comments are mainly from "recruits", new people on CAPTalk. And the previous thread is so far back they haven't seen anything. It doesn't hurt to hear new thoughts on the subject.

[RiverAux]

Any attempt to reform CAP in an attempt to make grade match responsibility falls down immediately because of the fact that CAP units are not operational entities.  Because we form ad hoc teams to perform missions you are still going to end up in situations where someone's place in the ICS system has absolutely no relationship to their rank. 

As I've said before on this forum, you can have grade match responsibility in terms of squadron organization or you can have grade match responsibility in terms of ES operations, but you can't have both at the same time. 

And all grade/responsibility proposals that I've seen fail because CAP members quite often change their responsibliities in the organization.  Sometimes moving up, sometimes moving down, and sometimes moving up again.  So, unless you're going to demote people after they no longer hold a position it won't work.  And while in principle such a system may seem workable, such a thing would be seen as a demotion and would not work. 

[Fuzzy]

Every Senior Officer deserves the Grade they wear, assuming they met all the requirements set out for them by CAP. I am not suggesting that we have inferior Officers, that need to be reduced in rank. We have exactly the Senior Officers that our system set requirements for and they are in fact capable men and women. I don't think there is anything wrong with our standards. We may however be able to improve upon the way we symbolize how members meet our standards.

I believe Rank should be the domain of command authority. But that doesn't mean we should fail to recognize Senior Officer Achievements, perhaps this could be done with ribbons equally well.

Or not, I understand.

[NCRblues]

We should apply the same thing to the cadet program as well.

How could this work? What if your child's squadron was very small, so he/she could never make it to Spaatz? This could never work, and it is not fair to the hard working and goal driven cadets.

[RiverAux]

I believe Rank should be the domain of command authority.

Command authority really only applies to the tiny little group of squadron, group, and Wing commanders.  No one else in any administrative position in CAP has any real authority to do anything.  And when it comes down to it, the Wing Commander is the only person that has any real authority in any state. 

The only exception to that are ICs. 

[Gunner C]

There is a possibility (not sure it would work):

Everyone (a few exceptions) would have permenant grade as some sort of flight officers/warrant officers.  When they're assigned to command, they're frocked to the appropriate grade.  Same thing could be done for group, wing, and region positions.  When the person leaves command, they could either move to the next higher echelon (if slots are available) and keep the grade or they would revert back to their permanent flight officer grade.

This would kill two birds:

• It would re-link rank with authority.
• Members would still increase in grade and recognition at their own pace.

Like I said, don't know if this would work.

[Fuzzy]

That is what I attempted to suggest.

However we all know it will never work, because Vanguard would have to actually come out with a full line of Flight Officer Insignia. 

[RADIOMAN015]

All Senior Members should be

[notaNCO forever]

 This is just my humble opinion

Members should be allowed to achieve up ti 1st Lt with the current PD program. To become a Captain one would have to serve as a deputy commander for a year and complete the current PD requirements for the grade. To be able to keep the grade of Captain the would have to serve as a Deputy Commander for at least two years and show how the improved the squadron or upheld the high standards of a already good squadron.

For Major one would have to do the same as a Captain but serve as a squadron commander or group vice commander. For Lt. Col. one would have to do the same as for major be a group commander or wing vice commander. This is just a rough idea that with a little refinement I think would work great.

[RiverAux]

You do realize that not even the real military does things this way?  People advance in rank often without ever having any command authority.  Why should it be harder in CAP?  There are plenty of people who advance up through holding various staff positions and if you ignore all the special appointments that CAP allows, this is basically how CAP works right now. 

[Fuzzy]

The military has limits on the number of promotions and there are other limiting factors as well, sir. I do not belive that is such a fair comparison.

Grade is assigned independent of Leadership Authority for everyone in our current system. You may be able to get away with that (or that may be allowed) in some job fields in the military, but eventually you will have to take on some leadership. But most jobs require you to take on an increaseing amount of leadership or responsibility.

Its not entirely the same, sir.

[PA Guy]

What the OP is suggesting is roughly the way the cadet and senior program were run till the early/mid 60s. Grade and training were not married.

Grade was based on the size of your unit.  Training was treated as a seperate issue.  Cadets completed the training program and that was recognized by ribbons. While they had to have completed the required training there also had to be in a sqdn that had a slot for say a C/Maj. So, a cadet could complete the training for the then equivalent of Spaatz but be a C/1Lt because their unit didn't have a slot for a higher grade.

The senior program was run roughly the same way.  Seniors had to complete the required training but there had to be a slot in the unit to progress in grade.

I guess my question to the OP would be, do you think your proposal should carry over to the cadet program and if not, why not?

My personal opinion is that grade for senior members should be done away.

[capchiro]

The problem is, is that we are not the military.  Rank does not go with authority and vice-versa, because we have little to no authority over anything.  We run a well laid out program and do not have the authority to think outside the box.  We are also a voluntary organization and therefore have little to no authority to "order" anyone to do anything.  Like the Scouts, another volunteer organization, we can cajole, beg, ask, and possible badger our members, but they can walk away with no consequences.  Why do you think we have so many different uniform choices?  As a leader in CAP, it is our job to convince our volunteer members that they "want" to do what we need them to.  Start giving ultimatums and you will soon find yourself without followers.  The reason for rank in CAP is for personal goals/satisfaction/reward to inspire members to join the program, learn the program, stay in the program, and work within the program.  The program is set up to work on an individual basis as far as progressing in rank.  With over 30 years in this time I will attest that the program works.  My silver leaves are about all I have to show for my work in the program, not that the experiences haven't been great, but the pay sucks..

[RiverAux]

Grade is assigned independent of Leadership Authority for everyone in our current system. You may be able to get away with that (or that may be allowed) in some job fields in the military, but eventually you will have to take on some leadership. But most jobs require you to take on an increaseing amount of leadership or responsibility.

You might want to review the senior member training program before making such statements.  CAP officers don't get very far into the program before coming to a dead halt unless they are willing to take on steadily increasing levels of responsibility of some type or another in regards to their administrative specialty.   

[ZigZag911]

Just to add to the historical overview: by the early 70s, cadets advanced in grade on completion of training requirements without regard to the size of their unit.

CAPR 20-1 (it was a reg back when!) specified grades associated with particular command and staff slots: for instance, the CC of a cadet squadron could rank no higher than major...this was true also for a small senior squadron.
To become lt col as sqdn cc it needed to be a composite sqdn or a BIG senior sqdn.

Most sqdn staff slots topped out at 1 Lt, Capt @ group, Maj @ wing

The majority of SMs started out as warrant or chief warrant officers -- the USAF did away with their warrants, insisted we did the same.

There have been lots of suggested solutions, most similar to this thread, on this forum -- but I don't believe the situation is perceived as a real problem at corporate officer level.

[Gunner C]

WiWAC in the late 60s, rank was completely tied to training.  Also, the ranking cadet was automatically the cadet commander - Period.  When his/her tenure was complete, they would be assigned to a small group called the "honor cadre" and the next ranking cadet would take command.