Problem with CAPF 2?

RogueLeader · November 11, 2009, 07:49:40 PM

I was filling out a CAPF 2 for a promotion, and I noticed that under the NCO Grade, that there is a box for Sgt but none for SSgt, then goes to TSgt. Is it just me or what?

SarDragon · November 11, 2009, 10:12:24 PM

Are you sure you're using the current form? The one presently available on the NHQ site no longer has the drop down list for grade. I noticed that the last time I did a 2a, which is the same way.

[Emily Litella mode]

Never mind.

[/Emily Litella mode]

Eclipse · November 11, 2009, 10:26:08 PM

You should be able to process the promotion online w/o paper anyway.

My wing / Region doesn't require paper until Major.

IceNine · November 11, 2009, 11:57:08 PM

Its a special appointment, not duty performance. He'll have to do paper.

It appears they simply forgot an "S" on the form. Click that box they'll promote him accordingly.

RogueLeader · November 12, 2009, 02:55:19 AM

I guess I forgot to mention that we do a paper copy for local files.

There is a CAP Sgt Rank that is the equivalent to e-4 in the navy, USMC or a Corporal in the Army. CAP SSgt is for all the e-5's.

LtCol057 · November 12, 2009, 03:06:54 AM

The current version of F2 is dated Nov 01. Any dated before that need to be tossed out, they're obsolete. That was one problem I ran into when I was the wing personnel officer. Too many units using old forms. All of them would get kicked back to the submitting units.

PHall · November 12, 2009, 03:20:57 AM

Quote from: LtCol057 on November 12, 2009, 03:06:54 AM
The current version of F2 is dated Nov 01. Any dated before that need to be tossed out, they're obsolete. That was one problem I ran into when I was the wing personnel officer. Too many units using old forms. All of them would get kicked back to the submitting units.

Hopefully with a note attached explaining what was wrong.

LtCol057 · November 12, 2009, 04:58:15 AM

Of course. I also let units know when I received paperwork from them, and tried to keep them apprised of the status of it when I could. More info than I get from the current personnel officer.

IceNine · November 12, 2009, 05:29:31 AM

Quote from: RogueLeader on November 12, 2009, 02:55:19 AM
I guess I forgot to mention that we do a paper copy for local files.

There is a CAP Sgt Rank that is the equivalent to e-4 in the navy, USMC or a Corporal in the Army. CAP SSgt is for all the e-5's.

That doesn't matter there isn't a Sgt Rank in the AF. CAP couldn't care less how you were addressed in your service. They only care how your number translates to AF NCO grades.

If you don't think they'll appoint him as an E-5 (the lowest eligible CAP NCO grade) call NHQ. I can promise you they won't appoint him as a SGT because it's not an option, and they won't make him a SAmn which is equally not an option.

The person who wrote the form forgot an "S" nothing to lose sleep over.

PHall · November 13, 2009, 03:10:24 AM

Quote from: IceNine on November 12, 2009, 05:29:31 AM
Quote from: RogueLeader on November 12, 2009, 02:55:19 AM
I guess I forgot to mention that we do a paper copy for local files.

There is a CAP Sgt Rank that is the equivalent to e-4 in the navy, USMC or a Corporal in the Army. CAP SSgt is for all the e-5's.

That doesn't matter there isn't a Sgt Rank in the AF. CAP couldn't care less how you were addressed in your service. They only care how your number translates to AF NCO grades.

If you don't think they'll appoint him as an E-5 (the lowest eligible CAP NCO grade) call NHQ. I can promise you they won't appoint him as a SGT because it's not an option, and they won't make him a SAmn which is equally not an option.

The person who wrote the form forgot an "S" nothing to lose sleep over.

Or tell the E-4 to study and get promoted to E-5. Problem solved...

IceNine · November 13, 2009, 03:49:14 AM

Quote from: RogueLeader on November 12, 2009, 02:55:19 AM
There is a CAP Sgt Rank that is the equivalent to e-4 in the navy, USMC or a Corporal in the Army. CAP SSgt is for all the e-5's.

Wait I can't believe I didn't catch that on the first round. There is NOT a CAP Sgt Rank, IF we had ranks for below E-5 it would be Senior Airman. We only have NCO's and an E-4 isn't an NCO on any scale.

MIKE · November 13, 2009, 03:57:28 AM

Quote from: IceNine on November 13, 2009, 03:49:14 AM
Wait I can't believe I didn't catch that on the first round. There is NOT a CAP Sgt Rank,

Only because they took it out of CAPR 35-5 1-3. c. in the last revision.

Quote from: IceNine on November 13, 2009, 03:49:14 AMWe only have NCO's and an E-4 isn't an NCO on any scale.

Tell that to corporals and PO3s.

SarDragon · November 13, 2009, 04:05:14 AM

^^^^

+1 on that. The AF is the only service without E-4 NCOs.

PHall · November 13, 2009, 05:21:45 AM

Quote from: SarDragon on November 13, 2009, 04:05:14 AM
^^^^

+1 on that. The AF is the only service without E-4 NCOs.

The rationale given by the Head Shed when they deleted E-4 Sergeant was that with E-4's as NCO's, 51% of the enlisted force was an NCO, i.e. more chiefs then indians.

SarDragon · November 13, 2009, 06:23:45 AM

That's interesting, given the AF's reputation for the slowest promotions. Now I wonder how the percentages come out in the other services, and whether they really care.

Hawk200 · November 13, 2009, 05:43:31 PM

Quote from: PHall on November 13, 2009, 05:21:45 AMThe rationale given by the Head Shed when they deleted E-4 Sergeant was that with E-4's as NCO's, 51% of the enlisted force was an NCO, i.e. more chiefs then indians.

I'd buy that, as an explanation it does work. I don't know the deeper history on Sgt, but for the few years prior to it going away, the rank simply meant that you had WAPS tested, and didn't make Staff Sergeant (your test scores were below cutoff).

Downloaded another Form 2, just to see if it's been updated. It hasn't.

Michael M · November 13, 2009, 11:07:51 PM

I was in the Air Force when SrA was first implemented. SrA was intended to reduce the number of "hard stripe" buck sergeants and to establish the PME program the Air Force currently uses. There were too many sergeants (E-5)s who were not properly trained to lead or had anybody to lead.

I was the first 100 below the zone SrA in the Air Force in 1977. We were required to attend PME Phases 1 & 2, supervise at least one A/B through A1C for at least 6 months with a mentor and to write an APR. In one year, if we showed promise, we were promoted to E-4, Sergeant and required to attend PME Phase 3, prepare and take the WASP test for E-5, and supervise a small team or section. It had nothing to do with failing to make a cut-off score. Heck, the Air Force was still trying to implement high year tenure outs for 20 year E-5s in the mid 1970's.

SrA who didn't show potential were rated on an AF Form 17 for retention purposes and stayed at the E-4 SrA and ETS'd out on their normal ETS date unless improvement was shown and a new AF Form 17 was completed showing the improvement.

The Air Force was trying to limit the number of hard stripes just like the Army has the Specialist (E-4) rank. It was a good training concept at the time to make better NCOs and to retain enlisted for 8 years with out making them NCOs.

There was even discussion back then to not even call E-5/6 NCOs; the ranks were called "Junior Enlisted" and E-7/9 were called senior NCOs. Even back in the 1970's MSgts were complaining their rank looked like TSgt chevrons. There was talk before I got out to remove the rocker and make it an inverted chevron to show senior NCO status. Well, it looks like that happened eventually.

Air Force E-4s were a hot commodity for the Army there were many a time Army Warrant Officer recruiters were cruising the snack bar looking for them to bring over to the Army to make them chopper pilots.