Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
What's up with USCGAUX?
"Gene Kearns" wrote in message Don't they accompany the regulars, on occasion? Yes, Auxiliarists can fill certain crew billets on CG vessels. And sometimes regular CG people patrol aboard CGAux vessels. In either case, it is only the regular Coast Guard that holds any legal enforcement authority. The CG is proscribed by act of Congress from using the Auxiliary in any law enforcement or armed interdiction function. In point of fact, the carriage of weapons by Auxiliarists aboard Auxiliary vessels is strictly forbidden. The CG is more than willing to provide regular CG training to any Auxiliarist who is willing to volunteer. In some cases, such as crew positions aboard vessels, certain physical standards and constraints must be met, and the Auxiliarist must meet the very same training standards as regular CG personnel. It is made clear that a concrete commitment of time must be made. The CG doesn't want to invest in training just to have someone waltz off after a couple of months. There are Auxiliarists filling CG positions on a part-time basis in a wide variety of job functions. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
What's up with USCGAUX?
Either Capt Lou is trolling or there are two jerks he the one that told
him he's an employee, and him for believing it. "Capt Lou" wrote in message ... As a member of the USCGAUX, I thought I was a civilian volunteer. Turns out I am told that I am a USCG employee. I thought employees were paid personnel! "Listen to the live broadcast of 'Nautical Talk Radio' with Captain Lou every Sunday afternoon from 4 - 5 (Eastern Standard Time) on the web at www.959watd.com or if you are in Boston or Cape Cod set your radio dial to 95.9FM. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
What's up with USCGAUX?
I volunteer with the Florida DEP but I am not confused that I am an employee
just because I do some of the same things employees do. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
What's up with USCGAUX?
At the end of 2003, The Department of Homeland Security (that oversees the
USCG), made some enormous changes in policy regarding USCGAUX membership. The Auxiliary could probably be used by terrorists, posing as volunteers, (anybody check out Capt. Lou, lately?...joking), to get closer to variouis military targets or installations than if they were simply part of the general population. You jump through a lot of hoops to join the AUX today, it's not a simple matter of being willing to work and showing up to volunteer. Through the USCG "Operation Patriot", the USCGAUX must now be ready to assume secondary strategic responsiblities for defending ports and harbors during a time of war. USCGAUX members have been divided into two broad categories: "Direct Operations" and "Operational Support". To join the USCGAUX today, you must leap the following hurdles if you aspire to be in the "Direct Operations" category. 1. Fingerprint check 2. Complete background investigation on a level sufficient to qualify the applicant for a "Secret" level security clearance. (applicants failing the background check will not be given any reason why they have been rejected, merely told that the check was "unfavorable".) 3. Must sign a statement allowing the USCGAUX to run a credit check. "Operational Support" category persons are only required to submit to the fingerprinting and the credit checks. For additional details: http://www.cgaux.info/g_ocx/publicat...st-550-03.html |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
What's up with USCGAUX?
Gene Kearns wrote:
Going back to the original poster's position...... that he was somehow informed that he was an "employee".... .... is it your take that these "Auxiliarists filling CG positions on a part-time basis" are employees? CGAUX members are not CG employees...the AUX is the civilian volunteer arm of the CG. Except that the AUX has NO law enforcement authority, only SAR responsibility, on the water they are the CG while on duty...and when on the water, they must operate under orders and guidance from the CG, even on inland waters where there is no CG presence. And like any other gov't agency, the amount of record keeping and paperwork that must be turned into the CG is humongous. If you're old enough to remember the Civil Air Patrol during WW II, the CG Aux is a very similar organization. I was an AUX member for a number of years, btw. -- Peggie ---------- Peggie Hall Specializing in marine sanitation since 1987 Author "Get Rid of Boat Odors - A Guide To Marine Sanitation Systems and Other Sources of Aggravation and Odor" http://www.seaworthy.com/html/get_ri...oat_odors.html |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
What's up with USCGAUX?
At my flotilla meeting, I was told by the former National Legal Officer that CG
auxiliarists are no longer civilian volunteers. I was kind of taken aback by this so I asked "what are we then?" His answer to me was "employees." I was kind of shocked! I then went home to review the Auxiliary's web site, and although it still claims in its history section that the Auxiliary is made up of volunteer civilians, the new Homeland Security background form that must be completed clearly asks for your CGAuxiliary employee number: This is what the form reads: "You will be asked for several peices of information in order to activate your account: Your seven (7) digit Auxiliary Employee ID. This is not your old member number (which are now obsolete), and does not contain any unit number. Your Employee ID can be found on your new member card. Your Employee ID will act as your login username for the eDirectory, so it is a good idea to have it memorized." "If you are unsure what your Employee ID or Zip Code is in AUXDATA, consult your FSO-IS. We can not give out this information for security purposes." Furthermore I found the following langauge in the latest CGAuxiliary Manual: "A member of the Auxiliary while assigned to duty shall be deemed to be a Federal employee for the purposes of the following: (1) Chapter 26 of title 28 (popularly known as the Federal Tort Claims Act). (2) Section 2733 of title 10 (popularly known as the Military Claims Act). (3) The Act of March 3, 1925 (46 App. U.S.C. 781-790; popularly known as the Public Vessels Act). (4) The Act of March 9, 1920 (46 App.U.S.C. 741-752; popularly known as the Suits in Admiralty Act). (5) The Act of June 19, 1948 (46 App. U.S.C. 740; popularly known as the Admiralty Extension Act). (6) Other matters related to noncontractual civil liability. (7) Compensation for work injuries under chapter 81 of title 5. (8) The resolution of claims relating to damage to or loss of personal property of the member incident to service under the Military Personnel and Civilian Employees' Claims Act of 1964 (31U.S.C. 3721). (c) A member of the Auxiliary, while assigned to duty, shall be deemed to be a person acting under an officer of the United States or an agency thereof for purposes of section 1442(a)(1) of title 28. Now what do you think? "Listen to the live broadcast of 'Nautical Talk Radio' with Captain Lou every Sunday afternoon from 4 - 5 (Eastern Standard Time) on the web at www.959watd.com or if you are in Boston or Cape Cod set your radio dial to 95.9FM. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
What's up with USCGAUX?
Capt Lou wrote:
At my flotilla meeting, I was told by the former National Legal Officer that CG auxiliarists are no longer civilian volunteers. I was kind of taken aback by this so I asked "what are we then?" His answer to me was "employees." I was kind of shocked! I then went home to review the Auxiliary's web site, and although it still Then you should quit in protest. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
What's up with USCGAUX?
"Gene Kearns" wrote in message Going back to the original poster's position...... that he was somehow informed that he was an "employee".... .... is it your take that these "Auxiliarists filling CG positions on a part-time basis" are employees? Not in the least. Absent a response from Capt Lou, I presume he's referring to some new documents in the CGAux world that contain a reference to employee numbers, or employee application, or some such thing. In the last year, there have been substantial upheavals in the procedures the CG uses to ensure compliance with new security requirements on the part of and concerning Auxiliary membership. Over the next few years they will be implementing fingerprinting and background checks on members. Involved with these new procedures are numerous forms (of course!) and in the interest of efficiency, I suppose, the CG just lifted standard forms from other agencies for their own purposes. One of the form, for example, is remaining from the DOT, even though the CG has for a year now been under DHS. Several of the forms that I've seen make reference to "employee numbers", or to "...information contained in your employee application...", etc. In fact, the CGAux membership information system on computer refers to member number as "Empl ID". God knows why. There are some few and intermittent times and circumstances when an Auxiliarist may be treated by the CG in the same manner as a regular CG member, but the bottom line is that, afaik, Auxiliary members are *not* considered to be employees of the CG in any legal manner at all. JG |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
What's up with USCGAUX?
See my response to Lou below
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
What's up with USCGAUX?
"Capt Lou" wrote in message "A member of the Auxiliary while assigned to duty shall be deemed to be a Federal employee for the purposes of the following: (1) Chapter 26 of title 28 (popularly known as the Federal Tort Claims Act). (2) Section 2733 of title 10 (popularly known as the Military Claims Act). (3) The Act of March 3, 1925 (46 App. U.S.C. 781-790; popularly known as the Public Vessels Act). (4) The Act of March 9, 1920 (46 App.U.S.C. 741-752; popularly known as the Suits in Admiralty Act). (5) The Act of June 19, 1948 (46 App. U.S.C. 740; popularly known as the Admiralty Extension Act). (6) Other matters related to noncontractual civil liability. (7) Compensation for work injuries under chapter 81 of title 5. (8) The resolution of claims relating to damage to or loss of personal property of the member incident to service under the Military Personnel and Civilian Employees' Claims Act of 1964 (31U.S.C. 3721). (c) A member of the Auxiliary, while assigned to duty, shall be deemed to be a person acting under an officer of the United States or an agency thereof for purposes of section 1442(a)(1) of title 28. Now what do you think? I made reference to this in my response above to Gene, when I said "...There are some few and intermittent times and circumstances when an Auxiliarist may be treated by the CG in the same manner as a regular CG member..." There's nothing new in the quote above, but they've apparently codified the status of Auxiliarists while operating under orders, for purposes of liability coverage. The CG lawyers have been batting this conundrum about for about three years now. Apparently, this is their solution. They consider us "employees" for purposes of liability coverage when we operate under orders. Maybe housing and exchange privileges are next. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|