Addressing a MSG, SFC & SSG as “Sergeant.” Does anyone else think this is disrespectful?

I don't find it disrespectful. Saying Master Sergeant is a mouthfull, especially when I'm identifying myself over the phone. Too many service members get on a power trip of being called by ther full rank, and it serves no purpose. Unless you're in a 1SG billet, or have been promoted to Sergeants Major, then there is no good reason to have Soldiers running around addressing you by your full title. And our regulations state Soldiers can address SGT-MSG as sergeant.

I work with a MSG on Battalion Staff. I address him as Master Sergeant. He earned the MSG rank and I will address him as such.

I have always addressed Sergeants through Master Sergeant as Sergeant. However I came to a new unit in the last couple weeks and it appears that they address Master Sergeants with their full rank.

The real issue I have seen with the regulation and addressing NCOS now days is text etiquette. When my old Platoon Sergeants would text me, I never knew how to respond.

Roger SGT?
Roger SFC?
Roger Sergeant?

As many have pointed out, it is not disrespectful. It is what we are supposed to do. I will sometimes refer to Master Sergeants by their full title, and in my unit we have a bunch of SGT Rivera's so I will refer to them by full rank, especially as we have one at each rank E5-E8, we had two E6's one male, one female but the male retired.

This may sound odd but for a Sergeant First Class or Staff Sergeant during 6 years of active duty I called either Sergeant with zero corrections. But knowing the T.I.S. and T.I.G. requirements for MSG I always address them by the full title. There are performance promotions as well but E-9 is hard to attain. I have a tremendous amount of respect for them all.
Thanks,
Rick

It depends on the situation. I was a "Sergeant" (SSgt, TSgt for over 10, MSgt for just a few months) for many years in the Air Force. Now I'm a SFC in the TN State Guard. I still get called "Sergeant".

Being called "Sergeant" or even "Sarge" never bothered me unless I knew the speaker was deliberately trying to be disrespectful.

THAT was a whole separate issue dealt with as needed.

Sounds like some ppl just want to make things more difficult. Because in combat I'm gonna be able to yell your full rank.... You know right before I yell you we're taking contact.

You'd better get it right in the Marines or you'll be picking yourself up off the deck!

When I was coming up in the Army I was taught that the proper term of address was Sergeant. It was also an unwritten rule that if you made a point of calling someone by their full rank in everyday situations it was a sign that you respected the rank, but not the individual wearing it. That made it a little difficult for me when I became a Navy Chaplain and got assigned to a Marine Corps unit. Calling someone Staff Sergeant So-and-So or Master Sergeant So-and-So was ingrained in me as being disrespectful. Took a while to get used to.

I never understood why in the Army everyone one from Sgt up was called a Sgt. While recruiting I was promoted to SSgt. I had several conversations with the Army recruiters about addressing myself and the other snco's by their rank. When I spoke with their snco's I addressed them by their rank. I think you should address all personnel by their proper rank.

For us AF folk the official term of address for all ranks from SSgt to SMSgt is sergeant or the full rank. I don't think it's disrespectful, it doesn't change my pay and I don't rely of people using my full rank as a means of respect. Respect is shown in everyday actions not simply using a longer title to address you.

To address a senior NCO (with 10 to 20 more years of service) as "sergeant," the same as any "3-4 year wonder" does a disservice to the senior NCO. Though unintentional, it is a minimalist attempt at military courtesy, and attains the lowest standard, the "common" denominator. That may be how the regulation reads, however we as soldiers ought to strive for a higher standard, "above and beyond the call," if you will. I must say that the U.S.M.C. has it completely right on the issue. Calling a Gunnery Sergeant a "sergeant," you might as well be slapping him in the face! Every enlisted Marine knows this, and takes the (slightly) extra effort to address a senior NCO with the title he or she has earned over time, effort, and often blood...

I don't think it's disrespectful, yet I can understand that an individual earned their rank and wanting to respect that. I currently have an additional duty where I write medals for the Operations group and per the AFI you only use Sergeant in the official certificate. The individuals actual rank only appears in the automatically generated statement.

Served 74-95 and always used Sergeant to address E-5 through E-8 (MSG). Used Sergeant Major to CSM and Sir to all Officers. Served me well!

Here's a small bit of trivia from days gone by. I can remember the old Army Rank Chart from when I was a young troop in the 70s which depicted two names for the grade of E-7...there was Platoon Sergeant and Sergeant First Class. I suppose the latter was supposedly intended for those who were not functioning as Platoon Sergeants in their unit's hierarchy, but there is nothing visible about the rank insignia which would set them apart like those insignia for E-8 and E-9. I don't see that on newer Rank Charts now though so I guess it is assumed that E-7s will most likely be Platoon Sergeants anyways. Another trivial bit of none-issue material for your consumption. ;)

It really never bothered me. A few times I was referred to as Sargent First Class because I was receiving something, mostly when referred to by my full rank, it was because I was in deep "dodo"

I always laughed at fellow NCOs that require to be called by more than just "Sergeant". It is not a matter of disrespect it is the proper term. That being said there have been a few MSG that I always use the full title, not because they wanted it but because of I respected them personally not just rank.

Could of, would of should of, but it's not a "Need", simply because of the regulations. I do think is appropiate in certain situations or scenarios to emphasize courtesy and respect but it's not necessary to be anal if Only Sargent is used. The one think I don't agree with is "Top" or "Sarge.

100% agree with you SFC Torres...I'll parrot what I said in the post on "Sir/Ma'am"...regardless of what the regulation requires (not saying blow off the regs, saying we can do better if we want), how about we try to treat each other with respect...I assume your SFC rank was earned from years of hard work and study...how about I treat you like the professional that rank indicates?

I always thought MSG is the perfect rank, just high enough to avoid BS.