Posted on Aug 23, 2014
Addressing a MSG, SFC & SSG as “Sergeant.” Does anyone else think this is disrespectful?
125K
526
272
20
18
2
I feel as if I’m speaking to a Master Sergeant, Sergeant First Class or Staff Sergeant, they need to be addressed as their full rank and not “Sergeant.”
Customs and Courtesies
Respect
Disrespect
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 123
6
6
0
I've always referred to SFC and SSG as Sergeant. My relationship with the individual dictates how I address a MSG. If I've worked with them for a while I'll tone it down to Sergeant, but if they're someone I don't know or that I haven't worked with for very long I'll address them as Master Sergeant simply out of respect for their rank, expertise and TiS.
(6)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
This is wrong though. AR 600-20 states that a MSG be referred to as Sergeant. it's on page 10 I believe.
(2)
(0)
5
5
0
I agree with and understand the regulatory guidance set forth in AR 600-20 concerning the proper address of ranks, but on that same token I too regularly address Master Sergeants by their full rank title. However, I do this with Master Sergeants whom have either already been First Sergeants in the past, or whom have been identified and selected to appointment to First Sergeant. If they have already earned that accolade that previously set them apart in the regulation for rank titling purposes and the NCO Corps in general, I see no reason why I can't continue to afford them the same courtesy they once enjoyed.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
I once got verbally reprimanded for calling a SSG "Sergeant", I took it like a good little soldier and then sat back and watched a 1SG verbally reprimand that SSG for calling the 1SG "Sergeant". Humorous from my perspective, but in all seriousness, it is in the reg and it is by no means meant to be disrespectful. To each their own and if a certain person of a certain rank prefers to be addressed differently, sometimes you just have to suck it up and address them with their full rank and drive on.
(5)
(0)
PO1 (Join to see)
SGT (Join to see) Excellent reponse! Sometimes individuals are just too involved with themselves.....
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
Too true and sometimes its not even worth the fight, unless of course the person wanting to be reminded of their rank is a complete dick; then sure lets throw the reg at them!
(4)
(0)
PO1 (Join to see)
SGT (Join to see) Are you implying there are AD SM's with EGO's so big that they feel the NEED to be stroked on a regular basis? OMG! EGAD! Beam me up Scotty....there's no intelligent life on this planet!
(1)
(0)
5
5
0
Unless its MSG and up, I address them as "Sergeant." To tell the truth, its the way we in the Army are bred because it starts in basic when you hear Drill Sergeants. If you really think about it, its only the Marines that address their NCOs by their full rank
(5)
(0)
4
4
0
Yep...I'm with MSG Wade Huffman - the AR is simple and straightforward. Yes, you have a full title - but seriously - do you think I want to be addressed as Petty Officer First Class, Surface Warfare, Medley every time someone wants to address? NOPE. Petty Officer Medley is fine.
Yeah, I get it that you worked your a$$ off to get there.....
Yeah, I get it that you worked your a$$ off to get there.....
(4)
(0)
SFC Robin Gates
Private is a private, specialist is a specialist, sergeant is a sergeant. This argument has been going on since 1776. The only ones wanting to be called by the full title seems that they have to be reminded of their rank. Power trip!!! First Sergeant is the only one different!
(1)
(0)
PO1 (Join to see)
SFC Robin Gates LOL...sometimes you get the bear...sometimes the bear gets you.....
(1)
(0)
SFC Robin Gates
PO1 George Medley, sometimes you got to show that bear... where it shit in the buckwheat!!!!!
(1)
(0)
4
4
0
Soldiers calling MSG "Master Sergeant" has got to be one of my biggest Army pet peeves. It's very clear that the first time a Sergeant is called something other than Sergeant is when they become a First Sergeant.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
I don't mean this with any disrespect to SFC (Join to see) , but it seems people of late are going out of their way to find disrespect where there is none.
Disrespect is like offense. It is taken as in the eye of the beholder, but in reality is purely a function of intent.
If they say it with the intent of being disrespectful than it is, if they are not, then it isn't, and since it is current regulation to address them as such, I'd say the intent is not there.
Disrespect is like offense. It is taken as in the eye of the beholder, but in reality is purely a function of intent.
If they say it with the intent of being disrespectful than it is, if they are not, then it isn't, and since it is current regulation to address them as such, I'd say the intent is not there.
(4)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SGT Birkinbine, I would disagree with you on intent. If a Soldiers says something to me that I find disrespectful but their intent is not to be disrespect that does not mean it's ok. If I perceive it to be disrespect and unless I'm completely off kilter than is disrespect. You have to remember that perception is key in this.
(2)
(0)
SGT Chris Birkinbine
I expect most people to disagree. My opinion is, if someone did not mean to insult you, offend you, or disrespect you, and you choose to take it as such, then you are making problems where there are none.
That has always been my belief and I have found that I tend to be a happier person when I don't always assume the worst intent of people.
That has always been my belief and I have found that I tend to be a happier person when I don't always assume the worst intent of people.
(0)
(0)
PO1 (Join to see)
I still have copies of that "butt hurt" chit if anyone is feeling disrespected.......
(1)
(0)
4
4
0
I've often referred to Army SNCO's by their rank and not as "sergeant" and I've never been corrected on it. Now on the other hand I have on 1 or 2 occasions been corrected by Marine NCOs for not using their correct rank and noting the reg difference between the 2 understand why.
(4)
(0)
MSG(P) Michael Warrick
No because the army has taught its Soldiers for a long time that they should be called sergeant not sergeant first class or etc.. this is not the Marines !!
(1)
(0)
4
4
0
It is what it is, never bothered me it was and is HOW we address or are addressed, if some asshat feels the need to be called by the exact designation of Staff Sergeant, Sergeant First Class or Master Sergeant, then they really need to look at their priorities!!
(4)
(0)
Sgt Andrew Pouliot
In the Corps calling a Staff Sergeant, Gunnery Sergeant, or Master Sergeant a Sergeant is liable to get your life ruined
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
They should be addressed by thier full rank. Try calling a Marine Gunnery Sergeant a sergeant and see what happens.
(3)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
Sgt Cody Dumont, of course you'd get into trouble with that example.
Even a POG knows that the preferred short form for "Gunnie" is "God"....
Even a POG knows that the preferred short form for "Gunnie" is "God"....
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
But you're dealing with a difference of Branch.
The Marines have been functioning in their way and the Army theirs.
The Marines have been functioning in their way and the Army theirs.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Cody Dumont
It domes not matter Marines address all ranks by thier appropriate rank and expect the same in return.
(0)
(0)
CW4 Larry Curtis
In many ways, comparing the customs and courtesies from one branch of service with the other just doesn't work. The Marine Corps is steeped with proud traditions, and rightly so. They have proven to be among the very best fighting forces in the whole world, if not THE best...and much of that stems from their high level of discipline. The unfortunate thing we have to deal with between our service branches is that what seems the logical norm for one branch may seem extreme or excessive to another, or maybe even the opposite...one branch may appear to be severely lax when compared to the other. I am a firm believer that it's those small foxes which can get us into trouble many times, but sometimes those small foxes have to mature beyond the cub stage before they are indeed an issue to reckon with. For me, having been a career soldier in the Army, this is one of those small foxes which hasn't grown out of the cub stage because I believe the Army has proven over and over that it functions quite well and professionally just as it has been. It's just a different motivational force driving the cart. I have had friends and relatives who have served in every branch of the military, to include the Merchant Marines of WWII. Everyone has a different set of particular values when it comes to these things...but the one thing we all have in common with each other is the need and desire to accomplish our missions successfully and be able to come away the victors. Sometimes we have to employ our forces in concert with one another to achieve our goals on certain operations, and most definitely to achieve the desired end result in the overall scheme of things. If I am an Army guy working along side a Marine who is a Gunnery Sergeant and he is accustomed to being addressed as such, then it is incumbent upon me, out of a show of respect, that I address him accordingly...and vice-versa. But that is really as far as this really needs to go. The Army cannot be the Marines anymore than the Air Force can be the Navy. But what may appear as minutiae to one may be highly-regarded to others, and vice-versa. In the end, we just need to remain focused on our mission and not allow the minutiae to cloud our vision and judgement. HOOOAHH!! Semper Fi, Anchors Aweigh, Aim High, Aim True, and Be The Army of One!. Now, let's go kick some ISIS ass, whaddaya say?
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
-
Ask questionGet expert advice and
tips for your questions. -
Post updatePost pictures, personal updates, plans, or anything you like!
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google