Experience vs Work Ethic: Which one is more important in an E-4 and below?

I would pick the PFC, but I would move the SPC to a SGT's team. If the SPC wants to ride that sham shield, he can do it all day for all I care. I will give the PFC a shot, see how he does, and get him to SPC early if it's available and see how he does with the shield. I would do this because that's how it's happened for me. Don't give up, understand that complaining does nothing but label you as whiny, and get proactive with everything, know that everything in the Army is written down somewhere, find it and you can do it. That's what got me from E-3 to E-7 as fast as physically possible.

I vote for work ethic. How about frocking the PFC to CPL and putting him/her in charge of the team. That seems like the right call to me.

Work ethic is more important, but the military has a rank structure for the good order and discipline of the force. Putting a PFC in charge of a SPC would disrupt that structure. The SPC needs to be given the opportunity to succeed. In an ideal world, better performance would equate to more responsibility and rank.

I think following the regular procedure for something like this is clear. The SPC would get the open slot because of rank. They would either fail or succeed. At the same time, with such a high speed PFC, the squad leader or platoon sergeant should have already advised their PL or commander that this PFC is recommended for promotion (provided they have TIG and TIS). Eventually those who show the potential will always rank-up and move into leadership positions no matter how many career-long specialists are currently above them.

I would first give the SPC an opportunity to lead and either prove him/herself or fail due to their incompetence, then I would provide the opportunity for the young PFC the opportunity if the SPC fails to be able to lead.

For a leader, work ethic is most important in my opinion. I'd rather be led by an E-1 to E-3 with a better work ethic than myself, and be able to share my knowledge with that Sailor to get the task done properly. Of course, it is expected of the E-4 to take up leadership and knowledge but also recognize when he should take a step back and let someone "under" him or her take the helm. Drop the pride, and realize rank doesn't equate to the ability to get things done.

The high speed PFC of course.

Definitely work ethic, you can have all the experience and knowledge in the world, but if you don't put it to use or are lazy then you are not leadership quality. However if you bust you're ass everyday with every task and prove you're worth, not only will you're leadership notice but all you're subordinates as well which that will gain their trust and respect and those are the values of true leadership.

Definitely experience and demonstrated potential. Some SGTs are in charge of other SGTs who are far their senior because they are more competent. Or SFCs being frocked to 1SG over a MSG based on merit and expertise. Might motivate that SPC to step up their game.

As a former hoodlum in the E-4 mafia, I'll say this: There are Sp4s just getting by. And there are Sp4s who (sorry) "want to be all they can be"! I am sure you are aware, Spec Burkett, Army regs might lean toward rank/time in grade as the main factor. But unlike some of my superiors have stated, I don't want to put someone unqualified into a leadership position and then "see if they fail" then replace them because I don't want me or my fellow soldiers to die unnecessarily. I'd rather have the PFC, as long as he had enough experience, training. See, in my mind, I can always teach someone small unit tactics, or how to come up with a duty roster or how to break a specific enemy code. I can't teach someone to give a shit.