8
8
0
What does everyone think about all of the SPCs and SGTs on here with (P) after their rank? I won't quote AR 25-50, I just want your thoughts.
Posted in these groups: 
Promotable
Promotable
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 28
21
21
0
<p>I just wanted to point out that a lot of people keep saying that AR 25-50 says that only Colonels can use the P as an identifier. That is not accurate. If you are going to site a regulation at least read the whole portion. AR 25-50 states and I quote</p><p> </p><p> </p><font face="Times New Roman" size="2"><p> </p><font face="Times New Roman" size="2"><p> </p><p align="LEFT">"(2) Do not use the “(P)” (meaning the signer is promotable) as part of a signature block in Army correspondence unless it benefits or enhances the image of the Army. However, it may be used in an address for such things as congratulatory notes. Examples are—</p></font><p align="LEFT"> </p></font><font face="Times New Roman" size="2"><font face="Times New Roman" size="2"><p align="LEFT"> </p><p align="LEFT"></p><p align="LEFT">(a) A lieutenant colonel promotable, filling a colonel position. The position requires the signature of a colonel or </p><p>higher. This situation would constitute using the (P) in the signature block."</p><p> </p><p>notice the 2 key phrases unless it benefits or enhances the image of the Army and Examples are- a lieutenant colonel.</p><p> </p><p>Sorry about that I am a stickler for if your are going to use and follow regulations use and follow the whole thing don't stop reading half way through.</p></font></font><font face="Times New Roman" size="2"><p align="LEFT"></p><p align="LEFT"></p><p align="LEFT"></p><p align="LEFT"></p><font face="Times New Roman" size="2"><p align="LEFT"></p><p align="LEFT"></p><p> </p></font></font>
(21)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
so you're saying a Sergeant that preforms as a Section Sergeant can use the (P) on the signature block when they are pulling that duty, or a SSG in a Platoon Sergeant position may use this as well?
(0)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
That is not what I am saying at all. I am saying that there are times and situations where the fact that someone is a (P) is necessary. I already used duty as an example. How many times have you seen certain SPC pull CQ and not others, or certain SGT pull staff duty and not others. It is because they are acting in the capacity of the next rank because they are promotable. Another really good example is Equal Opportunity Leader; to attend the class the Army says you must be an E5(P) or higher. So when I was an E5(P) the paperwork I sent required that I was addressed as such.
I am not saying that anyone should answer the phone or refer to themselves as SGT promotable Snuffy. I am saying that in some cases the (P) is needed and appropriate.
(5)
(0)
LCpl Mark Lefler
SGT Roberts, I could be wrong but reading your example, it looks like your mixing a Rank(SGT) and a billet(platoon sgt or section SGT) where as SSG Scmidt is talking about a rank (lt col) filling in for a rank (Col).
(2)
(0)
MAJ(P) (Join to see)
Where the confusion is, using the (P) that benefits the Army. A SGT(P) filling a SSG billet has no need to sign with the (P). There are no legal conciquences. It does not benefit the Army.
When a LTC(P) is filling a COL billet, he is signing official documents that require the rank of an O6. It benefits the Army. When an COL(P) is filling an O7 billet, his (P) signature gives the required weight to benefit the Army. Even when a promotable E8 is filling the billet of an E9, it benefits the Army.
Other than that, lower enlisted or company grade officers have no real need to add the (P) to the signature other than to "benefit" their egos. I know that's brash, but it's the cold hard truth.
When a LTC(P) is filling a COL billet, he is signing official documents that require the rank of an O6. It benefits the Army. When an COL(P) is filling an O7 billet, his (P) signature gives the required weight to benefit the Army. Even when a promotable E8 is filling the billet of an E9, it benefits the Army.
Other than that, lower enlisted or company grade officers have no real need to add the (P) to the signature other than to "benefit" their egos. I know that's brash, but it's the cold hard truth.
(2)
(0)
19
19
0
The (P) is generated by the site. The is a check box that asks if we are promotable. If you check the box the site puts the (P) by your name. I understand what the reg says, but if the site does it when a Soldier checks a box, that they are in fact promotable, the fault seems to lie with the website not the Soldier.
(19)
(0)
CSM David Heidke
If you are promoted into a slot and your orders haven't been cut yet, you are considered Promotable.
For instance, one of my peers was a 1SG, and he was promoted into a CSM billet. He was the selection, but the paperwork went back and forth because a period was misplaced, or the wrong serif was used on a font. But he was in the position and his troops called him CSM, so he was 1SG(P).
Here is not that big a deal. Perhaps people would think that if they were on a promotion list, they could put the (P), but you wouldn't sign correspondence that way. Only if you were in a position that you needed to, as the good 1SG (Join to see) has explained.
For instance, one of my peers was a 1SG, and he was promoted into a CSM billet. He was the selection, but the paperwork went back and forth because a period was misplaced, or the wrong serif was used on a font. But he was in the position and his troops called him CSM, so he was 1SG(P).
Here is not that big a deal. Perhaps people would think that if they were on a promotion list, they could put the (P), but you wouldn't sign correspondence that way. Only if you were in a position that you needed to, as the good 1SG (Join to see) has explained.
(1)
(0)
CW3 (Join to see)
Depends on the slot. I was, as a WO1, promoted into a CW2 slot, but I wasn't a WO1(P) because orders promoting me were published with a future date...my name didn't just show up on a list somewhere, like it did this past Tuesday, making me now a CW2(P).
(0)
(0)
8
8
0
I like it and I don't see the harm either way. It is nice to know exactly who you are looking at or responding to. In terms of SSGs - MSGs, I think it makes a great deal of difference. Don't forget that alot of people are on here creepy stalking the promotable's in their own MOS to see what the board was looking for last year.
(8)
(0)
CW4 (Join to see)
This is best addressed with some research; you can start by reading AR 25-50, 6-5c(2). Granted this regulation covers written correspondance, but the inference can be made for other applications.
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
This isn't an Offical site. Thus nothing posted on here is official Correspondence. Thus nothing on here falls under 25-50.
Its like asking if its OK to wear BDU's on your couch... Of course it is.
Its like asking if its OK to wear BDU's on your couch... Of course it is.
(11)
(0)
SSG (ret) William Martin
There is always that one guy or gal; the phone rings and, "This is Staff Sergeant Promotable NCOIC of the Super Section voted number one by the Brigade Command Sergeants Majors and I won NCO of the year how may I help you sir or madam?"
(13)
(0)
SGT Ben Keen
SSG William M....I can't believe I'm 3 months removed from this conversation but your reply is probably the best thing I read all day. I served with someone like that. As soon as she passed the board for E6, she DID answer the phone pretty much like that! All the other NCOs and Officers corrected her time and time and time again but yet she continued. The joke going around the unit was she was going to get a tattoo of E5 rank with a huge "P" right in the middle of it.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google