Posted on Jun 12, 2017
In today's modern military, would there be any benefit to an enlisted structure similar to that of the past?
108K
914
366
194
194
0
I believe that most, if not all of us, are familiar with the old army enlisted rank structure where one could go their entire career without ever becoming an NCO, but still make it up through the paygrades. We all have known people who were great at their jobs but not fit to lead. Is there any benefit to bringing back such an enlisted rank structure?
Rank
Leadership
Enlisted
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 246
1
1
0
Sure..some people can not lead. You cant make them. There is a place for everyone. Non leading people can contribute in other places.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I have said this for years. Forcing someone to move up when they don't want to or know they are not ready is bad for the Army. We also need lateral ranks for Army wide units. A specialist in a troop leading position should be a corporal and any 5 or above that cannot or does not feel comfortable being a leader should be able to maintain their grade but have, like in the past, a Specialist Rank SPC4, SPC5, SPC6. I have seen many in the last 20 years that were not people friendly, could not lead, and many of them knew it and didn't want to be but they were forced into it which made their situation worse.
(1)
(0)
GySgt (Join to see)
It is not a bad thing that they only did 4 years in uniform. 20 years is not for everyone and it should not be due to the responsibility and sacrifice that comes with military service. I don't think we need to cater to service members who "do not feel comfortable being a leader." If you are being forced into something, it sounds like the organization is not for them.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I think this questions misses the point. Under the old system, you were not made a Specialist because you were not fit to lead. Specialist ranks were based on jobs/MOS. It had nothing to do with your ability to lead. Can you imagine the arbitrary system for deciding who should be an NCO and who should be a Specialist? I'll recommend my brother-in-law to be an NCO, etc, etc, etc. As a side note, I was always treated as an NCO and assigned leadership roles during most of my nearly 8 years in the Army. My MOS, however, called for me to be a Specialist.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
No , way he soldiers nowadays get confused with just looking at a staff sergeant rank and some people get confused with a lieutenant colonel in a specialist
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
In cyper warfare, you are going to need high skilled computer hacker and program installers, the current system with it's up or out and zero defect mentality, is hurting us in this important field.
(1)
(0)
GySgt (Join to see)
It sounds like the cyber warfare job should be civilianized due to all the expertise that is required, with the exception of those that need to deploy in a combat location with the possibility of having to locate and close with the enemy.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Bring back the specialist ranks, not everyone is a leader, but now you ate losing all specialised knowledge needed to repair or keep things going, like medical, criptic, computers or machanical.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
No, keep em out but change the time in rate as the needs of the army change.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
From a non soldier perspective, I can see the benefits and drawbacks of both and I think either decision would have equal opportunity costs so the army would just have to decide if it’s more important to have leaders be at higher paygrades or to keep people in who are really good at their job.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Move up or move out , the pink slip , yet E-5 not able to retire but E 6 ok , I ve known failure E 6 s that were worthless but known some great E 5 s carrying them that got booted , it's sad
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google