In today's modern military, would there be any benefit to an enlisted structure similar to that of the past?

I have seen far too many who were unfit to lead nor are professional but yet the proficient and motivated get discharged. Part of the underlying problem is a little know clause in the UCMJ that was removed in 66_67 thst desperatly needs reinstatement. The MORAL TERPITUDE Clause. I had superiors on both usaf and us army who morally were bankrupt but in leadership positions. Now given that the us military is the only legalized form of SOCIALISM we support by government, ( socialistic in structure) and every form of socialism has failed from within because of moral decline.. it would seem such a statute needs to return to the Ucmj. Even the politics i saw in Tn Army NG were ridiculous. Here i was. 12 years of service. With superiors all around me , and many younger and inexperienced being promoted ahead of me. But yet in the shop no one had more promotion qualifications than me but the section chief. By only 3 semester hours of college and 1 more year of service. Numerous times i had to pull my rank as most qualified in shop over superiors who were not mos q or experienced and capable as i was when they started excercising their ranks but not their skills which werent on caliber to mine. They were promoted ahead of me. But yet i was selected 2x for OCS only to be DOR for inability to complete education requirements in time to graduate (ft worker at defense contractor facing overtime season which prevented attending school) and medically hindered the 2nd attempt because of re injury of service connected ankle injury. Was unable to do PT first 3 days of class. So IMHO yes. We can use technical ranks outside of leadership channels. But i believe we got a bigger problem in moral terpitude of the existing ranks where politics and personal bias rules over abilities and skills.

Bullshit. I was a Spec 5 who should have been a sergeant. I was the CQ. I conducted police call.

All jobs need leaders.

One word. No.

I believe we could add maybe up to E6 in the specialist ranks but no more. I think more importantly we should do away with the up or out policy. I noticed a couple other comments were similar in that some people may enjoy doing their job, steady paycheck, good benefits and a retirement plan but just simply don't want the headaches and Leadership. If somebody is doing a good job they should be able to stay as long as they can perform.

The technician rank should be back.

It would definitely keep people in the army longer

If the specialist ranks beyond E4 where brought back, I would have a real hard time to think of a SPC8 not being a leader. We must understand there are simply different types of leaders. Some are interpersonal while others are technical leaders.

Personally I'm fine with how it is now however I don't quite agree with the current advance or out ideology. Mostly for two reasons. One is that the army is hurting for people right now. As unfortunate as that is some units are struggling to meet personnel numbers. Two is that due to lacking personnel means lacking NCO leaders. Some units compensate this by forcing personnel to be boarded and promoted vs having to boot them for not doing so, this ends up with certain individuals who have very little to no personal care or want to lead in leadership positions which hurts the cohesion of the unit. So in my opinion up or out conflicts with meeting propper numbers. But once again this is just my observations.

some people are highly trained and lost to the military because everyone must be promoted or be forced out. They like what they do and are good at it. Having something like the old spec pay grades go higher would allow those people a way to stay in and be compensated at a higher pay scale It is a huge waste of training and manpower to force talented people out because they do not care to ever become CSM of the Army and lead troops outside their mos "shop"