Is it disrespectful to refer to junior officers and/enlisted Soldiers in emails by rank only?

2021-12-01T17:53:29-05:00

I say it is. The message is, you are not worthy of the time it would take me to type your surname. Thoughts?

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 1 at 2021 7:06 PM

2021-12-01T19:06:36-05:00

In a professional email (business), it is most definitely unprofessional to address someone you do not have a personal relationship by rank only, or worse, last/first name. The courtesy should extend up and down the rank structure. If you are conducting professional business, be professional. Plain and simple.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 1 at 2021 9:03 PM

2021-12-01T21:03:01-05:00

I don't see it is disrespectful. I get emails from people who just address me as "SFC." I don't care. There's people I email back with just their rank too - even officers - that I don't know personally. I'll email back LTs with "LT." I've emailed back CPTs or MAJs with just rank especially if they have a long name that I don't have time to sit there and make sure I don't misspell - and if I'm not sure if it's "sir" or "ma'am."

I'd rather people at least put my rank instead of nothing at all when they reply (yes I've had officers reply to me with no salutation of any kind). I guess to each his or her own.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Dec 1 at 2021 9:34 PM

2021-12-01T21:34:39-05:00

I see it more as a decorum issue.

Response by SFC Ralph E Kelley made Dec 1 at 2021 9:58 PM

2021-12-01T21:58:30-05:00

Depends on if it is Professional Contact Email or a personal email - same rules as sending a letter. the tone of the letter is key. Are they saying, "Great Job" or "You're Poopiehead"?

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Dec 2 at 2021 2:27 AM

2021-12-02T02:27:29-05:00

The proper verbal decorum back in the day was last name only for E-1 through E-3 (shipboard necessity). Then it became Petty Officer Surname, and then Chief minus the surname. In memos and correspondence, it was different with Rate, Name. For officers it's verbally Rank and the same as enlisted for stuff on paper. Also aboard ship, neither rank or name but position/function is used. Helm, Boats, Guns, and the list goes on. Of course there were the nickname "honorifics" for the Boot and Bull Ensign. Finally you know you really arrived when a special nickname got hung on you. For me it was Forks, then Tox(ic), then Pinks. Some Lance called me Pinks up at MWTC Bridgeport. Gunny slapped him hard on the backside of the head telling him it's Lieutenant Pinks to you. Laughter all around because they were thrilled this Seabee was building them a new medical clinic.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Dec 2 at 2021 9:24 AM

2021-12-02T09:24:52-05:00

Much like every military question, there's already a doctrinal answer in the regulations.
Please see AR 600-20, 1–7. Military grade and rank, Table 1-1 (Title of Adress for each rank/grade).

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 2 at 2021 10:18 AM

2021-12-02T10:18:07-05:00

This can’t be serious… is it disrespectful? No. If I have a shop with a SPC, 2 PFCs, and a couple privates, if I’m writing an email to one of them, I will refer to them only by their rank. E4 and below, rank only unless there are more than one, E5 and above rank and name.

Response by LCpl Sidney Green made Dec 2 at 2021 4:45 PM

2021-12-02T16:45:28-05:00

On the contrary, rank only is never inappropriate. Although you should try and include the name whenever possible.

Response by MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P made Dec 2 at 2021 4:47 PM

2021-12-02T16:47:39-05:00

I would say it depends on the tone of the message. If the message is formal/professional and I have not established a working relationship with the individual, I usually default to the "formal" approach (as in SSgt Soandso or A1C Whatstheirname). If it is someone I've known for a while, I might go with the less formal "SGT, PFC, A1C, SRA" depending on the purpose of the communication.

When in doubt, I always opt for the more professional/formal approach.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Dec 4 at 2021 9:21 AM

2021-12-04T09:21:09-05:00

LTC Private RallyPoint Member Yeah that does sound a bit Disrespectful, Now in Person, It would be Situational the BMs would usually refer to Me as CT1 No Name Necessary Unless all 3 CT1s Onboard were Present. We're More focused on Your Rate (Job Specialty) in the Navy..

Response by CSM Darieus ZaGara made Dec 4 at 2021 10:34 AM

2021-12-04T10:34:43-05:00

LTC Pappaionou I get your perspective and second that thought.

Response by MSgt Nancy Wilson made Dec 4 at 2021 12:06 PM

2021-12-04T12:06:34-05:00

I say - it depends on the relationship and the context it is used in. Generally speaking, when speaking to or referring to someone that you do not know personally -- then yes -- it is slightly disrespectful, again, depending on context. Military sense of humor knows no bounds -- gotta think about that.

Response by Cpl Mark Oresko made Feb 11 at 2022 5:53 PM

2022-02-11T17:53:00-05:00

It is important that people do not become a rank. Man, woman, young, or old, it is not just a courtesy, but it is a privilege to serve with other individuals who equally made the same pledge to serve their country. So yes, an e-mailed message lacking the receivers name can be considered rude, disrespectful, etc. etc. as if leaving out the persons name is intentional. But I say “Can be” because some people might not give a shit wether an email contains a name or rank at all. The fact that the message is in your in-box means that you were the intended receiver of its contents. People are people and sometimes people aren’t aware of how their electronic communication is coming across that computer screen and interpreted in that brain housing unit. The sender might just be ignorant of how their message is coming across to the people they are messaging. I was guilty of this when I first started writing emails. I would write everything in caps lock. I thought caps lock made my emails look nice, but someone had to tell me that writing everything in capital letters comes across negatively, like I am angry or shouting at the receiver. Emails introduce all kinds of human error when it comes to communication and choosing an email as a proper form of communication falls on the responsibility of the sender. So if a person sends an email with a message and that sender expects their message to produce some kind of result, then that message better be more than thorough enough to produce desired outcomes.

I keep picturing a bunch of lance corporals on a rooftop with a corporal as their squad leader, then you have a grip of weapons attachments from weapons platoon also on that rooftop (I don’t know about other branches but this is typically how the Marines rolled to clear houses in Fallujah). Now all of a sudden Lieutenant Biden screams CORPORAL light up that building with your gunner!! Every Corporal on that rooftop would just look at each other with that stupid confused deer in the headlights look on their face. This is because Lieutenant Biden might want a javelin fired at a location or a 240 Golf. However, no fire is ever going to be laid without a more descriptive order.

Always think of RESULTS. Ask yourself if your messages lack anything specific that the receiver would need in order to eliminate confusion, misinterpretations, excuses, or assumptions, to produce some kind of desired result. Clear, Concise, and Complete Communication prevents Confusion.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2022 2:18 PM

2022-03-08T14:18:14-05:00

If you have time to type or say their last name, you have time to add their rank. Would you like your subordinates to start an email with just your last name? No? You would feel disrespected if they did it? Then be respectful to them. Set the example so you don’t become an example.

Also a word of advice. It’s not your job to make people like you, but if they don’t like you, they will fu*k you.

I’ll take a cheeseburger and large fry.