Posted on Dec 1, 2021
LTC Deputy Staff Judge Advocate
11.7K
40
23
6
6
0
I say it is. The message is, you are not worthy of the time it would take me to type your surname. Thoughts?
Avatar feed
Responses: 12
MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P
5
5
0
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.
(5)
Comment
(0)
SSG Bill McCoy
SSG Bill McCoy
4 y
MSgt Steven Hold, NRP:
Agree; but the opening should be by rank & name, I'd think ... as this reply. Then if an informal contact, just rank is okay. Know what I mean, MSgt?
LOL
Regards,
SSG Whoever
(1)
Reply
(0)
MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P
MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P
4 y
SSG Bill McCoy - Touché! And well played! I didn't follow my own advice.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Michael Hasbun
5
5
0
Ceb1e5b8
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).
(5)
Comment
(0)
MSgt Nancy Wilson
MSgt Nancy Wilson
4 y
I get you -- all I am saying is that the hearts and minds of people can not be regulated.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SFC Michael Hasbun
SFC Michael Hasbun
4 y
MSgt Nancy Wilson the regulations are supposed to be the foundation of our knowledge as NCO's and Officers.
If you don't know the regulatory guidance, you're failing your subordinates and the minimum standard expected of all leaders.
Knowing the regs is the basics that everything else is built off of.
(2)
Reply
(0)
SSG Medic Advisor
SSG (Join to see)
4 y
MSgt Nancy Wilson - When was referring to the written and established guidance considered a failure. Failure is the refusal and inability to look for the proper answer.
(0)
Reply
(0)
1px xxx
Suspended Profile
>1 y
SSG (Join to see) - Yup...if one goes on just making things / stuff up, they are NOT part of the organization. I referred to Soldiers by their Rank & Last Name. To address them only by their last name was disrespectful. It isn't hard....
Avatar small
SFC Ralph E Kelley
5
5
0
Edited 4 y ago
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"?
(5)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Avatar feed
Is it disrespectful to refer to junior officers and/enlisted Soldiers in emails by rank only?
CAPT Kevin B.
3
3
0
Edited 4 y ago
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.
(3)
Comment
(0)
SFC Retired
SFC (Join to see)
4 y
Aboard ship was always a different world. There were dozens of different ways to address everyone and they were all right or wrong, depending on who was there and what your and their relationship was with the individual.
(0)
Reply
(0)
CAPT Kevin B.
CAPT Kevin B.
4 y
Yup, the Tactical Electronic Warfare Advocate (TEWA) was called The Easiest Woman Around. Another nickname.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
MAJ Operations Officer
2
2
0
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.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
CSM Darieus ZaGara
1
1
0
LTC Pappaionou I get your perspective and second that thought.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
1
1
0
LTC (Join to see) 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..
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
LCpl Sidney Green
1
1
0
On the contrary, rank only is never inappropriate. Although you should try and include the name whenever possible.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Intelligence Analyst
1
1
0
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.
(1)
Comment
(0)
SFC Retired
SFC (Join to see)
4 y
If I’m sending an email to multiple recipients I address it to ALCON.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Practical/Vocational Nursing
0
0
0
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.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close