Pay Grade Vs. Rank/Title

Your poll is telling in that it gives perspective as to the meaning behind what you overheard. For example, in the past if a Navy if a Chief Petty Officer (E-7) chose not to go through the Initiation process when selected for promotion from E-6 to E-7, they were not considered a "Chief" but an "E-7."

There's a difference between what you wear and who you are. Truth be told, that moral barometer is the best indication of when someone is ready to advance to the next paygrade. The old civilian saying "Dress for the job you want, not the job you have" is relevant here. We military folk can't very well dress for the job we want (e.g. the next higher grade), but we can act like we already have it. That's how we esteem ourselves to our superiors -- the word "superiors" being used very loosely here because not everyone who outranks us is "superior."

However, those who fail to live up to the expectations of the next higher grade despite wearing it on their collar or on their shoulder are rightly referred to informally in unofficial conversation by their paygrade because they're not only making a bad name for themselves, but they're also ruining the reputation of the GOOD leaders who wore that rank in the past through their own stupidity.

To answer your question, yes. It's bad form to speak ill of your peers or superiors in front of junior personnel. However, it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it damn sure ain't cocker spaniel. But if you're a real leader and not just someone who who's looking for scuttlebutt in the smoke pit you'll pull not only the two you overheard talking too loudly aside to straighten them out, but also the person they were talking about....if they truly need some improvement.

In the Navy, referring to a Chief as an E7 is an insult. The same holds true for Senior Chiefs and Master Chiefs. A Chief of any rank has been accepted into the Mess, an E7 (E8 or E9) is someone who has elected not to go through the process of becoming accepted by the Mess.

It's not that big of a deal and if you have a problem you can take it up with my E-7. Other than that I address him/her by their rank unless told otherwise.

The only exception is when referring to a group of SPC's and CPL's, or for administrative purposes i.e. today I was asking for DOR from everyone in my section and we have a CPL who was just promoted last month, so I told them i need your date of rank as an E4. Other then that rank is earned, paygrade just comes with it.

I think when we refer to someone by pay grade it's because they don't warrant the respect of the rank...typically it's a bad thing.

I've always believed that rank is the proper form of address even though we use rank and pay grade interchangeably. Why would anyone say "Good Morning, E-5" vs "Good Morning, Sergeant"?

For the Army the official guidance comes from AR 600-20 which states that "the numerical pay grade will not be used as a form of address or title in place of the proper title of address of grade. A Soldier holding the numerical pay grade of E–5 will be addressed as “Sergeant,” not as "E–5"." (paragraph 1-6.c.)

I think it would depend on what the situation is. If someone, say a civilian, or a member of a different service than mine is asking, I would explain using the pay grade. When I was a SSG, speaking with a member of the Air Force, I let them know that SSG was E-6, the same as their TSgt. Their SSgt was the same as Army SGT. I agree with SSG Woods, I earned both at the same time. I think the better question to ask is "Are you a SGT, or and NCO?"

I was in the Navy. Petty: insignificant. Officer: leader of men. Petty Officer: insignificant leader of men.

Don't call me petty. Rate and grade is what I preferred

I can remember WAY back (I think it was around the mid to late 1980s) there was a HUGE push in the Army to use the correct title and not pay grade then speaking of / to Soldiers. It was a big issue then (honestly, at that point in my career I wasn't concerned whether I was refereed to as a SPC or E4 - both were so common), maybe it's becoming an issue again.

In the limited exposure that I have had with other services it seems to be much more prevelant there than in the marine Corps. In the Mairne Corps usually when you hear of a Marine being referred to as E5 or whatever it is because they are underperforming or are just not a very good NCO. We tend to use it only as a deragatory.