570
562
8
I have been dealing with this a lot. I have seen both ways. As per AR 600–25 the junior person should salute. I see a 1LT senior to a 2LT and I salute them. I have seen many instances where this does not happen. Most see a LT as a LT regardless of being a 1st or 2nd. How do you all feel about this?
"B. All Army personnel in uniform are required to salute when they meet and recognize persons entitled to the salute. Salutes will be exchanged between officers (commissioned and warrant) and enlisted personnel, and with personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States..."
"B. All Army personnel in uniform are required to salute when they meet and recognize persons entitled to the salute. Salutes will be exchanged between officers (commissioned and warrant) and enlisted personnel, and with personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States..."
Officers
Customs and Courtesies
Army
Saluting
AR 600-25
Edited 11 y ago
Posted 12 y ago
Responses: 1296
0
0
0
0
0
0
When I found a 1LT and a 2LT walking together, I always made sure I saluted the 2LT. There's not much more fun than poking the 1LTs.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
When I was a Sgt I saluted all officers. When I became an officer I saluted everyone. Never gave either a lot of thought.
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I did the same. When I was a 2LT and saluted a 1LT I got called out on it and didn't know why.
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
From all the comments I've read it seems not much has changed. We can be professional and familiar. Depending on the environment and the maturity of those concerned.
(0)
(0)
I just don't think this is getting the attention it really needs. Just want to bump this thing back up to it's place of importance.
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
CPT Michael Barden By you merely commenting you are added to this. My ploy worked.
(2)
(0)
1LT Nick Kidwell
We must restore balance to the Force.
It's like this thread is Anakin Skywalker, and CPT (Join to see) is Emperor Palpatine.
It's like this thread is Anakin Skywalker, and CPT (Join to see) is Emperor Palpatine.
(2)
(0)
0
0
0
LTC John Wilson
Come on SFC? The question is simple, should a 2nd LT salute a 1st LT. YES is the only answer to this no brainer. The 1st Lt. always outranks a 2nd Lt in the US Military.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
AR 600-25.
1–5. Hand salutes and salutes with arms (selected paragraphs only)
b. All Army personnel in uniform are required to salute when they meet and recognize persons entitled to the salute. Salutes will be exchanged between officers (commissioned and warrant) and enlisted personnel, and with personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard), the commissioned corps
of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service entitled to the salute.
c. The junior person shall salute first. Accompanying the rendering of the hand salute with an appropriate greeting such as, "Good Morning, Sir" or "Good Morning, Ma’am" is encouraged. Personnel will not salute indoors except when reporting to a superior officer.
g. Civilian personnel, to include civilian guards, are not required to render the hand salute to military personnel or other civilian personnel.
AR 600–25 • 24 September 2004 1h. Military personnel under arms will render the salute prescribed for the weapon with which they are armed, whether or not that weapon ordinarily is prescribed as part of their equipment.
i. Salutes are not required to be rendered or returned when the senior or subordinate, or both are—
(1) In civilian attire.
(2) Engaged in routine work if the salute would interfere.
(3) Carrying articles with both hands so occupied as to make saluting impracticable.
(4) Working as a member of a detail, or engaged in sports or social functions where saluting would present a safety hazard.
(5) In public places such as theaters, churches, and in public conveyances.
(6) In the ranks of a formation.
and from Military Customs and Courtesies:
Signs of Honor and Respect
Every branch of the armed services has a variety of characteristic customs established
long ago and still in use today. Army customs and courtesies lend color, distinction, and
ceremony to your daily life as a Soldier.
Courtesies are the outward signs of your respect for your nation, your flag, your
comrades, and our country’s fallen heroes. They engender mutual respect, good manners,
politeness, and discipline.
Customs include such things as responding to a senior officer’s presence, recognizing
the officer’s rank or position of honor, correctly using military titles, wearing headgear,
saluting appropriately, reporting correctly, and honoring national and Army symbols
and music.
No where can I locate any document that states that Lieutenants do or do not salute one another in the Army. As you will notice, the word superior is used...thus the heart of the difference of opinion on this question.
I did find numerous "opinions" that it is a long standing tradition. In days of old, it was common for lower ranks to have command positions and thus received salutes simply because of their "job title" and therefore it is not a good example of rendering salutes.
I found "zero" references that there will be salutes exchanged except for the use of the word "superior". The problem here is that the Army has not done a good job of documenting history and tradition on this topic. It should be in print somewhere, but it is not. Vague areas such as this topic should be put to rest with a simple edit to AR 600-25.
Major Ballinger, has been the major defender of this tradition, and from my research over the past couple of months, seems to be the closest to correct answer...no salutes between Lieutenants in the Army.
I am convinced that there is a tradition out there, but the big wigs in DC who write these policies and regulations should include this tradition the next time an update is printed so this topic has a definitive answer to the question.
My suggestion would be: AR 600-25 sub paragraph b...
b. All Army personnel in uniform are required to salute when they meet and recognize persons entitled to the salute. Salutes will be exchanged between officers (commissioned and warrant) and enlisted personnel, and with personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard), the commissioned corps
of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service entitled to the salute. Saluting between Lieutenants is not required.
1–5. Hand salutes and salutes with arms (selected paragraphs only)
b. All Army personnel in uniform are required to salute when they meet and recognize persons entitled to the salute. Salutes will be exchanged between officers (commissioned and warrant) and enlisted personnel, and with personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard), the commissioned corps
of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service entitled to the salute.
c. The junior person shall salute first. Accompanying the rendering of the hand salute with an appropriate greeting such as, "Good Morning, Sir" or "Good Morning, Ma’am" is encouraged. Personnel will not salute indoors except when reporting to a superior officer.
g. Civilian personnel, to include civilian guards, are not required to render the hand salute to military personnel or other civilian personnel.
AR 600–25 • 24 September 2004 1h. Military personnel under arms will render the salute prescribed for the weapon with which they are armed, whether or not that weapon ordinarily is prescribed as part of their equipment.
i. Salutes are not required to be rendered or returned when the senior or subordinate, or both are—
(1) In civilian attire.
(2) Engaged in routine work if the salute would interfere.
(3) Carrying articles with both hands so occupied as to make saluting impracticable.
(4) Working as a member of a detail, or engaged in sports or social functions where saluting would present a safety hazard.
(5) In public places such as theaters, churches, and in public conveyances.
(6) In the ranks of a formation.
and from Military Customs and Courtesies:
Signs of Honor and Respect
Every branch of the armed services has a variety of characteristic customs established
long ago and still in use today. Army customs and courtesies lend color, distinction, and
ceremony to your daily life as a Soldier.
Courtesies are the outward signs of your respect for your nation, your flag, your
comrades, and our country’s fallen heroes. They engender mutual respect, good manners,
politeness, and discipline.
Customs include such things as responding to a senior officer’s presence, recognizing
the officer’s rank or position of honor, correctly using military titles, wearing headgear,
saluting appropriately, reporting correctly, and honoring national and Army symbols
and music.
No where can I locate any document that states that Lieutenants do or do not salute one another in the Army. As you will notice, the word superior is used...thus the heart of the difference of opinion on this question.
I did find numerous "opinions" that it is a long standing tradition. In days of old, it was common for lower ranks to have command positions and thus received salutes simply because of their "job title" and therefore it is not a good example of rendering salutes.
I found "zero" references that there will be salutes exchanged except for the use of the word "superior". The problem here is that the Army has not done a good job of documenting history and tradition on this topic. It should be in print somewhere, but it is not. Vague areas such as this topic should be put to rest with a simple edit to AR 600-25.
Major Ballinger, has been the major defender of this tradition, and from my research over the past couple of months, seems to be the closest to correct answer...no salutes between Lieutenants in the Army.
I am convinced that there is a tradition out there, but the big wigs in DC who write these policies and regulations should include this tradition the next time an update is printed so this topic has a definitive answer to the question.
My suggestion would be: AR 600-25 sub paragraph b...
b. All Army personnel in uniform are required to salute when they meet and recognize persons entitled to the salute. Salutes will be exchanged between officers (commissioned and warrant) and enlisted personnel, and with personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard), the commissioned corps
of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service entitled to the salute. Saluting between Lieutenants is not required.
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
It also doesn't say that officers don't wear qualification badges and yet we don't.
LTs don't salute LTs and if I saw one do so, I would correct him.
LTs don't salute LTs and if I saw one do so, I would correct him.
(1)
(0)
GySgt William Hardy
Maj Miller, my whole point is that there should be a place to find all of these customs in writing so that everyone is clear about things. Not having it in writing is exactly why this thread keeps going. I do not argue for or against the "custom of lieutenants not saluting one another." When I served in the Marine Corps, I had several official training manuals that stated in black and white many of the traditions and customs such as how to conduct a "Dining In" among Staff NCOs. They also gave the history for many of the traditions followed by Marines.
It would be nice if AR 600-25 made that clear by either including it within the regs or adding a section on Traditions and Customs and then stating clearly that 2LTs do not salute 1LTs. I am of the belief that Army regulations are lacking in some areas. In my time in the Army National Guard, I served time on active duty at Ft. Bragg, Ft. Campbell, Ft. Knox and then there was the year at Camp Taji in Iraq. During this time, nobody really paid any attention to this issue so I never gave it a second thought when active. I just researched many different on-line resources including other discussions on the topic. What I found was a total lack of any "proof" to support either side with most of the evidence on the side of those that say no saluting. So, I am just saying that if the Army's powers-to-be would simply include the common customs somewhere in the regs or other training manuals, it would end a lot of these discussions.
It would be nice if AR 600-25 made that clear by either including it within the regs or adding a section on Traditions and Customs and then stating clearly that 2LTs do not salute 1LTs. I am of the belief that Army regulations are lacking in some areas. In my time in the Army National Guard, I served time on active duty at Ft. Bragg, Ft. Campbell, Ft. Knox and then there was the year at Camp Taji in Iraq. During this time, nobody really paid any attention to this issue so I never gave it a second thought when active. I just researched many different on-line resources including other discussions on the topic. What I found was a total lack of any "proof" to support either side with most of the evidence on the side of those that say no saluting. So, I am just saying that if the Army's powers-to-be would simply include the common customs somewhere in the regs or other training manuals, it would end a lot of these discussions.
(0)
(0)
GySgt William Hardy
Major Ballinger, customs and traditions are of major importance to the military. I am only suggesting that be written so that all may see exactly what that custom is and how to apply it. I am not in opposition to what you are saying, I just think it would be an excellent idea to have a place to look up customs and traditions. As I previously stated, there would be no need to argue these points. All you would have to do is quote chapter and verse and direct the person who is inquiring to the proper source. In other words, when I wrote my thesis, I would have never have been passed if I did not provide sufficient valid references. I could not say, "According to prevailing customs... " because there is not real proof. I am saying lets make all of these customs and traditions on the same level authority by writing them down in an official document. I am on your side. I am just suggesting that it be written down for all to see.
(0)
(0)
Capt (Join to see)
Sorry, but when custom is written it then become more of a regulation than a custom.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
How about a twist? We all have a choice of addressing our officers by their name and rank, rank, or sir? Since sir is a sign of respect, how do you all feel when the officer is addressed by their rank all the time, as opposed to sir?
(0)
(0)
SGT Craig Northacker
Major, I absolutely appreciate where you are coming from, and from a general standpoint the assumption that command should have a better grasp because of the information available to it is a reasonable one.
I was not comparing proper respect to Nurnburg - I was commenting on blind allegiance when there are rules of war at play - and usually they are applicable only to the side that loses. I was in during the My Lai incident, so there was quite a bit of concern as to what constituted legal versus illegal orders.
I also mention it because of the abject failure of the VBA to abide by the laws enacted by Congress that control its' conduct. The ongoing blind allegiance to defective and illegal policies is unacceptable, and the fact that no one is held accountable, especially with respect to fiduciary and ethics violations. At the end of the day I am very much at the table, as my substantial experience and knowledge becomes part of the discussions at very high levels in our government, including being asked to serve on numerous task forces for sitting Secretaries and discussions with EOP executives.
It also enables us to deal with miscarriages of justice committed by company grade officers for a variety of reasons - the result of which can often be the initial spin on a downward spiral of an enlisted person which becomes a very expensive drag on the GNP. With respect to NCO's not assessing officers - we may not sign off on OER'S, but we sure as heck have an impact on training young officers in a positive way which extends in both directions.
I am not in the current military, but I meet with many who have extensive current military experience as well as retired flag officers. They have many very interesting stories...
I was not comparing proper respect to Nurnburg - I was commenting on blind allegiance when there are rules of war at play - and usually they are applicable only to the side that loses. I was in during the My Lai incident, so there was quite a bit of concern as to what constituted legal versus illegal orders.
I also mention it because of the abject failure of the VBA to abide by the laws enacted by Congress that control its' conduct. The ongoing blind allegiance to defective and illegal policies is unacceptable, and the fact that no one is held accountable, especially with respect to fiduciary and ethics violations. At the end of the day I am very much at the table, as my substantial experience and knowledge becomes part of the discussions at very high levels in our government, including being asked to serve on numerous task forces for sitting Secretaries and discussions with EOP executives.
It also enables us to deal with miscarriages of justice committed by company grade officers for a variety of reasons - the result of which can often be the initial spin on a downward spiral of an enlisted person which becomes a very expensive drag on the GNP. With respect to NCO's not assessing officers - we may not sign off on OER'S, but we sure as heck have an impact on training young officers in a positive way which extends in both directions.
I am not in the current military, but I meet with many who have extensive current military experience as well as retired flag officers. They have many very interesting stories...
(0)
(0)
SGT Craig Northacker
One very specific example was the failure of a two star National Guard adjutant to protect the National Guard soldiers being deployed to Afghanistan by taking base line DNA samples by State Public Health Officers. The two duties pounded into me were accomplishing your mission and taking are of your men. The failure to take care of his troops was a failure of leadership and needlessly exposed them to potential and very well documented health issues rampant in our current military endeavors. I held him accountable and he eventually retired within a relatively short time. I do not know if that had anything to do with me, or care, but I am an active advocate to protect ALL servicemembers, veterans and their families...as long as they serve honorably.
(0)
(0)
CDR Michael Goldschmidt
Your twist of rank via "Sir" became real to me when I was deployed to Saudi Arabia. In the Navy, it is considered more proper to address a Senior by his rank than by Sir and even more proper to address him by his rank and last name. In the Army, it seems the reverse to be true. One day, my boss's boss, an Army COL, remarked that I must really dislike him. I denied it and asked why he thought so. He remarked that when I saluted, I said "Good morning, Colonel Murphy, NOT good morning, Sir", and that soldiers did this when they thought their officers were assholes. I told him that custom was exactly the opposite in the Navy, that addressing him by name and recognizing his rank is the pinnacle of respect. Of course, from then on, I began addressing him simply as "Sir". Then again, one of my most respected Sergeants First Class once told me that I was "the shit". He meant it as a compliment. It took me a while to accept that one, but he meant that I was the boss, the big kahuna. Sometimes our decryption doesn't properly match the ENcryption.
(0)
(0)
MAJ Keira Brennan
CDR - it's an OLD tradition in the Army that addressing an officer by their Rank and Name is a sign of contempt! We are a tad backwards.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
By regulation the only correct answer is "yes". There is no exception listed for the 1LT/2LT relationship. That said, tradition says no.
AR 600-25 Para 1–5.
Hand salutes and salutes with arms
a. For instructions on executing the hand salute, see FM 3–21.5, paragraph 4–4.
b. All Army personnel in uniform are required to salute when they meet and recognize persons entitled to the salute. Salutes will be exchanged between officers (commissioned and warrant) and enlisted personnel, and with personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard), the commissioned corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service entitled to the salute.
c. The junior person shall salute first. Accompanying the rendering of the hand salute with an appropriate greeting such as, "Good Morning, Sir" or "Good Morning, Ma’am" is encouraged. Personnel will not salute indoors except when reporting to a superior officer.
AR 600-25 Para 1–5.
Hand salutes and salutes with arms
a. For instructions on executing the hand salute, see FM 3–21.5, paragraph 4–4.
b. All Army personnel in uniform are required to salute when they meet and recognize persons entitled to the salute. Salutes will be exchanged between officers (commissioned and warrant) and enlisted personnel, and with personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard), the commissioned corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service entitled to the salute.
c. The junior person shall salute first. Accompanying the rendering of the hand salute with an appropriate greeting such as, "Good Morning, Sir" or "Good Morning, Ma’am" is encouraged. Personnel will not salute indoors except when reporting to a superior officer.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
Between officers. Very clear. Are you disputing whether 1LT and 2LT are different ranks?
(0)
(0)
COL Randall C.
MAJ Carl Ballinger, regulations are littered with incorrect grammar, so I wouldn't put too fine a point on analyzing 'between' and such. Additionally, you're leaving out a lot of the complete portion of the regulation you were quoting.
b. All Army personnel in uniform are required to salute when they meet and recognize persons entitled to the salute. Salutes will be exchanged between officers (commissioned and warrant) and enlisted personnel, and with personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard), the commissioned corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service entitled to the salute.
c. The junior person shall salute first. Accompanying the rendering of the hand salute with an appropriate greeting such as, "Good Morning, Sir" or "Good Morning, Ma’am" is encouraged. Personnel will not salute indoors except when reporting to a superior officer.
If you still want to go with the 'correct grammar' portion, then we can quibble about the "and with personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States" portion since all military officers are 'personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States'
b. All Army personnel in uniform are required to salute when they meet and recognize persons entitled to the salute. Salutes will be exchanged between officers (commissioned and warrant) and enlisted personnel, and with personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard), the commissioned corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service entitled to the salute.
c. The junior person shall salute first. Accompanying the rendering of the hand salute with an appropriate greeting such as, "Good Morning, Sir" or "Good Morning, Ma’am" is encouraged. Personnel will not salute indoors except when reporting to a superior officer.
If you still want to go with the 'correct grammar' portion, then we can quibble about the "and with personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States" portion since all military officers are 'personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States'
(0)
(0)
CW3 Timothy Dunn
I wonder why it states between Commissioned and Warrant. CW2-5 are Commissioned Officers
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google