Should the Air Force bring back Warrant Officers?
1. Before the question of "if" warrants would be returned to AF duty, the AF must define their place in the chain of command. Warrants in US military are commissioned officers. That, there, is a mouthful. I was a commander for 13 years, from W1-W4. How does a warrant position affect the rating system, the chain of command, and is the AF unified on that decision? I ask this because despite major advances in understanding the role of warrant officers in the Army, that point is still being debated.
2. A warrant officer is a technically and tactically trained officer, specializing in areas of expertise and often employed as advisors to the commander and team leaders of critical units. Warrants are not "3rd lieutenants," senior-senior enlisted" or "cheap" officers for 66% of the cost of O-grade officers-- all of which are the misguided views that warrants often have to guard against.
If the Air Force was to bring back the W1-W5 ranks in order to be a force multiplier, all these things have to be clarified from "Top down."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergeant_pilot
A sergeant pilot was a non-commissioned officer who had undergone flight training and was a qualified pilot in the air forces of several Commonwealth countries before, during and after World War II. It was also a term used in the United States Army Air Forces, where they were commonly called flying sergeants. After World War II, non-commissioned pilots began to be phased out and today all air force pilots are commissioned officers.[citation...
Associate in Applied Science in Culinary Arts/ Restaurant Mgt. what really have me a lot of credits was my CCAF credits. (CDCs, time in training during CDCs counted as apprentice training (6years worth) NCO school, I did re-enter the AF as a SSGT.. and did good.. I had a problem and that was a cmdr who didn’t want to take a chance with a guy with a head injury.. so it seemed my fate was sealed. He even dug back to before the latest re-enlistment regarding time on weight reduction program, a few times.. actually I was only on for a few lbs over ea. Time.. s’body was trying to make themselves look efficient .. that Cmdr was told that first batch of years was off limits . He managed s’thing, I still got out and AF board comped me and still got me out with Honorable over that Cmdr’s objection. If it weren’t for the head injury and if the AF had s WO program.. I think I could have fit in as a Chef that became a W.O.
The Army ruled me out then because of my head injury.. (all the TBIs then were rated as too serious)- it happened in ‘77.
Prob’ly too much readjusting to the Army way of life. But I wouldn’t know until I tried it..
Now on to the cons, just as with the Army there is no defined way to treat Warrants. RLOs want to lump us in with them however, we are more concerned with the technical side. It is also figured that because we are the experts that we do most of the work when things go south. Instead the Enlisted should have enough knowledge to get things up a running and we just give them pointers as to items they might have forgot. I recently had an exercise in which I had to bring up two separate sites because the Signal Soldiers were not trained to do the job. This then brings the question of the Warrant doing training (which I will add I am not opposed to but I just need a heads up to conduct training).
At WOAC we had a discussion about WO relevance, and my argument was that the USAF was doing fine without them. Don't get me wrong I think it's an awesome program, otherwise I wouldn't have made the switch. The USAF could bring in WO's into certain positions as stated in other posts in this thread, and as a means to reduce the civilian force among our ranks.
A reintroduction of the SQT would a good start to help and I have heard that they are going to start a time in service requirement before a person can get the next rank. There are certain positions that a Warrant would be a good idea due largely on the fact that we bring a lot of knowledge and experience to the table as I told the Signal Company Commander when an issue I told him I have seen this before and it didn’t work then because of these reasons. I told him here was a better solution to the problem. Now as a Warrant the only problem I have is that we can advise and the command can ignore.
Here's something to consider and compare against your canoe club enlisted. Some of the finest techs I've run into are CPOs. By the time they make E7, they've probably attended two or three feeder MOS producing schools. That's why they can do the job of many of their Sailors in different MOSs.
The Army's problem and weakness is that they place a high value on leadership development, fulfilling 'I've held a leadership position at such and such, which doesn't amount to a hill a beans. Sergeants learn in school; real NCOs learn by osmosis. Think about that one for a moment.
Next, because the Army places such a high premium on holding slots / positions they are eating their own. Why? Because the higher you go up the chain of command (mainly in tech fields), the farther you are removed from the nuts and bolts of one's MOS. as a result, most E7s cannot really do the solid hands-on training required for their Soldiers.
That's where the WO comes in, if he / she are worth their salt.
I've watched it first hand from '67 to '13 when I returned to the retired rolls from the WOCC. All the best.
Ops Groups: Finding those enlisted personnel who have an aptitude to fly, the Army utilizes many WO for helicopters. The same principle can be used in the AF as well as for Drones or other airframes. Additionally, WOs can be assigned to lead ATCs, plans, QA, etc.
Security Forces: Especially assigned to units where their is only one or two commissioned officers assigned. examples would be Flight Commanders (WO 1/2) to work along side with the Flight Sergeant (usually a SNCO), CWO (3/4) to fill in section chief duties (S-2: Investigations, S-3 Assistant OPs Officer or as Ops Officer if a commissioned officer is not assigned, S-4 Supply and Logistics, etc) , CWO5s Work along side the Security Forces Manager and Commander as the overall supervision for all WOs
Fire Fighters: The WO1/2 are station chiefs while WO3/4 can be fire chiefs along with SNCOs. CWO5s are lead the over all fire dept. and works with the CE commander as an assistant fire marshal.
LRS/CE: WO1/2 are section chiefs (i.e. lead for POL shift, warehouses shift, etc.) CWO3/4 lead whole sections with their SNCO counterpart, and CWO5 works with the command sections.
MDG: Specialized practitioners that do not require to be a doctor (i.e. Social Workers, Counselors, etc) as well as nursing, and chiefs of sections. While they meet the education requirement to be a commissioned officer with a BS/BA or higher degree, this will allow them the option to be practitioners specifically
I also believe that when an enlisted person reaches E-6 they have a choice of going on to a management track (SNCO) or a technical expert track (Warrant Officer) meeting a set of steps necessary to meet each. Both tracks must require the TSgt has completed NCOA, meets all fitness requirements with at least an overall 80%, and have at a minimum a CCAF degree in the field that are in (exceptions are specialized practitioner). Furthermore, the TSgt must state in writing which track they wish to pursue and be accepted through a board of SNCOs or WO based on EPRs (past 5 years) and recommendations of at least 3 SNCOs or WO, the TSgt may submit to both boards. Boards will meet at the base level annually and a TSgt who has been passed over from the board may resubmit no more than three times. This will allow the AF that ability to invest those deserving while allowing TSgt to reach retirement (20 Years) while allowing the TSgts a chance to progress if passed over previously. Finally, WOs should only consist of about 10% of the total force such as the SNCO corps (WO1/2=MSgt Strength, CWO3/4=SMSgt Strength, and CWO5=CMSgt Strength)
Just for fun: All WO are called either "Warrants" or "Chief Warrants"
Here's a great thread highlighting a recent article about the potential return of the Warrant Officer to the AF ranks, definitely food for thought... thanks SSgt Moskal for posting!
Who was in the Air Force during the SrA/Sgt transition? | RallyPoint
I came into the service in 1974, at the age of 18. During that time the Air Force decided to go with the SrA rank (E-4) and then Sgt (E-4). That memory stays with me as something original in the post Vietnam era. Any thoughts or ideas about this? I kind of like the two-tiered E-4 idea.
Are Warrant Officer Utilized Correctly? | RallyPoint
Army Warrant Officers are technical and tactical experts in their respective fields. With the downsizing of our forces WOs are being required to work outside of the norm. IE: Battalion primary staffs (S-4, S-1, etc). Thoughts?