Posted on Jan 28, 2014
Should the Army bring back the Specialist titles?
952K
3.85K
1.21K
1.3K
1.3K
2
When I joined the Army we Specialist 4-6 (SP7 had just been discontinued). It provided those Soldiers who had technical expertise and experience the opportunity to progress and earn more pay. However they typically were not "green tab" leaders and were subordinate in rank to a "sergeant" of the same pay grade (SSG & SP6). I've often thought over the years that the Army deleted a program that brought added value to the organization by discontinuing these ranks, as not all Soldiers are not going to be good leaders but should have the opportunity to progress based on their occupational expertise.
Should the Army bring these ranks back?
Should the Army bring these ranks back?
Rank
Promotions
Specialist
Soldiers
SP6
Posted 12 y ago
Responses: 708
1
1
0
I think it could help however if it's from a financial standpoint then no because that's what TIS raises are for
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
Incorrect. There is no TIS increase for SPC past "Over 6." And TIS increases really aren't comparable to a raise commensurate with experience and impact.
Just looking at simple civilian auto mechanics, they make median salary of about $42,000, with a range from about $31,000 to $56,000. Diesel mechanics range from about $37,000 to $76,000 a year.
At 6 years in, an E-4 Army mechanic, mostly working on diesels will be maxed out on TIS increases and making just under $34,000, and flipping tractor trailer tires on the parking pad for PT. Allowing Technician/Specialist Soldiers to progress in pay and responsibility in recognition of their developing specialized skill set in an attempt to retain them is not a bad thing.
Just looking at simple civilian auto mechanics, they make median salary of about $42,000, with a range from about $31,000 to $56,000. Diesel mechanics range from about $37,000 to $76,000 a year.
At 6 years in, an E-4 Army mechanic, mostly working on diesels will be maxed out on TIS increases and making just under $34,000, and flipping tractor trailer tires on the parking pad for PT. Allowing Technician/Specialist Soldiers to progress in pay and responsibility in recognition of their developing specialized skill set in an attempt to retain them is not a bad thing.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
I vote yes.
I think there are good Soldiers out there, who are good at their job but not necessarily a good leader or that they may not even want to lead.
I think there are good Soldiers out there, who are good at their job but not necessarily a good leader or that they may not even want to lead.
(1)
(0)
LTJG (Join to see)
You may be an expert at your job, but with rank comes responsibility and an expected level of leadership. The military is not in the business of separating leaders and technical experts. An E5 is an E5, regardless of the title. If a service member is lacking in the required technical expertise or leadership quality required for the next pay grade, they are not ready for it. Once they've proven they are both technically competent and have proven to their superiors that they have what it takes to lead at the next level, they should only then be considered for promotion. I'm not a Solider, but I think the whole idea of separating technical experts and leaders of the same pay grade fails Soldiers. Just my opinion.
(0)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
LTJG (Join to see) - That's not a bad view point and I hadn't considered it that way. I've seen this discussion a lot lately so I'm curious to see where a lot of people lean and why.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I know a great number of NCOs who are very proficient at their jobs but should never have been awarded stripes. If we're not going to revive the various grades of Specialist, we should get rid of the SPC rank entirely. SPC / E4 as a standalone rank is probably the most useless rank in the U.S. Armed Forces.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I think they should. In my field as an 64C now 88M, I enjoyed driving trucks and was good at it, but didn't necessarily want to get promoted to take me away from my truck.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
I also believe we need to bring back the specialist rank 100%. As a Warrant Officer in the maintenance field for 22 years, I also seen some great soldiers leave the army because they didn't want a leadership role but otherwise were great at there MOS and could teach other soldiers well. Giving them the incentive to stay in the army and make rank and better pay.
CW3 Bailey, USARMY retired
CW3 Bailey, USARMY retired
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
The Specialist is just that, he/she specializes in the field of assignment. The problem is that the almighty dollar controls the size of our armed forces and, therefore, the ability to even have people who cannot function in the strategic world of combat no matter the MOS. So while I empathize with those who do not wish to occupy leadership positions, we may not be able to afford them. The hard truth.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I was an SP5 laterally promoted to SGT when reclassified. I had been a TVM and reclassified as an armor crewman! SP5 was a good rank in that you were paid for your skill as a mechanic while your supervisor handled the NCO responsibilities . MAJ (Join to see)
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google