Should the Army continue regarding NCOs as Sergeant or by their actual rank title?

2014-03-24T21:19:33-04:00

The question is whether anyone has an opinion if the Army should continue regarding its NCOs as Sergeants or by their actual rank title. Army NCOs, from the time that they pin on E5/SGT are referred to as Sergeants. This continues until the NCO reaches E8/1SG as there are a few Army MSGs that I have seen referred to as "sergeant" and they were not offended. The other services (Navy, USMC, USAF) refer to each of their ranks by their actual rank title; the USMC E6/Staff Sergeant is referred to as a Staff Sergeant while a E6/Tech Sergeant in the Air Force is referred to as a Tech Sergeant. The Navy uses rates such as Master at Arms (MA) 1,2 or 3 to signify rate and rank but still, its not just MA. As I am not offended by being referred to as a Sergeant by others as a SFC, mostly out of years of repitition, does anyone think that the Army should enforce rank references that reflect the actual rank title (eg. Sergeant or Staff Sergeant for an E6 and so on)?

Although I do realize that when an Army NCO is in a ceremony or similar formation, they are referred to by their actual rank however; when a Soldier, another NCO etc. needs to speak with Staff Sergeant Doe, John/Jane, they are acknowledged only as Sergeant. What do you think?....

Response by SPC Charles Brown made Mar 24 at 2014 9:24 PM

2014-03-24T21:24:56-04:00

Anyone above the rank of SGT E-5 has earned the distinction of that rank and as such should be addressed by their rank. They are entitled to the respect earned for their rank. Yes they should be addressed by their proper rank.

Response by SFC Frank Soto made Mar 24 at 2014 9:44 PM

2014-03-24T21:44:03-04:00

Not necessary...why ? because it creates more blah to communicate one to another. There is no need to re invent the wheel.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 25 at 2014 8:39 AM

2014-03-25T08:39:43-04:00

If the respect is there, I doubt many Soldiers Staff Sergeant and above feel the need to be addressed by complete rank. I've heard Marines make the argument that it's "wrong" but every branch has pros and cons. Every branch has regulations that the other prefers and/or envies.

Response by SFC William Swartz Jr made Mar 25 at 2014 8:50 AM

2014-03-25T08:50:13-04:00

Leave it be, we are the Army, we do not need to change how we conduct business merely because the other branches of service do it a different way. I only met a few NCOs over the course of my career that were, let's say so full of themselves, that wanted lower ranking NCOs/Soldiers to refer to them by their full rank title. As I was subordinate in rank to them I complied just so that I didn't have to spend any more time with/around them than required; usually they were oxygen thieves and I would leave their presence a lot more light headed than when I arrived!

Response by SPC Christopher Smith made Mar 25 at 2014 8:59 AM

2014-03-25T08:59:16-04:00

To be honest, if I had to say the entire rank I'd probably just stop looking for reasons to speak to people. Conversing would literally be rodger to everything if I understood or not, just because I wouldn't want to say the entire name of a persons rank and surname. I'd say be happy with the recognition you do recieve, Officers only get Sir/Ma'am regardless of rank.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 2 at 2014 2:56 AM

2014-04-02T02:56:36-04:00

All of the Air Force Personell that I work with on a daily basis laughed at me when I called an E7 "Master Sergeant". The E7 in question litterally said something along the lines of "Hey man, we don't do that shit. In the Air Force it's Sergeant all the way up to E9, and Sir/Ma'am for anyone, enlisted or commissioned. Also, he always referred to me as "Sir".

If I find out that my NCO is a former Marine, I address them as their full rank. Until told not to by that NCO. That is simply because I understand that the Marines consider it to be disrespectful not to.

All of that said, I still don't understand why we don't just use first names. It would make things less of a mouthfull most of the time.

Response by SSG Anthony Schoepp made Apr 2 at 2014 10:29 AM

2014-04-02T10:29:02-04:00

While deployed many of us on our small bases would drop rank/position to
a point in many circumstances as a sign of respect and equality in
combat. That did not mean that there was a lack of discipline but more a
mutual understanding that in combat we are all brothers/sisters. As far
as exact titles, if you are a NCO you are a Sergeant or an 'E' grade. I
have seen the difference between an E-5 and a Sergeant. E-5 does his
job to get a paycheck. A Sergeant develops those around him/her and
leads their troops. Other then official ceremonies... leave it be.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 2 at 2014 2:05 PM

2014-04-02T14:05:46-04:00

I agree and paractice this myself. I got chewed out by a Gunnery Sergeant (E7) when I was a SPC. A much more proffessional Marine SSG explained to me thier coutesies and why. Basically as you go up in rank, you have more time, more experience , and more rsponsibility. Think about it, as an SFC you are considered a SENIOR NCO, but to just be referred to as "SGT", its like being demoted. A SGT/E5 generally has 5 yrs TIS, a SSG/E-6 has 6-10, andan SFC/E-7 has at least 11-15yrs TIS. So after tha Gunny incident, I refer to everyone by thier Rank, do I shorten it, sure I address my Master Sergeant by just that or 'MSG" for short. I told my platoon to adress me as no less than 'SFC". This just might instill some more respect and discipline into these Soldiers.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 5 at 2014 8:44 PM

2014-04-05T20:44:54-04:00

I was in charge of my BN's vehicles and personnel at railhead at NTC; we worked with a group of Marine Logistics guys who called everyone by their rank. It took a little getting used to, being addressed as "Staff Sergeant" instead of the Army standard of "Sergeant".

I personally think that people have earned their rank (be it Private or First Sergeant), and addressing them by their rank wouldn't hurt anyone. I also realize that the Army has way more important things to fix than simple stuff like this.

Response by SGT Frank Leonardo made Apr 6 at 2014 2:58 AM

2014-04-06T02:58:19-04:00

When I was in the Army I always referred to fellow service men and women by their rank not just sergeant because I felt that it was only right because that was their title and they earned it. I was a E-5 sergeant all higher ranks in NCO's I called by Rank E-6 Staff sergeant ETC.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 9 at 2014 8:42 AM

2014-04-09T08:42:53-04:00

When I see a SSG I usually call them staff sergeant.

Response by Sgt John Anderson made Apr 9 at 2014 9:21 PM

2014-04-09T21:21:27-04:00

In the USMC, you all know it would be like spitting in a gunny's face to call him sgt. but I tell you the WORST is when you see some old angry looking Marine walking your way with dark green digi's on and so much black chevron on his collar that you can't tell what the hell his rank is. most of the time you could get away with a motivated oohrah, but I have pulled out the "good morning gunnerymasterfirstsgtmajor sir" that usually covers all the bases.

Response by CW2 Jonathan Kantor made Apr 9 at 2014 9:26 PM

2014-04-09T21:26:55-04:00

I never liked it when people would call anyone between E5-E8 (Minus the star) by their rank. My biggest pet peeve is when people call a MSG, Master Sergeant. More and more Soldiers are doing this and it bugs the hell out of me! I learned what to call an E-8 in Basic Training and that was 17 years ago! If I can still remember that, why don't the newer Troops? Seriously, it's annoying! Ok, rant complete.

Leave it the way it is. Each branch has their traditions when it comes to rank identification and means of address. I see no reason to change.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 9 at 2014 10:05 PM

2014-04-09T22:05:35-04:00

I personally think leave it be. I was at Airborne school when I was a cadet and was waiting for the phone and a Marine was on the phone with no blouse just talking away and basically barked at me to leave then said aren't you forgetting something when I responded. I said sergeant. He said no. I corrected myself and said staff sergeant. This is crazy as he has no rank on and well to be honest it is that shade of gray but don't cadets outrank SSGs? Where was his address to me as Cadet?

I think if you have to hear your full rank or make others say it, as I have seen some do, it might mean that you are unsure of yourself. If you need to remind them of your rank (unless they are being disrespectful, if that is the case you have a lot of often to remind them of your rank) then you are not doing a good enough job communicating and having mutual respect.

I do not have to remind people of my rank. I just hear Sir and go with it. I do not need to hear what rank I am.

Chiefs only go by chief that I hear.

Just one officer's thoughts.

Response by MSG Wade Huffman made Apr 10 at 2014 7:17 AM

2014-04-10T07:17:13-04:00

As a senior NCO I never took offence to being called "Sergeant"... after all, that is the PROPER address to be used for an Army NCO (with the exception of First Sergeant or Sergeant Major). Having said that, however, the services are becoming more "Purple" with increased joint activities and where exposure to members of other services in an official capacity USED to be the exception for most enlisted personnel, this is no longer the case and is pretty much becoming the norm (not a bad thing at all) it may be time for all the branches to look at the issue and have a standard policy DOD wide. In short, I would say unless the DOD wants to create a standard across the services, just leave it alone.

Response by Sgt John Anderson made Apr 11 at 2014 9:23 PM

2014-04-11T21:23:56-04:00

Ok, so I get it that it is in the Army regs to call everyone SGT, but what about "Sarge?" you soldiers really say that or is it a Hollywood thing? Sounds terribly unprofessional to me, but I guess you could make the same argument that as Marines, we call Gunnery Sgts "Gunny"

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 20 at 2014 3:55 PM

2014-04-20T15:55:18-04:00

I'm currently stationed on a Navy base. The Sailors I meet typically call me Master Sergeant even though the in the AF Sergeant is fine E-5 to E-8. I don't say anything because it's correct and if that's what they have been told to say I don't want to undermine their leadership. I've been working with the Navy's Color Guard and the Sailors refer to themselves by rate, HM2 for example.

I'm curious if "Gunny" is an approved title. There are many in the AF that call E-8s "Senior", which isn't official. It's not that I don't think they are worth it; they are in the top two percent of the enlisted force. With logic, we come back to everyone is referred to by their full title...

Response by SGT Richard H. made Jul 31 at 2014 10:10 AM

2014-07-31T10:10:03-04:00

If it goes to the point where NCO's are addressed by "actual" rank, E-7's will need something that sounds cooler that "Sergeant First Class"....marines have "Gunny". We need something cool like that.

Response by PFC Jason Rodrigues made Jul 31 at 2014 4:37 PM

2014-07-31T16:37:47-04:00

I would say leave it up to the individual soldier who is addressing the NCO, if PFC Snuffy wants to call SSG Bootstrap Staff Sergeant then no issue really should be made. If he just uses Sergeant then so be it as long as that NCO isn't a 1SG (then its either First Sergeant or Top) or a SGM or CSM.

Just my opinion on it.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 1 at 2014 12:37 AM

2014-08-01T00:37:35-04:00

I think it's fine the way it is. Firstly because it's worked well for so long. Secondly, the difficulties imposed on communication would be infuriating. For example: let's say I'm walking into my Co building at the start of the duty day and I see my PSG. By the time I would be able to articulate "good morning, sergeant first class" he would be 10 paces past me. Third: even the other branches have their own unofficial titles. Examples: Marine SSgts are often referred to as "Staff", or Gunnery Sergeants referred to as "Gunny".

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 1 at 2014 2:11 PM

2014-08-01T14:11:09-04:00

The Navy does refer to those in ranks E4-6 as "Petty Officers," both collectively and sometimes individually. The Army's practice of referring to E5-E7 (at least) as Sergeant appears related to referring to all CWOs as "Chief." It does seem to me a CWO4 has earned the right to be addressed differently from a CWO2.

Regardless of Army tradition, I attempt to address Sergeants as their actual rank (although 1st Sergeant being a position rather than a rank sometimes confuses me). Fortunately, since almost no Army person seems able to comprehend the difference between a Navy Chief, Senior Chief, and Master Chief (much less be able to read the collar/hat device), I seem to get a fair amount of tolerance over calling Army NCOs by the wrong rank...

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 21 at 2014 8:26 AM

2014-10-21T08:26:17-04:00

SFC Shaver, have been in places where both practices were done, and others where lower ranking people we addressed by first names....depends on the unit and the situation (public, private, combat...). One can rarely be wrong with demonstration of respect for actual rank; however, it's a bit cumbersome to do so and mainly used on television shows. I once had a Navy Lt. Commander who kept calling me as an SFC a "petty officer"--and I constantly reminded him that I as NOT an E6. So I called him LT for a while until he got the point.

Response by MAJ Ronnie Reams made Oct 30 at 2014 9:54 PM

2014-10-30T21:54:58-04:00

Really no different than calling all LTs LT, all COLs COL and all flags General.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 17 at 2014 6:24 PM

2014-11-17T18:24:42-05:00

We should probably me more concerned with things more important i.e. Training our troopers on thier job skills vs worrying about something that has gone on for years and hasn't changed and really doesn't change discipline level one way or the other. Should we respect other services and stay professional with their titles ? Yes. Let's just stay the Army and stop worrying about the other services. If we want to attack something that needs to be changed, let's get all the overweight personel out and NOT just the junior ranks.

Response by SFC Roberto Garza Jr. made Nov 17 at 2014 6:56 PM

2014-11-17T18:56:28-05:00

Let's get the NCO Corps to enforce the current regulation of having Soldiers address the NCO'S as Sergeant in the first place. This basic standard is something that is no longer enforced and should be to reinforce the lacking discipline standards. Let's get this fixed then address change.

Response by LCpl Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2014 1:45 AM

2014-12-23T01:45:31-05:00

Marine here. I had to go out to Fort Belvoir for training a few times and I always found it rather confusing and slightly insulting (as in I was giving insult) to refer to NCOs who were not Sergeants as "Sergeant". "Good morning, I'm Sergeant So-and-So" "...but your chevrons say Staff Sergeant. I know I'm a Marine and people make fun of us on the whole asvab thing... but what in the wide world of sports?"

It seems to work for the Army, but I think you should call any service member by the rank they've earned. It takes a fair amount of work to earn it, and to do less is disrespecting the rank and the person wearing it.

Response by LTC Joseph Gross made Dec 23 at 2014 4:47 AM

2014-12-23T04:47:57-05:00

It is an interesting thought and with SSG that is a pretty easy change to make, but imagine everyone addressing you as SFC Shaver... That's a lot to get out and it would be tiresome. Better to leave it as it is.

Response by Cpl Peter Martuneac made Dec 25 at 2014 4:06 PM

2014-12-25T16:06:14-05:00

I've never liked that about the Army. What reason is there to not call someone by the rank they've earned? I know it's not meant as disrespectful, but that's how it comes across to me when you call an E8 the same thing you would an E5.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 27 at 2014 2:40 PM

2014-12-27T14:40:11-05:00

Leave it as it is. The person addressing the Noncommissioned officer knows the rank of the person they are talking to....the NCO is wearing his rank on his uniform. So what is the need to use the full titled rank.

When aswering the phone, it is proper to answer by identifying ones self by their full rank as a professional courtesy and recongition for the caller. Once established, it's no longer necessary.

This was never an issue or a problem for NCOs during my time in the Army (73-96). I'm at a bit of a loss for the reason we see this to get quite a bit of attention here on RP as it has come up on numerous ocassions. Army regulations cover this topic, there is no issue, well, except apparently for a select few who seem to think their self-inflated opinions of themselves and deserve the special recognition as if unless they are addressed by their full rank title, no one will know what their rank is. REALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Response by CSM Christopher St. Cyr made Jan 8 at 2015 10:55 AM

2015-01-08T10:55:21-05:00

JMHO, If you are a Sergeant in the Army or a Staff, Master, First, Command Sergeant Major and don't like or want to be called Sergeant, then turn in your stripes and pin in the Specialist Shield again. Being a Sergeant in the Army, at what ever grade is an honor and privilege. Our job is about taking care of the Soldiers (BTW, Officers are Soldiers too) so they can accomplish missions assigned by Officers. If someone attempts to address you in a respectful, though uninformed fashion, accept the respect.

Response by SGT John Beardsley made Apr 2 at 2015 11:54 PM

2015-04-02T23:54:34-04:00

I came out of boot kinda proud that I could spot, correctly identify and address all of the NCOs by proper title at the turn of a hat. Went to my first permanent party unit and started noticing funny looks when I addressed Staff Sergeant so-and-so properly and Sergeant First Class (yeah, that one) with title due.

I got the message when I addressed the unit First Sergeant as "First Sergeant thats him" and he chewed me up for breakfast.

The custom, at least when I was in and in the field artillery, was that First Sergeants were called "Top". Everyone else in the non-comm corp was Sergeant, and if you made it into the corp yourself "Sarge" in informal situations.

I always thought that Sergeant was all the honorific I needed. If fate had played out differently, I would have been proud to be called Top.

Short answer, No. Leave the tradition as it is. If Army NCOs need to be reminded at every beck & turn what their rank is, there is another branch whose traditions may be better fitting.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 8 at 2015 12:45 PM

2015-06-08T12:45:24-04:00

I know my rank....I don't need it spelled out for me in every conversation. It actually irks me to hear the whole thing.

Response by SPC Charles Brown made Jun 8 at 2015 12:54 PM

2015-06-08T12:54:18-04:00

This is a matter that depends on the NCO in question and the soldier addressing them. The NCO has the power to determine how they want to be addressed and as such can correct the soldier on the proper manner of address as they wish it applied to them. I have seen and become "friends" with NCO's and been afforded the privilege of calling them Sergeant, while the more "chewed up" soldiers were taught to refer to the same NCO by their full rank.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2016 1:33 PM

2016-03-10T13:33:35-05:00

My last BC insisted that officers refer to NCOs by their rank instead of just "sergeant". His philosophy was "they earned that rank, use it".

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Feb 6 at 2018 3:40 PM

2018-02-06T15:40:15-05:00

Only if we can rename Sergeant First Class... Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue..