Posted on Mar 24, 2014
Should the Army continue regarding NCOs as Sergeant or by their actual rank title?
58.5K
93
78
4
4
0
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?....
NCOs
Rank
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 35
1
1
0
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.
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.
(1)
(0)
CW3 (Join to see)
Because some people are assholes regardless of rank, SPC Needham. First names are reserved for those who are your friends and family, or close to you. I've known people over the years who I've served with who I would never allow to call me by first name....not at all, regardless of the fact that they outranked me or that we were the same rank.
It implies a familiarity that does not, and should not exist.
It implies a familiarity that does not, and should not exist.
(6)
(0)
1
1
0
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.
(1)
(0)
SFC Michael Hasbun
If you're avoiding senior personnel because you don't want to use their full title, it will be hard to establish a friendship...
(1)
(0)
SPC Christopher Smith
I'm a smoker, I'll always be able to make a friend, lol. Seriously though, smoke pit is the best place to have an informal conversation with anyone. Everyone is there to relax and shake off some stress.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
SSG Hasbun, if it really did come down to referring to everone by full rank, I can almost guarantee you people would start using unofficial titles such as "Staff" for Staff Sergeants
(1)
(0)
SSG William Patton
As as staff sergeant I was called sergeant or sarge, but never staff sergeant. I had no problem with just being called sarge or sergeant. I used full rank when I addressed the first sergeant or sergeant major. We did not have a master sergeant at the time and if we did he would be addressed as master sergeant. I think E-8s and E-9s have earned the right to be addressed with their rank as a sign of respect for their accomplishments. Sergeant first class is a mouthfull and I always used the term sergeant when addressing them. However, that was the old Army and things change, but not always for the good.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
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.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
Only if we can rename Sergeant First Class... Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue..
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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".
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Really no different than calling all LTs LT, all COLs COL and all flags General.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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...
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...
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google