Should the Army continue regarding NCOs as Sergeant or by their actual rank title?
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
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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
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.
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.
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.
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google