Should the Army rename its Warrant Officer ranks?

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 01 Apr 2021 12:00:57 -0400

Is it just me or are the Army Warrant Ranks the least creative in regard to naming? W....1,2,3,4,5. What are your thoughts on maybe renaming them to show progression? Example: W-1: Warrant Officer, W-2; Warrant Officer First Class, W-3: Chief Warrant Officer, W-4: Senior Chief Warrant Officer, W-5: Master Chief Warrant Officer. That's my rough cut, any Warrants out there with an opinion? Or is the current rank structure good as is? Just curious...

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2021 12:37 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 01 Apr 2021 12:37:20 -0400

I was thinking about this the other day and all through WOCS. Something like Novice WO, Apprentice WO, WO, Chief WO, Master WO (and maybe bring back the approved but not authorized CW6 for CCWOs). While it would be nice to have a better name than just a number, it may hinder the more "it's just a pay grade and Warrants talk to each other more as equals while understanding the grade and position" rather than a CW2 being all "Yes Chief!" to a CW4, as placing the name creates more of a difference and inherent structure. (at least that was what was brought up to me when I posted a similar thing a few months back by a CW4).
It makes sense. As WOs are the SMEs and more "behind the scenes" Officers. Just like in SOF, we get by with first names because we have the necessary respect for the grade/position, but can talk to each other as humans and still accomplish the mission, not to mention that unique place between Enlisted and Commissioned.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2021 1:25 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 01 Apr 2021 13:25:30 -0400

Yea, the whole way the Army incorporates Warrants into the system has been diluted more and more over the years.

They use to wear the Eagle and Wreath on the ASU's, and they simplified the rank insignia as much as they could. The Navy/USMC still separate out WO1-CW2 with GOLD, and CW3-5 with SILVER. Same with the Service Cap. The Navy/USMC Warrants have their own Service Cap, and now Army Warrants use the Company Officer Service Cap.

On the surface it looks like Army warrants are being diluted into the Commission Officer ranks.

Example............
If a Navy Warrant was in full fancy dress white uniform you could tell he was a warrant at 50 yards standing next to an Ensign in the same whites.

Could you tell me you can tell the difference between a Army Warrant standing next to a 2LT in their Blue ASU at 50 yards? They have the same cap, I don't think you can make out the rank on the shoulder boards. Save for the ribbon rack which would be speculation, because the 2LT could still be a mustang.

*****
I get a sense (from being around a lot of warrants, I rated 4 of them at one time) they have their own culture they have been holding onto this whole time, but as the Army dilutes them more and more that sense of exclusivity is being lost to those outside their circle.

A Private will be scared of a SGT much differently than they would be a MSG or higher, and with good reason. That same Private would be scared of a LT differently than they would be a COL for those same good reasons.

I'm not saying Privates are disrespecting Warrants, but when a CW2 steps into the room verses a CW4+, from their perspective (that I've observed) it's not anything more special. They have to salute them all the same like they would an LT, but they aren't shaking in their boots like a CSM just walked in, or hoping the COL returns their snappy salute.

I think this is a byproduct of the Army's institutional dilution of Warrants.

Response by MAJ Ronnie Reams made Apr 1 at 2021 1:43 PM

MAJ Ronnie Reams — Thu, 01 Apr 2021 13:43:39 -0400

Not sure if it is still this way, but back in my day they were interchangeable. A WO1 - CW4 could hold any Warrant slot, as it mattered not the pay rate. Insignia had to change so that MacNamara's Morons and the other low IQ folks taken in after the draft ended could count the spots on the bars and know whether Warrants were a 1,2, 3 or 4.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Apr 1 at 2021 2:19 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Thu, 01 Apr 2021 14:19:52 -0400

We already did. We used to call them SPC-4, SPC-5, SPC-6, etc...

Response by CSM Darieus ZaGara made Apr 1 at 2021 2:48 PM

CSM Darieus ZaGara — Thu, 01 Apr 2021 14:48:39 -0400

Kind of like LT, 2LT etc. I think it is distinctive in its application, it clearly indicates very different titles throughout the progression. Anyway.

Response by SFC Marc W. made Apr 1 at 2021 3:37 PM

SFC Marc W. — Thu, 01 Apr 2021 15:37:14 -0400

I have to ask the question of why? Why would the ranks need to be renamed?

I feel like this is a good idea fairy and doing it for the sake of doing something.

Response by CW4 Guy Butler made Apr 1 at 2021 4:19 PM

CW4 Guy Butler — Thu, 01 Apr 2021 16:19:37 -0400

Is it broke?

No?

Then don’t try to fix it.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2021 7:29 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 01 Apr 2021 19:29:07 -0400

There really is nothing wrong with the system that's been in use for the many years. Why confuse everyone with more change? I believe the Army's titles for Warrant Officer grades are uniform with those of other services.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2021 7:35 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 01 Apr 2021 19:35:11 -0400

It looks like historically............. there already was a naming convention in 1947 along the MAJ's proposed topic.

https://warrantofficerhistory.org/Hist_WO_Insignia.htm

WARRANT OFFICER INSIGNIA OF GRADE - Warrant Officer Historical Foundation

The Army Institute of Heraldry's Rank Insignia Section, Warrant Officer Page

Response by MAJ Matthew Arnold made Apr 2 at 2021 9:55 AM

MAJ Matthew Arnold — Fri, 02 Apr 2021 09:55:47 -0400

As a commissioned (Major) army aviator I've been around warrant officers for years. They are all great professionals. To borrow from Will Rogers, I never met a warrant officer I didn't like. That being said, in my personal opinion, I think the Army should follow the Air Force and do away with warrant officers and change all those positions to commissioned officers.

Response by SGT Bill Christian made Apr 2 at 2021 10:48 AM

SGT Bill Christian — Fri, 02 Apr 2021 10:48:20 -0400

Somebody call for the net tje good idea fairy got loose again.

Response by SFC Melvin Brandenburg made Apr 6 at 2021 2:38 PM

SFC Melvin Brandenburg — Tue, 06 Apr 2021 14:38:07 -0400

no.

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 3 at 2021 12:19 AM

WO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 03 Sep 2021 00:19:49 -0400

WO are all Quiet Professionals Brothers & Sisters we don't get to wrapped up around WO Level/Ranks. We look out for each other and don't need to use rank.

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made Jul 21 at 2022 2:14 PM

CW3 Kevin Storm — Thu, 21 Jul 2022 14:14:21 -0400

Sir, leave well enough alone. All of the services except AF and Space Force have the same names.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 22 at 2022 12:14 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 22 Dec 2022 12:14:33 -0500

Leave our rank structure alone pls