Posted on Apr 21, 2016
Should the military implement a policy of professional Privates?
20.3K
69
62
5
5
0
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 17
We seem to prefer promoting people to the point of incompetence... instead of allowing people to continue to work at a level where they excel.
(15)
(0)
(1)
(0)
SSG Bill McCoy
SGT Jerrold Pesz - When I went Army from the Navy/USMC, I hd to do Army Basic. The Co Cdr was a CPT who was and OCS guy. The XO was a mustang 1LT with 3 PH's, a Stilver Star and multiple Bronze Stars with V among SIX rows of ribbons. The Co Cdr had a ND service ribbon. Despite all that 1LT's experience as an Infantryman, he was being RIF'd. That was in 1971. Why such things are done without consideration of EXPERIENCE boggles my mind.
(0)
(0)
SSG Bill McCoy
SSG (Join to see) - the Democrats give workers, and the military, a lot of lips service, but as I recall Carter, the peanut farmer as President, was so lackluster regarding the military that we had to ration gasoline; didn't have ammo for required annual weapons qualification, and then there's the debacle of the attempt to rescue our hostages in Iran. That failure was due in no small part due to aircraft maintenance issues; those due to the same - lack of funds to maintain readiness.
Clinton's Somolia debacle.
Then we have Obama who OPENLY stated he was going to shut-down the coal industry and power plants. Yet, the United Mine Workers endorsed and supported him, shooting themselves in their proverbial foot.
Yes, the Democrats support the military ... only with rhetoric.
Clinton's Somolia debacle.
Then we have Obama who OPENLY stated he was going to shut-down the coal industry and power plants. Yet, the United Mine Workers endorsed and supported him, shooting themselves in their proverbial foot.
Yes, the Democrats support the military ... only with rhetoric.
(0)
(0)
During my 22 years I knew several Sergeants who would have made good Privates.
(5)
(0)
CSM Charles Hayden Passed 7/29/2025
I once wrote an EER suggesting that an SFC led from the authority he derived as the senior member of the rear rank!
(2)
(0)
SSG Bill McCoy
I think we all knew NCO's who would have been good Privates as well. Not many thankfully, but enough to be a detriment to any unit's readiness. Not only readiness suffers, but so does morale. I knew many buck SGT's who had more courage to do what's right, than a few Sr NCO's, despite the former's experience level. I will say though, with one lone exception, EVERY officer from butter bars to full Birds and the CG of Walter Reed, were all true leaders.
(0)
(0)
Back in the days of Regimental Service in the UK, and late 1800's and 1900's it was not out of the norm to see 20 and 30 enlisted personnel. They served in the same Unit for the entire time, and never progressed past a promotion or two. While they did not get paid very much, they were very proficient in their duties and the Unit was tight due to very low personnel turnover. What would happen id we enacted this policy today? Would anyone want to stay a LCpl for 20 years? Not sure if my joints or back would last that long in the infantry. But in some jobs it might not make a huge difference.
(4)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
The "Up-or-Out" method of force reduction is kicking a lot of people to the curb. The smaller the unit, usually the better the morale, in my experience.
(2)
(0)
CW4 Russ Hamilton (Ret)
Sounds a lot like our National Guard. I'm constantly surprised to see 40 yr old PFC's and SPC's.
(1)
(0)
SSG Bill McCoy
SGT (Join to see) - Agreed! The "Up or Out" method can/did have disasterous effects on unit morale. I've seen SSG's booted who were truly great soldiers ... and often, their replacements were far less productive. As an MP, I was on the list for SFC and was NOT looking forward to ending up as a desk jockey. I had to get out for family reasons at the end of my 3rd Enlistment. It made it a bit easier knowing I wouldn't spend the next 8 years or more, in some admin position. Lord knows, I loved being a line MP and mentoring young soldiers.
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
SSG Bill McCoy - Well understood. Many people are most effective in a position that isn't the highest position available to them. And vertical promotion isn't the only way to progress. Join the pro-Specialist ranks discussion if you haven't already.
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/should-the-army-bring-back-the-specialist-titles
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/should-the-army-bring-back-the-specialist-titles
Should the Army bring back the Specialist titles? | RallyPoint
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...
(1)
(0)
I would like to have seen the days when there were multiple specialist ranks. I think it would probably solve a lot of problems if they were used again.
(3)
(0)
TSgt (Join to see)
SFC (Join to see) - The opposite happened to me during BCT. I had to go to the post hospital for something minor, and a form letter later arrived to my home addressed to CPL Unger (I was a SPC at the time)
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
TSgt (Join to see) - Now that you bring it up, I'm pretty sure the same happened to me. Personally though, my favorite is when I get emails from our down trace addressing me as SSG and sometimes SFC. I would say that it bothers me, but at the same time, I earned my chevrons, but no rockers yet, and I would rather be addressed properly until such a time that I get promoted.
(1)
(0)
SFC Everett Oliver
I was a team chief of a Navigational Beacon team when my orders for SP5 were cut. They caught up to me 6 months later (long story) when I was COMSEC Custodian at TCLSC-EUR. The First Sergeant told me as he pinned on the SP5 chevrons that as soon as the ceremony was over I was to go over to supply and get some Sgt stripes and he would have the orders amended or have lateral promotion orders cut.
(1)
(0)
CSM Charles Hayden Passed 7/29/2025
SFC (Join to see) - I fully agree. @Lead, follow or get of the way!" It takes all types, I have known several, technically competent, yet barely able to dress themselves.
(1)
(0)
911 occurred and Ft Riley was augmented at the gates by NG. One guard was a PFC and looked 60. As a 30some CPT I felt I owed him respect due to age.
(3)
(0)
SSG Bill McCoy
As a Patrol Supervisor and a Desk Sgt, I had a SP4 who was in his mid-40's - a Prior Service guy like myself. He was an above average soldier/MP and when we go to reunions, it's an honor to address him today as, "First Sergeant." He's one of those "old salt" types who younger soldiers, even when he was a SP4, looked up too because he walked the walk, and was a great example to younger troops.
(0)
(0)
Isn't Warrant Office the professional private? They are the SME of their MOS and just do their job. Allow E-4s to apply instead of E-5 and above.
(1)
(0)
CW4 Russ Hamilton (Ret)
TSgt Kerry Hardy - I also have to question whether aSrA E-4 is a true SME. In my experience and in my MOS, they (E-4's) are not.
(0)
(0)
TSgt Kerry Hardy
CW4 Russ Hamilton (Ret) - I the USAF they are as they don't make E-4 before 36 months and are trained to be trainers of E-1/3s. Pluse most in USAF are E-4s for 72 months before making E-5....
(1)
(0)
CW4 Russ Hamilton (Ret)
TSgt Kerry Hardy - OK, USAF E-4's are SME's. Making them WO's (even if the USAF had them) won't solve the issue. WO's in all services have even greater responsibilities than senior NCO's - so we're back to square one.
(1)
(0)
TSgt Kerry Hardy
CW4 Russ Hamilton (Ret) - True but making SM that want to be an SME and not a Admin NCO are who get promoted to WO. Some are meant to be SNCO but some should never get there as they make poor leaders. And there are some that are both...
(0)
(0)
It would require a cultural change in the Services to recognize that some people are good at what they do and quite happy to keep doing it for fair pay and benefits for a long time. I'm not sure "private" is the correct term for that type of person working as a "journeyman technician." Up-or-out policies sometimes force good people out the door only to be replaced by less experienced folks and those intensely interested in getting promoted (careerists). Private sector companies are often happy to have employees who do their job everyday meeting standards and not causing any problems. They offer them good wages and benefits and sometimes programs that allow bonuses for performance above standard. Is it reasonable for an E-4, who isn't an NCO to stay in the Service up to the earliest eligible retirement point? I don't know, but it's worth looking into.
The Air Force has wrestled with this problem every decade or so when the Service realizes that up-or-out forces good pilots and other aircrew members out the door. When the civilian market for pilots has an increased demand, the pilot exodus at the end of post-training commitment becomes painful for the Service. The AF then looks for ways to encourage pilots to stay. Some twice-passed-over captains or majors would be happy to stay on board and just fly airplanes. They are often good at the job and happy to take on responsibilities as instructors or evaluators, but have no desire to be a Commander of anything or career broaden into non-flying jobs or serve on higher headquarters staffs. They have little interest in PME and no desire to get a Masters Degree. In short, they don't want to do the stuff the AF says you need to do to get promoted. During my active duty time it was possible for some twice-passed-over captains to be allowed to stay to 20 years and retire; twice-passed-over majors usually had enough time in service to make it to 18 years (sanctuary) and then retire at 20. I don't know that the AF has found a way to resolve the issue since I retired in 1991.
The Air Force has wrestled with this problem every decade or so when the Service realizes that up-or-out forces good pilots and other aircrew members out the door. When the civilian market for pilots has an increased demand, the pilot exodus at the end of post-training commitment becomes painful for the Service. The AF then looks for ways to encourage pilots to stay. Some twice-passed-over captains or majors would be happy to stay on board and just fly airplanes. They are often good at the job and happy to take on responsibilities as instructors or evaluators, but have no desire to be a Commander of anything or career broaden into non-flying jobs or serve on higher headquarters staffs. They have little interest in PME and no desire to get a Masters Degree. In short, they don't want to do the stuff the AF says you need to do to get promoted. During my active duty time it was possible for some twice-passed-over captains to be allowed to stay to 20 years and retire; twice-passed-over majors usually had enough time in service to make it to 18 years (sanctuary) and then retire at 20. I don't know that the AF has found a way to resolve the issue since I retired in 1991.
(1)
(0)
The up or out policy is insane and only hurts the Military. I came within 6 months of my SPC RCP and like that promotion points drop like a rock and I made my cut off score. I was beginning to prepare to transition out, but accepted my promotion to SGT./E-5 instead. I do agree that the SP5, SP6, and SP7 ranks need to come back because some people are much better at their jobs rather than managing. Clearly, this will always be an issue for the services and those that would rather do the job they signed up to do.
(0)
(0)
Well, to take a cue from the past (at least for the Army, can't speak for the Corps), we used to have higher level specialists. There are quite a few people in the military who are outstanding at their MOS, however show little leadership potential. These personnel might benefit from a promotion to SP5 or SP6 for example, rather than SGT and SSG.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next

Military History
Leadership
Promotions
Retirement
