Posted on Feb 27, 2015
Should we unify and have one rank structure? Why or Why not?
34.4K
173
62
4
4
0
Is it time to unify the rank structure of the armed forces? I worked with a Navy Captain. After serving in the Army and referring to "full birds" as Colonels, it's a little uncomfortable to call as O-6 a Captain when that's rank of O-3 in the Army. Likewise, we have ranks with the same title, but different grades. For example, a master sergeant is E-7 in the USAF and E-8 is USMC. Since we use the same pay charts, wouldn't make since to unify the ranks so say a staff sergeant is an E-6 is all branches? Would are your thoughts?
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 38
In 2001 I was the SNCO of the USNSE in Pristina where I worked with all ranks of all branches. Yes I had to get use to a Navy Captain, learn the different Air Force ranks, but in the end, it's nothing but a thing. To combine ranks would take away the heritage of the Branch of Service. In the words of an old but good saying - "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Nothing here to fix.
(11)
(0)
I'd love to say I support it, but I can't, and there's a few reasons.
First is the Constitutional reason. Congress has a Constitutional Obligation to MAINTAIN a Navy, but only a Requirement to RAISE an Army.
Despite our jokes about being the "Men's Department," the Marine Corps is a member of the Naval Services. Much like the Air Force has it's roots in the Army Air Corps.
That leads me to tradition. Each Service has tradition tied to their ranks. What would the Marines be without our "Gunny's," or the Navy & Air Force without their "Chiefs."
The officer ranks are very delineated, with 3 of the 7 uniformed services using "ground" ranks, while remaining 4 use "naval" ranks (and uniforms). The enlisted ranks are very similar as well, however the introduction of the E-8 & E-9 with the military pay act of 1958, that things became "skewed."
Personally, I do agree about Sergeant (E5), Staff Sergeant (E6), and Master Sergeant (E8) being the same however. That's just a personal preference though.
First is the Constitutional reason. Congress has a Constitutional Obligation to MAINTAIN a Navy, but only a Requirement to RAISE an Army.
Despite our jokes about being the "Men's Department," the Marine Corps is a member of the Naval Services. Much like the Air Force has it's roots in the Army Air Corps.
That leads me to tradition. Each Service has tradition tied to their ranks. What would the Marines be without our "Gunny's," or the Navy & Air Force without their "Chiefs."
The officer ranks are very delineated, with 3 of the 7 uniformed services using "ground" ranks, while remaining 4 use "naval" ranks (and uniforms). The enlisted ranks are very similar as well, however the introduction of the E-8 & E-9 with the military pay act of 1958, that things became "skewed."
Personally, I do agree about Sergeant (E5), Staff Sergeant (E6), and Master Sergeant (E8) being the same however. That's just a personal preference though.
(10)
(0)
No. Although this can be confusing, it is also a tradition, which is important to these respective branches.
(4)
(0)
CW3 (Join to see)
Here's a story you'll find amusing. I was deployed to Kabul, and worked with another CW2 and a CPO. We all went to the DFAC on Camp Phoenix together. There was a Marine behind the counter for headcount.
The other CW2 went first, and the Marine greeted him with "Good evening, Chief"
The CPO went next, and the Marine greeted him with "Good evening, Real Chief"
They had to pick me up off the floor I was laughing so hard.....
The other CW2 went first, and the Marine greeted him with "Good evening, Chief"
The CPO went next, and the Marine greeted him with "Good evening, Real Chief"
They had to pick me up off the floor I was laughing so hard.....
(4)
(0)
I would not change it, not just because of tradition. In a practical matter, in almost every modern Navy, the Captain is universally a senior officer. Their insignia of 4 braids is almost universally recognized as well,
(3)
(0)
While I agree in principle that the ranks ought to be the same across the services, there is too much tradition with each rank for any of the services to give them up. I know this from servicing in two joint commands with other services.
Also, since this is part of US Code Title 10, it would take an act of Congress and approval from the President to enact this change.
I don't see this happening within my lifetime.
Also, since this is part of US Code Title 10, it would take an act of Congress and approval from the President to enact this change.
I don't see this happening within my lifetime.
(3)
(0)
I think the Enlisted Ranks are already fairly established, but it is frustrating to look at a Navy Lt's bars and have to remember that they are not a Captain, or seeing Oak Leafs and focusing on the Lt Commander and not a Major thing :D
(3)
(0)
Navy Chief, Senior Chief, and Master Chief Petty Officers differ from every other service. Also, the Naval Officer Rank structure is steeped in tradition and is in line with other navies that share the same heritage.
(2)
(0)
SCPO Ron Chandler
I think I might have a more clear perspective on this than most as I was active duty Army for 4 years and then went Navy. In my time in the Army I witnessed the progression of my maintenance sergeant go from SSG to SFC which was an event that was basically the same type of promotion ceremony that I had from PFC to SP4. The advancement of Petty Officer First Class to Chief Petty Officer is a significant process, too lengthy to type out here, but during that process one is prepared to be held accountable to a much higher standard. Not only does our responsibility lie in training and looking out for the welfare of our junior sailors, it increases to training junior officers to be leaders up to and through O-3. We provide the deckplate leadership required to effectively support the day to day operations allowing the junior officers to learn how to fight the ship and learn their craft that will propel them through O-4 and beyond.
(1)
(0)
No.
Because tradition, customs and courtesies. Also history.
And just because.
Because tradition, customs and courtesies. Also history.
And just because.
(2)
(0)
No. Even though I could probably think of several different reasons, two of my more passionate reasons are history and tradition. Some may disagree, but IMO each branch has strong foundation of tradition that should not be dismissed by the good idea fairy. It is what helps to define us as branches of the U.S. Armed Forces. Each individual worked hard to attain their place in their branch and have a certain sense of pride which they all deserve to have. I think it would hurt morale to a certain extent by trying to "simplify" things. There has been talk for some time of everyone going to one uniform which I hope never passes, but to totally strip tradition would be a major black eye to Esprit de Corps.
(1)
(0)
SFC Michael Jackson, MBA
I have great respect for tradition. However, I get concerned when dismiss alternative ideas simply because "we've always done it" a certain way. We use the pay chart, I just wondered the ranks were different. Esprit de Corps is certainly a consideration, but should it be the only consideration?
Over the years, the good idea fairy (GIF) has run rampant; However, every once in a while even the GIF actually has a good idea.
Over the years, the good idea fairy (GIF) has run rampant; However, every once in a while even the GIF actually has a good idea.
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I agree that there is always great ideas with change, but I don't think this is one. No idea good or bad should sacrifice our identity.
(0)
(0)
Ranks are fine the way they currently are. I will say however that there needs to be an emphasis on teaching people the ranks of other branches. I personally went through tech school with other branches so I learned them quick but I know many people who won't have a clue what I am talking about when I use ranks from a branch such as the Navy or Coast Guard.
(1)
(0)
The Navy's Ranking not only goes back in history but also displays a persons actual rating for enlisted and what Corps the Officer is. You can look at a Petty Officer's Rating Badge and service devices to determine if they are Aviation, Surface, Submarine, or Medical and what their Job is. Also the Fowled Anchor of the Chief Petty Officer has Naval symbolism. The Entire Naval Uniform and Rank structure has a long respected history.
(1)
(0)
I do not feel that it matters that ranks look different in other Branches, that is what makes each Branch unique and it just laziness on the individual to not learn the different ranks of who they will work with.
(1)
(0)
It would make it easier for all uniformed persons. Then even people fresh out of basic would know how and when to deliver the appropriate respects when around members of other forces.
(1)
(0)
Unifying the rank structure is not going to solve any longstanding problem but it will squander tradition for the sake of simplicity .....
(1)
(0)
I see a lot of tradition in our rank structure. Tradition should never be given up lightly. If we are going to change, then we have to go to the Navy Ranking system. The officer sleeve insignia are pretty much standard world-wide. We could not abandon those rank insignias.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next