Specialist Rank, why do we still have it instead of a corporal?

I agree on we should have kept the SPC ranks due to not everyone being capable of leading troops. But then I think Officers should have something similar. I've met some Officers that should never be entrusted to lead, but were good at technical tasks. A degree is just a piece of paper stating you are trainable, some have a degree and can't even be trained. That goes for Enlisted and Officers alike.

In the army not everyone wants to be a leader. SP/4 rank is what most people achieve on their first tour of duty. They then get discharged mostly because they joined the army for the bonus so they can go to college. If they reenlist then they will get promoted to Sgt. which is a leadership position. I think SP/5 and above was done away with because if they needed a NCO. you got treated like an NCO. If they needed a Peon you were treated like a peon. Other persons who had the stripes felt like the specialists got paid the same but had less responsibility and could use the system to get ahead. I know because after being in the Marine Corp as a Cpl. I joined the Army as a PFC. I went to SP/5 in 13 months I was whatever the company needed. Company, Armorer, Company Supply Clerk ,then company Supply Sgt. I had an Ammo Tech, Mos. 2311.

"Should we bring back the spec ranks, or scrap it completely and just use the corporal?"

Either of these options is better than what we're doing now. I know a great number of NCOs who are very proficient at their jobs but should never have been awarded stripes. If we're not going to revive the various grades of Specialist, we should get rid of the SPC rank entirely. SPC / E4 as a standalone rank is one of the weirdest ranks in the U.S. Armed Forces.

All I have to say is the SPC rank keeps the Army at full operational power. If we force ppl to be NCO's they will be graded as such if they can't cut it leadership wise then they will be out even though they are more than capable of doing their jobs. And most times better than the hooah!!! 24/7 troops. My question is if we take away SPC ranks should we also discharge high speed soldiers for not being fully versed in their technical fields? It's like any other profession we need ppl at each level and with a certain level of knowledge and I feel the SPEC ranks do that for us. So I vote bring Specs back all the way up to 6 I'm
Not to certain about 7.

I look at it from my last combat arms unit.. We had 1 e7 1 e6 3 e5s a few corporals and the rest if they had been back from AIT for a while were E4 per platoon It works on the reserve and NG side of the house as in alot of units there isnt alot of room for upward promotion without leaving the unit and traveling. My firefighting unit that i was in had 1 e6 1 e5 and 12 e4s per detachment I would say bring back the SPC- ranks and leave the Chevrons for the Combat Arms folks... I look at it this way... You have an outstanding E-4 spc and an average E-4 you have a team leader slot and no E-5 to fill it... without some sort of difference in rank you are looking at the same rank doing two different things

SGT Anthony Rossi
I say get rid of using corporal as a consolation price for the SPC's trying to make cut-off (seen that many times in support units). Also, I would get rid of the Private E-1 and Private E-2, let's give them a different name.

SGT,

I believe both should be kept. A lot of people function well as SPC but wouldn't perform well as a CPL. I was asked many times why I enjoyed being a CPL since you "don't get NCO pay" right there is reason enough for me why that person was a SPC and I was a CPL. It's a different mind frame altogether.

My understanding it was to simplify the Rank Structure. Why have two or three per rank when you only need one. The Corporal part (I was a Specialist and Corporal) has do to with being lower enlisted but serving in an NCO position. As an Forward Observer i was a PFC doing an E5 job. When i hit Specialist they "Lateral Promoted" me to Corporal. Yeah, thanks CoC. Who do you think the E5s picked to lead the crappy details....Corporals lol!

Most people in the Army only serve 1 enlistment then the get discharged. Thats why they have the SP/4 rank. Because a specialist is not considered a leader. If a person was to reenlist they would get promoted to Sgt.. I never liked the special ranks because I became whatever the company needed. I was a Cpl.in the Marine Corp after 4Yrs. I had to enlist in the Army as a PFC. 15 months Later I was a SP/5. The company Armorer was a draftee got discharged, so they made me Company Armorer. The supply clerk a draftee got discharged so I became Supply clerk, The supply Sgt. went AWOL. So I became a supply Sgt. as a SP/4. The 1st Sgt. got me promoted to SP/5. I never worked a day in my MOS. 2311 Ammo tech in the army. They should have a rank that says "Jack of all trades Master of none." cause thats what I became, In March of 66 I had 3 month left in the Army. I was offered a comission as a 2nd,Lt, in Vietnam because their were so many draftees entering the Army that their was a shortage of experienced personell. I Would have to stay in vietnam another year. I chose to go home to my wife of 8 months. This decision worked very well for me. Semper Fi.

Because most Specialists do not hold a NCO position. Corporal are if you want stick an E-4 in a E-5 position and they don't have enough check in the boxes for promotion to E-5. I have held NCO positions as an E-4. The only reason I didn't get promoted to Corporal was I was only temporary in that position.