Posted on Nov 28, 2016
What was the purpose of the higher Specialist ranks?
213K
483
234
53
53
0
During the time my grandfather served in the Army, there were many Specialist ranks all the way up to E-9. My question is, what was the purpose of having an E-9 SPC (SP9) back when these ranks were in service. I could use a good history lesson!
Thank you,
SPC O'Hara
Thank you,
SPC O'Hara
SP5
SP6
SPC
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 98
3
3
0
3
3
0
I was in 68-71 and spec grades where quite prevalent in the aircraft support companies . we had a spec 8 and quite a few spec 7's in company who worked mainly on the avionics of the birds. I came out a spec5 with a 63h30/76p30/and 52d30 mos'
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
Here's a good reference that addresses specialist rank. http://www.history.army.mil/html/books/non_commissioned_officer/CMH_70-38.pdf
Read pages 270 thru 273
Read pages 270 thru 273
ªñAJð2 ZJJoZZzº7cRÇëá`*Êjà/ÂKì'+zò`ùt Åó%RþÃVØHáe§üAü$.7q!!^ÅhèÌÖ/OÈ}[[~z¡/tâëJÝ0gyXª¶$g4(Ô A öHnøQØßÏ[Î/áÒÃ!óvU{@4MÏåB¡7ç{iÊð0ÕËÝûÈÁ KÜ.tpñÝèôz ðxJ;ÈÉýroµ1^¿3Áp0%áñÐLÆHwïæ7õÙé8W'(.J@úÂ|0jÀ¡qDÌîæU98Oô!ñÎ
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
I joined in 77 and served till 84. I was a Spec 5 and we had Specialists in my unit up to Spec 7 as best I recall. The Specialist ranks were for technical expertise and were not supposed to be used as NCOs. The reality is that Specialists did serve as supervisors where I served, I was a shift supervisor and supervised a PLL office (electronic supplies)and we had many specialist ranked supervisors at the Com-center where I was detailed. I never saw or heard of a Spec8 or 9, the graphic you posted was news to me, lol.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
You know I was promoted to SP/5 in Germany and given the power plant section there to command so I was given temporary hard strips so I could have command responsibility and this was 1969,1970.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
Like the old Tech Sgt. ranks, they were used for non-combat senior personnel in specialized jobs like mechanics, medics, finance and cooks.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
While with the 1st Cav , 83-85, met 1 Spc7 , he was our senior medic and had been a flight medic during Vietnam with a list of credentials that you would not believe .
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
I keep on hearing the sentiment that we should bring back the Senior Specialist Ranks because there are NCO's that are great soldiers/technicians/good at their job/etc, but not great at leading troops.
I think this gives a false impression of what those Specialist Ranks did (or could do). The Senior specialist ranks were not intended to be a hiding place to dump poor leaders. It was an administrative designation for jobs that did not require traditional military leadership roles like Combat Arms. For example, a senior technician working in the Pentagon or Hospital administration, could have been a SPC8 or SPC9. These Soldiers did not rise to those positions due to an inability to lead. Far from it. In fact, these Soldiers often manage entire departments in the same manner that an Infantry PSG manages a platoon.
If, for some reason, the Army decided to return to the system, you can bet that the Specialist track would have it's own evaluation system, and the soldiers would need to follow the same level of PME and STEP that is currently in use.
I think this gives a false impression of what those Specialist Ranks did (or could do). The Senior specialist ranks were not intended to be a hiding place to dump poor leaders. It was an administrative designation for jobs that did not require traditional military leadership roles like Combat Arms. For example, a senior technician working in the Pentagon or Hospital administration, could have been a SPC8 or SPC9. These Soldiers did not rise to those positions due to an inability to lead. Far from it. In fact, these Soldiers often manage entire departments in the same manner that an Infantry PSG manages a platoon.
If, for some reason, the Army decided to return to the system, you can bet that the Specialist track would have it's own evaluation system, and the soldiers would need to follow the same level of PME and STEP that is currently in use.
(3)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
Well stated. It should not be LACK of a leadership role/responsibility that causes one to be promoted as a higher grade specialist but rather acknowledgement of the highly technical nature of some leadership positions.
(1)
(0)
SGT Jim Wiseman
I like how this is put. There is always going to be a need for leadership ability in any section. What is required in a more technical MOS or section will not necessarily be what is needed in a combat MOS. We shouldn't think of any part of a military organization as a "dumping ground," but we should think about directing more technically minded and skilled individuals on a path that may garner success and a long career through serving on the "technical side." My own career would have been even more limited with the Army's reputed policy on not advancing NCO's unless they could attain degrees. That may be fine for certain individuals, but for people like myself who didn't get the proper advice and encouragement to enroll in college, but who have the aptitude and IQ which could easily be tested and used to determine whether they are suited to rank/leadership. History is full of individuals who appeared to have little potential but ultimately proved conventional thought to be wrong. In fact, I believe the military used to use observation and practical tests to judge individuals on their potential and ability to move up in rank, not "checking the block" for courses taken and education levels achieved, especially those noted by a piece of paper.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
The purpose of the higher Specialist ranks was to ensure that the ARMY had skilled techs in the assigned fields that were apart from the typical NCO type leaderships MOS. What is interesting is that we need the higher specialist ranks back, specially in the MOS of Cyber Security, were people with physical disabilities but superior brains can serve.
(3)
(0)
SP5 Michael Gold
I know that ASA merged with Mil Intell and became INSCOM. Are they still that or did something else come about. Thanks.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
We still have the Specialist 4. But I feel they should bring back the Spec 5-7. There were times I was not in a leadership role and my only distinction from those who were, was the lack of a green felt square on my Gortex and on my Class A's. Trust me, there were many times I felt like a Spec 5 than a Sergeant. Shit jobs have no where to roll down to when more than half the platoon is made up of NCO's.
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google