Posted on Oct 21, 2014
What would you change about the Enlisted rank structure?
167K
151
98
5
5
0
While I will always be proud to have served as a United States Army Senior Enlisted Soldier I would like to solicit feedback as to what changes you would suggest be made to our enlisted ranks?
I have been a long time proponent for eliminating the rank of Specialist (SPC/E-4) and making all Soldiers in this Grade of Rank Corporals (CPL/E-4). In addition, I would support a change in the title of address for the Sergeant First Class (SFC/E-7) grade of rank. While with said change I believe that all enlisted Soldiers should be addressed by their full grade of rank.
These are a few of my suggested changes that I believe will streamline the enlisted ranks, save money, increase discipline and pride in service while rewarding those who work hard to obtain military grade of rank.
I have been a long time proponent for eliminating the rank of Specialist (SPC/E-4) and making all Soldiers in this Grade of Rank Corporals (CPL/E-4). In addition, I would support a change in the title of address for the Sergeant First Class (SFC/E-7) grade of rank. While with said change I believe that all enlisted Soldiers should be addressed by their full grade of rank.
These are a few of my suggested changes that I believe will streamline the enlisted ranks, save money, increase discipline and pride in service while rewarding those who work hard to obtain military grade of rank.
Enlisted
Rank
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 38
2
2
0
I would ask that everyone starts out as E-1 in the military and our rank progression works similar to the Marine Corps. I was baffled by the amount of college graduates who were pulling rank on people in BCT and AIT while they had the same TIS as someone like myself who was an E-1.
E-1 to E-2 (1 year TIS)
E-2 to E-3 (2 year TIS)
E-3 to E-4 (3 year TIS and Promotion Board) Would be my proposed rank structure idea.
I see no rank integrity in my work. Specialists are almost triple the amount of Privates. I feel that Specialist is just a stagnant rank where people sit and argue about TIS and TIR.
E-1 to E-2 (1 year TIS)
E-2 to E-3 (2 year TIS)
E-3 to E-4 (3 year TIS and Promotion Board) Would be my proposed rank structure idea.
I see no rank integrity in my work. Specialists are almost triple the amount of Privates. I feel that Specialist is just a stagnant rank where people sit and argue about TIS and TIR.
(2)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SPC Ryan Slabaugh I agree with you Battle Buddy that Soldiers need to spend more time in grade of miltary rank and that the rank of Specialist needs to go away!
(1)
(0)
PFC Zanie Young
Yeah, we don't need any newbies with more rank than I do! I had to do BCT with E-2's and E-3's who was as ate-up as I was! Really grinds my gears!
(0)
(0)
SGT Jerrold Pesz
PFC Zanie Young - Long ago everyone started as an E1 no matter how many degrees that they had. At the end of BCT each platoon sergeant could (if he wanted to) promote 10% of his platoon to E2. I always did. If you weren't in that 10% you had to wait 6 months for E2. I based my choices largely on effort instead of raw scores.
(1)
(0)
PO3 Donald Murphy
SGT Jerrold Pesz - Yup. You're right. That WAS long ago. Today, we have to honor the fufu. If you don't, people won't do it. And if people don't do it, certain people will lose money. And then those people will talk to their senator/congressfolk and we'll be out of a job. Used to kill me that an admin shipmate couldn't organize his way out of a wet paper bag, but he was higher than me cuz he had a degree. *AND* he expected me to train him... Yeah... That went real well...
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
In the same vein as CPT LaFlame's response I would bring back the technical ranks. There should be two tracks one, of course, technical and the other leadership. There are a lot of Bucks and Staffs running around out there who have no reason (or desire) to be in leadership positions.
Not really a change to the rank structure but I also believe that once an NCO has become a First Sergeant and served in a unit within his or her CMF they should be allowed to take a tour in a support unit. I served five glorious years as a First Sergeant in artillery units but would have enjoyed going over to a medical company just to share the love.. Not sure if the reverse would work as well, however. Support First Sergeants tend to be a little light in the stripes, if you know what I mean.
Not really a change to the rank structure but I also believe that once an NCO has become a First Sergeant and served in a unit within his or her CMF they should be allowed to take a tour in a support unit. I served five glorious years as a First Sergeant in artillery units but would have enjoyed going over to a medical company just to share the love.. Not sure if the reverse would work as well, however. Support First Sergeants tend to be a little light in the stripes, if you know what I mean.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
MSG Allen,
I disagree about the technical ranks. The purpose of the NCO Corps is to train and lead Soldiers. I personally love technical tasks, but that doesn't relieve me of my responsibility as an NCO to lead. With the draw down we are going to need every NCO to step up and do their job as a leader. In my opinion, if an NCO doesn't want to lead Soldiers he should transition out and get a job as a contractor or DA civilian. Even warrant officers are put into positions requiring leadership and they are the closest thing the Army has to a technical position.
I disagree about the technical ranks. The purpose of the NCO Corps is to train and lead Soldiers. I personally love technical tasks, but that doesn't relieve me of my responsibility as an NCO to lead. With the draw down we are going to need every NCO to step up and do their job as a leader. In my opinion, if an NCO doesn't want to lead Soldiers he should transition out and get a job as a contractor or DA civilian. Even warrant officers are put into positions requiring leadership and they are the closest thing the Army has to a technical position.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
If I proposed this to the Marines in my platoon the most common answer would be to have a Senior Lance Corporal Rank (senior E-3). I find this comical because you have a lot of guys who have been Lances for a long long time and always make the new Lances call them "Senior Lance Corporal" or at least try to. But to me a SLC rank would be the equivalent of a Specialist in the army and I see no point in it. E-3 is E-3...if you don't like it...become promotable..
(2)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
Great input...our Marine brother's share many similarities to our Soldiers. These traditions are rampant throughout all branches of military service. I know that the Marines did come up wits a new Enlisted rank which is Lance Killer! lol jk... No LCpl'are equal to our PFC's...these days we all operate in a joint service environment where we learn all the great things about one another. Take care little brother...oorah
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Make them look less like some officers ranks. SPC from a distance can be confused for LTC. PO3 can be confused with COL. Fewer stripes between MSG and SGM for easier distinguishing. Just my .02
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I would standardize the ranks. For officers, the ranks would be:
1. Ensign
2. Lieutenant
3. Captain
4. Major
5. Commander
6. Colonel
7. Commodore
8. General
9. Admiral
10. Grand Admiral
1. Ensign
2. Lieutenant
3. Captain
4. Major
5. Commander
6. Colonel
7. Commodore
8. General
9. Admiral
10. Grand Admiral
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I know "everyone is a leader" is a viewpoint which is commonly espoused in the military and, while I understand the sentiment, in the fifteen years I've been in I don't think reality meshes well with sentiment.
Let me explain.
In terms of an effective organization, there can't be "all leaders." There are a large majority of people who join the Army who specifically want to "do a job." For me, it was Counterintelligence. I love Counterintelligence. Especially investigative work. Nothing gets my brain engaged more than doing a no-shit straight-leg CI investigation. However, I quickly made SSG shortly after becoming an agent and found myself in more "leadership positions" - ASAIC, Instructor/SGL, ASAIC, etc... while you'll never hear me openly complain about this, I think that there should be a parallel rank structure with no change in pay which delineates "leader" versus "worker."
I have read a lot on the old Specialist rank system and I understand how it disappeared and what those changes meant, but I personally see nothing wrong with it. You have strong, forward-thinking, capable leaders? Make them SGTs, SSGs, and SFCs and put them in charge of Soldiers. You have someone that is an amazing investigator or extremely proficient at their MOS but isn't really good at "admin stuff?" Make them a SPC5, SPC6, or SPC7. They'd still "outrank" lower SPC ranks and NCO ranks, but not be in a leadership capacity.
Leave leading to leaders and focus on building a more robust, proficient, and savvy workforce for those leaders to lead. It's too late for me. I'm about to pin SFC. So... I've accepted the era I served in.
I don't know. Those are just my thoughts.
Let me explain.
In terms of an effective organization, there can't be "all leaders." There are a large majority of people who join the Army who specifically want to "do a job." For me, it was Counterintelligence. I love Counterintelligence. Especially investigative work. Nothing gets my brain engaged more than doing a no-shit straight-leg CI investigation. However, I quickly made SSG shortly after becoming an agent and found myself in more "leadership positions" - ASAIC, Instructor/SGL, ASAIC, etc... while you'll never hear me openly complain about this, I think that there should be a parallel rank structure with no change in pay which delineates "leader" versus "worker."
I have read a lot on the old Specialist rank system and I understand how it disappeared and what those changes meant, but I personally see nothing wrong with it. You have strong, forward-thinking, capable leaders? Make them SGTs, SSGs, and SFCs and put them in charge of Soldiers. You have someone that is an amazing investigator or extremely proficient at their MOS but isn't really good at "admin stuff?" Make them a SPC5, SPC6, or SPC7. They'd still "outrank" lower SPC ranks and NCO ranks, but not be in a leadership capacity.
Leave leading to leaders and focus on building a more robust, proficient, and savvy workforce for those leaders to lead. It's too late for me. I'm about to pin SFC. So... I've accepted the era I served in.
I don't know. Those are just my thoughts.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
One of the problems I frequently saw and worked to address was a serious lack of technical expertise... I'd show up at a unit and be the only one who knew how to properly load and program a radio, set up and antenna, ect... I believe the army would be more effective with more specialists who focus more on the technical side of the house, not less.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
When I was an E-4, (and as an E-3), I ran my own section, set up and scheduled operator level equipment maintenance (emulating the motor pool), had my own office, conducted specialized and general unit training in CBRN topics. (training recon/decon teams and unit wide CBRN). During some Sergeant's Time training blocks I was tasked with going from group to group to assist and be SME for CBRN training. (We had theme based Sergeant's time in my unit: "This week is CBRN", or "Land Nav", for example.)
I did this with the Chicken on my collars, not the Corporal Stripes. Guess what... I got paid the same, and got the same amount of recognition and respect. I was not in a traditional "leadership" position but I was a leader regardless of the shape of my rank.
I did this with the Chicken on my collars, not the Corporal Stripes. Guess what... I got paid the same, and got the same amount of recognition and respect. I was not in a traditional "leadership" position but I was a leader regardless of the shape of my rank.
(1)
(0)
SSG Michael Needham
This has been one of my arguments for the Specialist rank there are leaders , and doers and not every NCO I worked for had even the foggiest idea of my mos or even how I did my job , all they wanted was the results most of what I did was " black magic" to them
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
1. Corporals should only be found in Combat Arms units. 2. If you cook or work in admin, you should promote all the way up to SP9. There should be no soldier in the Army who cannot: pass a PT test, qualify with their weapon at least 4 times per year, is proficient with basic combat skills. Hated seeing a big fat mess daddy with a fat cigar sucking down coffee and shhoting the shit with the 1sg or CSM.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
We have evolved throughout the years as every Soldier is a Rifleman first. We are a more lighter agile force consisting of Battalion and Brigade Combat Teams. Combative and US Weapons is a daily part of A Soldiers Warrior Tasks and Battle Drills. Soldiers and Marines stand in the same formations and fight side-by-side with one another. Not to mention our Navy and Air Force brother's and sister's being right there with us as well. I have love and respect for every man and woman who serves our country as a member of our Armed Forces with pride and honor.
We would not be able to financially support a seperate support only Enlisted rank structure. Bringing back the Specialist System or Technical Ranks in a non-starter. Today's Soldier has to be able to see the big picture and cannot afford to be limp, lame, or lazy. The POG's are being weeded out along with toxic leaders who watch to many Hollywood movies attempting to lead their troops in such a manner.
This is the real world and that lowest ranking Solduer doesn't need to be yelled at or treated any lesser then the highest ranking members of our Armed Forces. We need to take our smaller more agile force and maximize exer thing each individual brings to the table by empowering the and living our Warrior Etho's.
It is time to eliminate the last rank of our archaic Specialist system and stop accepting complacency. We are an all volenteer Army whereby as some of our brother's and sister's have stated some Soldier's either do not want to or have what it takes to be NCO's citing such as a reason to not eliminate this rank. I say put up and do what it takes of hit the road as a PFC when your enlistment is up. The Army needs to stop the minimalist who think they are on welfare or that they are owed something for serving. Just the same limit bonuses to worthy causes and enforce the notion that we serve for our brother's and sister's having earned our place as SOLDIER'S!
We would not be able to financially support a seperate support only Enlisted rank structure. Bringing back the Specialist System or Technical Ranks in a non-starter. Today's Soldier has to be able to see the big picture and cannot afford to be limp, lame, or lazy. The POG's are being weeded out along with toxic leaders who watch to many Hollywood movies attempting to lead their troops in such a manner.
This is the real world and that lowest ranking Solduer doesn't need to be yelled at or treated any lesser then the highest ranking members of our Armed Forces. We need to take our smaller more agile force and maximize exer thing each individual brings to the table by empowering the and living our Warrior Etho's.
It is time to eliminate the last rank of our archaic Specialist system and stop accepting complacency. We are an all volenteer Army whereby as some of our brother's and sister's have stated some Soldier's either do not want to or have what it takes to be NCO's citing such as a reason to not eliminate this rank. I say put up and do what it takes of hit the road as a PFC when your enlistment is up. The Army needs to stop the minimalist who think they are on welfare or that they are owed something for serving. Just the same limit bonuses to worthy causes and enforce the notion that we serve for our brother's and sister's having earned our place as SOLDIER'S!
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I agree with SFC Robert Anderson. Get rid of Specialist, every E4 should be Corporal. Cpt Richard LaFlame made the statement that some E4s don't want to NCOs . Every soldier should learn to lead. You can never tell where you're going to end up. E5/E6's that are mechanical specialist can be tech-sergeants.
(1)
(0)
CW3 Kevin Storm
If we do that get rid of auto E-4 and make every Corporal earn his/her stripe, the way it used to be.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
-
Ask questionGet expert advice and
tips for your questions. -
Post updatePost pictures, personal updates, plans, or anything you like!
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google 
