Posted on Oct 21, 2014
SFC Logistics Management Specialist
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.
Posted in these groups: Enlisted logo EnlistedRank Rank
Edited >1 y ago
Avatar feed
Responses: 38
Votes
  • Newest
  • Oldest
  • Votes
CW3 Air Ambulance Pilot
1
1
0
What exactly would be the purpose of this? Is it being suggested that addressing an E8 as "Sergeant" would cause one to forget that he/she is a Master Sergeant?
(1)
Comment
(0)
CW3 Air Ambulance Pilot
CW3 (Join to see)
>1 y
Since we all know what positions we hold and what authorities we have, what we're called seems like a bit of a non-issue to me
(0)
Reply
(0)
SFC Logistics Management Specialist
SFC (Join to see)
>1 y
CW3 Service Member how long were you a member of the United States Army Enlisted ranks for prior becoming a Warrant Officer?

Have you ever deployed or been part of any joint operations serving with our brothers and sisters from other branches of our Armed Forces?

Do you plan on identifying yorself or remaining anonymous?

If you have done any of what I asked in question one you are aware that for the last 14 years we operate as a joint venture. I have witnessed on multiple occasions laxidasucal fellow United States Army NCO's tell a Marine that addresses them as by their full rank not to. First this is what Marines are taught and how they address all ranks. There is no policy stipulating that we can not address our Soldiers by their full rank. As a matter of fact I hear SSG's, MSG's commonly a dressed by their full grade of rank. In addition it is in poor form to tell a member from another branch of our Armed Forces to deviate from how they are supposed to do something that is not just policy but the standard.

Let me take this a step further in if I as a SFC answer an official military line only referring to myself as Sergeant the person on the other side does not know if I am a SGT, SSG, SFC, or MSG. When I served as a SFC in a 1SG position I answered the phone as first identifying my unit, the that I was SFC my name the unit 1SG. Why; because as NCO's we set the standard by leading by example and there are on the other hand SFC's that are in 1SG positions who simply answer the phone and say 1SG when they do not hold this rank! It is time for many changes and this is one issue that needs to be taken mode seriously.

Finally, as you feel that it is all good to address SSG, SFC, MSG as Sergeant you probably don't think it is important to reward excellence and recognize those of us who have trained by teaching, coaching and mentoring America's Army. For all I know as you don't identify yourself here that you can be anybody but a CW3. Which is my point in I am not a SGT I am a retired SFC making a suggestion that we make changes to our Enlisted ranks while recognizing the excellent attributes, and leadership of our hard charging NCO Corps.
(0)
Reply
(0)
CW3 Air Ambulance Pilot
CW3 (Join to see)
>1 y
I do agree that we shouldn't contradict any lawful instructions given by another's chain of command. No matter our rank, general military authority doesn't allow this.

In your telephone example, if the "acting" 1SGs had answered with their actual rank, would that have somehow changed the request/instructions coming from whoever's calling? Would the goal of that call be altered in any way? If so, I'm having trouble seeing how.

While I don't see it as much of an issue, if an NCO, or anyone else, for that matter, were to inform me that they'd rather be addressed by their full rank, I'd have no trouble doing so, besides finding it a bit peculiar. If that's what they prefer, then so be it. I just don't see how this is helping us win the Nation's wars.


In answer to your questions;
1) 7.5 years.
2) Yes. Navy, Marines, and Air Force. Both the U.S. and foreign.
3) Actually, I had no idea folks couldn't see my name or profile. Thanks for pointing that out. I'll try getting more RallyPoint expertise in the future… maybe… probably not... who the hell are we kidding I really don't care enough about this
(2)
Reply
(0)
PO2 Skip Kirkwood
PO2 Skip Kirkwood
10 y
I have to say, questioning another participant's pedigree seems totally inappropriate. Regardless of TIS or where they served, everyone has a right to express an opinion - without that kind of personal inquiry.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
MSG Sr. Budget Analyst
0
0
0
I don't wish the elimination of SPC/ E4 rank/grade. Instead, I wish to expanded it before an enlisted can reach the rank of CPL /E4 or SGT(E5).
Also, I wish to see an option for educated MSG/ E8 to 1LT/O2, if (air tight) qualified. 10 years in the rank of MSG due to a lack of position to SGM is a waste of manpower and resources. There are too many young MSGs [E8] well over qualified than a 1LT in his/her current position.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
1px xxx
Suspended Profile
I would add a rocker for E-9 insignia, 3 up and 4 down.
Reestablish the technical ranks and not just E-4/5/6. Add 7 and 8 and possibly 9.
SFC S2 Intelligence Ncoic
0
0
0
As many people have stated. Bring back the Specialist ranks (SPC4,5,6,7, etc). But maybe caught them off at SPC7 if they dont wanna be a leader or switch over to Warrant.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Cpl Charles Trump
0
0
0
I would ban the use of the term Sarge and the term Sergeant for every rank. A Sgt is a Sgt, A S.Sgt Should be a S.Sgt etc. In the Corps u could end up doing alot of xtra duty pulling that off. Besides it's not tolerated from day one!
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
CW3 David Vinson
0
0
0
When I was on Active Duty then Spc all the up to Spc8.The rank was more of technical field rank than commander rank.Hard Rank has it place,but not all E-4 are ready for Corp strike.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO3 Kevin DeLong
0
0
0
I Would increase the number of warrant officers.In the army once you make E8 you chance for advancement is blocked into a small pool of E 8 and E 9 slots. I believe That a Rank of W6 should be created and called Command warrant officer. Only a Sargent Major or a W5 with 30 years or more active time could become one.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGM Ronald Cheatom
0
0
0
I believe once a soldier has passed the first leadership course, he should be laterally moved to corporal. He/ she has proven ready to move to the next step.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGM Bill Frazer
0
0
0
You know that SPC is the training ground for NCO's- if they don't cut it, you don't send them to the board- if you make all CPL's then they are NCO' and if they fail then is will show in their records as a bust, which will haunt them forever. I did not have time to stand around at formations and call everyone of me troops by rank. Also your changes save 0 money because you still have paygrade E1-E9, and does not streamline the enlisted ranks as you eliminated nothing.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Lt Col Jim Coe
0
0
0
Edited 8 y ago
First, the Services need to decide if an E-4 should be a junior enlisted rank or a non-commissioned officer. The answer so far is confusing. The AF took the stand that an E-4 is not an NCO. The Army and Marines, maybe. The Navy, yes, an NCO.

I can't say exactly how a SPC or SrA is treated on a day-to-day basis. I suspect it varies by unit and person. If the Specialist or Senior Airman is in a unit that is short on junior leaders, then they may be assigned some temporary duties equivalent to an NCO. In other cases where there are adequate E-5s (SGT or SSgt), the SPC and SrA will be treated much like other junior enlisted. The Army and Marines select some E-4s to be Corporals and give them NCO status, responsibilities and authorities. The Navy PO-3 is an NCO, but I have heard that they are often treated more like a super-E-3 than a true NCO.

My recommendation is for all the Services to declare that an E-4 is a junior enlisted grade. Also, there should be some rationalization of ranks and stripes among the Services. The three-stripe rank for non-Navy personnel should be reserved for Sergeant, an NCO; four stripes or three plus a rocker, Staff Sergeant; and five stripes, Sergeant First Class. Above that let the Services call them what they will. The Navy would have to reshuffle the stripes and titles, but their tradition of a Chief (E-7) having three chevrons and a rocker should be maintained. The Petty Officer ranks below Chief would have to be redone.

I also recommend we add an E-10. (Look for the question string on this one.) The E-10 would be reserved for the senior enlisted person on a General/Admiral/Joint Staff. In the Air Force we used to call that person a "Senior Enlisted Advisor." In the Army, they are the Command Sergeant Major. These very senior enlisted personnel, including the senior enlisted person in each Service HQ Staff, for example, the Command Sergeant Major of the Army, deserve the recognition and increased pay that a grade above E-9 would bring. There would be very few E-10s. Not quite as rare as a Marine WO-5, but almost.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

How are you connected to the military?
  • Active Duty
  • Active Reserve / National Guard
  • Pre-Commission
  • Veteran / Retired
  • Civilian Supporter