Why does the US Army persist with the rank of SP4?

Army wants to have "super privates" who are paid more but have no real NCO duties. This may be a head in the sand idea but it does allow for more soldiers to reach pay grade E-4 quickly without becoming a NCO. From time to time the Army has experimented with ways to pay more without requiring the soldier to become a NCO. Most of them have failed and SP4 is the only "Specialist rank" left. Army and soldiers would be better served to pay PFCs more and do away with the rank of SP4. Corporal and above should all be NCOs.

I was a Spec 4 on the flight line in 1969. They made me a Acting Buck Sgt in charge of the flight line. In 1970 some of us got promoted to E-5’s. They promoted me to a E-5 but wanted me to continue as acting Buck. I said no, if want to fill that slot, I get the strip, if not give the acting Buck title to someone else. There was a lot of responsibility that went with the Buck Sgt strip. I said I would go back to being a crew chief. Well I got the Strip and continued on.

(Talking out of both sides of my mouth) I don't LIKE the Specialist Grades, but I think that they are good, especially in many technical jobs. In 1970, I was in Basic Training with a man who was drafted and was a Journeyman Plumber. Upon graduation, he was given Sp/5 pins. Should a man with 9 weeks in Service be a Sergeant? No. Does a Journeyman Plumber or Electrician rate E-5? Absolutely!

I was a Spec4 in 1959 and my Section Chief was a Spec5, so I believe the "social experiment" started before the late sixties.

I think they did away with SPC 5 through 8 because they thought that warrant officers could fill the void... but like others have said, not everyone can be a good leader.

I left the Army with the rank of SP5. They tried to challenge me to re-up and try to make it a hard stripe. I just smiled and said I get paid the same as a Sargent but don’t have to go to command meetings.

I started my 20+ yrs. in the Army in 1979, had 3 specialist ranks before making SFC, and yet I have no idea what some of you are talking about - in all of my specialist MOS's I had leadership duties, was sent to PNCOC, SNCOIC, SEJPME, etc., and retired as head-NCO of a med battallion section, w/ only my 1SG, CSM and Commander above me in my unit (also had some limited exposure to MI before retiring). How did most of that happen during my specialist ranks if I had no leadership duties or skills? W/ those specilaist ranks I also had to train on the shooting range regularly w/ 45 pistols, M-16s, some M-60s & grenades, ran 5 miles minimum every day but Sundays, had regular BIVACs & field training (not in CONUS)... I'm confused by this ever-recurring subject.
Warriors Forever!
-Ed Boles

A better and more relevant question is why does the Army persist with the rank of Corporal? Why doesn't the Army just promote E-4s who run their own shops to E-5 so they can get not just the authority but the rank too? Why make an E-4 pay NCO Club dues if you are not going to raise his pay to Sergeant?

The SPC 4-9 used to be a path for Warrent Officer but now it is a non-leadership role to prepare people to become SGT without a serious qualification of leadership. We need the SPC to go back to what they were meant for and CPL to gain it's importance again...

It wasn't "started in the 1960s." In WW2 we had technical Sergeants and in WW1 and before we had NCO ranks tied to vocational areas like "Mess", "Motor", "Farrier" "Transport" etc that were identified as specialized, non combat leader skills. The idea of making everyone the same with a simplified rank structure is actually the modern "social experiment" within this discussion.