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

What I understand is that no one was ever promoted to Spec8 or Spec9! Not sure if there was anyone who made Spec7! And what with the Extra pay that Specialist grade were supposed to get? When I was an Spec5, never saw higher pay! Glad they got rid of the Ranks! I remember going to Germany and reporting to my unit, which was Field Artillery. I was a 64C, Truck Driver, not a gun bunny, and told the 1SGT that I going to get promoted to E5/Spec5. He didn't know what to do with me, they only had one slot for a 64C, so I spend two years just walking around post trying to find things to do! Went to morning/evening formations, that was about it! Also, as I remember, enlisted were required to attend NCOES Schools! Never saw a schools for only the Spec ranks!!! If you are in a combat situation, and you are the next senior guy, do you tell the troops, sorry guys, I'm only a Specialist whatever, not a leader!!! Ohh, that right Specialists are supposed to stay in the rear!!!

If the SP4 lacks leadership qualities or potentail then It is up to his supervisors to develop him or her.

So, I’m curious … I can definitely see the need for technical specialists in the military, and the fact that not everyone is born to lead, or be a leader … How does the pay scale work for those who continue to excel solely as a tech expert versus those who become technical experts, then go on to lead members into effective mission accomplishment. Would the non-leading/non-supervisory technical specialists be paid more or less than military members who become technically proficient then proceed to supervision & leadership? In my opinion, a non-supervisory technical expert (say E-7) should not be paid as well as an E-6 supervisor. People management is worth Waaay more than Project management and Leadership is instrumental in ensuring experts meet mission (military and civilian).

In many support mos's, sp4 is a death nail that encourages separation. The points required to enter nco ranks are too high to gain promotion as ncos are not as needed in support units. If these mos's had sp5 thru sp9, I think soldiers would be more receptive to reenlistment.

I know I am late into the game on this one. You hit it on the head, SPC ranks did not want to lead. Our unit had Spc6 with SSG in the same section, they fought the transition until threat of Chapter. Anyway it was a cool thing and the transition went fairly smoothly.

Spc4 is a good rank, it allows a transition by adding authority through the support of the SSG/SGT allowing the Soc to handle minor duties, maintain the prime weapon, ensure the Motor Poll was cleaned and ready for inspection, troops ready at for nation etc.

I'm not sure this solves the problem but the army tries to make everyone an e4 as fast as possible then let's them sit. The marines assign responsibility based on rank and an e4 has authority and knowledge. Sometimes more than an army e5. The army just wants to promote most likely to solve pay problems

I can relate and have agreement to this to an extent. Perhaps having up to SP5, but need to be NCOs beyond that, otherwise they have CPLs (NCOs) half their age giving them orders, since specialist/technical ranks were NOT NCOs and therefore had no legal authority. This is why they got rid of the technical/specialist ranks in the first place.

Myself, I also had a very great difficult socially connecting with people, reading social cues, etc. throughout life and it was/is a damn curse. I spent the first 10 years of my career as an intel analyst and was an S-2 NCOIC a couple of times - and was always mediocre at best. I could see that whatever it was I was doing (I didn't know!) was for some reason off-putting to people and subordinates often did not want to work with me. But most of the time being an analyst allowed me to work alone and I was highly praised and awarded for my work. At E-7 I went Special Forces. I had a difficult time in SFQC because of the social interaction skills and peered low all the time, but - as usual - was highly technically proficient. I was first an 18E (communications) then promoted to the team 18F (intelligence) and excelled in both - but as usual tended to isolate myself from the rest of the ODA especially while deployed and just do my job. Then, of course, I came down on the list for master sergeant and I knew right then I was in trouble, because I was going to have to be a manager and not a technical expert. As I predicted, I struggled a LOT as an E-8 in leadership positions but - as usual - excelled in technical proficiency and as a trainer/teacher. Being on the s**t list of msot of the Group E-9 mafia, I retired at 20 years. A few years ago, in my mid-40s, based on my own research and frustration I finally came to the conclusion that I am most likely high-functioning autism/Asperger's. Having this epiphany was like a load of bricks finally off my shoulders because I finally was able to put a name to what caused me a lifetime of struggle. Before that, I spent 13 years seeing psychologists, psychiatrists, adn therapists and taking the anti-depressants and ADHD meds they constantly pushed while having NO ideas what effect they would have. The most frustrating thing for me while seeing all those so-called doctors/experts is I brought up the possibilty of Asperger's but they immediately dismissed the possibilty because, according to them, I had been too successful and done too much in my life to be aspie. Five years ago I finally figured out that all those junk science experts said that because people in the mental health profession believe that aspies cannot be successful!Once I figured that out I dumped the pills and told them I was never coming back. Autism/Asperger's is a disqualifier for the US military, but these people have exceptional talents than can be used in specific skill sets. The Israeli army has special units for their autistics. In the US, approximately 80% of college graduate aspies/autistics are unemployed - because people simply do not want to work with them due to their lack of social skills. Fellow employees will complain an aspie makes them "uncomfortable" and management will fire the aspie with no real reason or recourse. Now, if an employee said that about, say, a transgender, what do you think would happen to the complainer?

SPC Kevin Ford
Do you want to persue a path to higher pay and more technical focus?
Apply to be a Warrant Officer.

How ironic…people whom supposedly have any real concept of service in their souls want maximum pay/benes for minimum performance.

So let’s connect some dots, shall we?

On this RP site we have topics/thread that almost respond to themselves. Of course I have an example:

Topic 1 “Specialist ranks for people avoiding leadership in any form or expectations.

Topic 2: People attending Ranger School only for the Leadership portion so they can slink back to the rear with a few more promotion points and a meaningless tab, as they have zero intentions of joining a Ranger Unit or performing the duties of real Rangers.

Topic 3
Some jibberish about “only real infantrymen went to Ft. Benning and have their “blue cord”.

Marine Infantry couldn’t care less about a blue cord. We can’t even automatically think to give a nod of respect to a Ranger Tab because it was probably some LD who only did the Leadership school then wants to maintain a Specialist rank to avoid leadership expectations.

Let me say that again:
Seek Leadership School wasting the Army’s time and resources training people to lead…who have no desire to lead.

It’s ok. The only leadership the Corps needs the Army to handle is when the Army Civil Affairs people come clean up our battlefield mess.
Yut!!

I recognize that there are some people who may be great at whatever task(s), but are horrible at managing people.

But I might be OK limiting their rank to E3. Compensation beyond that should imply you are (at minimun) capable of sharing/teach/coaching/training your expertise to others.