Posted on May 16, 2022
Why does the US Army persist with the rank of SP4?
87.4K
1.37K
326
291
291
0
Responses: 163
A rank does not make a leader. Under General Mille, the most important thing in his life is how to properly address the opposite sex and queers and notifying China before, should we decide to attack.
This is not the armed Forces I was in. The Iranians continue to tweak our nose, Saudi Arabia laughs at us, Hezbollah considers the U S A military forces a joke. And we are discussing SP5? When agreed we going to wake up?
This is not the armed Forces I was in. The Iranians continue to tweak our nose, Saudi Arabia laughs at us, Hezbollah considers the U S A military forces a joke. And we are discussing SP5? When agreed we going to wake up?
(0)
(0)
The Army being the largest force in the military doesnt really have an abundance of leadership roles for everyone advancing to E4. So when SP4 promotion comes and that soldier proves very effective his unit can recommend Corporal, get him to the Sgt board.
The USMC is a much smaller force. All promotions are based on performance or better known as fitness reports.
The USMC is a much smaller force. All promotions are based on performance or better known as fitness reports.
(0)
(0)
I wish the technical spec ranks had persisted personally. I was a spec4 for far too long. My skills advanced but my padid not. I was toying with ocs due to completion of my degree. But life circumstances and injuries kept me at E4 eternally I seemed.
(0)
(0)
To answer this question, yes and no, a SP4 has some leadership duties when that person is put in that roll, a Coporal steps right up when the occasion arises, both can lead, mentor, give advice, and look after their squad, and most of all be ready to carry out assignments
(0)
(0)
Simple. Because not all E-4's can be corporals. An E-4 is promoted to corporal when a Specalist doesn't have the points to be promoted to Sergeant, but an NCO is need in that particular section.
(0)
(0)
Specialists were supposed to be the enlisted 'technicians,' with emphasis on working in their skill area instead of taking time away for leadership responsibilities. Didn't quite work out that way. Most of the SP6 and above that I ever saw were in the medical fields. I made it to SP5 in EOD back in the mid-70s, but anything above that in my field carried Staff Sgt rank.
(0)
(0)
I am not sure what you are talking about. There has not been a SP4 rank in the Army since before I joined in 1991. By your picture I will assume that you are from the Vietnam era and the SP ranks were very prevalent. The current Specialist rank was adopted in 1985 and only the old timers still call them SP4. And while a specialist in the position of team leader is the leader of that team he/she is not the same as a Corporal. They are not considered a Noncomissioned Officer they are still junior enlisted soldiers. When I was in service in order to pin Corporal stripes you had to do a few things. Be in the NCO position for a minimum of 90 days, be promotable and not have any negative actions pending. i.e. no bars or pt failure or weight control issues. Even then it was very rare to get laterally promoted to Corporal.
I will say that I do think that they should bring back the senior specialist ranks. There are some people that are excellent at their jobs, yet have no business leading Soldiers. And while we are talking about it once a Soldier makes the rank of Specialist they should get rid of the retention control points and allow them the ability to retire after 20-30 years.
I will say that I do think that they should bring back the senior specialist ranks. There are some people that are excellent at their jobs, yet have no business leading Soldiers. And while we are talking about it once a Soldier makes the rank of Specialist they should get rid of the retention control points and allow them the ability to retire after 20-30 years.
(0)
(0)
The SPEC ranks needs to come back. They should have never been 86. The ranks was sent South one by one. I was a SPEC 5 when the Army converted me to SGT around 1985. When it came to lead, I lead. But was not a born leader. A Specialist rank was specifically to his / her techeninal MOS. A Hard Striper was a generic leader to all MOSes.
(0)
(0)
The Specialist rank is career specific. Not all jobs in the military are leadership roles. Squad leader roles are corrals but clerical may not involve other troops
(0)
(0)
My thoughts on this are, most E-4's are not ready , and maybe will never be ready to make CPL, but are technically adapt enough to get the job done without supervision.
(0)
(0)
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!!!
(0)
(0)
If the SP4 lacks leadership qualities or potentail then It is up to his supervisors to develop him or her.
(0)
(0)
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).
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
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
(0)
(0)
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?
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?
(0)
(0)
SPC Kevin Ford
Do you want to persue a path to higher pay and more technical focus?
Apply to be a Warrant Officer.
Do you want to persue a path to higher pay and more technical focus?
Apply to be a Warrant Officer.
(0)
(0)
SPC Kevin Ford
That's a great option for the younger guys. However, as a 54 year old man with Graves Disease I don't think I'm of much interest to the military anymore. :)
(0)
(0)
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!!
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!!
(0)
(0)
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next