Posted on May 16, 2022
MAJ Norm Michaels
86.4K
1.38K
326
292
292
0
B87590f
This social experiment on soldiers was started in the late 1960s, and it mostly died away in the late 1980s, with the exception of SP4. Is a team leader SP4 any less of a leader than a corporal?
Avatar feed
Responses: 163
Votes
  • Newest
  • Oldest
  • Votes
SGT Clive Choat
0
0
0
Because it allows the Army to promote to the E4 grade without hitting Congressional strength limitations. The Army can only have so many Corporals, Sergeants, Staff Sergeants etc. Privates thru Specialist grades are unregulated.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SPC Eric Gibbs
0
0
0
As an E-4, when I left service, I can tell you the following. The E-4s in combat MOS were used the same way Cpl was. I had soldiers I was responsible for, and my E-5 was in charge of both of our teams. The difference was all the BS our Cpl was expected to do to prove himself as an NCO vs me.

I had the technical know how that he did. I had the same experience level and exposure, and the same pay. What I didn't have was the separation. He was an NCO and therefore was not seen as the same level and actually had less respect that I did from the lower enlisted. He was a "Baby NCO", and that attitude was made worse by the senior enlisted and how they treated him.

Then came the school opportunities. I had way more than he did, because of his "Leadership Duties." Which mostly consisted of Gate Guard and Trash Detail because the senior enlisted would shuffle it off to him. I am all for paying your dues, but when you have an experienced squad weapon crew leader now shuffling paperwork, and doing all the crap jobs, and not on that M-60, you have a misuse of assets.

Bringing back the tech ranks would solve a lot of that. You would have people that are suited to command in command. Where the best 60 gunner I ever saw would be where he was happy, calling in artillery and rocking the 60. He left the Army after a year and a half with his stripes. He was planning to make it a career. He was a great soldier.

Last item, the person below comparing the Marines to the Army... STOP!! Although they have crossover, the Marines and the Army are not the same. They have different mission profiles, history, and culture. What works for one does not necessarily work for the other. I compare us to one big disfunctional family. We love each other, are radically different, compete a lot, and protect each other. But you can not compare the services as apples to apples.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
CPT Special Forces Officer
0
0
0
They need more privates of the guard than they do sergeants (NCOs) of the guard.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
CW3 Kevin Storm
0
0
0
Because 99% are not ready to be Corporals after 24 months!
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
CPT Staff Officer
0
0
0
I think it's straight up a recruiting tool. If I recall correctly, no other service allows a pathway to enlist at the rank of E4 (as well, without a degree those with a commercial drivers license can get in as E4 as 88M's). Other than that I see no material benefit for it.

The whole CPL NCO role is kind of getting diluted as well now that all SPC's are being sent through BLC come out as CPL's. So CPL is now more or less an "I completed BLC" marker and effectively is the same as SPC(P).

With the advent of contractors the Specialist pay grade makes even less sense.

So in time of war, and need and when the DOD is ramping up recruiting, if one wants to enlist and isn't focused on a particular service then the Army can dangle that carrot.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SP5 Delphis Kaczowski
0
0
0
I was a MEDICAL CORPSMAN in the Army. My training at Fort Sam Houston/Brooke Hospital in San Antonio was almost like going to Medical school to be a DOCTOR. They gave me proficiency pay because I was able to do medical procedures that an EMT or Paramedic cannot legally do in the States. AND remember that most medical personnel did NOT carry weapons because we were considered NON-COMBATANTS and/or religious conscientious objectors (many were draftees). I left because WE signed the Geneva Convention & I also had to perform life saving measures on the enemy (Nam 1962-1965). MOS 910/911 was my introduction to war casualties (ours, theirs, civilians, animals, etc.) PTSD is a nightmare for many veterans today.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Sgt Raymond Powell
0
0
0
What about the old USAF "Buck" Sergeant (E-4)
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney
0
0
0
Edited >1 y ago
Just As Easy To Ask,
Why Should They NOT Still Have
A SP-4 Rating?.....What Difference Does It Make?...
Call It What You Will, The Occupation Remains The Same.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Retired
0
0
0
All I know is that I've seen crappy NCO's as well as "Specialists" with great leadership skills, and vice-versa. I say do away with the specialist ranks alltogether and put everyone on the same [leadership] level. I had both types of rank and I see no pressing need for the differentiation other than hurting group motivation.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PFC Kathleen Woolrich
0
0
0
E550cb55
I would not know.I am a permanent PFC lol..honorable too loooooool
I boughr my grave with PFC..lol.I am such a loser loooooool omg loooooool
E 3 ...FTW loooooool and honorable too.I just played around all the time..two branches tooooooo loooooooll.I never cared about getting promoted loooooooool.I am honorable which is so stupid...I do not even know how I did what I did...whatever.I am still cute and still stupid omgggg
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

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