Would the Army be more effective in peacetime if soldiers could 'lock-in' at a preferred rank with payraises or with mandatory rank advances?

2024-03-07T08:06:56-05:00

I would say in peacetime because in war, you would want to promote the most skilled soldiers to fill emptied leadership positions in both the enlisted and officer ranks. OCS for units in refit and battlefield promotions for the most effective and proven NCOs.

Response by CSM Chuck Stafford made Mar 7 at 2024 8:19 AM

2024-03-07T08:19:36-05:00

If a soldier is happy as a SPC/E4 and performs well as a SPC/E4 and has no desire to go beyond, then let the Soldier retire as a SPC/E4 -- am I understanding the gist of your question?

Response by CSM Richard StCyr made Mar 7 at 2024 10:11 AM

2024-03-07T10:11:35-05:00

Used to see this with heavy equipment operators and crane operators. They were in many cases happy to just stay at E-5 / SGT. Because that's the most senior rate that still regularly operated equipment. SSGs got to run equipment while training their Soldiers but the Platoon Daddy at SFC was running beans, bullets, admin and fuel.

Response by SGT Kenneth Brockman made Mar 7 at 2024 2:17 PM

2024-03-07T14:17:52-05:00

I understand the question. There are a lot of soldiers that are excellent at what they do bu are not fit to lead. I for one am in favor of bringing back the spec 5 rank

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 7 at 2024 3:35 PM

2024-03-07T15:35:30-05:00

The PFC life was so easy then, all you needed to do was "Do As Told."

Response by SGT Aaron Atwood made Mar 7 at 2024 6:32 PM

2024-03-07T18:32:35-05:00

There was a video we had to watch in BLC. Had a couple of soldiers not seeing the need to do further education/PME/etc. since they were already truck drivers and good at what they did. Then a senior SNCO walks into the picture with things like the Ranger tab and various badge swag, and gives them a lecture on continuing to climb the ladder.

What that video DIDN'T tell you was that truck drivers are currently in high demand, and especially with a HAZMAT endorsement can easily make more per month than most 4-star generals. Personally I like to think about a classic WWII cartoon by Bill Mauldin when Joe (or maybe it was Willie) remarks to the Army engineers working hard on making a road, "At least yer learnin' a trade!" And Bill remarked in 1947 just how prophetic that cartoon was.

I always thought it was stupid that every one of us regardless of MOS had to strive to basically become the next company manager/CEO/executive board member in order to make it to retirement. Nowhere on the civilian side is that the case. You want to be an accountant? You can do so until you're ready to retire. Maybe if you do well enough you decide to open your own form or something. Want to be a musician? You can stick to your instrument for life; never needing to pick up a conductor's baton or deal with the logistics that staff of major ensembles are paid to figure out.

I hate that I'm hustling like a ho for promotion points just to help ensure I get promoted and can more easily stick around to retirement as I'm coming up fast to my tenure point when they're gonna tell me to get promoted or get the boot.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Mar 7 at 2024 11:57 PM

2024-03-07T23:57:04-05:00

It would have been more effective, productive if the Army had maintained the "Tec" or "Spec" ranks. Then this wouldn't be an issue.

Response by SPC James Neidig made Mar 8 at 2024 2:13 AM

2024-03-08T02:13:31-05:00

My Father Retired As A SPC 6 After Doing 20 Years As A Armor Crew Member/ Mechanic.
He Was A Leader Without The Strips Of An NCO!
Because He Taught And Passed On His Knowledge Of His Job To His Subordinates And In My Opinion That Is The Best Kind Of Leader, You Pass On Your Knowledge And Experience To The Younger Troops, You Don’t Need Strips To Be A Great Leader Or Soldier, You Just Need To Know How To Do Your Job And Be A Mentor.

Response by SrA Cecelia Eareckson made Mar 8 at 2024 1:05 PM

2024-03-08T13:05:08-05:00

1. Bad mindset. Peacetime cannnot be taken for granted.
2. Don't personnel have to apply for promotion after E-3 or 4?

Response by MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P made Mar 9 at 2024 12:15 PM

2024-03-09T12:15:57-05:00

Why not a hybrid of both? Why not allow a member to remain at a rank they are comfortable with (E-4 for example) but allow a path for further promotions when they are ready for it? I say that because for the longest time in my career, I would have been happy to remain at a technician level (for the AF, that was SrA/E4) without having to worry about supervisor responsibilities (E-5 and up). Later, I decided I wanted to be part of the senior leadership. I just didn't like the idea of being FORCED (via the up/out system) into it.

Response by SGT Kaye Fiorello made Mar 9 at 2024 1:15 PM

2024-03-09T13:15:03-05:00

I think that the military in general, places too much emphasis on promotion vs profession. Not everyone is cut out to be a leader, nor do they want to be. The reserve and guard reflects this better, mostly because people stay longer in service, and are content with the rank they have, while those who want to move up, do the work.
An alternate path, such as the old SPC/Tech ranks, would allow the military to grow some leaders, while also growing technical proficiency. If there is one lesson the military did not learn in ten years of war, it was the whole "active vs guard" and how people wanted guardsmen in the unit- because their civilian proficiencies far outpaced the rigid MOS and skill level systems still in the army.
Imagine how many BETTER leaders you could get into classes, if you did not need to fill seats in those classes with people who don't really want to be there. And imagine if you spent the effort to bring an SPC to a "3" level in their MOS, while the senior NCO who gets that training never uses it, because they are now in an admin role.
Imagine the skilled troops who are technical wizards, being allowed to rise to their ability, without being forced to also do "peopley stuff" they don't want.
US Industry has realized that "seasoned professionals" are an asset. Yet the military almost forces those assets out

Response by 1SG Jay Vanderford made Mar 10 at 2024 4:30 AM

2024-03-10T04:30:48-04:00

While I still serve I will tell you that the real issue is we allowed our politicians to make the Army (and other services) welfare agencies. I serve at a major HQs and see 25 or more suicide ideation CCIRs a week, these are tickets to a VA check for life, most of these Soldiers have only been in a year or two. The word is out, free money for life if you can hack basic, which is a joke anymore. We have (had) standards, its not about the rank structure or leadership, it is about just recruiting the right people, we need to remove a quota from the recruiters, no mental disorders allowed, not everyone is a Soldier. We have a societal breakdown in the USA, and we have allowed it into the Army, it shows.

Response by CPT David Tanner made Mar 31 at 2024 7:15 PM

2024-03-31T19:15:55-04:00

I think you should be able to continue to gain rank as earned as quickly as you are able to. If Someone that does a great job at building roads, working on trucks, etc. but is 5 lbs. over max weight or .5% over allowable body fat or is not able to get the setups needed to pass a physical fitness test, or simply does not want to advance in rank, then they should be able to stay in at current rank until regulations no longer allow it.

Response by SFC Freddie Porter made Apr 26 at 2024 10:39 AM

2024-04-26T10:39:59-04:00

I’ve wondered about this topic for over 50 years now. So I’m going to comment on why the wondering..

My father was a great auto mechanic. He was probably one of best you would ever find. People would line up in front of the house on weekends to get their cars repaired every weekend. He was a highly respected member of the community and noted for his honesty and technical expertise. He would never have been a successful business owner in his life. He tried it in the early 60’s (Fred’s Auto Repair) and it nearly killed him. My mother forced him to go back to a dealership to earn a living. That was where he shinned with everyone wanting to get their car serviced by Fred. Back then, his eighth grade education was all he needed for his line of work; not a college degree to turn nuts and bolts yet he knew every technical aspect of the automobile you could imagine. In 1968/1969 he told me he could modify a car to get about 50 mpg. That would have required he write it up though (and car manufacturers really didn;t want that level of efficiency back than. He got a great deal of satisfaction from knowing his strengths and worth. I always wondered how the military could keep people like that to provide the day-to-day operations with skill and professionalism. He would never had made a career being a Warrant Officer or SNCO. His strengths and skills didn’t lean that way and he would have struggled badly probably getting out when had he been forced to accept a higher promotion. My thoughts went to believing it would have been a waste to exclude men like him. They could teach so much to the young people through mentoring and daily job performance.

A long, long time ago, soldiers would intentionally screw up just to get an AR15 and be reduced in the ranks. They did not want to command troops in the field and this was the best way to do it. It would minor offenses but it was effective such as drunk on duty, fighting, sloppy appearance or something equally minor. We produced good leadership back in those days with the ability to promote not only the those that wanted it but the best of the best. Even Audy Murphy turned down a promotion to the officer corps several time because he did not want to change units although he was doing the work of a offiecer. Somewhere that changed in the military.

The military already has a process in place to retain the good guys. It’s call time in service pay increases. Unfortunately those increases end at a certain point and SM’s are now forced out of the military. A favorite author of mine (W.E.B. Griffin) talks about promotions in a lot of his books. He is always referencing the length of time it took for a SM to get to E-4/E-5/E-6 or 0-3/O-4. Someone in the military or civilian hierarchy came up with the brilliant idea of up or out and we have lost a lot of great talent and experience because of it.

I guess what I’ve concluded over the years is that promotion should be merit based without penalty for a lack of desire (or skills) to become SR leaders. Right now in 2024 the military is struggling to fill its ranks frequently falling under the authorized strength levels. This has severely compromised the combat readiness of the military and has made recruiter’s lives a living hell. There are only a limited number of SR leader slots available in the military. That means, by its nature, most of the SM’s will never see CSM or General of the Army. It inhibits the military from the keeping the best and the brightest. To me, I guess I long ago concluded that the up or out policy was just wrong. We should be trying to keep the best and the brightest..

Like I said in my opening, this is something I’ve thought about a long time so, if this writing seems disjointed or I’ve missed things, please bare with me. This is not a policy paper but rather my thoughts on a long standing question I’ve had. And, I welcome any thoughts others might have.