Avatar feed
Responses: 5
ENS Naval Officer   Ip Student
2
2
0
Love it or hate it, it's the direction we are headed in now. The Secretary of the Navy wants this, and as he has proven time and time again, once he has his mind set on something, there's no changing it. The Navy rarely if ever will admit to fault or go back on a change they have made. Ratings are a thing of the past - only to be mentioned when talking about "back in the day". Of course, they will be mentioned more on boards. Though, when we talk about GM1 Osmond Ingram no one will understand what that means. It's sad really. Personally, I feel that boatswain's mate are going to have the hardest time with it.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO1 Jose Garcia
1
1
0
Have NEVER heard the rating system EVER preventing ANYONE from advancement or any Equal Opportunity program. This was change for change sake only. Next - Get rid of PETTY in PETTY OFFICER. Then we can all be called officers.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
LCDR Vice President
1
1
0
They claim the reason was to “brings us more in line with the other services”, which really means the Army so how do you get a plural out of that.
(1)
Comment
(0)
1LT(P) Company Commander
1LT(P) (Join to see)
>1 y
Air Force has the same "mos" system as the Army but it's called AFSC. I think it will serve a purpose in the long run but it may be a hard pill to swallow. Getting rid of tradition is a tough call for a leader to do. I'm certain there is positive that will come of this. A leaders ultimate goal should be to improve the quality of his subordinates and establish trust. I'm sure his intent is good but it's just hard to see right now. A title shouldn't define who you are as a person but it's your character and support of those appointed over that should.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

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

close