Posted on Jun 15, 2018

Why don’t we put rank back on uniform collar?

10.3K

It’s annoying to stare at someone’s chest to try to see rank that may be obscured or is just difficult to see. It’s also annoying to see their face instantaneous with rank recognition. It was fine before and better placed on the collar in my opinion.

Posted in these groups: Rank

Rank

Senior Leaders Use common sense

Common sense

Posted 6 y ago

Follow this discussion

Responses: 19

CPT Jack Durish

Posted 6 y ago

Forgive me but I'm about to wander into the weeds here. And no, I'm not joking. Obviously, in any encounter, those on active duty are inclined to glance at the rank of someone with whom they are not familiar, even in passing to determine if a salute is needed. That means men are forced to stare at the chests of female service members and that tends to get me in trouble with women in civilian life. Is it the same in the active military?

(9)

Comment

(0)

CSM (Join to see)

6 y

Sir. Exactly. It is aparant where you’re looking when you rank verify. The chest rank is poorly placed.

(3)

(0)

SGT (Join to see)

6 y

CSM (Join to see) - you’re a CSM, so I’m guessing you’ve dealt with just about everything. Honestly, have you ever dealt with a SHARP case involving, “another soldier was staring at my chest!”
And the soldiers defense was, “I was only identifying her rank?”

I never saw encountered that situation or heard of it in all my travels in the Army.

(1)

(0)

SGM Erik Marquez

>1 y

I can’t say it was never brought to my attention as an issue by male or female all of those that propose that question were males looking to justify

Let’s face it the battle dress uniform no matter what flavor is not exactly revealing now if they were just rank on a T-shirt I could see maybe it being an issue

(0)

SGT(P) (Join to see)

4 y

Sir, rank is also on the PC. So through the course of most interactions where you would need to salute they are wearing their PC with rank. I tend to look there first, chest as a last resort.

(0)

Lt Col Jim Coe

Posted 6 y ago

This is one time I think the Air Force has it right. For a very long time in US history, the Army, Navy, and Marines wore enlisted rank on the sleeve. (At some point the Navy decided to put enlisted rank on only one sleeve, but on the sleeve none the less.) The Air Force inherited enlisted rank placement from the Army of 1947--on the sleeve. Exactly why the other three services started moving rank around on their uniforms I can't explain, but it's time to go back to the future. Put enlisted rank on the sleeve. It can be subdued for combat uniforms and work uniforms, but I don't recall a report anywhere of enlisted rank on the sleeve of a uniform giving away to presence of an enlisted person in a combat environment. I can be corrected on this, but I don't remember seeing anything about it. We do know that shiny officer rank on helmets or hats is a bad idea. It helps the bad guys identify who to shoot first and there are documented cases of this happening from at least the Revolutionary War onward--shooting the officers first that is. So officers should wear subdued rank on collars and hats of work uniforms and perhaps no rank on headgear of combat uniforms. Service dress uniforms jackets (a.k.a. blouses) take care of themselves for all services. Shirts for service dress (Class B) sometimes end up with enlisted rank on the collar, bad idea.
I'm for keeping it simple: enlisted rank on the sleeve on all uniforms, coats, jackets, blouses, etc. Officer rank on the shoulder or collar. Subdued rank on work, combat, and special purpose uniforms. Colorful rank on service dress uniforms. Clean, simple, easy to remember, easy to teach.

(8)

Comment

(0)