What is your opinion on the use of the term "Lower Enlisted" Soldiers?

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 08:17:33 -0500

<p>I have been in the Army for 25 years now. I hear this term loosely thrown around by Officers and NCOs. Back in the day, when I was an E-I owe you 1, I didn't think much of it. In fact, I don't think I even heard that term used in front of me. Are our leaders less aware of the audience that is listening, or am I off track here?</p><p> </p><p>Now as a senior NCO, I often politely ask for a word, when I hear a junior Officer or NCO using it around junior Soldiers. I never hear the word lower Officer used, and I feel that our junior Enlisted Soldiers may feel that this term is demeaning. Most junior Officers and NCOs that I talk to don't even think a second thought about using it until I mention it. Just my opinion, but I think our junior enlisted Soldiers deserve better. Nobody has argued against my point when I bring it up. Please let me know if I am out of whack with the modern day Army.</p>

Response by SSG Zachery Mitchell made Feb 20 at 2014 9:14 AM

SSG Zachery Mitchell — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 09:14:47 -0500

I feel the term lower enlisted is a bit offensive and derogatory myself. They are not lower than anyone else that has more rank. All humans are created equal last I checked. E4 and below are junior enlisted. Plain and simple. They are not "lower" or "less" than E5 and above or senior enlisted. They are just junior in grade.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2014 9:21 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 09:21:17 -0500

I didn't bother me to much when I was lower enlisted, I think if they are offended by that, they won't be able to handle other more stressful situations.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2014 9:38 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 09:38:39 -0500

I have to agree. My impression is that those who say 'lower enlisted' vice 'junior enlisted' even after having this brought to their attention are more interested in pushing the "you don't have rank, therefore you don't have worth" attitude.

Response by LT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2014 9:49 AM

LT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 09:49:30 -0500

I do not see anything inherently offensive or disrespectful about the term "lower enlisted." If the term is being used casually without any malice then there is no offense to be taken. The only problem I would have with it is if someone intentionally said "lower enlisted" to demean a soldier.

Response by SPC Christopher Smith made Feb 20 at 2014 9:53 AM

SPC Christopher Smith — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 09:53:32 -0500

I've heard this used by a 1SG once, and a few junior NCOs a few times. When said, the substance of what they said mattered not the title presented to the group. Although junior holds a more family oriented bond, than lower which I guess has a more value based connotation, it has some affect on how you get along with a group. You might be more willing to develop a junior, while casting away a lower element. That said, I'd say what is being said before or after means much more.

Response by LTC Joseph Gross made Feb 20 at 2014 10:02 AM

LTC Joseph Gross — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:02:12 -0500

I think I hear junior enlisted more often now but I do recall the days of lower enlisted. I never felt it was used to belittle but was simply the accepted term. I prefer junior enlisted just as we use junior or company grade officer.

Response by SSG Ralph Watkins made Feb 20 at 2014 10:03 AM

SSG Ralph Watkins — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:03:56 -0500

Leave Political Correctness & semantics to the civilian world. There should be no place for such a thing in the military. Too much focus on nit-picky little things & not on the important aspects of the military.

Response by MSgt Timothy Bridgham made Feb 20 at 2014 10:07 AM

MSgt Timothy Bridgham — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:07:48 -0500

Sorry, the term is an incentive to make rank. Unlike Officers, Enlisted must test, and achive to get promoted above junior grade. To be seen as a junior enlisted reminds the member where they are and gives them a goal to preform to move up. If a solider, sailor, Airmen or Marine is offended by the term, do you really want that troop moving up to be a leader? I would never have recommended a troop for promotion that was so easily offended.

Response by SFC Craig Dalen made Feb 20 at 2014 11:02 AM

SFC Craig Dalen — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 11:02:48 -0500

The term Junior Soldier is more fitting. These young men and women are not "lower" than anyone. Junior just indicates that they have less time and experience in the military. It is not about offending anyone it is showing the respect to these Soldiers as they respect who you are.

Response by SFC Gary Fox made Feb 20 at 2014 11:07 AM

SFC Gary Fox — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 11:07:29 -0500

My oh my how the Army is changing and not necessarily for the better in some areas. I can't believe some would be offended by the term "lower enlisted." Lower enlisted only means those personnel are lower in rank because they are not NCOs or Officers. The number 1 is lower than the number 9. Is that to mean we should start saying the number 1 is junior to the number 9?

I'm sure in these days someone would find "junior enlisted" to be offensive because the term gives the impression they are not real soldiers.

Let's get real people, the term "lower enlisted" isn't anything derogatory. It's stating those personnel are lower in rank because they simply are not NCOs, WOs, or Officers. It means nothing, absolutely nothing else.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2014 12:01 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:01:52 -0500

As an AF NCO, we use the term "junior enlisted," I don't have much of a problem with that.....it's where does it cut off? I've also seen "junior NCO," but we only have 2 NCO ranks, so that I do not get at all and refuse to say it or join the "junior NCO association."

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2014 12:06 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:06:52 -0500

I don't recall hearing the term lower enlisted used, at least not with any frequency. Junior Enlisted seems to be the go-to term. With that said, different people have different definitions for what qualifies as being "Junior Enlisted". I've seen some people group E-1 through E-6 as Junior Enlisted, while others E-1 through E-4 (Specialist). As for distinctions between Junior and Senior NCOs, I've seen Junior referred to as E-4 (Corporal) through E-6 or just E-4 to E-5. Personally, and I'm biased and believe that "Mid-level NCOs" should be a term for use to describe E-6s; there is nothing junior about E-6 and yes, the term, while inherently empty, does bring with it the stigma of being junior, even when you're not.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2014 12:09 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:09:37 -0500

I remember an article in the Army Times a couple of years back stating that they wanted us to call them "Junior Enlisted Warriors" I think the nixed that after they found out what the accronym was going to be.

Response by Maj Chris Nelson made Feb 20 at 2014 12:17 PM

Maj Chris Nelson — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:17:24 -0500

Truely, I think it is all semantics..... lower enlisted vs junior enlisted....both mean essentiall the same. on the flip side, I don't often hear people talking about the upper enlisted....most the time it is senior enlisted corps or senior NCOs. If you want to keep it consistant, then Junior and Senior should be used. I never took offense at being "lower enlisted" when I was E-1 through E-4, then I became an NCO.... would E-5 be a Junior NCO or Lower NCO? just food for thought!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2014 12:18 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:18:57 -0500

Are we seriously worrying about this? For as long I have been in we have referred to various echelons of rank as lower enlisted, jnr NCO'S, snr NCO's, CSM's jnr officers, snr officers, and field & gen officers. Eventually we added mid-grade NCO's for whatever reason, I suspect for feel good PC. Does it really matter? It never hurt my or any of my lower enlisted peers feelings.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2014 12:30 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:30:41 -0500

I personally do not find the term "lower-enlisted" offensive. To me it has always simply meant "Anyone not E-5 and above". I feel as though nobody is calling anyone lower then anyone else specifically and personally to attack anyone, only that it is just a neutral term describing a group of ranks.
Using "Junior enlisted" is simply a synonym for "Lower Enlisted". It is interchangeable and neither are offensive. I think that there a lot more derogatory terms that we use in the military that are much more offensive such as POGS and whatnot.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2014 12:33 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:33:26 -0500

please disregard this comment

Response by SSG Bruce Durham made Feb 20 at 2014 12:41 PM

SSG Bruce Durham — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:41:35 -0500

I always used the term junior enlisted. I think the Brits have it right by referring to them as Private Soldiers.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2014 1:15 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 13:15:08 -0500

As a Junior Soldier myself, I honestly don't mind it. I understand I am lower on the totem pole. There are many terms that military members use that could be considered demeaning if used with negative connotations, but generally when I hear "lower enlisted" I just think of it as the same thing as Junior Soldier or E-4 and below.

The only time it would be an issue for me is if it was purposely used negatively, or when an NCO or Officer assumes that because I am "lower enlisted" that I can't possibly do any higher level thinking or that any form of critical thinking or judgement must be too advanced for my pay-grade. This has only happened on a few occasions, when there was an NCO up on his high horse thinking, because he is an NCO, he knew all and the lower ranks knew nothing and should be spoon fed information like kids and moved around like cattle.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2014 1:21 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 13:21:58 -0500

I believe Junior is the better term. This could become inflammitory as well if we start enlisting old people who might regard Junior as demeaning. I have started calling E4 and below enlisted, and NCO's NCO's. I do not call any Officers Junior. I use the term Company Grade and Field Grade for those in my immediate area. I wish we could bring back the term DOG TAG but also understand some people would be hurt by that as well.

Response by SGT Christopher Camacho made Feb 20 at 2014 1:41 PM

SGT Christopher Camacho — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 13:41:59 -0500

Yes, MSG, you are right in saying that we should use the term 'Junior Enlisted' over 'Lower Enlisted' and good for the Army for having leaders like you to see the difference.

I hate hearing how this is a 'New, kinder, gentler Army,' a 'Politically correct Army,' or the biggest offense in my book, 'a softer army.' Because back in my day... BLAH FREAKIN' BLAH.

You know what, this is a new army. Every day it's changing. We know that it's changed since you've been in (I'm talking to you 'Old Timers'). Yes, I know when my mom and dad joined the Army back in '80, wall-to-wall counseling was THING and that getting physical with your Soldiers to get through to them was acceptable. But that's changed. Hell, the Army's changed since I've joined.

But the thing that has made and kept us the greatest Army in the world, is that we adapt to change. We see the things that don't work, the things that do work and then we CHANGE.

The young men and women joining the Army today are different than you. And one of those changes is that maybe they are affected by your word choice of junior over lower. If that's the case, then why can't we, as leaders, accept that and use it to our advantage?

These young men and women joined the Army (and the military, as this goes for all branches) in a time of war. Pessimists look at these young adults as the generation who is more into their video games, cellphones, and that 'interweb.' Good. They're also some of the smartest recruits we've had in a long time. We want this.

BECAUSE THEY WILL BE THE ONES IN OUR POSITIONS YEARS FROM NOW.

Response by SPC Brendan Kearns made Feb 20 at 2014 2:07 PM

SPC Brendan Kearns — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 14:07:06 -0500

I just have to wonder who listened to the good idea fairy about all this pointlessness.

Personally it dose not bother me when i am called "lower enlisted" Jr enlisted" "FNG" Ect.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2014 11:45 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 23:45:06 -0500

MSG Kepler,<div><br></div><div>I appreciate your concern for the junior enlisted soldiers.  However, controversies like these regarding semantics remind me of other new politically correct terms that are supposed to benefit the recipient, but don't.</div><div><br></div><div>For example, I am no longer Indian or American Indian.  I am now a "Native American", in spite of the fact that most of us continue to call each other Indian.  I'm also told that I should be offended because the Cleveland Indians and Marquette Warriors chose to name their teams after my heritage.  I'm honored that sports teams want to use our likeness, so who benefits from this change... Indians like me, or non-Indians who feel they have something to prove? </div><div><br></div><div>If the junior enlisted don't mind being called lower enlisted, as they have been called for ages, why must we change?  As long as the intent behind a person's terminology is not disrespectful, I don't see the problem.</div>

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 21 at 2014 12:42 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 Feb 2014 00:42:06 -0500

MSG, you ask us what are opinions are on this topic and you have received a wide range of answers. I'm going to add mine, even though some of what I say has already been stated here by others...To everyone else out there, the bottom line is, as a Profession of Arms, we should be setting the example. While this issue may seem minor to some, it speaks to the very core of discipline and dedication to duty. Times are changing and yes this is different Army than what many may remember or have been told stories of...but that is not going to stop progress. While using the term "lower" versus "junior" does not have the same impact as the repeal of DADT, the point I'm trying to make is this: Use the proper term, out of respect and courtesy. I'm sure it offends at least 1 person out there to be called a "lower" enlisted (and for the record it offends me to hear it). Using "Junior Enlisted" will create a more positive environment and lift your Soldiers up. It can demonstrate your awareness as a leader to be sensitive to others. And, it's just better grammar! Do we call SFC and above "upper" enlisted? No, because it sounds stupid!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 21 at 2014 10:26 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 Feb 2014 22:26:21 -0500

I do not find the term Lower enlisted as demeaning and will when recalling stories from my years as an E-1 through E-4 I will start out by saying when I was lower enlisted it never bothered me and honestly if being called lower enlisted is the biggest concern E-1 through E-4 have then they have it a lot better then I did.

Response by CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 21 at 2014 10:48 PM

CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 Feb 2014 22:48:58 -0500

I feel it can be demeaning honestly. I'm a PFC and started as a fuzzy almost 2 years ago and I haven't been in the ARMY more than a hot minute but I joined at 27 and my experience in the RL isn't even considered when I speak to E-5s who are barely in their 20's. I respect them and achievements and wish I had joined earlier, however when someone who can simply out wit me when it comes to ARs and DD/DA forms comes at me like some sort of nit-wit and talks about how I'm just a PVT, lower enlisted. I can help but get a bit irritated. However, I've taken that serioiusly in regard to my personal performance. I've grown on my leadership and feel respected. It's a barrier you have to prove you're not apart of. Be a private, act like a private. I want to be an NCO, so I act like an NCO and I've slowly been able to be treated as a dependable person, not a junior enlisted joe.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 21 at 2014 11:30 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 Feb 2014 23:30:31 -0500

well MSG I see it like this, you are a SR NCO, yes? You could also say that you are a Senior Enlisted member, true? We also have JR NCO's as well. No one gets a negative counseling from a SFC and above for ie: Disrespect to a "Higher Non-Commissioned Officer" it is a SR Non-Commissioned Officer. Why call SFC and above SR if we call the opposite "lower". The comparison can be used for fathers and sons. If the first is SR, is the second ie: John Doe "lower"? No, its JR. There is higher/lower therefore there is Senior/Junior. Pretty self explanatory is how I see it. Respectfully.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2014 12:39 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Feb 2014 00:39:53 -0500

As I said in another post that social engineering seems to be in effect and it is getting ridiculous.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2014 2:52 AM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Feb 2014 02:52:12 -0500

I've never heard or used lower enlisted, only junior Marines. Never complained myself or heard of any complaints.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2014 4:30 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Feb 2014 04:30:44 -0500

One of my favorite statements that I would share with Soldiers pertaining to proper nouns and common nouns. Soldiers, unknowingly and unintentionally would call me...captain without my name behind it. Not in a condescending tone or not out of disrespect. Just the word, captain. Obviously, captain or any rank without a name behind it is just a common noun. It is unfortunate that the word sergeant works quite well when used by itself. However, it is particularly clear when you hear officer ranks without names instead of Sir or Ma'am.

So I tell them, please do not call me "Captain" without my last name, for example say CPT Moss. I don't want it to be left up to interpretation so please call me CPT Moss or Sir. I am not on a cereal box and my name isn't, Captain Crunch.

This harkens back to my theory about "Be Inclusive, Not Exclusive" again it applies to many things. So when you want to say Private or Privates it would be much better to use rank with the name attached rather than without. The proper term then is Soldiers or Soldier which is obviously a universal term that is both proper and common in my opinion.

Now, the origin of your argument spawns from TRADOC Regulation 350-6 Appendix K (Para K-3(c))----c. Groups as a whole are addressed as "Soldiers" or "Warriors" vice "You" or "Privates." Civilian, GS workers, and contractors who are in contact with IET Soldiers must attend the appropriate TRADOC course in conjunction with TR 350-6, Appendix B to perform their duties around IET Soldiers. (FYI--Appendix B--states the required training responsibilities for IET Training Courses such as the AIT Platoon Sergeant, other cadre training courses.)

http://www.jackson.army.mil/sites/dss/docs/1061

Response by SPC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2014 5:03 AM

SPC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Feb 2014 05:03:53 -0500

Personally, I don't much care what word people label us with. What I do care about is Senior NCO's, Junior NCO's and officers treating junior enlisted as tho they are "lower" or not due equal respect. Or as the Chief above put it, "you don't have rank, so you don't have worth attitude".

I am here to train, to learn and to advance in my career, as are most junior enlisted. No one wants to show up to work being told their opinions don't matter, that they can't possibly know how to do something, etc. More often than not in the 6 years that I have been in, I have seen those junior soldiers who needed the most help being built up, instead being ridiculed, harassed, and torn down as though this is a fun game for the NCO's. It makes me sick to my stomach to see someone wearing the rank of E-6, E-7 on up treating a soldier this way, with their excuse almost without a doubt being, "Welcome to the US Army" or something of that nature. It's become a disease in the Army IMO that being pinned with that next rank has changed from being an increase in responsibility of leadership to being about climbing a little higher on the totem pole so I can crap on more people now.

So frankly, call me lower enlisted, call me junior enlisted I don't really care, just don't treat me or anyone with disrespect.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2014 9:30 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Feb 2014 09:30:49 -0500

It doesn't bother me. I am fairly low on the totem pole but nobody expects to be an E-7 when they enlist. I call myself lower enlisted because that is exactly what I am, if it bothers you then get some thicker skin or suck it up until your contract is up because you chose the wrong career path.

Response by SFC Gary Fox made Feb 22 at 2014 11:26 AM

SFC Gary Fox — Sat, 22 Feb 2014 11:26:10 -0500

During 25 years of military service, I never once heard someone in the pay grades of E-1 thru E-4 ever complain about being referred to as being a member of the lower enlisted. I've read pretty much every post in this discussion. There was one PFC who prefers to be called a "junior enlisted," but referred to himself as being a "fuzzy" when he was an E-1. To me you call an E-1 "Private" not "fuzzy."

I've also read where some who had posted find the term "junior" to be offensive. My point is, whether we refer to those in the pay grades E-1 thru E-4 as "lower enlisted" or "junior enlisted," someone is going to be offended.

If someone finds themselves being offended by being referred to as a member of the lower enlisted ranks or junior enlisted ranks, they should just grow the heck up. I'm glad I retired. All this PC crap is disruptive. Don't believe me? Just read all the posts.

Response by MSgt Matthew Foulkes made Feb 22 at 2014 7:32 PM

MSgt Matthew Foulkes — Sat, 22 Feb 2014 19:32:08 -0500

I'll keep this short...never in 20+ years was I ever referred to as lower anything. It was always Jr Enlisted and when I became a SNCO I ensured my troops were afforded the same respect that I was.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2014 1:10 PM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 25 Feb 2014 13:10:32 -0500

Should the army change the wording in its doctrine from Superior Officers and Subordinates because it somehow has a connotation that there is an "inferior" group of individuals? You are lesser than those above you for purposes of command and responsibility. Nobody is saying you are less of a person. This is just were one fits in, in the grand scheme of things.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 26 at 2014 6:22 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Feb 2014 06:22:57 -0500

Demeaning? Come on now, let get off this "everything is demeaning" kick. Then maybe we should stop using the phrase "senior enlisted" also because that might be demeaning to the "lower" enlisted. If thats the case, get rid of the term "leg" also.

If this is what the we are worried about, we are going to be in for some serious trouble in the future.

And yes, I was part of that lower enlisted group "back in the day".

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 27 at 2014 12:48 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Feb 2014 00:48:25 -0500

I am sure this has already been addressed, but I am too lazy to go through a wall of text to verify......

Back in nineteen hundred and ninety-three when I first came in, my first PSG (the best I ever had, so it went downhill from there) corrected people on using lower enlisted for this simple reason:

We don't call Junior Officers "Lower Officers".

Worked for me.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 28 at 2014 8:32 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 28 Feb 2014 08:32:43 -0500

I appreciate all the feedback. The point I am trying to make is that, as leaders, we should be a bit more mindful of the words we say and the folks around. I find that when I use certain words, I get a different reaction from Soldiers. When senior leaders are interacting with Soldiers, they are watching all the time. I sat in a briefing Wednesday and an O-5 said that he was taking a command initiative and "dumbing it down" so that an E-5 or E-6 can understand it. I watched the face of a SSG that was flipping slides drop. She happens to have a masters degree. Just my opinion, thanks for the input.

Response by SGT Chris Hill made Mar 15 at 2014 7:09 PM

SGT Chris Hill — Sat, 15 Mar 2014 19:09:06 -0400

I don't understand why this would be an issue, it's not degrading. Lower enlisted describes exactly as it's titled! They are the ones who are are lower on the graph until they demonstrate themselves to rise above. Now granted those select ones that are in a non promoting mos and stuck as e4, I can understand that frustration. I've known some amazing leaders that were e4's for years, due to their promotion points being maxed. It seems like no matter what we call a soldier, they will find a way to be butt hurt.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 15 at 2014 7:15 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 15 Mar 2014 19:15:12 -0400

MSG, you aren't whacked out. I agree with you and call my junior enlisted by their rank. I saw too many Soldiers get upset by someone calling them lower enlisted when I was coming up the ranks and made a conscience decision to be different. As leaders we have to inform our superiors and teach our Soldiers to treat everyone with RESPECT. After all, they are just like us, but just haven't poured as much blood and sweat into their careers like their Seniors.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 15 at 2014 7:46 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 15 Mar 2014 19:46:04 -0400

Junior enlisted is the correct term. I challenge any NCO to find an AR with the term lower enlisted. Respect is a two way street.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 16 at 2014 1:15 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 16 Mar 2014 01:15:28 -0400

MSG Kepler,

When I hear the term "lower" enlisted, I simply correct the individual and state that "Junior" Enlisted is the proper term and is in fact, more accurate. I've seen PFCs and SPCS outshine SGTs and SSGs in their MOS. They may be Junior, yes, but definitely not lower. This is a rank structure and not a caste system, however I believe some have lost sight of that due to prior experience(s).

As an example, when I was a young PV2, I experienced this behavior and determined that, per Ben Parker, with great power comes great responsibility. It is my personal belief that some individuals lose sight of this.

V/r

SGT Mullet

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 16 at 2014 3:21 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 16 Mar 2014 15:21:23 -0400

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 16 at 2014 3:27 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 16 Mar 2014 15:27:40 -0400

I just wonder what the Russians are doing right now, while our society and our army is weak and concerned with questions like this. They are making them hard over there and letting the weak weed themselves out how it used to be over here. But now we gotta make sure we are handing out hugs and kisses....

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 17 at 2014 1:57 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 17 Mar 2014 13:57:59 -0400

I just use the terms "junior enlisted" or "lower ranks," depending on the context. Personally, I try to be as precise in terminology as possible. Words have meanings, and truthfully we tend to either conflate too much or assume words are synonyms when they're not. Precision seems to help avoid a lot of otherwise likely butt-hurt. And yes, I do tend to think that people are overly sensitive these days, but that's also a battle you can't win with a one-man campaign.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 17 at 2014 2:00 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 17 Mar 2014 14:00:41 -0400

MSG,

I
could care less. This is one of those cases on being TOO politically correct
when It is not needed.

Definition of lower (adj)

low·er

[ lṓ ər ]

1.
below something: physically below another thing, especially one of the same
type

2.
reduced or less: reduced or less in amount

3. closer to bottom: closer to the bottom
or base of something

E1-4 are (by definition)
below (definition one), less in amount (of grade) (definition 2) closer to the
bottom (definition 3)

Now what really
bites is being in the navy. You can be an NCO but you are still a PETTY officer…

Definition of petty (adj)

pet·ty

[ péttee ]

1. insignificant: of little importance

Now, I think I rather be “lower” than “petty”

Just my opinion. It did not bother me
at all and I have been called a lot worse than “lower enlisted” when I was
Lower enlisted.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 17 at 2014 6:10 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 17 Mar 2014 18:10:38 -0400

Many of you who are objecting to the objections of 'lower enlisted' for E1-E4 personnel are missing the point.

First and foremost, plenty of more senior personnel use lower enlisted to mean lower worth. I can tell you that Psychology 101 means if one of your privates or specialists has an honestly good idea on how to improve things in the workplace, they won't bother bringing it up, because they'll get the impression that they and their ideas aren't valued.

Secondly, it costs NOTHING to refer to E1-E4 as junior enlisted. You won't even do that? What makes you think that those junior enlisted will take you seriously if you won't even do that much.

Seriously, people, we're arguing here over a word. Those objecting to the term are being accused of being whiny, and needing to suck it up. The same could be thrown at the other side. Why can we not rationally discuss this?

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Apr 6 at 2014 9:01 PM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Sun, 06 Apr 2014 21:01:25 -0400

Good Point but no less demeaning than a lot of our rank names anyway in the Navy. The worst name I've been called was "Recruit" When the CC Started calling us Sailors the last two weeks gave us a giant boost. Seaman Apprentice, An apprentice to an E-3 that is not necessarily a good one. Not that our Lower NCO Names are that much Better "Petty" Officer but at least it has a great history. No I don't fixate on it but you do bring up a very valid point and if I had ever heard a Junior Officer use the term Lower Enlisted, I would have probably shot him the evil eye over my Gold Hash Marks.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 18 at 2014 1:46 AM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 18 Sep 2014 01:46:37 -0400

I suppose how the term is used would dictate whether it is meant to be demeaning or not. I mean if it is just standard vernacular I do not see really wrong with it. I see your point on how it could be demeaning I suppose. If someone used the term in a condescending snarky manner with tone to sound demeaning than I suppose it might be a point of contention. Factually they are the lower echelons of the military hierarchy so it would not be completely out of line.

I am not sure if this term is used anymore. But when I went to a Army military school for a year and did one year of SROTC as an elective requirement. I remember the term D I R or "Dck In Ranks" being thrown around for those of us that were MS1's. It was mostly the prior service cadets that would throw that terminology around a lot. They used to say that's why we are called privates because we were the D I R, etc. Granted we were cadet privates and not real ones.

It would seem like that would be more demeaning to someone in the Army who was E-3 or below, than being called the lower enlisted. I am guessing in 'military D I R probably is no longer used.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 1 at 2015 10:11 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 01 Mar 2015 22:11:06 -0500

MSG Private RallyPoint Member, as a "lower enlisted", I can appreciate what you're saying. However, I don't believe I've ever heard the phrase used, in my experience, as anything derogatory. It just it was it is :)
To be honest, I prefer the terms "lower enlisted" to "junior enlisted". But that may be because the term "junior" reminds me of kids.

Oh well. Enlisted or junior...not really a big deal. Just don't go Full Metal Jacket on me!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 1 at 2015 10:43 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 01 Mar 2015 22:43:17 -0500

MSG Private RallyPoint Member For me, I only use Soldier, NCO, and Officer. At the same time, what about those Senior Enlisted Advisors?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 1 at 2015 10:51 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 01 Mar 2015 22:51:34 -0500

I was called lower enlisted. I also didn't cry because I was a PFC and called Private. I saw that somewhere. Crying because they were called Private. What's wrong with Privates… (end rant)

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 2 at 2015 12:08 AM

SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 00:08:27 -0500

Since when did calling someone by what they are derogatory? They are lower enlisted soldiers. It's not like we made up some derogatory slang to refer to the lower ranks. Should we call them promotionally challenged? Lesser ranked soldiers? We can't compare that to officers because they are officers and that's a different ball of wax. I have heard this same line of thinking when troops are called by their rank. Then it was we couldn't call them our subordinate soldiers. That somehow being called a private is demeaning (though we call generals, General). In my opinion if someone dislikes being called a private or a lower enlisted soldier, then work hard and perform and get promoted. It's not supposed to be pleasant. We are getting out of control with this touchy feely emotional crap. It's one thing to mindful and considerate of our varying genders, creeds, colors, races and religions, but it's quite another to be sitting and wondering if someone is going to get their feelings hurt because they are screwing up and riding the bolt forward on their 240B and I'm yelling at them so they stop making a mistake that could kill someone. Get over it. It's not the tiger scouts. If you get this hurt over a simple phrase then you will never accept what has to happen in combat. We are warriors of the greatest military in the world, not spoiled brats in Mrs Cline's 2nd grade reading class. Wipe your tears pull on your big boy underoos and suck it up!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 2 at 2015 12:23 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 00:23:44 -0500

I have been lowered... Not proud by any means....call me what they wanted... At the time I had my head lodged iny a$$...it took a lot of Damn fine NCOs to mold me into the SSG I am today... I was called a lot of different stuff, I never let it bother me.
Personal belief is, shape up or ship out... The mentality of what are you doing it all for was what remained. If you are a turd I will not pass you off... I will do all I can to buff you into a diamond... When all else fails you get flushed...try not to stain the bowl on your way down.

Response by Sgt Adam Jennings made Mar 2 at 2015 5:49 AM

Sgt Adam Jennings — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 05:49:31 -0500

Must be an Army thing. I've never heard that one, even as a NCO all I ever heard Marines refers to was junior enlisted Marines by anyone. Different culture I guess.

Response by SSG Gerhard S. made Mar 5 at 2015 4:39 PM

SSG Gerhard S. — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 16:39:53 -0500

I see nothing wrong, or derogatory with the term "lower enlisted". I see it as a simple means of referring to the enlisted E-1 through E-4 (those NOT in a leadership position). As NCO's are also enlisted simply referring to E-1 through E-4 as enlisted does nothing to delineate to whom one is referring. I never thought of it as a class delineation, or as a means to refer to someone of a lesser stature, only to one of a non-NCO enlisted rank.

As to how such a term relates to the "modern " Army, I'm probably the wrong person to ask, as I've been retired for 10 years.

Response by TSgt David Holman made Mar 5 at 2015 5:08 PM

TSgt David Holman — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 17:08:27 -0500

It should never be used. Junior Enlisted is appropriate since they are just that, but "lower" implies that they are lesser people.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 5 at 2015 9:08 PM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 21:08:24 -0500

MY take:

We call E-7 and above "Senior Enlisted" not "Upper Enlisted." So following that logic, you would call others "Junior Enlisted" not "Lower Enlisted."

Every *professional* publication uses the term "Junior Enlisted." Those who support using "Lower Enlisted" are usually those who came up hearing and using the wrong terminology and are resistant to using the proper terminology.

The Army is the only organization I have ever been a part of where its members are openly and militantly resistant to proper use of the English language (and other things).

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 5 at 2015 10:26 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 22:26:12 -0500

I am a pv2, lower enlisted isnt demeaning to me at all. I know I dont speak for everyone, as we all have different experiences, but if it did offend me, I would just be all the more motivated to gain rank.

Response by CW4 Brian Haas made Mar 6 at 2015 11:17 PM

CW4 Brian Haas — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 23:17:05 -0500

We are starting to spend way too much time trying to figure out how to coddle Soldiers. There are Senior NCOs, Junior NCOs, and lower enlisted. It is not like there is a derragatory name being used. Don't like it? Get promoted. My GOD, what woulod some of you have done had you heard what used to be said, and I have not even been in that long!! Privates have it better than they ever have before, they are not learning respect from it, and we are worried about this? Send 'em out the door doing Iron Mikes!

Response by CSM Carlson C. made Apr 30 at 2015 11:11 AM

CSM Carlson C. — Thu, 30 Apr 2015 11:11:09 -0400

Junior Enlisted, Lower Enlisted.... It both means less the the Senior Enlisted. The military has become extremely P.C. In some sense that is a good thing, however, any term can be used in a derogatory or sarcastic manor, i.e.... "Come here genius." or "Hey highspeed, what do you think your doing?" I definitely do not think the individual is fast not acting smart at the time. Speech is used to convey a point, if our point is misunderstood, we need to clarify or change presentation. I was never offend being called lower enlisted. I was on the lower end of the pay scale. I guess I have a different perspective.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 20 at 2015 8:08 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Jul 2015 20:08:56 -0400

As an E1-E4, I never really minded being grouped together in the lower enlisted crowd. To me it means being lower in the ranks; not lower as a person.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 3 at 2016 12:15 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 May 2016 12:15:07 -0400

MSG, as a Junior Enlisted soldier the term "lower enlisted" doesn't really mean much to me other than remind me that I'm at the bottom of the rank structure of our great army. Do I care? No. I know where I stand and I have a job to do. I don't truly have time to feel hurt about a term when I know that my NCO's respect me and I them.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 3 at 2016 12:18 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 May 2016 12:18:04 -0400

There are MUCH bigger issues than this made up cry fest to worry about. IF YOU DO NOT LIKE THE TERMS OF AN ORGANIZATION LEAVE. That simple. Freedom is exactly that the right to vote with your feet regarding the policies of an establishment. If you do not want to be called lower enlisted stop attending military functions, go AWOL or do not enlist/re-enlist. Do not cry to me about it because I did my time as a lower enlist and survived I am not damaged, my self image does not revolve around a term that someone uses to describe my place in an organization that was here LONG before me and will be here LONG after me. I do not care if your feelings are hurt, not even a little.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 3 at 2016 1:10 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 May 2016 13:10:55 -0400

This reminds me of my LDAC experience when the title Warrior was deemed inappropriate. We need to stop with worrying about silly things like this.

Response by SMSgt William Hassiepen made May 3 at 2016 1:25 PM

SMSgt William Hassiepen — Tue, 03 May 2016 13:25:48 -0400

I've always used "junior" enlisted but so what? junior, lower what's the difference, if they are"offended" tough, that's the way it is

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 3 at 2016 1:51 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 May 2016 13:51:35 -0400

Are we crying about calling soldiers certain words? Really?

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made May 3 at 2016 3:22 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 May 2016 15:22:14 -0400

The term "lower enlisted" isn't meant to be derogatory. It's simply a statement of fact. They, just as you and I at one point, constitute the lower end of our rank structure. I've been called every derogatory term in the English language coming up as a young 18X as I broke ice in the gig pit. I never took it personally. It never hurt my feelings. The military is not, nor should it, be a nice business. Civil, yes.....nice.....not so much. We're in the business of protecting our country and our interests against enemies who already think we're soft. And I believe we are. Watch Russian recruits go through their own form of INDOC. It's not nice, it's friggin brutal. Violence of action is preached at every turn and they simply endure more suck than we can fathom at this point. Now I'm not a hammer dropping jerk. But I'm not overly concerned about feelings either. It's just how I came up. And I think it's important we get back to what we were, or I think you'll see when we go up against a peer level threat not remotely concerned about feelings........they're just going to "out tough" us. I guess I could have just said "We need to collectively suck it up."

Response by SFC Shane Funkhouser made May 3 at 2016 4:31 PM

SFC Shane Funkhouser — Tue, 03 May 2016 16:31:25 -0400

Because nobody cares. Holy christ, with all the crap wrong in our military today you decide your crusade is against a term no one but you cares about. I ever found the term derogatory or offensive. To be derogatory it has to be used in a context meant to be offensive, it isn't its just a discriptive term regarding rank not an individual. Grow up and get the dumb ass political correctness out of the military and leave it to the idiot politicians where it belongs.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 3 at 2016 4:39 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 May 2016 16:39:41 -0400

I think we got more important things to worry about than a term that doesn't effect anyone till the pic nazis make it a problem

Response by SSG Harper Peterson made May 3 at 2016 6:00 PM

SSG Harper Peterson — Tue, 03 May 2016 18:00:02 -0400

I think you've gotten too sensitive Top. Lower Enlisted is exactly what they (Pvt - Spc). Nothing derogatory about the term.

Response by Cpl Charles Vadnais made May 3 at 2016 6:25 PM

Cpl Charles Vadnais — Tue, 03 May 2016 18:25:16 -0400

I've never heard the term "lower enlisted", only "junior enlisted", which isn't bad at all its just a description

Response by SPC James Anderson made May 3 at 2016 7:07 PM

SPC James Anderson — Tue, 03 May 2016 19:07:39 -0400

In polite terms "to fucking bad" if an individual does by chance find this derogatory in any way shape or form I'm sure that the above mentioned individual will promptly shit themselves when confronted by any type of stressful situation and is exactly the type of person that we do not need in the military. Political correctness has little place in real life and absolutely none in the military. The military is not a social experiment, it is the front line of defense to our country and all this type of chicken shit is doing is decreasing our overall effectiveness.

A "Proud Lower Enlisted"

Response by SFC Edwin Mujica made May 3 at 2016 7:07 PM

SFC Edwin Mujica — Tue, 03 May 2016 19:07:48 -0400

I'm a retired NCO and I remember the term used constantly on my days but never thought much of it. I never heard the term used in a derogatory manner, so it was not consider demeaning. May be the reason you hear the terms lower vs senior enlisted is because as enlisted members we come in as privates that don't know much about responsability and military leadership. As we get promoted to NCO's we become leaders and more is expected of us. Officers, well they come in as leaders from the moment they are sworn in, so that's probably why you never hear the term lower Officers used.

Response by SGT Robert Mcfadden made May 3 at 2016 8:30 PM

SGT Robert Mcfadden — Tue, 03 May 2016 20:30:11 -0400

What has happened to the nco corps now we worry about calling a soldier just what they are lower enlisted. Please Msg dont tell me you never called a 2nd Lt a butterbar lol. Its just part of moving up, and good soldiers know that the ones that dont lije shouldn't be there. In my opinion.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 3 at 2016 8:35 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 May 2016 20:35:35 -0400

To be honest, Ive never given it any thought. I would just chalk this up as another case where the world needs more apathy. Of no one cared whether they were called lower or junior then "sensitivity" wouldnt be an issue. Besodes, I am fairly certain that we were all called much worse in our military careers than a term that wasnt said with any animosity.

Response by Cpl Christopher Bishop made May 3 at 2016 8:50 PM

Cpl Christopher Bishop — Tue, 03 May 2016 20:50:04 -0400

Can we find more things to get Butthurt about?

I remember when command told us we can no longer refer to lady Marines as "WMs" which simply meant Women Marines. Even when there were no ladies anywhere near an all Male Infantry barracks, and the gender of other Marines was simply relevant to the conversation. The correction was to go to FMs for Female Marines. I had no idea "men/women" were ever thought derogatory or how "male/female" changed a thing.

Clearly some of you need to find more important or useful things to do.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 3 at 2016 9:54 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 May 2016 21:54:50 -0400

I do use Jr enlisted myself but it's because I'm PC. It's just the way I've always worded it, however, i do agree with comment if lower enlisted is offensive then we shouldn't have to refer to you as senior enlisted. See how that kind of sounds dumb? Think about it...

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2016 1:37 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 May 2016 01:37:25 -0400

I believe it's fine. We need to get out of this PC mindset. Personally I feel that this new PC Army is the biggest threat to the force. "Lower enlisted" Combat Patches what's next? I'm grading EIB right now but it might offend others that I have it but they don't so let's start issuing that it them. Heck I'm offended that I'm not a general and he or she is give to me. It always starts with a foot in to door and works its way up to an open flood gate. Even if it takes years upon years. If words offend you the Army probably isn't the place for that individual. When I was a little private I knew I was scum and a "pissant" but I busted my ass to prove I wasn't.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2016 2:52 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 May 2016 02:52:01 -0400

MSG, are you familiar with the saying "don't over think it"? You're doing that.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made May 4 at 2016 10:27 AM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Wed, 04 May 2016 10:27:28 -0400

And what's the problem? Lower enlisted is just that - the lowest enlisted. I started there and I've never known anyone offended by this. Get off the Politically Correct BS and drive on.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2016 1:36 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 May 2016 13:36:42 -0400

This might be an example of too much political correctness; lower classmen, upper classmen. Freshmen, Sophmores, Juniors, Seniors. All of these terms signify where an individual is currently in there professional or academic career. I never took the term 'Lower Enlisted' to identify inferior soldiers more so 'lower' on the chain of command. Furthermore, it signifies to me that those soldiers are at the beginning of their career and have a level of professionalism to strive for. But, that's only if you ask me.

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2016 6:40 PM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 May 2016 18:40:48 -0400

As a "lower enlisted" it truly doesn't bother me. In all fairness, I usually hear the term "junior enlisted" vs "senior enlisted," but at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter. Reality is, if words hurt so bad, maybe the military wasn't fit for them? As a junior enlisted, I expect my higher ups to be tough, to be hard on me if I make mistakes. I appreciate being let off the hook every now and then, but if this is a military where my higher ups are so scared of how I feel to the point they wont correct me when I'm wrong, then I feel that the military is nothing our enemies should be afraid of.

Ultimately, this political correctness age needs to burn and die out. It's a crack in the dam. When we compromise for one issue, it's that much easier to do so for another. It all starts with someone getting their feelings hurt, and now it's not getting smoked when you fuck up. I remember my father (prior service Air Force) telling me about his boot camp experience, and my Navy boot camp experience was way easier than that. I can honestly say that boot camp did nothing to change most of my fellow recruits' characters. Political correctness has led to such a weak military in terms of discipline. I remember hearing about a Navy Seamen Recruit (E-1) telling a PO1 (E-6) to "go fuck yourself" and saying something along the lines of "You can't do shit to me, you're a student as well." (This was in A school). This is what happens when we cater to weaklings and the entitled folks. This is Political correctness at its finest.

Response by SSG Russell D. made May 4 at 2016 7:16 PM

SSG Russell D. — Wed, 04 May 2016 19:16:04 -0400

Are you kidding me? You waste your time on thinking peoples feelings may get hurt? lol, what a joke. MSG, you are the reason our military is getting weaker & more politically correct. Political Correctness is a weakness, a cancer, it destroys a strong traditional military. Who cares if some lower enlisted feelings are hurt by saying lower enlisted? If anyone has their feelings hurt by that, they should not be in the Army, that means they are a creampuff, a pussy someone who doesn't like a term again. Well to bad, they are not mentally tough enough to be in the military, let alone combat. Shame on you for correcting any lower NCO or Officer. We need a strong, tough Army like we used to have that could kick ass, now we have a politically correct military that complains about everything they don't like, wants medal and awards for doing nothing, don't like what you say because their feelings get hurt, .....its so bad the lower enlisted are running the damn military not the higher ups. You've been in for 25 years?...Yeah, ok that's around the time that boot camp had stress cards to stop Drill Sergeants from yelling at the PVTs and you probably had one in your pocket.

Response by SGT Javier Mendoza made May 4 at 2016 8:51 PM

SGT Javier Mendoza — Wed, 04 May 2016 20:51:11 -0400

MSG, first let me say thank you for your continued service and sticking up for what is right. I think everyone from E-1 to 0-9 fight and die in battle, so yes, you are correct. It is a matter of arrogance that makes some use the term. Unfortunately it seems that since the late 90s some senior NCO's found it funny to put a soldier down by calling them by their pay grade, and not proper rank, but were quick to get upset is someone showed them any kind of "disrespect".
The culture now is so bad, that even as a contractor at the GS-14 level I had to deal with a SFC who found it necessary to use foul language towards me and my personnel when I told him he was not allowed in a restricted area. He said he was a SFC while I was a MF contractor. Let's just say that the Colonel did not feel the same way when I mentioned it in our morning meeting.
Unfortunately it is a culture which will take long to change, as it has penetrated the core of the Army, and unfortunately, it is the reason for many great junior enlisted soldier leaving the service. Respect is a two way street, and that is hard for many to understand. Thank you for making the correction and not just "going with it"

Response by FN James Goodman made May 4 at 2016 10:15 PM

FN James Goodman — Wed, 04 May 2016 22:15:51 -0400

The only time I would have taken offense to that term is new sailors ranked up faster and wanted to act with a big head.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2016 11:09 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 May 2016 23:09:01 -0400

When I was a 25 year old slick sleeve Private, I never took offense to the term "lower enlisted". I understood my place in the hierarchy and the term never bothered me. Sounds to me like some of today's younger soldiers need a bit of maturity and get a thicker skin if those words "hurt". In other words, they need to grow a pair.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2016 11:42 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 May 2016 23:42:08 -0400

I posted this over two years ago and saw the amount of posts that I got back. RP decided to re-post it and it started all over again. It may seem like a small detail, but if the Soldiers that I work around feel a little bit better about it, it is worth it to me. Thanks for all the feedback!

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2016 11:38 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 May 2016 11:38:45 -0400

When I saw lower enlisted I understood I was lower enlisted. It only makes sense to me. In a normal job there is always senior staff and the new people are the newbies or some other term.

Response by PO1 Lance Ginest made May 14 at 2016 12:25 PM

PO1 Lance Ginest — Sat, 14 May 2016 12:25:51 -0400

The problem is people are offended by anything and everything. One of the many causes of this problem is intelligent people looking for, and pointing out, things that should offend others and then letting them know they should be offended.

Response by SSG Joseph Henderson made May 14 at 2016 4:19 PM

SSG Joseph Henderson — Sat, 14 May 2016 16:19:19 -0400

Next the term senior will be offensive because it makes people feel old.

Response by Sgt Jamie Greenhalgh made May 14 at 2016 4:46 PM

Sgt Jamie Greenhalgh — Sat, 14 May 2016 16:46:10 -0400

I'm sure it's demeaning to the lower enlisted who don't have the potential to become senior enlisted. We don't want to hurt anyones feelings or try to motivate and mentor the lower enlisted to become great leaders. It's just better to change the title.

Response by CPT Drew Allen made May 14 at 2016 8:39 PM

CPT Drew Allen — Sat, 14 May 2016 20:39:16 -0400

Please see the IG....

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2016 10:26 PM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 May 2016 22:26:26 -0400

Wow, this is nuking it to another level, but Other than "Not knowing how to do anything because I'm a junior" I have never heard anybody complain about being called a "lower or junior enlisted" because they knew that's what they are, at least for the Navy and the Marines. Even when I was a junior, I didn't mind it, it wasn't demeaning to me, I was new, but it made me want to get promoted so I don't have to deal with the "bullshit" that a junior has to deal with. If you start treating juniors and enlisted like they deserve the best treatment, then they're going to act like they deserve the best treatment from everybody. That's how it is now, that's why we have a lot of juniors who fight back because they believe that they deserve the same treatment as an NCO, SNCO, or Officer. They should work for it, otherwise our future leadership is just going down the hill of self-entitled adults. It doesn't matter, why butter up the fact that they are in fact Junior or Lower enlisted? That is what they are. Note that it's lower "enlisted" not lower "person". I'm not saying that you should treat them badly, but they should learn to start from the bottom and work their way up. If you're a junior, work harder than the other juniors and you'll your rewards. Everybody has to start somewhere, earn respect.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 15 at 2016 6:43 PM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 May 2016 18:43:29 -0400

I use junior enlisted and senior enlisted, not lower enlisted and higher enlisted. I don't entertain service members tears over what they are - if they don't want to be at the bottom of the totem poll, then climb.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 1 at 2016 6:32 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 01 Aug 2016 18:32:54 -0400

Sometimes in the mide 90's I switched over "junior enlisted".

Response by CPO Bill Penrod made Jul 19 at 2017 5:31 AM

CPO Bill Penrod — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 05:31:44 -0400

Not sure what Navy e-3 below are called today but in the 60/70's they were called non-rated.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 19 at 2017 7:48 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 07:48:32 -0400

I hear and use the term lower enlisted a good bit. I've never thought of it in a negative way, just to mean someone that is enlisted but is not a NCO yet.

Response by CH (LTC) Robert Leroe made Jul 19 at 2017 9:21 AM

CH (LTC) Robert Leroe — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 09:21:52 -0400

"Junior Enlisted" sounds more respectful.

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made May 5 at 2018 10:41 PM

SGM Bill Frazer — Sat, 05 May 2018 22:41:12 -0400

Terms are terms- 1. There are lower enlisted as you know- traditionally lower enlisted E1-E4, junior NCO's CPL-SSG, and senior NCO's- SFC-CSM. The is in the manuals and through out the Army for decades. Why are we wanting to be PC? Does it hurt their feelings? Frankly MSG during my time in, as long as it wasn't SOB, I didn't care what my leaders called me as long as they were taking care of me.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2018 9:43 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 06 May 2018 09:43:43 -0400

I don't really know why someone would go out of their way to use so many syllables in a conversation honestly. Here all junior Enlisted are referred to as "Airman", E-5 to E-8 are "sergeants", and the old man with all 8 stripes is called "chief", We have an enlisted force structure handbook that breaks it down. While I don't think it's derogatory, reinforcing a culture of candid respect demonstrates the art of leading by example.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2018 10:41 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 06 May 2018 10:41:27 -0400

Junior Enlisted not lower enlisted, no one is lower than anyone else, just junior in rank.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2018 5:52 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 06 May 2018 17:52:34 -0400

It was a term we used all the time. I never had any thoughts on it. In the regular Army, Soldiers don't stay in those ranks very long, so maybe that's why it wasn't a big deal. In the reserve component however, at least ARNG, it can be a long wait for promotion so perhaps it bothers people there?

Response by SMSgt Bob Wilson made Oct 26 at 2020 1:15 AM

SMSgt Bob Wilson — Mon, 26 Oct 2020 01:15:51 -0400

In 26 years I never use the term or even considered it. I referred to my people as "Airmen" or "Junior NCOs". Is it demeaning? NO, I don't think so. I believe it does not show the "leader's" respect for their people.