. . . . or, you could say just flat "wrong."
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Going the Enlisted Route?
- Thread starter mastertae
- Start date
. . . . or, you could say just flat "wrong."
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
The only time where this can be somewhat true, from what I've been told by my uncle who served as an enlisted nuke in the 90s, is when talking about enlisted nukes and junior nuke officers. To quote what he said "when you're in the engine room, everyone is working together. No one really cares about what rank you are; they only care how good you are to the squad. Outside the engine room everyone will salute you and call you sir and whatnot, but things are different down there."
Even still, from what I've gathered on this site, nuke officers have to earn their SWO qualifications as well so that they can one day command a ship, and my uncle probably wasn't privy to that area of their jobs.
I agree TOTALLY!! This couldn't be more true in the Nuclear Community.
In every warfare specialty and platform, there are simularities in basic levels of knowledge required by both Officer and enlisted personnel. An example would be basic Damage Control knowledge. And yes, there are times and places where some folks perceive that everyone is an equal. Wrong assumption. Being an Officer is more about leadership and accountability. The Navy Times is filled with stories about Commanding Officers being relieved of command due to "loss of trust & confidence" for a host of reasons. While Enlisted members of all ratings bring a level of technical expertise and knowledge that the Navy has to have in order to function, it doesn't make them equal with members of the wardroom.
These are outstanding points. Every so often a thread that pops up in Proceedings is why O's get paid more than Chiefs. The argument goes that since they both have the same basic requirements and the sometimes the same education (BA/BS) then they should be paid the same. However, those arguments are missing a key point. Officers have more responsibility, and that is what they get paid for.
Sure, there are those oddball cases where this is not true, but as a whole it is true.
Thats him, I just didn't want to drop his name on the web without his permission. Great guy. I felt bad once cause I was talking to him on his cell phone when he was actually at the doctors with his wife... Definitely bent over backwards to help out.
There are plenty of guys at GM who know more about how a car is made than the CEO and President of the company. When the stock price goes down, shareholders don't look to can the foreman on the chassis-assembly line.
Officers are accountable for anything that their unit does or fails to do.
Officers are accountable for anything that their unit does or fails to do.
cyristvirus
STA-21 FY08 College Dude
It may be true about nukes and what not, but the air side is totally a different story. I would say that officers are treated as if they were kings and queens, as enlisted is treated as work horses. That being said, there is a very defined line between officer and enlisted in some areas of the Navy.
Your probably right as I can only speak as of my experiences...
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
I've been told that the line between officers and enlisted military personnel is very distinct, and is there on purpose. The nuke community, if it's the way my uncle said, is an exception, not the norm.
cyristvirus
STA-21 FY08 College Dude
I agree with you. Also a lot of the nukes are just as educated as a lot of the officers, so it would be somewhat dumb to develop differences in the officers and enlisted. Most air type maintainers have little to no education so the differences there is education and pay. I think this about sums it up:
:icon_wink
There's also a big difference between aircraft with enlisted aircrew and those without. From my observations, in particular on MEUs, there's a big difference. The helo guys tend to be tighter with the enlisted than the jet guys, since we go on the road with aircrew and often other troubleshooters in back. The Harrier guys don't have as much interaction and familiarity with them. Not knocking them per se, just the nature of the beast. As a former flightline OIC, the Harrier mechs would comment on the noticeable difference between the pilots in that regard.
I don't think the different attitudes come as much from education levels as from the type of interaction intrinsic to the job.
I don't think the different attitudes come as much from education levels as from the type of interaction intrinsic to the job.
Really? How so? The "differences" you refer to are many and varied. While true that education is a prerequisite for entry into the Officer ranks, there are many other traits and skills that must be learned & developed.
"Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent."
I don't think that is a very accurate statement, but I guess it really depends on your definition of "little to no education." There were numerous maintainers that I was stationed with that were either in college, already had a degree, became A&P certified, or pursued education in some other form. The way the Navy is heading these days education is not an option anymore.