Addressing a MSG, SFC & SSG as “Sergeant.” Does anyone else think this is disrespectful?

SFC (Join to see), I completely disagree. When some level of my commander puts out a policy letter that supersedes AR 600-20 I will say the full rank when addressing an E5 though E8 (other than First Sergeant). Until that point, outdated or otherwise, AR 600-20 is the standard, and unlike doing better on a PT test or scoring higher in a school, doing what you propose does not amount to "exceeding the standard". I will also address ALL E9's as Sergeant Major (including the Sergeant Major of the Army). I will use their full rank when referring to them to a third party. When an E7 is temporarily fulfilling the role of the First Sergeant, I will address them as "Sergeant" or "Sergeant [name]" and refer to them to others as SFC [name]. If they are assigned to the position officially I will address them as First Sergeant.

Separate from that, apart from extreme or odd circumstances, when we start doing and encouraging others to do differently than what is prescribed in guidance (written or otherwise) we not only undermine that higher authority, but also our own. Why the hell should I do what you tell me, when you clearly don't do what your boss tells you?

*edited for words - also added below this line, and an additional edit later**

In re-reading your post, I realize that you don't seem to be condoning enforcing saying the full rank while the regulation states otherwise...just that you're a fan of the idea of doing so. I apologize for any of my post that implies otherwise.

Also, in your last paragraph you say

"Addressing our enlisted Soldiers by their full rank will increase discipline..."

This should be provided locally by the Soldiers' immediate leadership.

"...provide clear lines of authority leaving no one to wonder if that person who answered to phone simply as Sergeant is a Sergeant or Master Sergeant..."

Aren't people supposed to answer the phone referring to themselves with their own full rank?

** Additionally, if you interact with people with the respect owed to them for being a human and likely also a brother or sister in arms, you won't have any issues if you don't get the form of address exactly right until the title is clearer. Just say "Sir" or "Ma'am" and don't be a douchebag until the specific rank is clear (probably best not to be a douche afterwards either, but that's on you). If it really bugs you, ask.

Ooops, I posted the above again, so now there's this. :)

Thanks for the very articulate and well thought out response to my suggested changes SGT Douglass Andrews. It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy all over when a fellow Soldier takes pride in adding to a topic such as this. Remember, it it not about anything more than evolution in that over time things change.

A Soldier's rank should never define them as a person. It is a position of responsibility that is earned by setting the example and leading from the front in that respect and admiration from subordinates, peers, and seniors comes with being good at what we do. We earn everything we get in life and as Soldier's promotions that rightfully should be addressed by full grade of military rank.

Thanks for the input!

Why would Gunny need a K-bar?

LTC Paul Labrador - Sir, Respectfully when people address you do they say LTC or C

Lieutenant Colonel or Colonel

SFC Thomas Brennan - When speaking to me directly, it was "Colonel". When I answered the phone I said "LTC Labrador speaking" because I was referring to myself in the third person. Now I'm just "Paul"..... ;o)

I know this is an old old thread, but I could not help myself. It mildly confuses me (deep down irritates) when they refer to a LTC as a Colonel or a 1, 2, 3 star(s) General as General. The reason it bothers me is that whenever I hear "The Colonel is coming.... or General XYZ is here..." I automatically think of an actual O-6 Colonel or an actual O-10 4 star General, but then I come to find out and it's a LTC or a BG/MG/LTG. Not downplaying those ranks at all or the person. Therefore I refuse to acknowledge that practice and I actually mention the whole rank as "Hey Lieutenant Colonel is coming or Brigadier/Major/Lieutenant General XYZ is here." Anybody else, or am I alone on this one?

I know I have been retired for several years now but as I have been reading through all the comments I just keep trying to understand when it became acceptable to only follow the regulations you wanted to follow. If the Army is still the one I was in..there should not be any issue here. 1SG Todd Jackson, you nailed it. The AR states how NCO ' s are to be addressed and referred to. At no place in the regulation does it state to do what makes you feel good. So stop trying to make yourself feel important and focus on your duties and responsibilities. That is what makes you a good sergeant, not your title.

It was never a concern for me either. What I have found is a good NCO does NOT get caught up in the title other than (as !SG Todd Jackson so clearly stated) Corporal, Sergeant, First Sergeant and Sergeant Major. More focus on the mission than on your title is a better path to pursue than getting hung up on ego. Others can see your NCO status by your uniform, so move on and get the mission done.

So I have a humble question. What is the regulations on addressing a Sgt-SSG-etc. In civilians. All I have been told is once the uniform is off rank no more. Rank. Obviously out of respect we still address with Sgt. But is there an actual AR stating how we have to address NCO’s when in civilian?