What do you think about the Navy Eliminating 241-Year-Old Rating System in New Enlisted Rank Overhaul?

LT Carl Martin — Fri, 30 Sep 2016 08:59:02 -0400

Response by SGT David T. made Sep 30 at 2016 9:02 AM

SGT David T. — Fri, 30 Sep 2016 09:02:05 -0400

Makes it easier for us non-navy types to figure out what to call Sailors.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2016 9:07 AM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 30 Sep 2016 09:07:50 -0400

Are they going to make it easier to understand?

Response by Cpl Justin Goolsby made Sep 30 at 2016 9:43 AM

Cpl Justin Goolsby — Fri, 30 Sep 2016 09:43:55 -0400

Personally I think it makes it easier to understand. Why be addressed as your job title if no one outside of your actual job is going to know what your job is. Being addressed by rank is simple and it keeps people from thinking they're untouchable. I have known some who would mouth off to a senior rank because they were in different fields and didn't think they could be corrected by someone of a different field.

Response by CDR Terry Boles made Sep 30 at 2016 9:44 AM

CDR Terry Boles — Fri, 30 Sep 2016 09:44:04 -0400

This is an interesting development or change. I can understand the simplification of designated Navy ranks since I have had the pleasure to be a member of other services. I think in the end, it helps most understand the rank structure, however possibly take away some of the long traditions of being separate entities within the Navy i.e. Brown show vs Black shoe, Fireman vs Airman, etc. Should they keep the rating design on the dress uniforms like their unit tabs then OK, it still identifies their rating (job) albeit the new improved Navy a Seaman is a Seaman. It will be interesting to see how the fleet and old salts weigh in. Interesting change!

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Sep 30 at 2016 10:51 AM

CAPT Kevin B. — Fri, 30 Sep 2016 10:51:22 -0400

Had to laugh a bit over this one. I remember a lot of griping about not being able to tell what someone's job was without the rating symbol on the Crow. They didn't have it on working uniforms so you'd only see it mostly when people weren't working their job, i.e. at dress formation, port entry, etc. Everything has consequences. It will smooth out some of the up/down manning bumps but can suboptimize what's left with a training/skill gap. A lot seems geared to lessening tough decision stuff with the top brass. If that is true, then I'd be concerned that the result is a more diluted force structure. Time will tell. One thing for sure, they'll never measure the before/after aspects. They'll just take credit for the improvement, real or imagined.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2016 11:49 AM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 30 Sep 2016 11:49:15 -0400

their reasoning is "to brings us more in line with the other services” which means the Army, don't know how you walk away with a plural there

Response by SN Greg Wright made Sep 30 at 2016 12:56 PM

SN Greg Wright — Fri, 30 Sep 2016 12:56:36 -0400

What I think isn't appropriate for this forum. I will say that I have never loathed a politician like I do Ray Mabus.

Response by SFC Joseph Weber made Sep 30 at 2016 5:43 PM

SFC Joseph Weber — Fri, 30 Sep 2016 17:43:57 -0400

You guys are getting rid of the one boat, two boat, three boat, red boat, blue boat, green boat rating system?? That's crazy!

Response by SSgt David Tedrow made Oct 1 at 2016 4:02 PM

SSgt David Tedrow — Sat, 01 Oct 2016 16:02:30 -0400

I think it is just another example of "political correctness" running out of control. This is just another example of taking something that helps a service stand apart from another. Soon the politicians will want a unified armed forces where everyone is the same. Leave the things alone that work and are not broken.

Response by 1LT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 3 at 2016 10:57 PM

1LT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 03 Oct 2016 22:57:56 -0400

Easy. A person should be judged by their character and the work they produce and not by a title. I get the whole tradition issue; but change is not always a bad thing.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 4 at 2016 6:53 AM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 06:53:53 -0400

In the past 27 years I've been in, I've held two Navy ratings (QM and HM) and in both fields have seen ratings come and go (DT was folded into HM, SM was folded into QM, and QM's on subs became ETs not to mention DP's, etc.) and name change (SK to LS, MS to CS, etc.). Ratings have been created, merged, renamed, and destroyed so they've never been sacrosanct. While I understand the emotional attachment people have to their rates, this is not something that hasn't happened to LOTS of different rates over the years. The difference here is scope - it's happening to all. While we won't know the results of the changes until they're complete and we've had a chance to measure, I can say that there has always been a lot of overlap in the deck rates. BM's, QM's, SM's, OS's all have significant overlapping responsibilities and it makes sense (at least to me) to provide the opportunity for a sailor to cross qualify and have the opportunity to fill any of the positions. One can have depth *and* breadth of training and when combined with opportunities for civilian certification or licensure, I think there will be more good than bad that comes out of this.

Response by CPO John Dupee made Oct 4 at 2016 6:56 AM

CPO John Dupee — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 06:56:13 -0400

The UNITED STATES DEFENSE FORCE was born 29SEPTEMBER2016. The long game is a SINGLE Military.

-They've been chipping away at the CPO process for years. Now they've moved their attention to the bottom and working up.
-ALL services will be in Green before long.
-NAVY Advancement exams will be next in favor of a system like ARMY or MARINES
-Get NAVY in line with rank structure priority like ARMY and MARINES.

This was NEVER about titles or making civilian transition easier. This is ALL about the needs of the Navy and doing even more with less. That Machinist's Mate will now be able to work in the galley as a cook and NOT necessarily because HE/SHE wants to

Response by PO3 Lynn Spalding made Oct 4 at 2016 7:53 AM

PO3 Lynn Spalding — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 07:53:35 -0400

I really think they should leave well enough alone.

Response by PO2 Marc Gunter made Oct 4 at 2016 7:59 AM

PO2 Marc Gunter — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 07:59:22 -0400

The only possible benefit I can see is that it might prevent some sailors (sailpersons?) from being forced out of the service because "we can't let you cross-rate from GS to MA because GS is more critical...so you're just going to have to take the medical discharge with 10% disability instead of finishing out your last 10 years."

Meanwhile, I bounced from job to job for the next 12 years because nobody would hire a turbine tech without a college degree or 20 years in the service.

Response by CPO Douglas Winslow made Oct 4 at 2016 8:01 AM

CPO Douglas Winslow — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 08:01:58 -0400

I think this is absolute GARBAGE! Sailors are different from all the other services because we identify ourselves by our Rating First, Rank Second........ the one last thing that made us unique has just been stripped from us.

Thank God I'm retired and don't have to pretend to support this decision made my PC Idiots.

ETC (Retired) Douglas J. Winslow

Response by PO1 Matthew Maxon made Oct 4 at 2016 8:04 AM

PO1 Matthew Maxon — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 08:04:13 -0400

This is the dumbest shit in Naval Stupidity ever done by the stupid ass Chain of Command trying to put something on their CV when they get the fuck out!! Just proves they DGAF about the people they "Lead". To hell with 200+ years of tradition!

Response by CAPT Hiram Patterson made Oct 4 at 2016 8:18 AM

CAPT Hiram Patterson — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 08:18:20 -0400

Total lunacy! Ever heard the phrase "Jack of all trades, master of nothing?"

Response by PO2 Richard Blakey made Oct 4 at 2016 8:53 AM

PO2 Richard Blakey — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 08:53:40 -0400

first my rate was ms now cs hell on

Response by PO3 Chris Fuentes made Oct 4 at 2016 9:02 AM

PO3 Chris Fuentes — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 09:02:11 -0400

i feel like the government is trying to make all branches one then will have all the power it needs to over take any other government its all smoke and mirrors. don't let the us turn us into slaves even more then what we are.

Response by PO1 James Giunta made Oct 4 at 2016 10:05 AM

PO1 James Giunta — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 10:05:38 -0400

I don't think much of it at all.... Navy traditions are so much more than worrying about gender neutrality or political correctness. Women have been in the Navy since WW II & virtually every rating in the Navy has been open to women (with few exceptions) for decades. Now all of a sudden everyone wants to worry about whether or not the rating title depicts a man or woman? Total crap.

Response by PO3 Terry Miller made Oct 4 at 2016 10:11 AM

PO3 Terry Miller — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 10:11:28 -0400

Another example of trying to reshape America into a socialist mold. Strip the individuality from sailors by taking away an identifying characteristic and one that sailors have proudly worn from 241 years. This kind of disrespect for enlisted is intolerable.

Response by LT Richard Michael made Oct 4 at 2016 10:19 AM

LT Richard Michael — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 10:19:34 -0400

Total Bullshit. Glad I retired.

Response by PO2 Carl Ralls made Oct 4 at 2016 10:20 AM

PO2 Carl Ralls — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 10:20:26 -0400

It is aggravating; big mistake! Argh! What's the point?

Response by SN Will Dickson made Oct 4 at 2016 10:39 AM

SN Will Dickson — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 10:39:30 -0400

I am all for being able to cross train and branch out beyond your nominal rate. Having said that... This change is complete and utter bullshit and shows nothing more than our Navy further caving under the yoke of political correctness!

Response by SCPO Robert Henry made Oct 4 at 2016 10:50 AM

SCPO Robert Henry — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 10:50:04 -0400

It just goes to show that Civilians who have Never served in the military, especially the Navy, such as the Secretary of the Navy, should not be making decisions that impact the Honors and Traditions of the force. Unlike the other sister services, when the Navy is at sea, you can not call the local fire department or emergency services to rescue you. You need specifically trained personnel to do the jobs and take care of the emergencies and repairs at sea. The rating on the Crow indicates a degree of professionalism and pride for the sailors that were it. If a person is a second class Petty officer, let's say Machinist Mate, then your supervisor knows what you have been trained to do and what you can generally accomplish without supervision. You do not just call any PO 2 to repair the boiler or turbines you call a boiler tech or machinist mate, nor do you call any PO2 to man the personnel office and type a letter, you call a Yeoman, and you definitely do not call a machinist mate to moor the ship or coxswain the whaleboat you call a Boatswains Mate. None of these titles are gender specific so that is not a reason to eliminate the ratings. All of the ratings are a personal pride to the sailors because the rates combined with the ranks show the sailors training and professionalism. The Officers in the Navy differ, unlike the enlisted, the Officers fall mainly into two categories, Command at Sea, and Support, i.e. Supply, legal, engineers, etc. support Officers are not eligible for Command at Sea. You can not have a JAG Officer, no matter what you saw in the TV series, Commanding a Destroyer, a Squadron of F-14's or any other Command at Sea. Traditions, Honors, and Day to Day Operations of the Navy have been developed over hundreds of years of ships at sea. They should not be eliminated by some "Sand Crab", (sideways walking beach creature), like the Secretary of the Navy and the land locked advisers, who pass through that office because of political whims and fancies.

Response by PO1 Roger Waddle made Oct 4 at 2016 11:19 AM

PO1 Roger Waddle — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 11:19:50 -0400

BULLSHIT THATS WHAT I THINK

Response by PO1 Frank Reiffenstein made Oct 4 at 2016 11:29 AM

PO1 Frank Reiffenstein — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 11:29:35 -0400

I thought all the uniform changes over the last few years was stupid. This by far the dumbest thing the Navy has done. I believe they bowed down to P. C. again. Wake up and smell the salt water.
Retired Shipserviceman First Class (SW).

Response by PO2 Kevin Easter made Oct 4 at 2016 11:35 AM

PO2 Kevin Easter — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 11:35:12 -0400

Bad idea. The Navy is organized around shipboard life. Life aboard ship is and always has been based upon job description and type. In this respect, it differs fundamentally from the other services which are land-based services. The recent attempts by the Navy to align itself with the other services is misguided, in my opinion.

Response by PO2 Mark Evans made Oct 4 at 2016 11:38 AM

PO2 Mark Evans — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 11:38:28 -0400

Not my circus, not my monkey, but this is the stupidest thing I have seen come down the COC and I've seen a lot.
I'll always be former STS2(ss)

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 4 at 2016 11:44 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 11:44:41 -0400

If that is what Big Navy feels will make our Navy stronger than I have to support my leadership's decision.

Personally, I'm disappointed because I busted my butt to become a BM1. We are becoming a Navy of PC instead of a Navy of long lasting traditions. We've always prided ourselves that we have those traditions. But the jobs aren't going to change, just the names. I am and will always be a Boatswain's Mate. I have my crossed anchors tattooed on my arm to prove it.

Fair Winds and Following Seas Navy Rates (taps being played in the background)

Response by PO1 Cliff Heath made Oct 4 at 2016 12:21 PM

PO1 Cliff Heath — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 12:21:22 -0400

I think it is one of the dumbest goddamned ideas I have ever heard, proudest moment was putting on those Crossed Cannons. When you are in a rate that you have to bust your ass, get filthy, you want everybody to know you are U.S. NAVY GUNNERS MATE, takes away the identity that makes each rate special. seeing a command personnel inspection with blank Crows would remind of slick sleeve E-1

Response by CWO2 Roger Lamb made Oct 4 at 2016 12:35 PM

CWO2 Roger Lamb — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 12:35:31 -0400

I'm concerned that a knowledge and skills based enlisted promotion system will turn into a political, ass kissing system of political correctness and popularity/beauty contests if rating exams are tossed in the shitcan. I don't too much care about ETs working as EWs, FTs, etc. but I've a bit of experience with ATs crossing to ETs a lot of retraining on concepts of repair will need to be taught in both directions.

Response by PO1 Jeanette Blackwood made Oct 4 at 2016 1:07 PM

PO1 Jeanette Blackwood — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 13:07:07 -0400

Horse snot. It is just another way to align the Navy with other branches. "Let's get rid of the Rates and just identify by NOS to equate to the other branches MOS'." Well we wouldn't want tradition to get in the way of our "creating everyone equal" would we.

Response by PO1 Donald Hammond made Oct 4 at 2016 1:28 PM

PO1 Donald Hammond — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 13:28:12 -0400

I was and will always be an Electricians Mate. Submarine Qualified. EM1(SS).

But all that talk about being able to cross train into new jobs. Right. When you see a nuke able to cross train to another rating that is NOT a nuke, that will be the day. Born a nuke, die a nuke.

Bunch of bilge water.

Response by Sgt Kelli Mays made Oct 4 at 2016 1:50 PM

Sgt Kelli Mays — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 13:50:48 -0400

LT Carl Martin NOt knowing anything about the Rating System...I would say...that things were different 241 years ago and perhaps it needs to be looked at, assessed and changes made.

Response by CPO Zack Lindsey made Oct 4 at 2016 1:58 PM

CPO Zack Lindsey — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 13:58:38 -0400

Well I'm old school guess you would say a old fart at least that is what is what my son keeps calling me, but I don't like it true some things everyone can do, like fight that fire when it starts in the workspace or passageway, or give first aid to your shipmates when they need and it does not matter what is on there arm be it crossed cannons or a eagle on the collar and those things we all aré taught the day we step on the ship. But running the raído or nuke plant or any of the other equipment that is why we should keep the ratings but hey just a old fart here that lost anthor proud NAVY WAY IN THE WAVES

Response by SCPO Frank Carson made Oct 4 at 2016 5:23 PM

SCPO Frank Carson — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 17:23:48 -0400

Long overdue

Response by LT David Staehlin made Oct 4 at 2016 5:32 PM

LT David Staehlin — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 17:32:55 -0400

I think people are getting entirely too emotional about this change. I am proud to have served as a Radioman (RMSR through RM2) in the Navy. But I'm just as proud of the job I did in the Air National Guard, where I didn't wear my job on my sleeve.

I was a Navy Petty Officer Second Class first, then a Radioman.
I was an Air National Guard Technical Sergeant first, then an HF Radio Operations Supervisor.
I was a Navy Lieutenant first, then a Supply Corps officer.

I have no problem with eliminating ratings and instead using NOSs. There are pros and cons to every option. Changes--even big ones--aren't automatically bad just because they're different from when we served.

Response by PO2 Weaver Brian made Oct 4 at 2016 5:38 PM

PO2 Weaver Brian — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 17:38:46 -0400

I think it's another load of bull from the politically correct, civilian Secretary of the Navy, who knows very little, and cares even less, about long standing traditions of the US Navy. In what world is this new 'NOS' easier to understand than the existing NEC? Neither is on their rank/rating insignia. You would probably have to look up either one if you aren't in that particular specialty anyways. As for making it easier for people outside the Navy to understand, until the Army and Air Force start sending their personnel out to sea on destroyers, I can't fathom where it makes any difference. This is absolutely not about inclusiveness, or whatever the current politically correct term is, it is about tearing down the traditions and uniqueness of the different branches of the military in the name of political correctness. We may all be created equal, but that doesn't mean we remain equal our entire lives. Whether they like it or not, people are different, and for a huge variety of reasons.

Response by MCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 4 at 2016 6:15 PM

MCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 18:15:16 -0400

To put it bluntly I think it sucks and is a poor decision. However the decision has been made and now needs to be supported to make it turn out for the best. I believe there are enough smart people who with the right motivation can provide constructive feedback to make it work. My own feedback, is continue with the process of allowing/encouraging Sailors to work multiple rates, but still give them a primary rate. That primary rate they can still wear and feel a part of and of course continue the brotherly ribbing that goes with it. I can understand why some would want to change rates after coming in, they see that gods chosen rate is a Machinist Mate and they want to be part of that :)

Response by PO1 Scott Cottrell made Oct 4 at 2016 6:30 PM

PO1 Scott Cottrell — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 18:30:34 -0400

I think it's BS, but I'm retired. If you call me Petty Officer, I most likely will not respond. If you say AC1, I will most likely respond.

Response by PO2 Marshall Clowers made Oct 4 at 2016 9:54 PM

PO2 Marshall Clowers — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 21:54:55 -0400

Dumbest thing of I have heard in a long while. For many years I was AT2. I'd answer to it, use it to identify myself and it would lead off my signature on a VIDS/MAF. On a small boy there was a high probability that I was the ONLY AT2 aboard the ship, and it was a whole hell of a lot more convenient to call someone by their rate, rather than "Good morning Petty Officer Umptysquat".
I understand merging rates, but doing away with the designation altogether will hurt morale. And if someone is trying to use the explanation that it will open up advancement to those ratings that are tight, it's a fantasy.

Response by PO1 Kevin Arnold made Oct 4 at 2016 11:26 PM

PO1 Kevin Arnold — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 23:26:06 -0400

I think it will put more of a rift between those that were in the Navy before the change and then after the change. The old Navy will be like what is your rating and the new guy will say he is a Petty Officer and then give out some numbers. Okay how will that relate to anything to the old navy or even those who are now employers wanting to know what exactly is they did in the Navy.

Response by PO1 Michael Gentile made Oct 5 at 2016 2:30 AM

PO1 Michael Gentile — Wed, 05 Oct 2016 02:30:58 -0400

This is what happens when Obummer fires all the Generals and Admirals who disagree with him. don't think I could survive todays Navy. Retired ET1(SW/AW) and dam proud of it.

Response by PO2 Heath Howard made Oct 5 at 2016 10:56 AM

PO2 Heath Howard — Wed, 05 Oct 2016 10:56:44 -0400

My title will ALWAYS be HM2(FMF)/USN

Response by PO3 William Fusick made Oct 5 at 2016 11:22 AM

PO3 William Fusick — Wed, 05 Oct 2016 11:22:34 -0400

This is the dumbest move yet

Response by PO1 Jeremy Simon made Oct 5 at 2016 1:34 PM

PO1 Jeremy Simon — Wed, 05 Oct 2016 13:34:43 -0400

Fast forward a couple of years....Today the CNO announces that due to confusion throughout the fleet and difficulty detailing and identifying what job sailors perform based on thier NOS, the Navy will Institute a new system to identify sailors based on thier primary job. This new system shall use a combination of letters and numbers for job specialty and rank. The letters (also known as "ratings") will most likely be an abbreviated form of the job title for instance: PR, for parachute riggers, AE for aviation electricians...

Response by PO2 Pete Haga made Oct 5 at 2016 5:17 PM

PO2 Pete Haga — Wed, 05 Oct 2016 17:17:37 -0400

if it is not broken leave it alone why do they have to mess with shit like this because they want to fast track certain people and skip over others kinda like in the 70s some of us remember that!

Response by PO3 Terry Miller made Oct 6 at 2016 2:26 PM

PO3 Terry Miller — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 14:26:03 -0400

Socialist Political Correctness run amok. The only reason for doing this is to strip away any vestiges of individuality. Getting rid of "-men" in rates was a convenient excuse. I am very hopeful that the next SecNav will actually have the Navy's interests at heart instead of the socialist interests that Mabus has been so fond of following.

Response by SSG Philip Evans made Oct 6 at 2016 2:43 PM

SSG Philip Evans — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 14:43:43 -0400

Another step in eliminating tradition! It seems that 'tradition' is under attack from all sides in society today. No one seems to care for 'history', 'values', or 'lessons learned' any longer and God forbid any mention of 'morality'! I am a firm believer in traditions and the values they instill. Traditions are 'character building', 'enhance 'morale', and give people a good feeling knowing that they are a part of history. Each branch of service has their own traditions and each must find their own way to carry those onward for the future!
GMG1 (CC) Philip E. Evans (31 years USN, USNR)
SSG (Ranger) Philip E. Evans (5 years USA) (Retired)

Response by PO2 Steven Parker made Oct 9 at 2016 7:41 AM

PO2 Steven Parker — Sun, 09 Oct 2016 07:41:18 -0400

Not in favor of it at all. I will always be an AT. This was one of the worst Ideas ever. The Navy Marines Army and Air Force need to move forward in Tech but not lose tradition. But this President is worthless and has all but destroyed our military's ability to perform at a top level.

Response by CPO Byron Sargent made Oct 13 at 2016 12:35 PM

CPO Byron Sargent — Thu, 13 Oct 2016 12:35:45 -0400

I believe that we are headed toward one Service in which planners in the pentagon will distribute the enlistees into the appropriate or not appropriate job as they see fit. There will be one standard uniform for Working, battle, dress, with distinguishing unit or service patches. Each member will have a primary MOS (service) and secondary MOS (specialty) and so on. The way the navy has changed in the recent years is evidence of this. (or maybe it is just stupidity). I guess it would be very much like the Chinese model. It would require a lot of front end training since there would be the same basic requirements for all enlistees.

Response by PO3 William Fusick made Oct 13 at 2016 4:00 PM

PO3 William Fusick — Thu, 13 Oct 2016 16:00:33 -0400

I think it's one of the dumbest things they could do. I personally have pride in being an EO3

Response by SCPO Frank Carson made Oct 20 at 2016 10:19 PM

SCPO Frank Carson — Thu, 20 Oct 2016 22:19:11 -0400

Long overdue. And there will always be a Navy!

Response by CPO Bill Penrod made Dec 21 at 2016 5:33 PM

CPO Bill Penrod — Wed, 21 Dec 2016 17:33:23 -0500

It was rescinded. Navy enlisted get their job titles back.....................!!

Response by CPO Bill Penrod made Dec 21 at 2016 9:50 PM

CPO Bill Penrod — Wed, 21 Dec 2016 21:50:59 -0500

The Sailors have their ratings back, According to Navy Times..............