Posted on Sep 29, 2016
Navy scuttles sailors' enlisted rating titles in huge career shake-up
4.62K
36
34
5
5
0
I'm not sure what this means to today's Sailors. Is it a good, or bad thing? You Sailors tell us how this affects the enlisted.
The Navy deep-sixed all of its 91 enlisted ratings titles Thursday, marking the beginning of an overhaul of the rigid career structure that has existed since the Continental Navy in a radical shift sure to reverberate through the fleet and the veterans community beyond.
Sailors will no longer be identified by their job title, say, Fire Controlman 1st Class Joe Sailor, effective immediately. Instead, that would be Petty Officer 1st Class Joe Sailor.
The Navy deep-sixed all of its 91 enlisted ratings titles Thursday, marking the beginning of an overhaul of the rigid career structure that has existed since the Continental Navy in a radical shift sure to reverberate through the fleet and the veterans community beyond.
Sailors will no longer be identified by their job title, say, Fire Controlman 1st Class Joe Sailor, effective immediately. Instead, that would be Petty Officer 1st Class Joe Sailor.
Navy scuttles sailors' enlisted rating titles in huge career shake-up
Posted from navytimes.com
Sailors
Enlisted
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 8
5
5
0
It's terrible, Keith. Sailors take pride in their ratings, and identify as them -- I was a CTOSN (RP's refusal to recognize Naval Ratings notwithstanding), and every CTO before and after me, until now, was a CTOxx. Now, they're taking that away. It's breathtakingly retarded.
(5)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
I'd be upset too Greg. What's the reasoning for doing this? Why try to fix something that's not broken?
(1)
(0)
LCDR (Join to see)
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
(1)
(0)
PO3 Michael Johnson Sr
I was an "AD(R)" the "R" stood for reciprocating. Now that does not exist anymore, and now we take away the "AD", aviation machinist. So how do you know who's job is what?
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
It's a terrible thing. Now I not only have the stress of the rate I was placed in to, but also the stress of knowing IT work, CT work. It's upsetting that the navy spent thousands of dollars on security clearances for sailors who won't be working in the kind of fields that need them. I personally don't like knowing that I worked my butt off in my A and Christmas school to be called Petty Officer and not an IS.
(4)
(0)
2
2
0
I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong...
I know the Navy is all about tradition and heritage which isn't a bad thing. But I don't really see a problem with separating the rate from rank (as the other services do) so long as there is still a way to easily & visibly determine the Sailor's career field. That's one thing I didn't see in the article. I would also hope that for promotion, Sailors would still complete against peers in their NOS/career field groups.
Airmen wear chevrons for their rank but also wear a function badge for their career field so we can retain that differentiation and pride in our chosen career fields. I never worried about someone calling me by the wrong AFSC as long as they got the rank right. Even though I had several joint-service assignments, I never fully figured out the myriad of rates when trying to address a Sailor.
The biggest advantage of this change from my perspective is being able to address a Sailor the same way we address members of other services: rank and name. For the untrained, determining a Sailor's rate is difficult but looking at the stripes isn't (not knowing to count stars on top of anchors was another story...). Most Sailors I worked with had no problem with me addressing them as Petty Office instead of "Cryptologic Technician Interpretive 1st Class" or Petty Office 1st Class. And when it comes to other correspondence (i.e. email), PO1 is much more easily understood than CTI1.
As for post-service market-ability, many civilian employers don't know or care about your rate or rank. They only care if you have the skills and can do the job quickly, competently, and professionally. How well you illustrate that on your résumé will determine your hiring potential.
This is simply my perspective on the issue right, wrong, or indifferent. Some will be upset, others will welcome the change. Time will smooth things over and life will go on.
I know the Navy is all about tradition and heritage which isn't a bad thing. But I don't really see a problem with separating the rate from rank (as the other services do) so long as there is still a way to easily & visibly determine the Sailor's career field. That's one thing I didn't see in the article. I would also hope that for promotion, Sailors would still complete against peers in their NOS/career field groups.
Airmen wear chevrons for their rank but also wear a function badge for their career field so we can retain that differentiation and pride in our chosen career fields. I never worried about someone calling me by the wrong AFSC as long as they got the rank right. Even though I had several joint-service assignments, I never fully figured out the myriad of rates when trying to address a Sailor.
The biggest advantage of this change from my perspective is being able to address a Sailor the same way we address members of other services: rank and name. For the untrained, determining a Sailor's rate is difficult but looking at the stripes isn't (not knowing to count stars on top of anchors was another story...). Most Sailors I worked with had no problem with me addressing them as Petty Office instead of "Cryptologic Technician Interpretive 1st Class" or Petty Office 1st Class. And when it comes to other correspondence (i.e. email), PO1 is much more easily understood than CTI1.
As for post-service market-ability, many civilian employers don't know or care about your rate or rank. They only care if you have the skills and can do the job quickly, competently, and professionally. How well you illustrate that on your résumé will determine your hiring potential.
This is simply my perspective on the issue right, wrong, or indifferent. Some will be upset, others will welcome the change. Time will smooth things over and life will go on.
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
MSgt Doug P., You're right. Some won't like it, some will, but in the end it all comes out in the wash. The new recruits won't have a hard with the change, and that's a good thing. Thank you for your comments.
(0)
(0)
PO1 Jeanette Blackwood
The Career Fields are our rates. The Air Force wears a function badge and we wore Rating badges. How do you think you would feel if they took your Military "Identity" away from your Airmen?
(1)
(0)
MSgt Doug P.
PO1 Jeanette Blackwood, I don't think it would matter much since I would know my Airmen well enough to know their capabilities, strengths, and weaknesses. Whether or not they had or wore function badges is irrelevant since they are optional in USAF (wings are mandatory).
I didn't wear function badges on my uniform most of my career (just like many others I worked with). My first two career fields (9S000 & 9S100) still do not have a function badge (even 20 year later). My other career fields did have badges and near the end of my career I earned a set of wings. But I didn't feel difference in pride or identity in the various career fields I performed just because I did or didn't a badge. It just wasn't part of the USAF tradition.
I personally wouldn't really care about the loss of a ratings badge since I know who I am, what I did for the USAF, and what I am still capable of doing. The people I worked with knew who I was and what I could do even without seeing a function badge. I wasn't instilled with the tradition that Navy used for so many years.
I can understand why you'd be upset if they took it away completely which is why I said I hoped the Navy retains a way to "easily & visibly determine the Sailor's career field". Maybe this means they create something like a function badge for the uniform as a transitional device.
In the end you are still a U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class and have earned all of the privileges and responsibilities of that rank regardless of your rate. Be proud of that accomplishment. Be confident in yourself and your capabilities without the labels.
I didn't wear function badges on my uniform most of my career (just like many others I worked with). My first two career fields (9S000 & 9S100) still do not have a function badge (even 20 year later). My other career fields did have badges and near the end of my career I earned a set of wings. But I didn't feel difference in pride or identity in the various career fields I performed just because I did or didn't a badge. It just wasn't part of the USAF tradition.
I personally wouldn't really care about the loss of a ratings badge since I know who I am, what I did for the USAF, and what I am still capable of doing. The people I worked with knew who I was and what I could do even without seeing a function badge. I wasn't instilled with the tradition that Navy used for so many years.
I can understand why you'd be upset if they took it away completely which is why I said I hoped the Navy retains a way to "easily & visibly determine the Sailor's career field". Maybe this means they create something like a function badge for the uniform as a transitional device.
In the end you are still a U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class and have earned all of the privileges and responsibilities of that rank regardless of your rate. Be proud of that accomplishment. Be confident in yourself and your capabilities without the labels.
(1)
(0)
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google