What is the idea behind the difference between Officers and NCOs??

[aelf]

I was an officer. I had the pleasure of working with many NCOs who were WAY more qualified and capable than some of my fellow officers.
To be an officer means you passed college, and you probably did ok in some mediocre difficulty training...
To be an NCO means, you might not have finished college, and you have had to go through a lot of mediocre and/or good training... especially to be in the upper ranks of the enlisted (SFC and above).

I think the point is capability != success. So being an NCO might mean that you are capable, especially with some experience under your belt and particularly in practical matters that are very important. But officers will always be seen as more successful than you are, which may be somewhat reflected by differences in pay structure.

 

[kochman]

I think the point is capability != success. So being an NCO might mean that you are capable, especially with some experience under your belt and particularly in practical matters that are very important. But officers will always be seen as more successful than you are, which may be somewhat reflected by differences in pay structure.

True... but, I have also known great NCOs that prefer being an NCO, because they are closer to the troops. More direct leadership roles...

Officers have to do a lot of staff work, powerpoint presentations, etc... less time with the troops.

I personally got out after attaining Captain, because from there on up, there is so much less interaction with the troops.

 

[Flying Pig]

To me, NCOs are just people that didn't make the cut. And often that's even worse than not being anything, since you're kinda stuck in the middle between the officers and the men. That's why a lot of NCOs are arseholes.

...I joined as an NCO, having turned down the opportunity of trying for officer training. I later became an officer and did rather well at it, thank you very much. Did I 'not make the cut'?

Well, I'm talking about terminology in the US Army... there are differences which are deliniated. Technical jargon.

My mistake... I thought we all spoke English.

One thing we can be sure of... the military uses way too much specific terminology for anyone to know it all!
It's good to be specific in the military, know your job!

Gen dit. Bravo Zulu oppo, arvee for a wet?

 

[kochman]

My mistake... I thought we all spoke English.

We do, until we join up!

Initiate the assault at Juliet. After clearing the objective, fall back to the assault area, and then we'll conduct link up operations with echo at the LZ after send some javelins down range. Make sure your element is PZ clean NLT zero six hundred, and that your adjacent friendlies cover down on your AOR. Over.

 

[aelf]

...I joined as an NCO, having turned down the opportunity of trying for officer training. I later became an officer and did rather well at it, thank you very much. Did I 'not make the cut'?

No, you did not "not make the cut" because you had the choice. Your ego is intact. Does that satisfy?

 

[Flying Pig]

No, you did not "not make the cut" because you had the choice. Your ego is intact. Does that satisfy?

I'm far from the only one that had the choice. But take it further - suppose I'd left school at 16 and joined Junior Leaders. I've still got the brain for officer selection, but because I'm not qualified I have to be an NCO... does that mean I 'don't make the cut'? Quite a few people would rather be a great NCO than a mediocre officer and so take the former route; it's not that they're not good enough to be officers, far from it, but they think they'll do better in an NCO role.

 

[aelf]

Well, if you don't want to read the rest of my posts, one of which is at the top of this page, I can't make you. So I suppose I should just let you have your moment of indignation. And, by the way, yes, those people may be considered failures because they made the wrong choice, so to speak. It's hardly a novel way of thinking, is it? If you can't get a job because you chose to study something considered worthless by employers, you'd often be considered a failure. If you chose to flip burgers instead of working in a bank, you'd often be considered a failure. That's just how it is, yes?

 

[Flying Pig]

If you chose to flip burgers instead of working in a bank, you'd often be considered a failure. That's just how it is, yes

No. It would depend on how good you were at flipping burgers, whether you had a good family life, and a hundred other things. Not having a white-collar job does not make you a failure.

 

[bhsup]

Well, if you don't want to read the rest of my posts, one of which is at the top of this page, I can't make you. So I suppose I should just let you have your moment of indignation. And, by the way, yes, those people may be considered failures because they made the wrong choice, so to speak. It's hardly a novel way of thinking, is it? If you can't get a job because you chose to study something considered worthless by employers, you'd often be considered a failure. If you chose to flip burgers instead of working in a bank, you'd often be considered a failure. That's just how it is, yes?

That's only how it is if one is an elitist . Some of us judge a person by the person, not their job/station/paycheck.

 

[aelf]

Jesus, I swear some people cannot understand that their own opinion and the prevailing opinion can exist at the same time. When they don't agree with something, someone who simply observes that other people do think that way is wrong and must be corrected. lol.

 

[IglooDame]

Jesus, I swear some people cannot understand that their own opinion and the prevailing opinion can exist at the same time. When they don't agree with something, someone who simply observes that other people do think that way is wrong and must be corrected. lol.

"You're entitled to your opinion, no matter how wrong it may be"?

I think the issue here is that "NCOs are generally yelly screamy types because they feel like failures because they aren't officers" #1 can be either true or false, and #2 as a statement it reflects poorly on NCO's motivation and maturity. I've known plenty of solid professional NCOs and bitterness or feeling of failure on their part isn't something that seems very likely.

 

[aelf]

Hell, I've never argued that the opinion I expressed is correct. I merely sought to explain why it exists in the context that I know. I don't think it's surprising given that the rest of the society is predisposed towards measuring success in highly conventional ways.

In any case, I don't really believe most people who say that flipping burgers can be a worthwhile pursuit, especially if they are self-described conservatives. I mean, there has to be some kind of cognitive dissonance going on when someone thinks poor people deserve their situation because they are lazy and etc, but what they do for a living can also be worthwhile pursuits

 

[Flying Pig]

In any case, I don't really believe most people who say that flipping burgers can be a worthwhile pursuit, especially if they are self-described conservatives. I mean, there has to be some kind of cognitive dissonance going on when someone thinks poor people deserve their situation because they are lazy and etc, but what they do for a living can also be worthwhile pursuits

In this country we have a thing called the minimum wage, which means that when we talk about hte poor we don't mean those with a job. Civilization is a wonderful thing.

 

[aelf]

People earning minimum wage with families to feed are not poor??

 

[Flying Pig]

People earning minimum wage with families to feed are not poor??

No. We also have this wonderful system by which the state gives enough money to families to make sure that they can care for their children. Wehn they talk about poverty in Britain and the western world, they either mean a tiny number of special cases - almost all of htem unemployed - or poverty by statistics, which isn't the same at all.

 

[aelf]

Trick question: Do they receive help because they are poor or are they not poor because they receive help?

 

[Flying Pig]

Trick question: Do they receive help because they are poor or are they not poor because they receive help?

They get the help before they become poor, since it is recognised that without help they will become so. Having received the help, they do not become poor. Next!

 

[aelf]

So before they received help and when they were earning minimum wage with families to feed, they were not poor?

 

[Hornblower]

aelf - I think that the point here is that many of us are saying that your opinion of NCO's be it right or wrong is belittling and elitist. You are putting down somebody for what they do. Flipping burgers or being an NCO is considered by many as noble a pursuit as being a Doctor, Teacher or Policeman. Not everybody measures a line of work by how much money, responsibility or prestige is garnered by it.

 

[aelf]

That's precisely arguing that my opinion is wrong. And "putting down somebody for what they do" is what pretty much what everyone does in some capacity. I do it in my army context because a lot of the people I know don't value what we do in the army anyway, particularly since we are not there by choice - might as well have a prestigious job that is comparatively well-paid; anything else is a failure by virtue of being meaningless to us.

It takes someone who is really open-minded to not judge people for what they do under any circumstances, which is not something that I readily believe is achievable with a conservative mindset.