qj0309@westpoint-emh2.army.mil (Welsh James CPT) (02/20/91)
From: Welsh James CPT <qj0309@westpoint-emh2.army.mil>
Some of the information presented concerning USMC Warrant Officers is not
correct. All Marine Warrant Officers come from the enlisted ranks. Most were
staff NCOs. Warrant officers are generally specialists in a limited field.
They are sometimes inaccurately called "Gunner". Gunners are infantry warrant
officers. They wear the appropriate warrant officer rank insignia on one
collar, and a bursting bomb (flaming onion?) on the other. Gunners attend the
warrant officer basic course with other W.O.'s, then they go on to the infantry
officers course for more training. The average gunner has 20+ years time in
service. He was probably a senior gunnery sergeant or first sergeant. Several
sergeant majors have been selected. Needless to say, the competition for
selection has been fierce.
One gunner is found in every infantry battalion and most infantry
regimental HQs. He is the commander's expert on infantry training,
marksmanship, and weapons. Most C.O.s put him in the S-3 (Operations), but an
increasing number have decided that the gunner is better employed in the
weapons company. Other warrant officers are not gunners. They are strictly
technicians. They assumed a title they didn't deserve during a period when
infantry warrant officers were no longer being made.
The concept of an official chain of command and a real one is absurd, at
least on the ground side of the Corps. Lieutenant platoon leaders are
tactically and technically competent, or else they are quickly removed. There
have never been 90 day wonders or shake and bake lieutenants in the Marine
Corps, even at the height of the Vietnam War.
The role of an NCO at all levels is to be a partner in leadership. They
provide advice based on experienced leadership. They are given a great deal of
authority, but in the end, an officer bears the responsibility for the unit. I
worked closely with my first sergeant, but there was never any question
concerning who made the final decisions.
Sorry to get on my soap box in a non-science area, but I have developed
strong feelings regarding the issue of leadership at the company level in my 12
years as an infantry officer. I'd welcome any interested parties to respond to
me directly.
Welsh James CPT
<qj0309@staff>major@uunet.UU.NET (Mike Schmitt) (02/21/91)
From: bcstec!shuksan!major@uunet.UU.NET (Mike Schmitt) > From: Welsh James CPT <qj0309@westpoint-emh2.army.mil> > The concept of an official chain of command and a real one is absurd, at > least on the ground side of the Corps. Lieutenant platoon leaders are > tactically and technically competent, or else they are quickly removed. There > have never been 90 day wonders or shake and bake lieutenants in the Marine > Corps, even at the height of the Vietnam War. Well said, James, all around. A little background: During the build-up for Vietnam each service expanded its officer/warrant ranks in different ways. The Army increased the number of Officer Candidate Schools (OCS). Before Vietnam there were two - Infantry and Artillery (upon graduation you could select another branch). First they increased the number of companies. When I arrived at my class (October 1965) there was one battalion with 5 companies (150 students per). When I graduated (April 1966) there were two battalions and 10 companies of candidates. Plus there were OCS schools for Engineers, Quartermaster and Armor (I think). There were never any "90 day wonders" - it was 6 months. Then the brand new 2LT had to go to a basic branch qualification course - then was sent to a Stateside unit that was preparing to ship to Vietnam. [BTW: My class started with 150, graduated 95, and by December '66 - 100% of my class plus our tac officers and cadre were in Vietnam - most went to the 9th Div or 4th Div] Now, at the same time - the Army had a desparate need for photo interpreters and other intelligence-types in their warrant ranks. So the Army went to the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps and asked any E6 or above if they wanted to transfer to the Army in the rank of Warrant Officer 1 - as PI technicians. Many, many took the offer - the majority were Air Force E6s, some were Navy E6s, only a few marines took the offer, some were E7s but there were not many E8s. Most remained in the Army for fine careers as warrants. Now, the Marines did it differently. They took some of their senior NCOs and Warrants and asked if they'd like to be "officers" for awhile. Again, I'm most familiar with the intelligence skills. They became "Limited Duty" officers. They began as 2LT's. They could be promoted through the grades but never higher than Lieutenant Colonel (terminal grade). They would maintain their former warrant/enlisted rank - and in fact be promoted in these grades along with their contemporaries. But - at any time - convenient to the Marines - they could be "adminstratively" reverted to their previous ranks. (I served with the "oldest second lieutenant in the Marine Corps" - a CWO3 with 28 years service - took their offer to be a 2LT - he got paid the highest of the two base pays - was promoted to 1LT and 5 days later promoted to CWO4). After Vietnam - most of these "LD" officers reverted to their previous status. ------------- One wonders what 'wierd' personnel policies will occur as a result of the gulf war. Right now, everyone is "frozen in place". mike schmitt