While I was attending class 134 of the Senior Enlisted Academy (I was one of two Coasties in the class), we had Master Chief Campa pay us a visit. We were told to address him as "MCPON" and not Master Chief.
My question is why?
If you were to address the CNO would you call him Admiral or "CNO". What about the President - Mr. President or "POTUS"?
I asked a few of my class mates and they really did not know. I figured I would ask around in here and see if anyone knew.
By the way - the NSEA was a great time and I learned a lot and made a few good friends.
Master Chief should be just fine. Truth of the matter is the Navy has much bigger problems then how the MCPON wants to be addressed. That should have been decided when the billet was created.
Originally posted by whalersailor: He is the only E-10 in the Navy. The correct navy title for that paygrade is Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy. I would say that it is correct to address him by his proper title the same as E-9s are Master Chiefs, E-8s are Senior Chiefs, etc., etc., etc..
I had a post up earlier this morning in which I used the term E-10. The CG, for some unknown reason, has, in the last 15 - 20 years, created this unknown paygrade to describe the E-9 in the office of MCPO-CG. It was meant to be tongue in cheek. I apologize if I was misleading.
I deleted the earlier post because the original poster is CG. The general trend over on the CG board, in the last few years, is that anything added by retired members is generally considered useless drivle, and not worth the time. I did not want to waste any space with background info on the billet of MCPON. It would be better left to U.S. Navy personnel to reply on this subject.
Originally posted by MastersMate: I had a post up earlier this morning in which I used the term E-10. The CG, for some unknown reason, has, in the last 15 - 20 years, created this unknown paygrade to describe the E-9 in the office of MCPO-CG. It was meant to be tongue in cheek. I apologize if I was misleading.
I deleted the earlier post because the original poster is CG. The general trend over on the CG board, in the last few years, is that anything added by retired members is generally considered useless drivle, and not worth the time. I did not want to waste any space with background info on the billet of MCPON. It would be better left to U.S. Navy personnel to reply on this subject.
Youth is wasted on the young, or put another way, one can ignore, belittle, or laugh at their ancestors at their own peril.. Take it to the bank its not just on the Coast Guard board.. In defense of the younger members of boards I visit, I have to say there more then a few "know it all" Old Timers online also.. Of course no one could ever say that about us.
Maybe we need a catagory for Old Far*s only??
Remember back in the 60s when the youngsters all said "trust no one over 30" Well now I live by the rule of trusting no one UNDER 30....
The general trend over on the CG board, in the last few years, is that anything added by retired members is generally considered useless drivle, and not worth the time.
Usually that comes from people that still think their invincable. Some of the best seafaring lessons I learned were from Captains getting close to retirement. Mother nature still throws curveballs and sliders that lock you up and to not listen to the BTDT's sometimes is fatal. Rat, the rule is never trust someone under 60.
MM, One of the directors of Military.com is Vince Patton a former MCPO-CG. He's definitly not invisable.
I agree this is not a matter of national security, I was just curious if there was a reason, apparently there is not. If I had a serious conversation about the war, or whatever, I would not have started something here - retirees might offer their opinion!!!
Bravo! Well said river rat. Let the Khaki community engage itself in the business of winning the current war and planning for the next.
