(SEE PAGE 1571, WHOLE No. 148, Vol. 39, No. 4, DECEMBER, 1913)
LIEUT. COMMANDER E. C. DE KAY, N. M. N. Y.—Without doubt the most important factor in the operating force of any ship, yard, plant, factory or commercial enterprise is the man who oversees the detailed performance of the work to be carried out, pursuant to the decisions and orders of the administrative and executive force of the organization. It is, therefore, of paramount importance that those who are to oversee the execution of the plans should be qualified to supervise and direct the work of the men who are placed under their charge for the accomplishment of the desired results.
Lieut. Commander D. W. Knox makes a very potent suggestion in his discussion of this question when he states that "gun crews, boat's crews, hose crews, W. T. doors, parties, etc., should be almost synonymous terms," and it would seem that such a co-ordination of duties, if not already in full effect, would be very easily established by only a slight rearrangement of the ordinary station bill.
The article in the December, 1913, issue of the PROCEEDINGS by Ensign E. W. Robinson, while a bit rough on the discipline and subordination of men holding special ratings, presents a plan which merits consideration, but which seems to be capable of more simple solution along the lines to be presented herewith. The necessity of considering a petty officer as a "person lawfully invested with a subordinate office" needs no additional brief, and the necessity of giving due consideration to the qualities of adaptability and leadership in those who are to be selected for ratings which imply leadership as well as adaptability, is too well accepted to require further argument.
Granting, therefore, that a petty officer should typify and signify authority and experience, it would seem feasible to preclude from general authority those who had not had the experience necessary to qualify them for the performance of the varied duties of execution and leadership expected of those whom we are asked to consider as invested with a subordinate office. The plan devised by those who have given great thought and effort to the co-ordination of ratings, responsibility, position and pay has resulted in the rating of specialists in accordance with the pay necessary to obtain their services, and, by virtue of these ratings, they have been given a position in the personnel of a ship to which their special qualifications entitle them. Their responsibility, however, has unfortunately been co-ordinated along with their pay because of these ratings, and the sentiments expressed by Ensign Robinson undoubtedly prevail in many quarters owing to the deep-seated feeling in the minds of all officers that a petty officer, no matter what his branch or length of service, is, or should be, by reason of his rating per se, a leader, in all that the word implies, whereas under present-day conditions he has probably been selected on account of his special qualifications rather than his general knowledge and efficiency.
The suggestion herein submitted takes this view of the situation. It simply proposes retaining the present rating-marks for all petty officers whose duties call upon them to direct the work of various crews, parties or gangs, and who are expected to set an example in deportment, as well as efficiency in their ratings. The increasingly numerous specialists aboard ship to-day are already on a widely varying plane as regards pay, so that the original intent of making the rating commensurate with the remuneration received, has practically outgrown its limitations and should, therefore, come before a "plucking" board for consideration.
If all specialists were deprived of the chevron commonly spoken of as the "buzzard" or "crow" mark, and given a corps device under which could be appended straight horizontal bars indicating the grade, or, have the corps device surrounded by circular bars as in use by the Canal Zone Constabulary, there would be no misleading impression as to the general authority of the wearer.
There does not seem to be any necessity of grouping a boilermaker in a grade corresponding to seamen 1st class, any more than it would be suitable to group a chaplain or paymaster with ensigns; the star on the sleeve of the line-officer is deemed sufficient to identify him and distinguish between his duties and that of a "sky pilot," and if the spread eagle were confined to the use of only such petty officers as were entitled thereto by reason of experience, adaptability and leadership, there would be no more question of confusing the position or responsibility of a graded member of the artificer or special branches with those of the seamen branch than in the case of commissioned or warrant officers.
Petty officers of the seamen branch, or as they may be termed, "line petty officers," should be considered as bearing the same relation to their associated specialists as the line commissioned officer bears to his specialty associates. Should such a distinction be instituted it would not be long before the province of petty officers would not only be defined and understood by the whole ship, but their province would be respected and not infringed upon by either their superiors or associates.
If a coppersmith, a baker and a painter are all of the relative grade of petty officer 1st class, give them each three horizontal red or blue bars under a device indicating their occupation, but let us not continue further in our orgy of co-ordination by turning loose upon the beach a fresh-caught bench mechanic or journeyman baker in the make-up of a first-class petty officer of the United States navy.
In such a distinctive rearrangement the authority theoretically assigned to line petty officers would soon be co-extensive with the assigned responsibilities and such authority would not only be supported by seniors but would be jealously developed and protected by all with a resulting increase in morale, upon which is dependent discipline and efficiency.