First Warrented Officer in the Navy, were often private contractors who
were hired to run things like the pursers office and like. They were
given all rights and priviledges of an officer, but were not in the
command structure.

Midshipmen, were sort of a warrented officer, since they did not have a
commission, but were taking time off from the Academy or like. They were
below all other officer in command.

Army Warrents, were designed to do two major things.

Basically be a specialist rank, namely for persons like pilots that have
no real command other than their bird.
Or a way up for enlisted soldier, that had been in for a long time such
as like how the British Sergeant Major is or namely for staff functions.
Much like how a person in an admin skill can after years, become a
warrented officer, cause they are specialist in their field, but they
have limited command authority.

Commissioned, is this also that they are granted it by an act of
congress or some other means? Warrent was much like a commission, just
not as high in status.

Mike
PS: But don't ask for a Warrenty.


Pepperoni wrote:

Throughout its history, the Warrant Officer Programs of the various
services have not only differed among the services, but have from time to
time undergone drastic reductions and revisions.

Not only did the commissioning process occur at different times for the
various services, but somewhat differing roles within each service led to
some confusion and benefit differences which was not begun to be
standardized (equalized) until the 1990s.

Pepperoni

**********************************

"The Defense Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 1986 amended Title 10 of the
United States Code (U.S.C.) to provide that Army Chief Warrant Officers
shall be appointed by Commission. The primary purpose of the legislation was
to equalize appointment procedures among the services. Chief Warrant
Officers of the Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard had been commissioned
for many years. Contrary to popular belief, the commissioning legislation
was not a TWOS recommendation but a separate Army proposal. Further
clarification of the role of an Army Warrant Officer, including the
commissioned aspect, is found in FM 22-100."
http://www.penfed.org/usawoa/wo_hist.htm

In 1991 the WOMA proposal was considered by the Congress and it was
incorporated into the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 1992. Six
key provisions were enacted based on the Warrant Officer Management Act as
signed by the President in December of 1991, these were as follows:

A single promotion system for warrant officers.

Tenure requirements based on years of warrant officer service.

Establishment of the grade of CW5 with a 5% cap on the number of warrant
officers on each service's active duty list at any one time.

Selective mandatory retirement boards for retirement eligible WO.

Position coding for warrant officers.

Automatic integration into Regular Army at CW3

the actual bill as enacted into law.
http://www.penfed.org/usawoa/downloa...-36_3Jan91.pdf

The Army Warrant Officer Corps is comprised of approximately 21,300 men and
women of the active Army (53%), Army National Guard (35%) and Army Reserve
(12%). Of these 45% of the Army warrant officers are aviators. Warrant
officers are technical experts that manage and maintain increasingly complex
battlefield systems. They enhance the Army's ability to defend our national
interests, and to fight and win our nation's wars.

Candidates who successfully complete Army Warrant Officer Candidate School
are appointed in the grade of Warrant Officer One (WO1). When advanced to
Chief Warrant Officer Two (CW2), warrant officers are commissioned by the
President and have the same legal status as their traditional commissioned
officer counterparts. However, warrant officers remain single-specialty
officers whose career track is oriented towards progressing within their
career field rather than focusing on increased levels of command and staff
duty positions.

There are five grades within the Army Warrant Officer Corps. A person is
initially appointed as a Warrant Officer (WO1), and progresses to Chief
Warrant Officer Two (CW2) after 2 years. Competitive promotion to Chief
Warrant Officer Three (CW3), Chief Warrant Officer Four (CW4), and Chief
Warrant Officer Five (CW5) occur at approximately six year intervals for
Aviation Warrant Officers and five year intervals for those in technical
fields.

"fudog50" wrote in message
...
You're absolutely wrong, Mr.young old timer,
A Chief Warrant Officer in the Navy is Commisioned from day one. Go to
these 2 websites to get educated on Chief Warrant Officers in the
Navy. Specifically, click on the "history" button.

http://www.bupers.navy.mil/pers211/index.html

http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Set/6711/


You do not know what you are talking about, I do, I am a
"COMMISSIONED" Chief Warrant Officer..


On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 21:37:31 -0800, "Young Old Timer"
wrote:

One comment. A Warrant Officer is not an Officer in the sense of the
title.
A Warrant Officer is APPOINTED, not promoted or commissioned. Therefore,
the crap about fraternization between officers and enlisted do not apply
here.
Did you know that there are a lot of enlisted personnel married to
officers
on active duty?? Is there a double standard?? You bet your ass there
is.
Example: LTC Smith (female) is the head nurse of a large military
hospital,
and SP4 Smith is a supply clerk on the same post, not necessarily the
same
unit, but it could be. What do you do in a situation such as this?? COL
Jones is a Physician - Neuro Surgeon that was given a commission directly
to
the rank of Colonel due to his skills and shortage of it in the military.
His wife is a Master Sergeant that has been on active duty for 18 years.
Prior to his commission, he worked in a large research hospital near the
base where his wife was assigned as NCOIC of Computer Information
Services.
All of these are just examples on how the military system has a double
standard when it comes to this sort of thing. The REAL problem is when
say
CPT Casey who is the Commanding Officer of Company A is dating PFC
Dingleberry who is a radio repair(person). THAT's what the military has a
problem with, especially when the officer has direct supervision or
influence over the enlisted person's career and advancement. This can
also
work in reverse where CPT Casey gets ****ed and finds a way to give
Dingleberry an Article 15 for some bull**** offense.

THEREFORE, yes, there is a double standard. I've seen it played all
sorts
of ways and have never personally seen anyone disciplined for it. But it
has happened and very publicly at that.

As for the situation you post about, yes, the Command should have put a
stop
to it immediately by transferring one of them out of the Command.
Instead,
they let it continue because the spouses were not there, and therefore a
serious incident wasn't likely to happen.

This goes on daily in the Armed Forces, and as long as men and women are
deployed together, especially to isolated areas, **** will continue to
happen, and so will babies.

"Nick Jade" NickJade(at)hotmail(dot)com wrote in message
...
Let's get this out fix this problem so hopefully it won't happen when
our
soldiers return from Iraq.








December 31, 2002





"The hard right over the easy wrong", "What goes TDY, stays
TDY"
, "Screw-up and move up", we have all heard these sayings before but
just
how true are they? Well I'd like to tell you a story and let you
decide.



A few years ago a women deployed to Bosnia with the 3rd
Armored
Cavalry Regiment in support of SFOR7. She was a SPC, an avionics tech,
married and the mother of three children. While in Bosnia she met a
man.
He was a CW3, OH-58 pilot, also married with children. They would both
call
back every few days to their spouses and say that all was well. But it
wasn
't, the SPC and CW3 were having an affair. The affair started not long
after they arrived in Bosnia and lasted almost until their
redeployment, 8
months later.

They would eat, watch movies, and go on trips together.
They
would also meet in his office late at night, after he finished his
night
flights. They spent a lot of time together, so much time that rumors
started. But no one cared to look into the rumors, too much trouble
maybe?
When they called their spouses, they would even warn them that rumors
were
going about and not to worry, the rumors weren't true.

She was promoted to SGT and even earned her Spurs, while
having
an affair with a Chief Warrant Officer. He continued to fly and earn
his
flight pay while getting his "Becky fix", a term they used for their
private
moments. But, as all things do, the affair was found out.

Not by some one with them in Bosnia, but by her husband.
The
rumors where too much and he confronted her. She admitted to her
husband
that yes she was sleeping with this pilot, whom he also knew. So the
affair
stopped (?) and they returned home to FT. Carson, CO. In time her
marriage
ended, but not her career. She applied for and was accepted to the
Warrant
Officer Flight program and is now a WO1 attending flight school at Ft.
Rucker, AL. The pilot? He is still flying and is now a maintenance
test
pilot. She earned her promotion and her Spurs, but did she disserve
them?
Screw-up and move up?

The base in Bosnia was small and everyone knew just about
everyone. So I wonder how their affair was missed. The Army has a
policy
about relationships between enlisted and officers. In basically states
that
officers and enlisted personnel will not have improper relationships.
It
goes on to define "improper" as anything other then professional. I
think
eating alone, going to the movies, and going on MWR trips together
would
fall under the improper category. One of the duties of a NCO is to
know
your soldiers. It's hard to believe that her Squad Leader, Platoon
Sergeant, and First Sergeant did not notice that something might be
going
on
between her and this CW3. Where they just bad NCO's who didn't care or
did
they see the problem and decide it was just too hard to confront? The
easy
wrong over the hard right? What about his peers and superiors? Didn't
they
notice either? What goes TDY, stays TDY?

What about the command? Well a few months after the 3d ACR
returned to Ft. Carson someone spoke up about the affair and an
investigation was started. The SGT was asked about her relationship
with
the CW3 and she said they were just friends and the investigation was
dropped. A short time later her packet for Warrant Officer was
approved
and
letters of recommendation signed. Maybe the command was just wanted
her
to
quietly disappear. The "Not my problem anymore" syndrome?

A lot of people who were with them in Bosnia knew about or
at
least suspect that they were having an affair. My question is how come
no
one said anything about it? Is the Army fostering a climate were
actions
like this are ok? Are the soldiers being taught by example that as
long
as
you don't get caught in the act it's ok? As long as they do their job,
no
one cares what they do in their off time? Are our leaders afraid to
confront soldiers about their personal life? Do we expect our soldiers
to
follow the Army values or are the Army values just lip service?

I hope that the Army can train its leaders to be more
perceptive
and not afraid to approach a problem which may be "touchy" and
embarrassing.
To guide and mentor our soldiers to do the right thing and to up hold
the
Army values.





This story is true. How do I know? Because the SGT in
this
story was my wife, Rebecca Beasley (now WO1 Rebecca Clark) and the CW3
is
Edwin Annis. Now you maybe be wondering why I wrote this story. Maybe
it's
because I'm a hurt and angry ex-husband wanting to get back at his
ex-wife?
No, it's too late for that. But I am an NCO who has seen a soldier do
a
terrible wrong and get away with it and I also have soldiers who have
lost
faith in our system because of this. I also wrote this story because I
am
tired of living this lie. How can I look my soldiers in the eye and
preach
to them about doing the hard right over the easy wrong and following
the
Army values when I myself can't do it. I should have said something
along
time ago. Now I will retire in a few years and when I do it will be
with
a
clear conscious. So I wrote this letter for two reasons: as a NCO to
officially inform you of an incident which I believe was wrong and as a
man
who must live by his principles.

I also ask that you use this story as a training tool for
our
soldiers and leaders. We have all heard stories like this one after
major
deployments. I feel something must be done about it. Maybe it's time
to
enforce a distinct separation between Officers, NCOs, and the soldiers.
Policies are written which do just that, but are they enforced?

Maybe this story can be re-written so as not to incriminate anyone and
shown
to our soldiers as an example of what can happen when we start
believing
in
terms such as those stated at the beginning of this letter. I have
been
in
for 20 years now and am tired of hearing "What goes TDY, stays TDY". I
hope
this letter helps to show others that that saying is wrong.



Thank you