Talk:Company sergeant major

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	British military history task force
	European military history task force

a

CSM - Sir?

It has been a while, but I don't think a CSM is ever referred to as "Sir". As a matter of fact, I remember the standard reply from a CSM, when they were mistakenly addressed as "Sir" is "DON'T YOU CALL ME SIR SOLDIER............I HAVE A REAL JOB!! Niloc

I believe you are broadly correct (and I speak as a complete outsider: I've never been in the Army, the TA, or even the cadets): however, as ever with the British Army, there are exceptions. The Queen's Royal Lancers call their Squadron Sergeant Majors 'sir' (and their Staff Sergeants 'Sergeant Major' — see here). And the Coldstream Guards even call their Colour Sergeants 'sir' (here).

Call me Mr Cynical, but I wonder if the senior NCOs of different units conspire to make their rules on protocol as inconsistent, confusing and byzantine as possible, precisely so they can pounce with joyful wrath when new recruits, and those posted outside their parent regiment, inevitably screw up. — Franey 08:28, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sergeants will say that. Warrant Officers, however, frequently expect to be called "Sir". In my experience, it varies with the individual. Some prefer "Sir"; some prefer "Sergeant-Major". -- Necrothesp 11:40, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Every CSM I've ever known in the Canadian Army has been "Sir".Michael Dorosh 14:42, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the Canadian Forces...what about when an army/air force Warrant Officer (WO) is appointed a CSM? You still call them "Warrant" as a subordinate. In my unit the CSMs of two different companies are WOs and are adressed just as they would be without their respective appointments as CSM: "Warrant."Rp81 01:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In reply to Franey, the above as I explained is a reason why so. In the Canadian Army that would be an expected reply to a new private who mistakenly calls a Warrant or Sergeant or below "sir" because that's not how they are suppoed to be adressed by subordinates. It's a correction, sort of like when a new private gets shot down for adressing by a lower rank, which is often met with far worse consequences. Another frequent one is, "you can't promote me; I bet you wish you were that important, don't you?" Rp81 01:52, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plurals

Note that in the British Armed Forces the plural is "sergeant majors" and not "sergeants major". That would assume that a sergeant major is a sergeant and "major" is simply a modifier. However, in Britain this is not the case. The sergeant major is a warrant officer, not a senior sergeant, and the rank or appointment is entirely separate from that of sergeant. For an illustration of official British usage see the very bottom of this page of the London Gazette. And it isn't a new usage either: see this page from 1881. The earliest usage of "sergeant majors" in The Times is in 1822. The last of the (very occasional) usages of "sergeants major", except when referring to American NCOs, is in 1938. I'm not sure of the practice in the rest of the Commonwealth, although it was certainly identical to the British practice up to and during World War II. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:01, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]