Rum Ration
the Navy Network

A rose by any other name. the official term Stoker was gone before I joined in 1959 as a JM(E), I still left as a Chief Stoker in 1986, having gone from a CPOM(E) to a CPO(MEM), losing a star from my branch badge which denoted scale A pay. In this months Navy News a young engine room rating is still referred to as a stoker. About 1981 I was introduced by the 1st Lt. to a visiting Admiral as the "chief stoker" and he remarked that he was pleased the old names were still used. I was horrified when the term Able Seaman,(and L/S and OD disappeared) Are these reinstated now from OM etc. The Royal Navy without an Able seaman baffled me

Originally Posted by JunglyDaz

Someone at the top gets back handers from the badge printers, don't they?

G'day all.

At least when they call for us uc2's as we are now WS(UW) they won't have the same scope for name calling as we used to be often known as useless being the first part.lol

pingbosun

Bring back the old Warrant Officer Chef,most apt WO(CK),Wok geddit?

Ah well back to me Prozac!

Originally Posted by TattooDog

Correct!

Officially no Artificers, just Technicians - ET(WE), ET(ME) and AET.

CTs are still Tiffs though

Originally Posted by andym

Bring back the old Warrant Officer Chef,most apt WO(CK),Wok geddit?

Ah well back to me Prozac!

Even better was the Junior Acting CooK with a second name Tar

JACK Tar

Totally confused by all this name changing - I was a Jack Dusty, and will always refer to them as such.
On a lighter note, anyone remember when they introduced the RO(SM) concept to boats in the 70s ? They brought the originator of the idea on VALIANT to sell it to the lads. The genius turned to the CRS and asked "And what does the RO(SM) concept mean to you, Chief ?"
"Result of stupid management, sir"
The meeting was not a success, and didn't last much longer..........

Originally Posted by Wiggy_RN

Originally Posted by TattooDog

Correct!

Officially no Artificers, just Technicians - ET(WE), ET(ME) and AET.

CTs are still Tiffs though

CTs have never been or will ever be Tiffs. A Tiff is an ARTIFICER, i.e. A SKILLED TRADESMAN with an apprenticeship or equivalent behind him, a CT is a Golly with morse.
CT=Communications Technician, although there is nothing technical in their job. Im not dissing Cts or their professionalism, they are excellent analysts, this Technical part of their name enabled them to achieve same promotion/pay as aTif. Ever since then the CT Branch has steadfastly defended its feathered nest.
What makes me laugh was a certain CT on board a certain T22 was reported on as the No1 technical chief onboard. Some Technical person then decided to wire his mug handle into a cable loom. After promptly moaning about this jape, he was told that as the No1 technical chief onboard he should be able to wire it out. Needles to say he didnt

Originally Posted by angry_mac

Originally Posted by Wiggy_RN

Originally Posted by TattooDog

Correct!

Officially no Artificers, just Technicians - ET(WE), ET(ME) and AET.

CTs are still Tiffs though

CTs have never been or will ever be Tiffs. A Tiff is an ARTIFICER, i.e. A SKILLED TRADESMAN with an apprenticeship or equivalent behind, a CT is a Golly with morse.

Wrong shippers, we don't do morse anymore, not as matter of course anyway.

In the strictest sense of the word, you're quite right, we're not TIFFs as the dictionary would define it, but we are TECHNICIANS (No matter how much you stamp your feet like a kid on a school playground) the title says so, as does the length of training we undergo. The dit about the CPOCT in the amended version of your post, whilst making me chuckle, is a tad unfair as the word "Technical" was obviously being used to describe his skill and proficiency within his own Spec. He was obviously deemed by the powers that be to have been more proficient within his own Spec, than any of the other Technical CPO's were in theirs, not to mention the other factors that are considered when writing someone's RORRS such as secondary duties to name but one.
I feel that you're a bit out of order using the forum about Branch Names to have a go at an individual in a particular branch. At the end of the day, he was reported on as the No1 Technical CPO on board; he didn't write that of himself, it was said of him and therefore, to have a go at him for it, smells a little bit like sour grapes......do better than you did he?