What is proper protecol here? Is it optional for a person to keep referring to themselves as “Captain ___ ___” or it it disrepectful for me to not automatically address him as such?
I have a client who just called and gave an unbelievable dressing down to our receptionist for having the audacity to address a letter to him as “Mr ____ _____” (this guy must have a looooot of time on his hands)
He is not really old gentlemen either, I have met him and he is late 50’s early 60’s. and we are speaking of the Canadian Military here, but I am interested in hearing about all countries military.
It’s my understanding that it’s a matter of courtesy that retired officers are addressed by their title after retirement:
In the case of general officers (generals and admirals), however, the rule and the reason for it are different: They are not “retired” but “on the retired list” – meaning that they are no longer required to serve on a daily basis and can plan their lives without reference to superior officers’ wishes, etc. But they are not “out of the service” – they are subject to call on reasonable terms whenever the country has need of their skills and training.
Well, for my dad (USN, ret.), he’s only ever addresses as “Commander” when he receives correspondence from the DoD and affiliated military sources (i.e., his insurance co., which caters to the military, veterans groups, etc., etc.). Otherwise, his mail, phone calls, etc., are just like everybody else’s.
Of course, all that’s confused by the fact that he’s an MD, too, do everyone addresses him as “Doctor,” anyway.
Even we lowly enlisted types who are either on the Retired List or have been transferred to the Fleet Reserve (Navy’s version of retirement for those of us with 20 or more but still less than 30 years’ service) are subject to recall to active duty.
As to the OP, it’s just a courtesy thing, courtesy obviously something the retired “gentleman” in question doesn’t have. I think I very well may have interrupted him with, “Excuse me, sir. I don’t tolerate such abusive language on the telephone.” Then hung up and related the conversation to my supervisor.
Or maybe I’d just send him another letter, but this time addressing him as “Ms.”
Unless you are a military office (which I am assuming you are not since you are asking this question), he should have no reasonable expectation that your receptionist would even be aware of his rank.
Hey, if you’re going to go by that then you’ll have to say, “Apparently fokls in the U.K. get a huge promotion when they leave the Service.” One of my favourite episodes is the one in which Peacock is handily manipulated by someone who knew Peacock in the Service…and knew that Peacock was only a Corporal!
I’ve read in publications about (and by) the military as well as in books about writing that officers should be addressed by the title they had while in the military. I don’t know about enlisted guys (like I was), but I’ve seen books and articles written by “Cecil Adams, Sergeant Major (ret),” and the like, but addressed by the public as “Mister” or “Sir.” One of my old First Sergeants works with the public in a civilian capacity and is known as “Mr. M******.” I once worked with a retired sergeant (E-6? E-7?) whose military history was well known and I refered to him publically as “Sergeant Smith.” Nobody present, civilian or military, seemed to think this was inappropriate.
Never heard an enlisted person say, “Excuse me, ma’am, but I prefer you address me as Private Jones, not Mister.”
I am the receptionist for an Ocean Engineering firm. We have contracts with governments. So I communicate with the military on a regular basis. Everyone is very informal on the phone and during visits. Except one gentleman on our Board of Directors. He insists on being referred to as Admiral Asshole (not his real name). He is a very set-in-his-ways, bossy man of about 65 years of age. He expects to be deferred to in every way. I think it is just the nature of the individual, as in lots of things in life. Just be glad your receptionist did not attend a fundraiser with the admiral’s bags in the trunk of the company car when he needed to catch his flight. I did!
Per the Army Officer’s Guide (43rd Ed., pp. 50, 413, 415):
“Individuals retired from the armed services not on active duty are authorized to use their titles socially, and in connection with commercial enterprises, subject to prescribed limitations. … (DA Pam 600-5, Retired Army Personnel Handbook)”
“Of course, they must never be used in any manner that would bring discredit upon the Army.”
“Military titles may not be used in connection with a commercial enterprise by individuals on active duty.” (Authorship of publications can be excepted per AR 600-50)
Looks like DA Pam 600-5 would have all the answers.
f. In a military office, retired soldiers using military titles on the telephone could lead to confusion and unwitting misrepresentation, conveying the impression of active duty status. In any case, common sense is the guide when a retired soldier works for the Government. No reasonable retired officer would invite awkwardness when employed in a military office by insisting on being called by military title, if such title outranks the retired soldier’s active duty chief. The retired soldier’s use of his rightful title in Government employment is guided by his acceptance of his civilian status and loyal conformance to the established channels of command. Local customs, practices, and conditions of employment are the primary influencing factors.
I can only comment on the UK Airforce, but a SENIOR officer (Squadron Leader and above) is entitled to use thir old title after retirement, e.g. Sqn Ldr R Smith RAF (Ret’d). Enlisted men (like I used to be), Pilot Officers, Flying Officers and Flight Lieutenants do NOT have the right to use their old title after discharge/retirement.
How about Sergeant Pepper? Colonel Sanders? Huh? Huh?
I have piles of friends and releatives who are retired military over the years, usually Bird or Full Colonel. They do not mind being addressed as such from time to time (particularly on Veteran’s Day) but prefer to be Mister, or Joe or George or whatever.
The whole hullaballo reminds me of poor Captain (Corporal) Peacock as an imposter habadasher. The man got one glorified position based on the fraudulent credentials of another. Just pathetic.
My rule of thumb is to address people how they want to be addressed provided that I am not misleading another or committing a blasphemy.
In the spirit of “I am interested in hearing about all countries military”, retied Irish army officers often use their titles socially and commercially. Last I heard, which was 15 years ago, the Irish military rulebook says they’re entitled to do so, although the Chief of Staff (most senior Irish officer) can direct them not to if they do something that would embarass the military (convicted of a criminal offence, for example).
In summary, they often put their rank on their business cards, but I’ve never known one to insist on it being used.
Generally (no pun intended…), it’s considered a courtesy. If I’m aware of someone’s prior service, I’ll probably address them by their rank. Many retired generals and admirals tend to appreciate this.
Colonel Sanders, by the way, was never a colonel in any military service. Neither was Colonel Tom Parker, Sgt. Elvis Presley’s agent.
From what I understand (British Armed Forces), traditionally you could keep your rank title after retirement if you were a major (army), lieutenant commander (RN) or squadron leader (RAF) (NATO OF3) or above.
Below that you kept your rank title only if you were still on the reserve list.
Then again there are civilian ranks, usually airline and shipping captains, who are still referred to as captain.
