Seniority

DBS · Post by **DBS** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:43 am

I have never heard about this, but there has to be some sort of seniority system in place in Starfleet. We know that by VGR the captain of the "most tactically effective" ship takes command in absence of a clear pecking order, but what about captains on the same ship, or while not aboard their ships but still in command situations?

An answer seems to me to be seniority. Basically, some captains are more equal than other captains (in CERTAIN situations) on the basis of when they achieved captaincy.

Consider, that in the later TOS movies, there are no less than three "captains of the Enterprise" at any one time. Count 'em! Kirk, Spock, and Scott! Unless there was a formal (as in legally established) pecking order, some staff meetings might have been interesting to say the least (no wonder there is not a single one in the TOS movies where they are all functioning legally as Starfleet officers!)

Any thoughts?

The Wormhole · Post by **The Wormhole** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:01 am

Believe it or not, it's not unheard of for multiple officers on a ship to hold the rank Captain. I've heard it's quite common even in today's navies.

Of cuorse in those situations, the other officers who hold the rank Captain aren't actually line officers and therefore not in the ship's chain of command.

DBS · Post by **DBS** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:52 am

I actually heard about the concept of seniority watching a Horatio Hornblower movie, and it kind of hit me that that might just apply (even if as a little-known, seldom used, arcane rule) to the Enterprise in TOS

That might also explain Scott's rank (and make Starfleet not ask what was up with three captains), since in ST III they talk about promoting him to "Captain of Engineering" on the Excelsior. So Scotty may not be a line officer, as you said (but he still seems to be third in command, at least according to the series).

But Spock was technically the Enterprise's captain as of ST II. So there is no way he wasn't a line officer. Ergo, there must be some sort of seniority for when Kirk is slapped back all the way to the center seat!

Not too relevant, I just thought it was neat.

Space Ghost · Post by **Space Ghost** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 5:34 am

If I am not too much mistaken, the only person on a ship (in today's military) who is addressed as Captain is the CO. I even read that a Marine captain on a ship is referred to as something else. But I could be wrong. Any "Squids" here who could confirm or deny this?

Crushproof · Post by **Crushproof** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 10:30 am

Well according to DS9 (I forget which episode) whoever is in command of a Starship, regardless of rank, is referred to as Captain. So perhaps Captain does indeed only refer to the Commanding officer of a ship, and not any and all other people who hold that rank who happen to be on board.

Post by **Teaos** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 3:39 pm

In trek and here who ever is commanding the ship is called captain regardless of rank. I suppose people in different positions would hold rank over others.

DBS · Post by **DBS** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 9:09 pm

Not to contradict you (it doesn't) but sometimes in TOS movies Kirk addresses "Captain Spock", while addressing him as a subordinate. So even though it is traditional for the title to be given only to the CO, if another person has that rank, it seems to me that it still be used even if that captain is not in command.

I'd like to see an episode where the CO was called "Skipper"

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 9:38 pm

I believe that tradition states that only the CO is called "Captain". If a naval Captain is aboard in any other role they are called "Commodore", while an army Captain is called "Major". In other words they get bumped up a rank to avoid confusion.

DBS · Post by **DBS** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 9:54 pm

So that seems to be one tradition that is dropped at least in TOS. (Maybe it comes back, but the situation of multiple captains doesn't present itself much outside of TOS)

Maybe they decide that the conflicting traditions get too confusing and sometime between TOS and VOY they alter the regulation either to the way it was or to something new? It seems, for example, that by TNG it is not possible to become a captain at all without a command. Riker is even given a field promotion in BoBW, but loses it when Picard is rescued. Also, he is offered several ships, but doesn't actually receive the promotion until he takes command of the Titan.

Reasonable enough, especially when you consider that captain Spock WAS in command of the Enterprise just before ST:II. But what about Scotty?

Post by **Teaos** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 4:32 am

I think it could also change ship to ship.

I can imagin people saying "Don't bother calling Captain"

I could just be personal preference.

That explains away the slight contradictions we see every so often and from family in the military I know it does sometimes happen. They only use Formal titles in formal situations.

Post by **Mikey** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 4:01 pm

It does seem possible (at least in the TOS/movie era) to acheive the rank of captain without the position of captain - i.e., starship command. In this situation, it seems most reasonable that any captains other than the CO would only be addressed as "sir" or with their name following mention of rank; for example, Scotty after making the rank of captain (but before getting command of the Jenolen) could be addressed as "Captain Scott," but not as "Captain."

Monroe · Post by **Monroe** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 7:37 pm

In the real life military the default is who's been serving longer (For the Army anyway) but special orders can change that.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 8:46 pm

AFAIK those "special orders" would involve bestowing temporay or local rank, which would mean one individual simply outranking another, rather than relying on systems to determine precidence among individuals of the same rank.

Post by **Mikey** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:38 pm

There are a number of instances of an individual (read: Picard) assuming command which is customarily outside his rank - that is, taking command of a fleet or task force when his position is that of captaincy of ONE starship; c.f. ST First Contact, et. al.

Does anyone know of any on-screen evidence of a system or regulation which would lend "official" credence to these assumptions of command - or even any evidence that he was the most senior officer on the scene?

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:07 pm

I don't know of any on screen evidence, but it matches perfectly with the Napoleonic Royal Navy's definition of a Commodore. At the time, promotion to Admiral was strictly based on a Captain's seniority - you kept moving up the list as your seniors either died or were promoted, until you got to the top, whereupon you got your flag. The problem with this was that Captains perfectly capable of commanding a fleet were not promoted because they had people above them on the list. The solution was to appoint them Commodore - a temporary position that allowed the navy to give command to the most deserving characters, without messing up the system of seniority. A Commodore would be given command of a number of ships for a given mission, and revert back to Captain once that mission was completed.