Funny story, not a very professional non-commissioned officer, but funny nonetheless.

Running a school where I have two sergeants (E5), four staff sergeants (E6), four sergeants first class (E7) and a command sergeant major (E9), there is a HUGE difference between sergeants. The buck sergeants and the newer staff sergeants lack experience, savvy and institutional knowledge. My older staff sergeants and SFCs are pretty squared away. I just re-enlisted and promoted the most junior staff sergeant. He screwed up the re-enlistment oath so badly (everything afer "I, state your name," he almost said "state your name") that I was stopping at 2-3 word phrases since he was having so much trouble. It was embarassing.

Make no mistake about it, my soldiers know who is in charge. Even my chief warrant officer (CW2) has his place. Take a look at the photos of the M88 with the main winch out, Chief wanted the winch replaced and the senior SFC wanted to send it to third shop to be done. Look where the winch work is being done. My SGM and I stayed out of that one.

NCOs maybe the backbone of the organization, but God, no.

Like you said Sabot, the NCOs are the backbone of any unit - and when that unit isn't perfoming to a satisfactory standard its the NCOs that will inevitably take the hit. Consquently the NCOs should be taking an active interest in how the unit's run, and be able provide frank advice to higher on how problems can be resolved.
Obviously this is only my opinion - different armies, quite rightly have their own methods of getting things done. The ability of NCOs, jnr NCOs in particular, to 'push the boundaries' is probably quite different between US forces and Australian.

Hello!

I dunno much, and I'm not a soldier, so I'll base my post on my cadet officer experience...

In our system, Officers are gods... They are "supervisors"... They just do the paperwork...Drills and other stuff are left to the NCO's... NCO's address the Commissioned Officers as "Sir"...And the Cadet Privates, as well as those cadets undergoing SCO address Officers and NCO's as "Sir"..(Im i making sense?)

Well, that's how our system works....

Thanks for hearing me out!

It's the "job" of the senior NCO to "mold" and "mentor" young butter bars. Yes, they are officer's and you must render the proper respect to their RANK but respect for them as an individual is earned. When I first camein the Air force you never saw an officer running anything at flight level (at least weapons flights) now we seem to have sodang many of them they are pushed down to flight level. Had this one young LT who had the bad habit of BSing with my guys while they were trying to get maintenance done on armament equipment. she wasn't letting them get anywork done. So finally I had to tell her to leave my guys alone while they were working. Now I did do it in a tactful way. No one had any respect for her because her idiocy shined like a beacon. We got another LT later on and he was the heat. He listened to his senior NCO's and learned from them. He also actually had a degree in his maintenance field unlike the other LT who had a degree in language. (italian).
In the Air Force, according to the PFE, you can address officers by their rank. don't have to SIR or MA'Am them. I do call the officer's who have earned my respect sir or maam though.

I just echo alot of what has been said. This is from a former USAF Major.

A good junior officer will be interested in his people and their mission. The same goes true for a senior NCO.

Bad (ego inflated) "butter bars-2nd Lts" will put their ego fist and tend to make sure everyone knows who is in charge. A good junior officer will/should listen and typically follow his experienced NCOs recommendations.

Bad (ego inflated) senior NCO's tend to ridicule and disrespect unpopular junior officers, they make sure that their subordiate enlisted people know that "they are guy who is REALLY in charge". A good senior NCO will make the junior officer look good.