Rank Has It's Privileges??

Does rank have privileges?

Sure it does. People who earn rank, supposedly, have gone through some type of trial by fire in order to obtain that rank (i.e. oral interview boards, written tests, performance reviews, etc). Ranked personnel have the ability to have a greater latitude in what they do because, simply, they are not supervised by as many people as a peon. Peons may have five or six or more supervisors over them such as a Cpl, Sgt, Lt, Capt, Major, and Chief. The higher one climbs in rank also, supposedly, the greater the responsibility. The responsibility of the supervisors troops, their welfare, and moral, rests on the supervisors shoulders. So to some degree they should enjoy some perks.

As we discussed before, moral is a very important part of any organization. If moral of troops is poor, their performance will be equally as poor. It's a proven fact. That's why they say that an army travels on it's belly. Because well fed troops are happier. Feeding personnel or personnel consuming food together brings about a sense of society and personal interaction and it also generates a low level of dopamine, which is why people who are depressed may eat to excess. Nevertheless, supervisors do enjoy a level of privileges because they have a greater latitude to do what they want. In fact higher echelon supervisors make the rules, so they also have the ability to bend them. However, this creates great animosity between ranks because personnel feel that if their supervisors don't have to abide by regulations then regulations don't apply to them either.

It is important that supervisors lead by example. Very important. Supervisors that generally lead by example are respected by peons rather than those that do what they want and the rules don't apply to them yet they are writing up personnel for regulations that they ignore. Leading by example will earn supervisors respect instead of gaining respect from fear and intimidation of employees. Again, a counter productive situation. Look around where you work. Do people tend to follow the supervisors they respect or fear?

Some common traits of a bad supervisor are they don't stand up for their subordinates, use threats and intimidation in order to achieve action from personnel, "do as I say not as I do", loafing, uninterested in personal problems of subordinates, aligned solely with administration (yes men), and lying to personnel in order to justify a decision. What are your thoughts?