Examination Requirements

In 1927, advancement to warrant officer from within the enlisted ranks required passing a formal examination. Exams were conducted nationwide for the specialties of Boatswain, Gunner, Machinist, Carpenter, Pay Clerk, and Radio Electrician.

Eligibility was limited to “permanently rated” chief petty officers who had at least one year of service and were between the ages of 21 and 42.
Applicants were required to submit a formal letter requesting to be designated for examination for appointment to a temporary warrant grade. In addition, they had to obtain letters of recommendation from all former commanding officers who were still serving in the Coast Guard.
An examining board composed of commissioned officers evaluated candidates based on educational background, professional qualifications, and general fitness. The written examination included spelling 25 words, basic grammar exercises, composition of a short essay, arithmetic problems, and questions covering what were described as “well-known facts that any intelligent man should know.”
Although study courses were available free of charge to enlisted personnel, commissioned and warrant officers were required to pay for official correspondence courses and textbooks. In 1928, course costs ranged from $3.70 for “Good English” to $23.14 for the “Coast Guard Academy Preparatory” course. Even so, these mail-order programs were significantly less expensive than comparable commercial courses, which could cost as much as ten times more.
Limited Advancement and Pay Inequities
Even after meeting these demanding requirements, newly appointed temporary warrants faced additional challenges, including limited advancement opportunities and inequitable pay structures.
In 1927, the Coast Guard had more than 800 warrant officers due to the expansion of positions needed to combat smuggling during Prohibition. Yet only 25 warrants were selected that year for permanent commissioned status.
Compounding the issue was an uneven pay system. Prior to World War I, Coast Guard commissioned officer pay was aligned with the Army’s, but this alignment did not extend to warrant officers or enlisted personnel. After the war, congressional legislation moved Coast Guard pay closer to Navy standards, resulting in improvements.
However, inequities persisted. Differences remained between the pay of warrant officers and commissioned chief warrant officers, and between those serving ashore and those assigned to sea duty.
Various members of Congress introduced legislation in an attempt to correct disparities created by the Joint Service Pay Act of June 10, 1922. For six years, military personnel received no pay raises. Legislative efforts addressed pay, rank structure, and advancement in piecemeal fashion.
Until 1928, the Coast Guard had no admirals. Furthermore, unlike their Navy counterparts, Coast Guard warrant officers did not automatically advance to chief warrant officer after six years of service.
These structural and financial challenges contributed to growing frustration within the warrant ranks and further strengthened the desire for organized representation.