Ok so with Riker turning down the captain's chair at least 3 or 4 times during TNG, couldn't Riker's superior officers just FORCE him into promotion? Riker was captain material as of early in the show, and after the losses at Wolf 359, couldn't Starfleet have ordered him to take a ship to command? How could he turn down a promotion to the rank of Captain at the end of Best of Both Worlds part II? As a military officer wouldn't you be required to obey your superior officer's command to take a promotion? Why would a rank promotion be a voluntary thing? Am I missing something here?
That was a really un-credible aspect of TNG and very bad for the Riker character.
AlboOfBorg is correct, being placed in command is an
order. In "Chain of Command" we see a Starfleet change of command ceremony, and the language in the orders is basically the same as the 19th century Royal Navy: the officer is "requested and required" to take his post. Refusing an assignment, in effect repudiating superior officers' judgment as well as their confidence, sounds like a pretty effective career-killer.
Of course, TNG supposes otherwise, but this was a cheap way to generate some suspense in some episodes (but not much; did anyone really think Riker would accept and leave?) at the expense of Riker's character. He was supposed to be a high-flying, driven officer on the rise. Him refusing his own command made him an also-ran, a follower. Obviously, a TV show wants to keep its cast together and can't have them rotating out for different assignments. But it would have been better if the whole issue was never raised, and we were able to assume Riker was serving a fairly normal period as an XO. Instead, they had to make it a big issue, and strain credulity.
I think your assumption that Starfleet is just like a 21st Century military is flawed. It's apparent that "up or out" is not the case in Starfleet. And why should it be?
That sounds nice, but it really doesn't hold up to scrutiny. You have a finite number of starships, with x-number of jobs for commanders, and y-number of junior officers who want to be promoted and move into positions of greater responsibility. Can you really expect to develop good up-and-coming officers when their progress is blocked by officers who prefer to stay in the same comfortable billet year after year?
I think the existence of some gray-haired background ensigns and lieutenants indicates that Starfleet is willing to allow their personnel to move through their career at their own pace.
Or they followed a different career path. Perhaps they were commissioned form the ranks? If anyone saw the recent "Carrier" mini-series on PBS, they may have noticed a late-thirties ensign in air traffic control and a JG of similar age running the watch in the CDC. The former-enlisted limited duty officers are a real wealth of technical know-how in the USN.
It could also indicate that, given the longer lifespan expected in the 24th Century, that moving personnel up at the same rate as today is unnecessary. No one retires at age 65 in the 2300s, so why bother moving Riker (or any other commander) up to captain if he (or she, or it) doesn't want to?
That (letting officers stay around as long as they want) has already been tried in the real world and has worked out terribly. It leads to slow promotion, dissatisfaction among motivated officers, too much satisfaction among bad officers, high turnover in the junior ranks, low morale, rivalries, pettiness, and generally poor performance in wartime until the dead wood is thinned out.
Yes, it obviously works somehow and the TNG Starfleet is a big happy family. But believable it's not.
--Justin
