THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL
thing is going to happen, but they don’t
say anything. They have relevant infor-
mation, but don’t share it. Valid reasons
might include classification levels or
personally identifiable information (PII).
But the process regarding danger
pay seems to have been an adminis-
trative decision closely held and then
announced as a done deal. This is a poor
way to treat employees.
When people in dangerous loca-
tions overseas are carrying out the core
mission of your organization, it should
be your first priority to support them
and keep them informed. Decisions that
affect an employee’s bottom line—secu-
rity, pay, health, safety—should be as
open and transparent as possible.
We’ve seen the extensive debate on
the Sounding Board about the deci-
sion to cut danger pay for many posts.
It appears that the process began in
November 2014, yet AFSA was not
consulted until February 2015—and only
members had found out about it
through other channels and contacted
Some information must be controlled
and protected, but the vast majority of
the information with which we deal can
be shared. State should be transparent
in its communications, empower the
Foreign Service team with information,
and trust them with it.
Consulate General Nuevo Laredo
The November article on the Arctic(“Getting into the Game: America’s Arc- tic Policy”) was exceptionally well done.
Even those who are not familiar with the
area and its issues, probably most Ameri-
cans, surely come away with a far more
extensive and profound understanding