The Foreign Service Journal, May 2005

MAY 2005 • AFSA NEWS 3 AFSA AND THE DG Preserving the Commitment to Leadership AFSA President John Limbert and AFSA State Vice President Louise Crane met with Director General Robert W. Pearson on March 25. They asked how he rated the department’s commitment to leader- ship and management — a commitment that was central to Secretary Powell’s program and which did so much to improve conditions for Foreign Service members and their families. The DG responded that the department, AFSA and others have done much to make this and other improvements perma- nent. The real test will be how we main- tain these achievements when the sys- tem comes under stress, be it from per- sonnel shortages, budget problems or new requirements. A continuing stress issue is that of staffing unaccompanied posts. Embassy Baghdad is the largest unaccompanied post, with about 125 Foreign Service positions. Worldwide there are 599 positions at 15 unaccompanied posts: two in Europe, four in Africa, and nine in the Middle East. Foreign Service person- nel are volunteering for difficult assign- ments, but, as noted above, the stress of filling so many positions means that maintaining training and other stan- dards will be an ongoing challenge. AFSA’s Voice on the Hill AFSA is the strongest advocate you have with Congress. AFSA has been out- spoken on your behalf for improved embassy security, in-state tuition rights, availability pay for Diplomatic Security agents, capital gains tax exclusions, long- termcare insurance andmany other key issues. But AFSA needs your support to con- tinue tomake a difference for you and the Foreign Service. Please consider donating to the AFSA Legislative Action Fund. Every dollar counts. Send contri- butions (payable toAFSA Legislative Action Fund) to: AFSA Legislative Action Fund, P.O. Box 98026, Washington, DC 20090-8026. Continued on page 5 V.P. VOICE: STATE ■ BY LOUISE CRANE Psst! Wanna Get Senior Performance Pay? Don’t Take a PD Job Overseas. I did an analysis of the State Senior Foreign Service employ- ees who received performance pay in 2004—where they worked and what they did. This was admittedly a very informal analysis (I did it by hand) and most certainly has errors. But here are my conclusions. It doesn’t matter whether you’re overseas or not: performance pay was almost even- ly split between those on domestic assignments and those overseas. But it does matter whereyouareoverseasandwhatyouaredoing. Ofthe118SFSpostedabroadwhoreceived performance pay, only 11 were serving in non-hardship posts. That’s just 9 percent. AFSA argues that there is serious substantive work being done in the Berlins and Tokyos of this world, but the selection panels didn’t see it that way. The panels are responsible for recommending up to 50 percent of the Senior Service for performance pay cash awards, which—nowunder “pay for performance”—come with addition- al salary increases as well. It is hard for AFSA to believe that the senior employees in these key capitals were below par. If you are overseas, you should be a chief of mission or a deputy chief of mission to get performance pay. Ninety-nine of the 118 overseas recipientswere. The rest were sectionheads, of whomonly onewas a public affairs officer. TheCareerDevelopment Office reports there is a paucity of bidders on senior level public affairs positions. Could this be why? If you are a senior looking for a domestic assignment, try to get assigned as either a deputy assistant secretary or an office director in a regional or management bureau (Counter-Terrorism and Consular Affairs are the exceptions) if you want to get that additional increase in your base pay. Don’t take any of those diplomat-in-residence slots, be an adviser to a military command, or go on detail to the Hill or another gov- ernment agency (except to the NSC), because your chances for performance pay for doing so were nil in 2004. This is important because of what it means for your financial well-being. From 2004onward, being recommended for performancepaywill translate intoahigher salary. It’s part of the newpay-for-performance systemfor allmembers of the Senior Executive and Foreign Service. Before pay for performance, members of the SFS got an auto- matic annual pay increase based on the automatic pay increase for Congress. This is still true, and in Januarymembers received the 2.5 percent increase. However, the up- to-50 percent of the Senior Foreign Service who are recommended for performance pay are now eligible for an additional salary increase, perhaps as much as 2 percent or more on top of the 2.5 percent everyone received. That’s a gift that keeps on giving! AFSA is not arguing that the best performers shouldn’t get the extra salary. Our problem is that based on the pattern emerging from the 2004 list, there appears a bias to give it topeoplewith certain titles in certain countries andbureaus. It looks toAFSA like the star performers in the FirstWorld, in global issue bureaus and in public diplo- macy jobs are getting short shrift. We have sent the department some suggestions on how tomitigate the unfairness. Our first and most important recommendation is to remind the selection panels that performance pay is based on an employee’s contribution to fulfilling the department’s mission, not as compensation for sacrifice and hardship. ▫ AFSA NEWS BRIEFS