The Foreign Service Journal, May 2011

M A Y 2 0 1 1 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 7 The Nepotism Syndrome The many positive aspects of family employment abroad have been elo- quently and effectively described. Now that the program has been fully institu- tionalized, perhaps this is an appropri- ate time to consider its potentially negative impact on operations. The op- erative word is potentially ; the active, unmentioned word is nepotism , as in- sidious as it is pervasive. I do not in any way intend to un- dermine the important and beneficial contributions of family member em- ployment programs, of course. My sole objective is to raise awareness of the damage nepotism can cause. Many respected organizations enforce strict rules against nepotism, because it can be so disruptive to morale and efficiency. Consider the possibly corrosive ef- fects when the Employee Evaluation Report for the number-three in the visa section, who happens to be the spouse or partner of the deputy chief of mission, is written by the consul — whose own efficiency report is written by the DCM. Any analogous situation will generate similar but not necessar- ily insurmountable obstacles to effec- tive communication, and operations. Many day-to-day relations can be affected. Other employees, including superiors, may not interact with a con- nected colleague in the same manner as with someone lacking a relationship. It may not always make a difference, but inhibitions will be in effect much of the time and with most people. This can be the case even if favored indi- viduals are unaware of the treatment, or make conscious efforts to avoid it. I still recall a summer, part-time temporary visa assistant position in Baghdad when I was chief of mission there. Two visiting college-age de- pendents, one of them my daughter, shared the job. At dinner shortly after her stint began, I brought up the like- lihood of special treatment. She flatly rejected the entire con- cept, insisting that she was treated ex- actly like the Foreign Service Nationals, even getting the same food for ‘lunch’ (served and eaten at desks, since the embassy worked straight through the day and closed mid-afternoon). A pro- tracted, highly instructive silence fol- lowed my asking her how much it cost. Speaking truth to power is often viewed as dangerous, whether that power results from a rank or a rela- tionship. It is not always easy to per- ceive or control, but many people will behave deferentially to those seen as able to affect their lives — or jobs. A staff meeting in the ambassador’s residence in Algiers was interrupted by the ambassador’s spouse, who angrily declared that a coffee with other em- bassy wives had been organized so they could complain about poor general services office support from the em- bassy. She reported that she had cut them off with the following statement: “That is absolute nonsense. Every sin- gle thing that I ask to have done is taken care of the very next day.” As the Foreign Service moves into increased, welcome and productive opportunities for spousal employment, there may be some benefit to the na- tion, and to those working to advance its interests, from increased sensitivity to its potential downside. Edward L. Peck Ambassador, retired Chevy Chase, Md. Increase Allowances, Not Locality Pay The implementation of locality pay for Foreign Service employees serving in the United States was a real mis- take. All FS salaries used to be based on living in Washington, D.C. At that time, cost-of-living allowances were based on data from other areas with higher costs of living thanWashington. (Somewhere through the years this distinction was lost.) However, base pay never kept up with economic changes inWashington, D.C., so employees didn’t want to be assigned there. Locality pay was then added as an incentive for a Washing- ton assignment. When this was all forgotten, and employees didn’t want to go overseas (even though this is the Foreign Serv- L ETTERS