The Foreign Service Journal, June 2003

ist” political officers and more easily allow management to fill Service needs in some 17 recognized specialties, par- ticularly in the consular and administrative functions.) On Jan. 14, 1971, AFSA Chairman Bill Harrop, AFSA President (and State’s Executive Secretary) Ted Eliot and former AFSA Chairman (and then-press spokesman for the department) Charlie Bray met with Secretary of State Rogers to present him with AFSA’s plan for alternative arrangements for labor management relations for the Foreign Service. Shortly thereafter, Macomber announced that the State Department had proposed to the White House that the Foreign Service be exempted from E.O. 11491, and unveiled a seven-point plan to allow greater participation in the Foreign Service bargaining unit. The cornerstone of this alternative approach was a provision that any dead- locked issues in labor management bargaining be appealed to the Board of the Foreign Service for resolu- tion, subject to final approval by the Secretary of State, USIA director and USAID administrator. The AFSA “Young Turk” Governing Board (now run by Bill Harrop as Charlie Bray had moved on to be the department’s press spokesman) agreed to this. AFSA’s tit- ular president, Ted Eliot, chaired a Feb. 8 town hall meet- ing to explain its decision. Bill Harrop and I detailed the failure of E.O. 11491 to meet the Service’s needs and the benefits of management’s proposal. Bob Maxim then spoke for the Junior Foreign Service Officers Club in favor of the original executive order. After well over an hour of lively debate had passed, John Ray of the “Ad Hoc Committee for the Executive Order” offered a “sense of the meeting” resolution that the Governing Board should withdraw its agreement to the seven-point proposal. Instead, Eliot announced that a referendum would be conducted of all AFSAmembers, to be followed by anoth- er general meeting. He then gaveled the meeting to a F O C U S 24 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / J U N E 2 0 0 3 AFSA’s Early Lobbying for Members’ Interests In 1972 AFSA was elected to represent the Foreign Service in State, USAID and USIA. AFSA President Tom Boyatt and I called on Rep. Wayne Hays, D-Ohio,to lobby him for passage of a number of members’ interests issues that had been blocked by State management or OMB. Hays was one of the powers in the House of Representatives. As chairman of the House Adminis- tration Committee, he personally decided everything dealing with the running of the House, from granting office space to hiring the elevator operators who pushed the buttons. Rep. Hays also headed the House International Affairs subcommit- tee, with oversight of the operations of the State Department and USIA. AFSA had testified before his subcommittee the year before, seeking grievance legislation for the Foreign Service, which he had blocked. Tom Boyatt and I arrived on time and were left to cool our heels for a long time in the chairman’s busy front office, which looked like the sweater competition for the Miss America pageant. Finally, we were shown into his office, which was a decorator’s showplace. Soft buttercup walls were hung with European masterpieces next to heirloom furniture; we entered the room stunned by its elegance. Hays did not rise from behind his elegant desk, but looked up at us with eyes squeezed into slits and rasped, “What do you sons of bitches want today? If it is grievance legislation, you will have to wait until hell freezes over.” Tom replied with great courtesy that we had not come to ask for grievance legislation, but for a kindergarten allowance for Foreign Service children that State’s managers had agreed to but was being blocked by the bean-counters at OMB. Hays looked up and said flatly, “I will give you that.” He then pushed his intercom and asked his special assistant to come in. “What else is on your list?” he asked us. Tom went down the list of a dozen items. On about two- thirds of them, the chairman nodded agreement, not to us, but to his special assistant, and offered comments about the skin- flints at OMB. On a few items, such as overtime for staff and junior officers, Hays ranted against the proposal and then turned his attention back to the list. When we finished, Chairman Hays berated us again for seeking grievance legislation for the Foreign Service, but promised that the bread-and-butter items he had agreed to would be in the authorization legislation for the Foreign Service. And they were. AFSA had discovered its legislative role, taking the Foreign Service’s needs directly to Congress outside of the agencies and OMB channels. — Tex Harris