THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | JULY-AUGUST 2025 73 AFSA TERM REPORT been ignored, ongoing meetings with working-level counterparts have been canceled, and Office of Human Capital and Talent Management (HCTM) staff have been told to not engage with AFSA or other unions at USAID. Senior government officials are currently pushing to have USAID absorbed into the State Department as a quasi-independent agency, with an estimated 300 U.S. direct-hire (USDH) staff (Civil and Foreign Service) transferring to the State Department. USAID has effectively been canceled and unconstitutionally eliminated. As this report is written, in February, nearly all FSOs and FSLs have been placed on administrative leave, overseas FSOs have been told they will be “voluntarily recalled” to the U.S., a majority of domestic FSOs and an unknown number of overseas FSOs have received reduction-in-force (RIF) notices, and there is an expectation that the remaining FSOs will receive RIF notices soon. AFSA has been waging a massive counteroffensive. This includes filing a lawsuit to prevent the shuttering of USAID; filing multiple unfair labor practice actions and implementation disputes with appropriate authorities; press interviews by the AFSA president and USAID VP; a social media campaign; securing legal services in anticipation of a cohort filing to the Merit Systems Protection Board; and providing support and guidance to FSOs filing individual grievances to counter agency actions. As AFSA’s USAID VP Randy Chester told his agency’s leadership: “You may not believe, or be unwilling to understand, the sacrifices made by FSOs, the high level of integrity FSOs demonstrate every day, our commitment to serving the American taxpayer, or that at the end of the day we are American patriots who believe in the good that the U.S. has to offer.” America is less safe without USAID, and our ability to influence the world is severely diminished. Chester’s message to the USAID workforce remains: “I know how important our work at USAID is, how great the sacrifices of our FSOs have been, and I will con- tinue to tell everyone about you, my heroic colleagues. I remain in awe of the work we have done and our continued efforts in the face of this storm.” Foreign Commercial Service AFSA’s Vice President for FCS Joshua Burke had three clear intentions when he ran for the board: to support the well-being of FCS officers, to collaborate with (and to confront when needed) management on issues that affect their lives and mission, and to tell their story to the Hill to finally get the appropriations they deserve. Over the past two years, that mission has taken the form of officer coaching, internal policy battles, workforce advocacy, and relentless efforts to elevate FCS’ role within AFSA, Commerce, and the interagency. A major focus was ensuring that FCS simply complied with its own rules and policies. One of the earliest fights was challenging unilateral changes to the special bidding opportunity (SBO) process. After a nearly 18-month effort, the Foreign Service Grievance Board decision forced the agency to return to previously negotiated and published policy. Unfortunately, the last administration again violated our assignments policy by direct assigning several officers; litigation on this remains ongoing. After another long battle, the agency finally capitulated by confirming that all deputy assistant secretaries and executive directors are in fact a part of AFSA’s collective bargaining unit. While not yet across the goal line, we pushed for the agency to ensure compliance with the 1980 Foreign Service Act by implementing a constructive dissent policy. As of the writing of this report, AFSA and the agency are very close to an agreement on realigning the TIC/TIS and CSA policies to ensure clarity and alignment with the interagency. Beyond internal policies, advocacy on the Hill was a key pillar during this term. We worked to ensure that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and key congressional staff understood the critical role FCS plays in advancing U.S. economic security. We sent letters to FCS appropriators, making the case for doubling the FCS budget by explaining that our officers return more than $400 for every $1 invested in taxpayer appropriations. It became increasingly clear that despite our undeniable return on investment, the FCS budget is not keeping pace with the rising demands placed on its officers. Unfortunately, it’s become clear that the challenge for budget lies with Commerce leadership, not with the Hill. We launched several workforce surveys to quantify the impact of budget and organizational constraints. The results were staggering: Locally employed (LE) staff had
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODIyMDU=