The Foreign Service Journal, September 2008

T he U.S. government’s medieval attitude towards mater- nity/paternity leave for employees is oneof themost regres- sive aspects of our personnel system, and it creates unique hardships for Foreign Service members assigned overseas. Ironically, the people of the Foreign Service are better placed to understand just how unfair these policies are because most of us have had first-hand exposure to the vastly more progressive policies of other countries. While paid maternity/paternity leave is almost unheard-of in the United States — and nonexistent for federal employees — it is absolutely the norm in virtually every other Western democracy. In places like the U.K., France, Germany and our neighbor Canada, female employees are guaranteed generous amounts of paid leave when they become pregnant and understandably want to spend a considerable period of time caring for the new baby. Women in these other civilized soci- eties receive full or nearly full salarywhile takingoffmanymonths—insomecoun- tries asmuchas a year—for labor/deliv- ery and newborn care, and their jobs are waiting for themupon their return to the work force. Fathers enjoy similar bene- fits. Noonequestionstherightofemploy- ees to leave the workplace for significant amounts of time for childbirth, and no one expects themtohave tosacrifice their income during this period. In sharp contrast, American employers, including the U.S. government, have a longstanding traditionof stinginess andhos- tility towards employees starting families. They treat pregnan- cy as a disease that they reluctantly accept will inevitably cause employee absences, but require the employee to coverwithwhat- ever vacation time or sick leave she may happen to have saved up. If she shouldwant to stayout ofwork longer thanher accrued paid leave, ourCongress has generously guaranteed throughpas- sage of the 1993 Family andMedical Leave Act that she has the right to go on leave without pay for up to three months. Under these circumstances, it is typical for working women in our country to stay on the job up to their delivery dates, then to plan on squeezing in maybe a month or two with the new baby before returning to the workplace. Staying out any longer would be prohibitively expensive. Herein lies the dilemma for female Foreign Servicemembers assigned overseas. Most of them can- not stay at their duty station and keep working until their delivery date—and have no option to return towork soon after the birth — because they are orderedonmandatorymedevac to a different location for amin- imum of three full months, usually from six weeks prior to the delivery date until sixweeks afterwards. During this forced three- month absence fromwork, there is nopaidmaternity leave avail- able to that employee. She can continue to collect her salary for as long as her accrued annual or sick leave hours last, but then must go on leave without pay. This harsh approach tomaternity hits more junior employ- ees hardest because they typicallyhave lit- tle annual/sick leave saved. And why don’twe ask themost fundamental ques- tion: why shouldanemployeewhowants to have a baby be forced to exhaust her annual and sick leave anyway? Childbirth is neither a vacation nor an illness. And what about female Foreign Service employeeswhohave to goon leavewith- out pay for asmuchas threemonths dur- ing their medevac and are the primary (or sole) income-earners in the family? Things are onlymarginally better for male ForeignService employees assigned overseas. When theirwives get pregnant and are medevaced away from post for three months, they do have the option of using annual and sick leave to accompany them for all or part of that period without loss of salary. But again, it all depends on howmuch leave they have accrued and are willing to deplete. In a halting first step towards an attempt to rectify this injus- tice, theU.S. House of Representatives, voting largely along party lines, recently passed a bill that would authorize four weeks of paidmaternity leave for federal employees. ForeignServicemem- bers applauded this albeit limited measure, but were appalled when theWhiteHouse promptly threatened a veto, saying that the proposed legislationwould “create a costly, unnecessary, new paid leave entitlement” for something that is no different from any other “serious health condition.” The people of the Foreign Service canonly hope that the next resident of theWhiteHousewill have amore progressive, broad- minded view of pregnancy and childbirth. o V.P. VOICE: STATE n BY STEVE KASHKETT The Dark Ages S E P T EMB E R 2 0 0 8 / F OR E I GN S E R V I C E J OU R N A L 71 A F S A N E W S While paid maternity/paternity leave is almost unheard-of in the United States — and nonexistent for federal employees — it is absolutely the norm in virtually every other Western democracy.