The Foreign Service Journal, September 2024

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | SEPTEMBER 2024 55 Rather than traveling back to post on Saturday, the first available travel day after training, Ben had indeed delayed until Sunday. In most normal circumstances, the comment from the voucher examiner makes sense. However, Ben, a practicing Orthodox Jew, could not travel on Saturday, the Jewish sabbath. Prior to the trip, he had requested a religious accommodation from his supervisor, who was happy to comply when approving his travel authorization. The voucher examiner, however, was adamant there could be no exceptions. It was only after filing an EEO complaint, a lengthy and onerous administrative process, that Ben’s voucher was accepted and paid. This situation, while perhaps not common, occurs more often than one might think and highlights the challenges many employees face when trying to maintain their professional work life while adhering to their religious beliefs. Adherents of many faiths—such as Seventh-day Adventists who also observe a Saturday sabbath, Sikhs who have special clothing requirements, and Muslims whose prayer times occur during the workday—may observe religious traditions that conflict with standard working hours and procedures. As much as State Department officialdom stresses the need for inclusion and acceptance, many people of faith routinely feel their convictions are not respected, and in many cases, they are actively discouraged—often via social or even professional exclusion—from even revealing their religious beliefs at work. Why the Exclusion? There are a number of likely reasons for this, including a widespread misperception that because the State Department is a federal workplace, it must also be a completely secular one. There is also a belief that one’s freedom of religion is limited to private worship practices or personal belief, and not the free and open exercise of one’s faith. Two other examples highlight this phenomenon. Some Muslim employees were stymied for years when they asked for a room at the Harry S Truman Building to be dedicated for Friday midday prayers. Department officials repeatedly told the group that such a prayer room, even if it wasn’t labeled as such, could not be allowed because “Main State is a federal government building.” At around the same time, a Christian Diplomatic Security agent working in SA-20 asked a colleague if he wanted to meet up sometime for Bible study and prayer. His colleague informed him that a “secret” Christian group was already meeting, but it had strict “Fight Club” rules about discussing the existence of the group—because “if management finds out we’re praying at the office, they will shut it down.” For both these groups, simply meeting together to pray during their breaks—something explicitly permitted under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, the 1997 Clinton Guidelines on Religious Exercise and Religious Expression in the Federal Workplace, and the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998—was discouraged or even outright denied. Much of the frustration many religious employees feel stems from misunderstandings and a lack of awareness about the rights that all employees enjoy. Fortunately, this situation is changing within State. The changes can be attributed in great measure to the hard work of the department’s three faith-based employee organizations (EOs): GRACE, Jewish Americans for Diplomacy (JAD), and American Muslims and Friends at State (AMFAS). GRACE: The First Faith-Based EO These three groups, all relatively new, have worked together to bring about a better understanding of the need for religious diversity and the inclusion of people of faith within the Department of State. GRACE, the employee organization for Christians, faced significant backlash in its struggle to become the first recognized faith-based EO. Employees involved in the group’s creation even received hate mail. The Washington Post published an article that was at best skeptical, if not critical, of the new organization. For years, many within the department, including at the top levels of leadership, felt an organization that represented the rights of religious employees had no place. Fortunately, in 2018, GRACE received formal recognition by State and opened the door for the formation of other faith-based groups. Common Ground and Codification While differing in religious convictions, the three faithbased EOs have found common ground in several areas that affect all people of faith within the department. One issue of particular importance to all three groups is codifying the department’s rules around religious accommodation. Previously, requests for religious accommodation were dealt with rather arbitrarily by the individual’s immediate ISTOCKPHOTO/BENJAVISA

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODIyMDU=