The Foreign Service Journal, October 2010

A s Foreign Service members, our primary job is to pre- sent America to the world. It is only reasonable, then, that we should know our country well and keep up to date on the latest permutations of American politics, culture and thought. In addition to staying in touch with friends, families, neighbors and communities, we should also ensure that our children, during our overseas tours, do not lose touch with our homeland. These were among the considerations that guided Congress to include a benefit to the Foreign Service known as “home leave” in the Foreign Service Act of 1980. The department originally interpreted this law as requiring a period of leave of no less than 20 days. As often happens, however, the realities of Foreign Service life hamper our ability to use this benefit, leading many to comment about it on AFSA’s surveys, or to seek our assistance to resolve the remarkable number of problems this benefit engenders. The biggest com- plaint is that assign- ment schedules and the needs of the Service rarely allow employees to take more than the bare minimum of home leave allowed, and even that is often granted only after considerable effort by employees to obtain agreement from all parties affected. Close behind is the lament that the realities of these agree- ments often require employees to use part of their home leave time for work-related issues such as medical treatment (deferred to home leave to save the department money). It is not uncommon for FS members to go through their careers with large numbers of unused home leave days, with every earnings and leave statement reminding them how little of it they have been able to use. To make matters worse, unlike annual leave, the unused home leave contributes nothing to retirement. It is a use-or-lose benefit that many employees are unable to use, which in and of itself provokes resentment. Ironically, the next most frequent complaint is that home leave is mandatory, and for employees with large families and/or smaller incomes, it can be extremely expensive. Few employees of the Foreign Service have a residence to return to in the U.S. Most who do own homes have rented them out during their years overseas, meaning that, in most cases, the “family home” is occupied by a renter when the employ- ee returns for a brief home leave. Many have relatives with whom they can stay, but over time that becomes impracti- cal. So for many, home leave means paying high hotel bills, car rental fees and other expenses, detracting fromwhat should be a pleasurable experience. Timing is often an issue as well, particularly for employ- ees with school-age children during the summer cycle. Mandatory home leave can force employees to arrive at post after school begins, complicating orientation into a new school or class. And because educational benefits do not begin until the employee arrives at post, employees often end up pay- ing thousands of dollars out of pocket (to be reimbursed later) to hold places for their children in overseas schools. To deal with this, home leave can be deferred; but that is not only sometimes difficult to negotiate, but could also have a neg- ative effect on rest and recreation and other leave benefits. Underlying all of these issues is one thing: current regu- lations stipulate that home leave must be taken as one large chunk of time, not in increments. Since as early as 2001 (fol- lowing a Department of Defense revision of its home leave regulations), AFSA has urged the department to change its procedures to allow home leave to be taken in smaller incre- ments. Under such a scenario, based on the DoD model, employees would be allowed to use accrued home leave (in smaller chunks of perhaps a week or so) during any visit to the U.S. This would allow employees to use up home leave days and simultaneously stay in better contact with the coun- try we represent. One result of AFSA’s initiative was the department’s agreement to allow up to 25 days of home leave upon return from overseas to assume a domestic assignment, and not merely between overseas postings. At AFSA’s urg- ing, the department has agreed to further study the issue. AFSA believes that for Foreign Service members to be rep- resentative of the American people, greater flexibility is need- ed to allow all FS members to maintain the closest possible ties to our communities and countrymen back home—with- in the realities of family requirements and budgets, and the department’s own operational requirements. ❏ Home Is Where the Heart Is V.P. VOICE: STATE ■ BY DANIEL HIRSCH For employees with large families and/or smaller incomes, mandatory home leave can be extremely expensive. OC T OB E R 2 0 1 0 / F OR E I GN S E R V I C E J OU R N A L 45 A F S A N E W S