The Foreign Service Journal, November 2005

V.P. VOICE: STATE n BY STEVE KASHKETT A Painful Family Quarrel A FSA’s electronicopinionpoll has revealedadeepandpainful dividewithin the ForeignService family. Agreatmany FS employees servingall over theworldhave sentus comments protesting that our colleagueswhohave volunteered to go to Iraq andAfghanistanare gettingpreferential treatment inpromotions and onward assignments with little regard for their performance. Meanwhile, a handful of people currently serving in one of those twowar zones have respondedby arguing that theydeserve every possible compensation and reward for living through the hell of being posted in those places, which, as we all know, feature daily hardships, deprivations anddangers thatwouldget anyother, less politically symbolic post shut down immediately. At the same time, AFSA continues to detect disturbing indi- cations of the tremendous pressure being placed upon the direc- tor general and the human resources system to fill all the vacant positions inIraqandAfghanistan, bywhatevermeans andatwhat- ever cost is necessary. We in AFSA have the highest regard for our colleagues who arewillingandabletoundertakethishazardousduty,andwebelieve there should be extremely generous rewards for those who serve in IraqandAfghanistan. These rewards couldand should include any number of creative ideas, such as substantial extra pay, spe- cial R&R arrangements, flexible accommodations for family vis- its and home leave, departmental awards and fulfillment of vari- ous careerdevelopment requirements. AFSAwill continue topress the department to increase these and other incentives, as well as totake immediateactionto improve the security, housingandqual- ity of life at posts in those countries. What this hazardous service should not do, however, is hold out the promise to those people of special treatment for promo- tions and onward assignments at the expense of everyone else in the Foreign Service. We all compete for class-wide promotions onthebasisof howwellweperformover amultiyearperiod. AFSA annually sits downwithmanagement tonegotiate theprecepts for promotion—preceptsthatattachcentralimportancetothoselead- ership,managerial, substantive, interpersonal and foreign language skills that demonstrateone’s ability to thrive at ahigher grade level and one’s potential to serve effectively as a more senior officer. Willingness and availability to go toBaghdad or Kabul for a year, while commendable, tell us little about the skills that shouldqual- ify an employee for promotion. Giving special “promotionpoints” to thosewho serve ina few dangerous posts demeans the work being done by FS employees everywhere else. What about the person performing superbly at one of our many important hardship posts not quite as difficult orashigh-profileasIraqandAfghanistan? What about someone doing brilliant workonvital policy issues inCairo, Port- au-Prince,Moscowor evenWashington, D.C.? Don’t these talented, dedicated FS employees deserve an equal shot at promotion? Whether we like it or not, the reality is that promotions are a zero-sumgame. Especially at a time of tight budgets whenmost of us would consider ourselves lucky to get promoted after six or sevenyears at grade— andwhen the threat of being “selected out” remains very real— it is essential thatpromo- tion boards base their decisions solely on the skills and potential of candidates reviewed ona level playing field. Everyone agrees that we in the Foreign Service, like all feder- al employees,must have a strictlymerit-basedpromotion system. Okay, then: let’s keepour promotions basedonmerit, not onwill- ingness or availability to go to two particularly dangerous posts that may happen to be politically sensitive at the moment. Similarly,theopenassignmentsprocessissupposedtobeatrans- parent exercise in identifying thebest-qualifiedcandidate for apar- ticular assignment. As the number of hardship posts increases andthenumberof “cushy”postsdwindles, it becomes all themore important for the system to show fairness and even-handedness in the assignments process. Willingness to volunteer for a year in Iraq does not necessarily make someone the best candidate with the most appropriate skills for a particular onward assignment. Service there shouldnot trump strongqualifications of other bid- ders, especially those with a recent tour at a hardship post. This is a painful family quarrel. Most of us know people on both sides and can sympathize with the emotions of each. But the issue isnot aboutwhether ornot there shouldbe special recog- nition, incentives and rewards for our brave colleagueswho serve in Iraq and Afghanistan; AFSA is firmly in favor of better incen- tives packages for them. It is about determiningwhat are themost appropriate rewards that neither come at the expense of the rest of the hard-working Foreign Service, nor unfairly put everyone else at a long-term disadvantage. o NOVEMBER 2005 • AFSA NEWS 3 Everyone agrees that we in the Foreign Service must have a strictly merit-based promotion system. Okay, then: let’s keep our promotions based on merit.