AFSA NEWS 68 NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2026 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL We Track the FAM, So You Don’t Have To Changes to Discipline, RIFs, Assignments We’re continuing our regular feature highlighting instances in which the administration has been implementing important changes in the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) without negotiation or consultation about impacts on those in the workforce. In the September-October AFSA News, we noted changes to the FAM dealing with the annuity exception, public communications, and the list of offenses subject to disciplinary action, as well as the special needs education allowance. In this edition, we look at updates to discipline procedures, reduction-in-force (RIF) protocols, and senior leadership assignments. All these updates were made without explanation or, notably, consultation with AFSA. As the ways members can land in trouble keep growing, we will keep you informed through our regular communications. AFSA staff review the FAM regularly, but we also encourage members who notice changes to the FAM or the Foreign Affairs Handbook (FAH) to let us know at member@ afsa.org. n —Lisa Heller, AFSA director of professional policy issues To highlight this issue: 3 FAM 4340, 4350, 4360—Disciplinary Action These three sections—4340 (Reprimand), 4350 (Suspension), and 4360 (Separation for Cause)—are all sections of the disciplinary chapters of the FAM and all have similar changes. “Reasonable time” to respond has been removed, and whereas in the past those stationed overseas had 30 days to respond to formal notifications of disciplinary actions, (and those working in Washington had just 15 days), in the new version, everyone has 15 days to respond. Further, the language for requesting extensions has been removed. In 3 FAM 4369 (Separation for Cause) advance notification of unsatisfactory performance of duties and a 90-day period to improve performance prior to a discipline proposal have been removed. AFSA Take: This is consistent with other agency actions aimed at separating people from the service as quickly as possible without regard to established timelines and process. 3 FAM 2580 Reductions in Force—Foreign Service Shortly before last year’s RIFs of FS personnel, HR (formerly GTM) changed the standards for such RIFs from a global standard (i.e., all those at a given grade and cone were in one competition group) to narrow groups that were defined by office. Whereas previously those in position to potentially be RIFed were compared against hundreds of others in their grade and cone, during the July 11, 2025, RIF, at least two-thirds of those RIFed were in a competition group of one (themselves) thus rendering any notion of RIFs based on performance, tenure, veterans’ status, etc., completely meaningless. AFSA Take: This sets a dangerous precedent that essentially allows the department to define who it will RIF without consideration of Foreign Service Act requirements that tenure, performance, and veterans’ status be considered. 3 FAH – 1H – 2425.8-2 (A) Chiefs of Mission, 3 FAH – 1H-2425.8-3 (DCMs and Principal Officers) A new phrase has been added: “No category of employee shall be favored over consular officers in the selection process for assignment of [COMs, DCMs, and POs] because the U.S. Department of State and our embassies and consulates abroad have no greater responsibility than the protection of U.S. citizens overseas.” AFSA Take: This one has us scratching our heads. While we’re all for protecting U.S. citizens overseas, this seems to suggest that consular officers get priority in overseas leadership roles (and also implies that those in other cones can’t or won’t protect U.S. interests). It’s unclear the extent to which this was actually an SOP in the latest round of COM selections. 3 FAM 5300 Department Relationships with EOs There are two changes to this section: the removal of “sexual orientation and gender identity” from the list of nondiscrimination requirements and the addition of the requirement in 3 FAM 5315 that all previously recognized employee organizations (EOs) reapply for recognition within six months of the publication of the FAM updates. As the updates were published on February 5, 2025, this deadline would have been in September 2025. AFSA Take: Although neutral on paper, the requirement that EOs re-register is clearly designed to discourage any such activity as potential leaders of such groups would be reluctant to come forward in the current atmosphere. We are aware of some groups that have moved to register as nonprofit organizations, but most EOs at State are currently dormant.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODIyMDU=