Category Archives: Updates

Leadership and Management Principles for State Department Employees

Domani Spero

 

Last week, the Office of Inspector General told us that the State Department has already adopted some of the OIG’s major recommendations, such as updating the Foreign Affairs Manual to address leadership (see Don’t Give Up On Us Baby: State Dept OIG Writes Back on Leadership and Management). So we went and look it up. Updated in January 2014, 3 FAM 1214 (pdf) now includes the Leadership and Management Principles for Department Employees. It covers the State/USAID/BBG/Commerce/Foreign Service Corps-USDA and applies to Civil Service and Foreign Service Employees. Excerpt from the relevant section:

a. The Department relies on all employees to represent the U.S. Government in the course of carrying out its mission. The Foreign Service Core Precepts and the Office of Personnel Management’s Executive Core Qualifications, in addition to existing Leadership and Management Tenets, such as those established by Consular Affairs, Diplomatic Security, Economic and Business Affairs, and Public Diplomacy, set clear expectations for their employees. Additionally, the Department as an institution embraces an overarching set of Leadership Principles. The established Department-wide Leadership Principles apply to and can be used by anyone, regardless of rank or employment status (e.g. Civil or Foreign Service, Locally Employed Staff, or contractors). 

b. Supervisors and managers have a unique opportunity and responsibility to lead by example and foster the highest attainable degree of employee morale and productivity. However, you do not need to be a manager to be the leader. 

The following principles reflects the values the Department believes are important for all employees to cultivate: 

(1) Model Integrity – Hold yourself and others to the highest standards of conduct, performance, and ethics, especially when faced with difficult situations. Act in the interest of and protect the welfare of your team and organization. Generously share credit for the accomplishments of the organization. Take responsibility for yourself, your resources, your decisions, and your action;

(2) Plan Strategically – Develop and promote attainable, shared short and long term goals with stakeholders for your project, program, team, or organization. Provide a clear focus, establish expectations, give direction, and monitor results. Seek consensus and unified effort by anticipating, preventing, and discouraging counter-productive confrontation; 

(3) Be Decisive and Take Responsibility – Provide clear and concise guidance, training, and support, and make effective use of resources. Grant employees ownership over their work. Take responsibility when mistakes are made and treat them as an opportunity to learn. Formally and informally recognize high quality performance; 

(4) Communicate – Express yourself clearly and effectively. Be approachable and listen actively. Offer and solicit constructive feedback from others. Be cognizant of the morale and attitude of your team. Anticipate varying points of view by soliciting input; 

(5) Learn and Innovate Constantly – Strive for personal and professional improvement. Display humility by acknowledging shortcomings and working continuously to improve your own skills and substantive knowledge. Foster an environment where fresh perspectives are encouraged and new ideas thrive. Promote a culture of creativity and exploration;

(6) Be Self-Aware – Be open, sensitive to others, and value diversity. Be tuned in to the overall attitude and morale of the team and be proactive about understanding and soliciting varying points of view; 

(7) Collaborate – Establish constructive working relationships with all mission elements to further goals. Share best practices, quality procedures, and innovative ideas to eliminate redundancies and reduce costs. Create a sense of pride and mutual support through openness; 

(8) Value and Develop People – Empower others by encouraging personal and professional development through mentoring, coaching and other opportunities. Commit to developing the next generation. Cultivate talent to maximize strengths and mitigate mission-critical weaknesses; 

(9) Manage Conflict - Encourage an atmosphere of open dialogue and trust. Embrace healthy competition and ideas. Anticipate, prevent, and discourage counter-productive confrontation. Follow courageously by dissenting respectfully when appropriate; and

(10) Foster Resilience – Embrace new challenges and learn from them. Persist in the face of adversity. Take calculated risks, manage pressure, be flexible and acknowledge failures. Show empathy, strength, and encouragement to others in difficult times;

And here is a detail appended to this section of the Foreign Affairs Manual on spouses; keep this handy should some senior spouse try to twist your arms to do something you’d rather not be doing:

3 FAM 1217 Participation of Spouse
(CT:PER-571; 09-27-2005) (Uniform State/USAID/BBG/Commerce/Foreign Service Corps-USDA) (Applies to Foreign Service Employees Only) 

Unless working as an employee or contractor, participation of a spouse in the work of a post is a voluntary act of a private person, not a legal obligation which can be imposed by any Foreign Service officer (FSO) or spouse. Nonparticipation of a spouse in representational, charitable, or social activities in no way reflects on the employee’s effectiveness on the job.

As always, we’d like to know how this works in real life.

* * *

 

 

 

 

About these ads

Leave a comment

Filed under Foreign Service, FSOs, Leadership and Management, Org Culture, Org Life, Realities of the FS, Spouses/Partners, State Department, U.S. Missions, Updates

State Department’s Shutdown and Furlough Updates

– By Domani Spero

 

In the October 2 Daily Press Briefing, the State Department officially identified two offices that do not have “carryover funds” and were immediately impacted by the shutdown:  the Office of the Inspector General, and the International Boundary and Water Commission.

The Office of the Inspector General (State/OIG) Inspection branch has approximately 65 employees; adding that to the number of staffers from Audit, Investigation, General Counsel, Public Affairs and EX, amounts to approximately 200 total employees according to two sources.  One branch has four employees designated as “excepted” out of 50 employees.  We are guesstimating that about 10-12% of the total IG staff has been declared “excepted.” We are unable to locate a separate Absence of Appropriation Plan for the IG office. State’s September 27 Guidance on Operations During a Lapse in Appropriations is here.

On September 27, the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) published its own guide on IBWC operations during a lapse in appropriations. The IBWC traces its roots to the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the Gadsden Treaty of 1853, which established temporary joint commissions to survey, map, and demarcate with ground landmarks the new United States (U.S.) – Mexico boundary.

Its shutdown guide indicates that  “operations department will continue to operate critical functions at the San Diego, CA and Nogales, AZ International Wastewater Treatment Plants; Falcon Dam and Falcon Power Plant; Amistad Dam and Amistad Power Plant. These operations require 24/7 operations to ensure the safety of lives and property in these regions. Water delivery and accounting operations will continue at Falcon Dam, Amistad Dam, Anzalduas Dam, Retamal Dam, and American Dam in compliance with 1944 and 1906 water treaty obligations. Oversight of flood control operations is also required of the Upper and Lower Rio Grande Flood Control systems to manage the potential of floods events.” 

The interesting thing about the IBWC guide is it also includes a roster of “excepted” employees during the furlough effective October 1, 2013 12:01 AM EDT that includes names, titles, divisions and emergency contact numbers. We don’t know how many IBWC employees had been furloughed but about 180 employees have been designated “excepted.”

As of 3:30 pm on October 2, AFSA reported that bureaus, with the exception of the OIG, have not notified any employees of their excepted/non-excepted status.  USAID similarly is relying on multi-year funds to sustain operations. Furloughs, however, are in effect at Department of Commerce HQ and domestic posts; chiefs of mission determine excepted/non-excepted status at post. Furloughs are also in effect at Department of Agriculture (FAS and APHIS) HQ and domestic posts; chiefs of mission determine excepted/non-excepted status at post. At the BBG, all overseas broadcasting efforts have been deemed essential.  About 600 employees had been furloughed out of a total staff of 1600.

Now to the official State Department update via the Daily Press Briefing with Marie Harf, the Deputy Spokesperson on October 2, 2013:

QUESTION: So do you have any more update on the shutdown’s effects on the State Department, furloughs for example, or any kind of information you give us on these programs that are funded for one year and –

MS. HARF: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: — which ones might be affected?

MS. HARF: Yeah, absolutely. So no update on furloughs; we’re in the same place we’ve been on that for the last few days. I know Jen’s talked about it a lot.

In terms of programs that are impacted immediately and one-year funding, I have a couple of examples here. There – and again, as we’ve talked about, these offices do not have the available carryover funds to sustain operations and don’t have other sources of operating funds like fees, as we’ve talked about with passports and visas. Some of these offices include the Office of the Inspector General, the International Boundary and Water Commission. Certain Department of State accounts with only single-year direct appropriations also include contributions to international organizations – not all of them but some of them. There’s also an impact on our foreign military funding. I know we’ve talked a lot about FMF in here. In the absence of a continuing resolution, we have no FY14 Foreign Military Financing, International Military Education [and Training], or Peacekeeping Operations funds to obligate.

So for example – I’ll just give you one example – FY 2014 security assistance funding for Israel will be delayed until a continuing resolution or until full-year appropriation is passed. The State Department’s ability to provide military assistance to Israel and other allies in the timeframe that is expected and customary could be hindered depending on the length of the shutdown. So while there are no furloughs, it’s not just business as usual, and there are programs, certainly, that are affected and which all could be up and running again if Congress could get some business done. 
[…]
QUESTION: I just wanted to see if you could give us a little bit more detail. A couple of days ago, Jen was saying the number crunchers were looking at what funds are available, what’s in, what’s out. Can you just give us an idea, do they kind of know in advance what’s out there, because obviously, you deal with budgets all the time, or is it they are sitting up on a floor up there looking at things as we’re speaking and saying, “No, we can’t afford that; we can’t afford this”? What – behind the scenes, what do they do?

MS. HARF: Right. Well, obviously, we have a picture of what our resources look like, right? So Jen has talked about this a lot in terms of the fact that we haven’t had to furlough yet, which is – for most of our employees, which is a good thing. But I think the longer this goes on, every day that the government is shut down, we have to take a look at the numbers and we have to take a hard look at competing priorities and our programs around the world. And every day that this goes on longer, there will be things we can’t do. There will be ways that we cannot go overseas and promote our interests.
[…]
QUESTION: Regarding these furloughs and people who are – federal employees that they are going to be affected by – which the number – I mean, it’s like, in the last two or three days, they are saying about 800,000 people.

MS. HARF: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: Do you have an – I mean, I know it’s a big number and it’s an unspecified number. Do you have, somehow, a round figure of how many people would be affected with the State Department or its –

MS. HARF: I don’t, and I can look into that and see if there’s more specific numbers I can get to you. As you all know, we’ve talked about for the last few days that we have a specific funding mechanism that has allowed us to continue without the massive furloughs that we’ve seen elsewhere, but I can look into if there are specific numbers going forward. Hopefully, we won’t get to that point.
[…]
QUESTION: In terms of the Office of Inspector General and the Boundary and Water, and all that –

MS. HARF: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: — how were they affected?

MS. HARF: How were they – well, you asked about offices that were impacted immediately under one-year funding.

QUESTION: Right.

MS. HARF: So offices that operate with this one-year funding that does not have available carryover funds, they’ve been notified that they have to cease operations.

QUESTION: So that doesn’t affect – that doesn’t mean there’s furloughs?

MS. HARF: I can check on that, on furloughs for you. In terms of these very small number of employees, there may, in fact, be. I think we’ve said for the last few days that we – most of our employees are not affected by furloughs at this point. There may be some in these offices. So I’ll check on that.

QUESTION: Okay.

MS. HARF: And I can check if there are numbers available. I just don’t know.

Mm-hmm.

(ô_ô)

Leave a comment

Filed under AFSA, Federal Agencies, Follow the Money, Govt Reports/Documents, Shutdown, State Department, Updates

Bolivian President Expels USAID For Alleged “Political Interference”

WaPo reports that Bolivian President Evo Morales acted on a longtime threat Wednesday and expelled USAID for allegedly “seeking to undermine Bolivia’s leftist government.” He also harangued Secretary Kerry for calling the Western Hemisphere the United States’s  “backyard.”  Bolivia’s ABI state news agency said USAID was “accused of alleged political interference in peasant unions and other social organizations.”

Screen Capture of USAID/Bolivia

Screen Capture of USAID/Bolivia

USAID Bolivia has put out a fact sheet says in part, “The United States government deeply regrets the Bolivian government’s decision to expel the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).We deny the baseless allegations made by the Bolivian government.”

The USAID fact sheet also indicates that in the last 50 years, USAID has spent nearly $2 billion in Bolivia on education, health, agriculture, food security, alternative development, economic development, and environment programs.  USAID’s budget for Bolivia in FY2011 was $26.7 million from a high of over $72 million in 2008 before U.S.-Bolivia relations soured.

The most recent OIG report we could locate is dated 2008.  At that time, USAID Bolivia had 16 American direct hire employees and 116 foreign national staff and a total funding for FY 2008 of $72,135,552.

President Morales expelled DEA agents from Bolivia in 2008 for alleged conspiracy.  On September 10, 2008, the Bolivian Government also expelled Ambassador Philip S. Goldberg, after declaring him Persona Non Grata.   It is not clear if a reduction in staffing followed the reduction of funds for Bolivia in the years following the double expulsion in 2008.

Update on 5/3/13: According to the State Dept:   There are 9 Americans and 37 Foreign Service Nationals (Bolivians) working at USAID/Bolivia.  After the May 1 announcement by President Morales, the Bolivian Foreign Minister called the Embassy to officially inform us of the decision to expel USAID and said USAID would be given a “reasonable” amount of time to end operations. The Embassy has not received a diplomatic note and no further details regarding a timeline were given.

This is not the first time the Bolivian president got upset over remarks made in Washington, of course.  David Greenlee who was Ambassador to Bolivia in 2003-2006 spoke briefly about this as part of the ADST Oral History (Ambassador Greenlee was interviewed by Charles Stuart Kennedy in 2007.  See here — http://www.adst.org/Readers/Bolivia.pdf):

On the political side, our relations quickly deteriorated. Morales couldn’t stop attacking us. Partly, I am sure, it was his personal resentment, still occasionally stoked by intemperate remarks from Washington. The problem there was not the State Department. But off-hand comments, here and there, would give him something to work with. Once Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, for example, said something sneering about Morales on a visit to Paraguay. It played to Morales’ hand, not ours.

Morales looked for anything he could use to demonstrate to his base that we were the enemy and he was “bending our arm.” Once some guy from the U.S. came into Bolivia and allegedly, I have to be careful about my language, blew up a couple of buildings, or parts of buildings. There were deaths and injuries. Morales accused the U.S. of sending him to terrorize the country. The reality was that the guy had been arrested in Argentina for blowing up an ATM machine, and then obtained a Bolivian visa on the border with Bolivia, entered the country, and went on to get a license from the police to sell dynamite. I went over this with Morales, and he even thanked me, and thanked me publicly, for the “clarification.” But within a week he was back with his accusations. “Why is the U.S. always sending us terrorists?” he would say. Morales lives in a parallel universe.

And here is what Ambassador Greenlee said about bilateral assistance back in 2007:

 Relations had always been good, but very asymmetrical. The U.S. was the biggest bilateral assistance donor. Until Evo Morales was elected president at the end of 2005, the U.S. was always courted, paid deference to, because of that. But our presence was overwhelming. We were too big, the way we did things, was too big for the bilateral relationship. It was bad for Bolivia, and it was bad for us. The Bolivians were in the habit, the bad habit, of being supplicants, and we were in the position, the frankly arrogant position, of doling out assistance. The Bolivians wanted help without conditionality, while we needed to know that our aid wasn’t being squandered, that it was going to something that had a developmental purpose or an anti- drug purpose. The Bolivians resented the emphasis on drugs. They saw the cocaine trade as a U.S. problem, but it was increasingly, even on the consumption side, a Bolivian problem in equal measure.

If you want to read more, click here to see the ADST Bolivia Reader.(pdf)

–DS

Leave a comment

Filed under Ambassadors, Federal Agencies, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Assistance, Updates, USAID

Major Donors to Pakistan Flood Relief as of 23-August-2010

The following major commitments and contributions to the Pakistan Flood Relief are extracted from OCHA‘s Financial Tracking Service report on Total Humanitarian Assistance per Donor as of August 23, 2010. 

WaPo reported that the slow motion response to the appeal for assistance prompted criticisms of many of Pakistan’s closest allies, including China and Saudi Arabia. S/RAP Richard Holbrooke is quoted in the WaPo piece:
“I think the Chinese should step up to the plate,” Holbrooke said. “They always say Pakistan is their closest ally.” 


The United States top the list with total commitments/contributions/pledges of over $160 million, followed by Saudi Arabia whose commitment and pledges to the relief effort now total $105 million ($5m of this is in cash, with the rest in the form of relief goods according to The Guardian).  A few more rich Muslim countries have came forward with assistance but only Saudi Arabia has made it to the top major donors. 

Meanwhile, China, who this past week was reported to have overtaken Japan as the world’s second largest economy, and is considered by Pakistanis as an “all weather friend unlike the USA” according to a retired Pakistani ambassador and army general managed to contribute some $9 million to the relief effort.





Top 10 Donors
Funding
% of Grand Total
Uncommitted Pledges USD
United States
102,062,529
20.8 %
60,000,000
Saudi Arabia
65,290,000
13.3 %
40,000,000
United Kingdom
64,764,977
13.2 %
43,250,328
European Commission
54,154,652
11.0 %
39,318,480
Australia
31,616,981
6.4 %
225,836
Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF)
16,595,962
3.4 %
10,000,000
Norway
14,810,658
3.0 %
0
Japan
14,440,000
2.9 %
0
Private (individuals & organisations)
12,589,619
2.6 %
69,733,824
Germany
12,440,190
2.5 %
20,325,210
Other donors
Turkey
11,767,027
2.4 %
0
China
9,262,089
1.9 %
0
Kuwait
5,000,000
1.0 %
0
Oman
5,000,000
1.0%
0
Morocco
2,000,000
0.4 %
0
United Arab Emirates
1,519,482
0.3 %
5,000,000
Afghanistan
1,000,000
0.2 %
0
Indonesia
1,000,000
0.2 %
0
Malaysia
1,000,000
0.2 %
0
Qatar
400,000
0.1 %
0

See the full list of donors here:


Leave a comment

Filed under Disasters, Foreign Assistance, Pakistan, Updates

Quick Summary on US Embassy | Yemen

From the State Department’s January 5 Daily Press Brief:

There remains an ongoing threat to U.S. Embassy in Yemen; one aspect of the threat was dealt with  * U.S. has been providing security assistance to Yemen for quite a while * U.S. needs to see a more consistent effort by the Government of Yemen in addressing extremist issues and security concerns * U.S. participating in multilateral meeting in London on 28 Jan with focus on Yemen and Afghanistan * U.S. has recently increased assistance to Yemen * no 1208 funded projects qualified in 2008.

The US Embassy in Sana’a reopened for business yesterday.  The embassy, btw, is now on Facebook here.
 

Leave a comment

Filed under Countries 'n Regions, Facebook, U.S. Missions, Updates

BlogNotes: External Links

A reader recently called my attention to the dead links in this blog. Thanks for the note and my apologies to all. Two websites that I link to quite often, state.gov and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC) have recently undergone a make over. As a consequence, some of the links especially those relating to the nomination hearings may no longer be working. As this blog is a one-person operation, I cannot go back over a thousand posts and repair the dead links. I hope to update or redo the nomination hearing page and put that back up as soon as I can. Cheers!

Leave a comment

Filed under Blognotes, Updates

Goldman Decision Upheld in Brazil; GSP Bill Passes

Here is an update on the child abduction case that has turned into a child custody battle in Brazil that I last posted on Monday (Child Abduction Case Threatens Trade Bill):


The Christian Science Monitor reported that Brazil’s chief justice upheld late yesterday a lower court order handing 9-year-old Sean Goldman over to his American father. The Brazil custody case has been dragging on for five years, reflecting the difficulty of international custody disputes.

More here and here. But no word yet when the boy will actually be turned over to his father in Brazil.

AP also reports that Sen. Frank Lautenberg’s hold on the renewal of the $2.75 billion trade deal that would remove U.S. tariffs on some Brazilian goods was lifted after Tuesday’s ruling.

Last night, the U.S. Senate approved by unanimous consent H.R. 4284, legislation that will extend the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) and Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA) duty preference programs until December 31, 2010. As soon as the President signs the bill, the extension will be enacted into law.



Related Post:

Child Abduction Case Threatens Trade Bill

Related Item:
EXTENDING GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF PREFERENCES AND THE ANDEAN PREFERENCE ACT — (Senate – December 22, 2009)
[Page: S13792] GPO’s PDF

Related articles by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under Americans Abroad, Bills, Congress, Consular Work, Court Cases, U.S. Missions, Updates

Did You See That ACS Job in Kabul?

Afghanistan, March 2002 - Afghan girls sing at...Image via Wikipedia

Somebody asked. That would be the Consular/American Citizen Services (ACS) job at the embassy in Kabul? Um, no, did not. Did you see it?

I heard that the job was posted some 5 days or so before bidding ended, and there reportedly was no announcement that this job is out there. Bidding ended last Wednesday, which means it popped up in the big job thingy listing late last week. How do you get people to bid on a job that gets listed just days before the deadline? Some HR guy forgot to list it on time? Forgot to send out the vacancy alert email? What?

My neighbor probably could have included it in his bidlist; that is, if he knew it was there. Too late now; I think he’s going to Niger (no, not Niger he says) one of those African posts where something is always happening.

I supposed this would not be the first time HR was inflicted by human error or was misinformed. In Farris v. Clinton, the plaintiff sued for race/gender discrimination after being denied (among other things) consideration of the POLAD position in The Hague. The Department did not contest the plaintiff’s account of the factual circumstances surrounding her requests to be considered for The Hague POLAD position. Id. At 13-15. Instead the Department explains:


“that although it had already submitted its short list in November 1999, the position still appeared by mistake on the “open assignments” list. Id. at 13-14. Because Whitlock “did not have any involvement with [the Hague POLAD] placement,” he was unaware that bidding was closed on the position when he mistakenly told the plaintiff that the position was still open. Id. at 14. In December 1999, the position again erroneously appeared as an open assignment – this time on the “hard to fill” list – because the individual responsible for posting the “hard to fill” list was misinformed. Id. Finally, the defendant notes that the plaintiff would not have been offered the position even if she had been allowed to bid on it because she was less qualified than the successful candidate. Def.’s Mot. at 10, 29-30.”

The Court opinion says in part: Here, whether the defendant’s nondiscriminatory justification is called into question depends on whether one believes its contention that the inconsistent information was the result of innocent human error or, conversely, that the defendant deliberately sought to mislead the plaintiff.

Updated 10/17/09.

Leave a comment

Filed under Afghanistan, Foreign Service, Realities of the FS, Updates, US Embassy Kabul

Ambassador Hill Updates Congress on Iraq

{{Potd/-- (en)}}Image via Wikipedia

The US Ambassador to Iraq, Christopher R. Hill will be on Capitol Hill the next two days to give an update on Iraq. I will add links to the prepared statements when they become available.

At the Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Wednesday, September 9, 2009 cancelled
Thursday, September 10, 2009
IRAQ: Report From the Field
Time: 2:30 P.M.
Place: 419 Dirksen Senate Office Building

Senator Kerry’s Opening Statement

Senator Lugar’s Opening Statement

Ambassador Hill’s Statement

See video of SFRC hearing via cspan.org

Read transcript of hearing.

At the House Foreign Affairs Committee

Thursday, September 10, 2009
Outlook for Iraq and U.S. Policy
Time: 9:30 AM
Location: Room 2172 Rayburn House Office Building

Statement by Howard L. Berman

Statement by Ambassador Hill

Webcast (need Real Player)

Updated 9/11 with links to videos and statements

Leave a comment

Filed under Ambassadors, Congress, Iraq, SFRC, Updates, US Embassy Baghdad

H.R. 2346: Overseas Comparability Pay, Almost Here

I was not paying much attention to this; the CRS summary from May 2009 did not even include the OCP adjustment in its text. But it looks like H.R. 2346: Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009 “Making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes” is going to be the vehicle that would finally close the overseas comparability gap in the Foreign Service.

H.R. 2346 passed the House on May 14, 2009 and passed the Senate on May 21, 2009. The differences were resolved on Jun 16, 2009 and the bill was cleared for the WH on Jun 18, 2009. Having passed in identical form in both the House and Senate, this bill now awaits the signature of the President before becoming law.


See H.R. 2346 page in govtrack here. Click here for the final text of the enrolled bill (scroll down for Title XI).


Title XI: Department of State
(relevant sections on OCP, reemployment of annuitants and incentives for critical posts reprinted in full below).

Overseas Comparability Pay Adjustment
Sec. 1113.
(a) Subject to such regulations prescribed by the Secretary of State, including with respect to phase-in schedule and treatment as basic pay, and notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds appropriated for this fiscal year in this or any other Act may be used to pay an eligible member of the Foreign Service as defined in subsection (b) of this section a locality-based comparability payment (stated as a percentage) up to the amount of the locality-based comparability payment (stated as a percentage) that would be payable to such member under section 5304 of title 5, United States Code if such member’s official duty station were in the District of Columbia.

(b) A member of the Service shall be eligible for a payment under this section only if the member is designated class 1 or below for purposes of section 403 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 3963) and the member’s official duty station is not in the continental United States or in a non-foreign area, as defined in section 591.205 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations.

(c) The amount of any locality-based comparability payment that is paid to a member of the Foreign Service under this section shall be subject to any limitations on pay applicable to locality-based comparability payments under section 5304 of title 5, United States Code.


Technical and Other Provisions
Sec. 1115.
(a) Modification- Title III of division H of Public Law 111-8 is amended under the heading ‘Economic Support Fund’ in the second proviso by striking ‘up to $20,000,000’ and inserting ‘not less than $20,000,000’.

(b) Notification Requirement- Funds appropriated by this Act that are transferred to the Department of State or the United States Agency for International Development from any other Federal department or agency shall be subject to the regular notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations, notwithstanding any other provision of law.

(c) Reemployment of Annuitants-

(1) Section 824 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 4064) is amended in subsection (g)(1) by inserting ‘, Pakistan,’ after ‘Iraq’ each place it appears; and, in subsection (g)(2) by striking ‘2009’ and inserting instead ‘2010’.

(2) Section 61 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2733) is amended in subsection (a)(1) by adding ‘, Pakistan,’ after ‘Iraq’ each place it appears; and, in subsection (a)(2) by striking ‘2008’ and inserting instead ‘2010’.

(3) Section 625 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2385) is amended in subsection (j)(1)(A) by adding ‘, Pakistan,’ after ‘Iraq’ each place it appears; and, in subsection (j)(1)(B) by striking ‘2008’ and inserting instead ‘2010’.

(d) Incentives for Critical Posts- Notwithstanding sections 5753(a)(2)(A) and 5754(a)(2)(A) of title 5, United States Code, appropriations made available by this or any other Act may be used to pay recruitment, relocation, and retention bonuses under chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code to members of the Foreign Service, other than chiefs of mission and ambassadors at large, who are on official duty in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Pakistan. This authority shall terminate on October 1, 2010.

(e) Of the funds appropriated under the heading ‘Foreign Military Financing Program’ in Public Law 110-161 that are available for assistance for Colombia, $500,000 may be transferred to, and merged with, funds appropriated under the heading ‘International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement’ to provide medical and rehabilitation assistance for members of Colombian security forces who have suffered severe injuries.

There — are you smiling yet? This is turning out to be a memorable June. If I don’t catch the news when POTUS sign this into law, please zap me an email.

Related Item: (updated 6/22/09)
AFSANet on Closing the Overseas Pay Gap

Updated: 6/22/09 @10:29 pm:

Thomas indicates that H.R. 2346 was cleared for the White House on 6/18/2009 and presented to the President on 6/19/2009. The following describes the enactment into law following approval by both houses. Read the whole thing here.

Article I, Section 7, of the Constitution outlines the procedure for presidential judgment of legislation. The president has four options: sign the bill, which makes it law; VETO the bill and return it to Congress; refuse to take any action, in which case, after ten days, the bill becomes law without the president’s signature; or, if less than ten days are left in the congressional term, “pocket veto” the bill by not signing it (because Congress has no time to take up the bill, the pocket veto kills the bill).

There should be a final word on this between now and July 3.


Leave a comment

Filed under AFSA, Congress, Foreign Service, Pay Gap, State Department, Updates