Posted: 3:14 pm PT
[twitter-follow screen_name=’Diplopundit’ ]
Updated: 9:25 pm EST
HTP/Africa #1: One high threat post in Africa should have 3 Regional Security Officers (RSOs). One rotated out of the position with no replacement. Then there were 2 RSOs. One went on medical evacuation. Then there was 1 RSO. “D.C. Has sent some TDY support when they can, but another permanent RSO is not coming for months.”
Updated: Oct 16, 2016 6:55 pm EST
HTP/Africa #2: Serving at an HTP Africa post and our Regional Security Office is understaffed and has been for ages. For a while we had the ARSO as our only full time RSO with a lot of TDY coming through but we never had the mandated three RSOs in the office. It would seem the ARSO is good at their job but don’t we deserve an actual RSO at the helm if we are a High Threat Post?
Last week, we received a Burn Bag asking, “Why are our most threatened missions not getting appropriate security staffing?” We are reposting the Burn Bag item below:
“Someone needs to ask DS leadership why the bureau with the greatest growth since Nairobi and Benghazi is not fully staffing it’s positions at High Threat Posts. I mean DS created an entire new office to manage High Threat posts so why are our most threatened missions not getting appropriate security staffing? At my post, which is designated as Hight Threat, the two ARSO positions have been vacant for more than a year. I understand from colleagues that numerous other posts have similar significant security staffing gaps. DS agents leaving for agencies (as reported by Diplopundit) is not going to help what appears to be a significant DS personnel shortage. Does DS or the Department have a plan to fix whatever the issues are?”
One reason why Diplomatic Security is not fully staffing its vacancies at High Threat Posts maybe that it is refusing to panel agents who came back through the reinstatement process. Even if those agents have apparently told DS that they are willing to fill these critical need vacancies.
We are now just learning that prior to this mass departures of DS agents for the U.S. Marshals Service (where there was a warning that departing agents will not be allowed back) Diplomatic Security has already refused to panel agents who came back to Diplomatic Security through the reinstatement process. We understand that the Bureau of Human Resources has processed these employees for reinstatement, but Diplomatic Security is refusing to panel the reappointed employees for High Threat priority staffing positions where there are unfilled positions. For those not in the FS, an Assignment Panel is established for the purpose of reviewing the bids and qualifications of employees for assignment to domestic and overseas positions, and make recommendations on who should go where.
So there are HTP posts with vacancies, there are folks willing to go, but DS refuses to consider these folks for the HTP vacancies. Does that even make sense? We would loved to have Diplomatic Security elaborate their thinking on this. No, not because we are nosy but because even insider folks cannot make heads or tails of what’s going on. And because we have reporting from at least one HTP post saying hey, we are in an HTP post and our two vacancies for security officers have been unfilled for over a year! Over a year! How many other HTP posts are in a similar pickle? We are collecting information on how many HTP posts have not been fully staffed. Contact us here.
- Why Are DS Agents Fleeing Diplomatic Security In Droves For the U.S. Marshals Service?
- Is Diplomatic Security, the State Department’s Law Enforcement Arm Trying to Break the Law?
- New Word of the Day: Nordstrom, \nord-struhm\, verb