Congratulations to AFSA’s 2019 Awardees for Constructive Dissent: Anna Boulos, Timmy Davis, and Moises Mendoza

Via afsa.org:

William R. Rivkin Award for a Mid-Level Officer:
Anna Boulos, Consulate Tijuana | While serving in Tijuana, Ms. Boulos challenged Mission Mexico’s consular management over policies that exposed adjudicators to an increased number of Visa Lookout Accountability violations, harming their chances for tenure and promotion. Ms. Boulos requested AFSA’s assistance to advocate for reforms to VLA procedures. As a result of her efforts, the Consular Affairs Bureau’s Visa Office recommended rule changes that have benefited all officers who adjudicate H2 visas in Mexico.
William R. Rivkin Award for a Mid-Level Officer:
Timmy Davis, Consulate Basrah |As Consul General in Basrah, Mr. Davis embodied the best traditions of the Foreign Service and constructive dissent. During the lead-up to the Sept. 28, 2018, decision to suspend operations and evacuate the consulate and its nearly 1,000 staff, and the subsequent carrying out of that evacuation, CG Davis showed courage and conviction in presenting the case for the continued operation of U.S. Consulate General Basrah.
W. Averell Harriman Award for an Entry-Level Foreign Service Officer:
Moises Mendoza, Consulate Matamoros | Mr. Mendoza is honored for his extraordinary two-year efforts to make U.S. Consulate General Matamoros safer by ensuring his colleagues had training in dealing with medical emergencies, at great personal cost. As the consulate has no medical unit and local health facilities are poor, Mr. Mendoza was concerned that colleagues having a medical emergency could die before help arrived. Despite bureaucratic obstacles, he became an emergency medical technician and a CPR instructor in order to make post safer.
It doesn’t look like there are awardees for the Christian A. Herter Award for a member of the Senior Foreign Service(FE OC-FE CA) or for the F. Allen “Tex” Harris Award for a Foreign Service Specialist.
Note that the State Department’s Dissent Channel and USAID’s Direct Channel are unrelated to AFSA’s dissent awards. AFSA states that it welcome any discussion and encouragement of dissent within the foreign affairs agencies, but messages sent through these channels will not necessarily come to AFSA’s attention unless cited in a nomination.
Criteria for the Dissent Awards

The awards are for Foreign Service employees who have “exhibited extraordinary accomplishment involving initiative, integrity, intellectual courage and constructive dissent”. The awards publicly recognize individuals who have demonstrated the intellectual courage to challenge the system from within, to question the status quo and take a stand, no matter the sensitivity of the issue or the consequences of their actions. The issue does not have to be related to foreign policy. It can involve a management issue, consular policy, or, in the case of the recently established F. Allen “Tex” Harris Award, the willingness of a Foreign Service Specialist to take an unpopular stand, to go out on a limb, or to stick his/her neck out in a way that involves some risk. Nominees may or may not have used the formal dissent channel. Recipients receive a trophy as well as a $4,000 cash prize. Click here to read more about what constitutes dissent.

The awards will be presented during AFSA’s annual awards ceremony, which takes place on October 16 at 4:00 p.m. in the Benjamin Franklin Diplomatic Reception Room at the Department of State. Please contact AFSA Awards Coordinator Perri Green at green@afsa.org or (202) 719-9700 for more information.

Mr. Smith Writes to Washington, Goes to Bat For Local Staff in the Persian Gulf’s Unfair Labor Markets

Posted: 2:43 am ET
Updated: 10:17 am PT
[twitter-follow screen_name=’Diplopun

Via AFSA:

William R. Rivkin Award for Constructive Dissent by a Mid-Career Officer – Jefferson Smith, U.S. Embassy Kuwait

Jefferson Smith receives this year’s William R. Rivkin Award for Constructive Dissent by a Mid-Career Officer for his commitment to combatting unfair labor practices and his push for compensation reform for locally employed (LE) staff at posts in the Persian Gulf.

While posted to Kuwait, Management Counselor Smith observed that the nine embassies and consulates in the Persian Gulf region are staffed almost exclusively by third-country nationals (TCNs) who did not enjoy the rights of citizens and earned wages and benefits so low that they could not support their families. U.S. Embassy Kuwait employs more than 200 TCN men and women from 27 different nationalities—and employs no Kuwaitis because the U.S. government does not pay enough to attract them.

Mr. Smith gathered data, framed his arguments and then brought his views to a regional management officers’ conference, where he found allies and organized a regionwide approach. He then wrote a detailed, thoughtful cable to Washington, signed by the six regional ambassadors, proposing that the department should define a new standard for compensating its LE staff at posts employing a majority of TCNs in unfair labor markets.

In short, Mr. Smith challenged the department to lead—not just follow—local practice in these markets. All of his preparation and action had an effect: The under secretary for management approved a Public Interest Determination (a policy exception) to create housing and education allowances for LE staff, and moved U.S. Embassy Kuwait to the top of the list for the next tranche of wage increases. The result was an average 22-percent salary increase in addition to the new allowances.

Mr. Smith’s success in winning a more just compensation package for the LE staff of U.S. Embassy Kuwait was an important milestone that will serve as a model as he and others continue to fight for a more equitable way to compensate employees under these conditions.

Mr. Smith has served in Kuwait since 2014. As a management-coned Foreign Service officer, Mr. Smith has had opportunities to serve in consular, economic, political and management functions in four regional bureaus and six overseas assignments, including Kingston, Dar es Salaam (twice), Yaoundé, Dublin and Kuwait.

The annual award is named after Ambassador William R. Rivkin (1919–1967) who served as ambassador to Luxembourg, Senegal, and Gambia in the 1960s.  He is the father of Charles Rivkin, the current U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs, and the former U.S. Ambassador to France (2009-2013). Read A/S Rivkin’s Honoring Constructive Dissent: The William R. Rivkin Award on DipNote.

We should note that this is one of AFSA’s three dissent awards and is separate from the State Department “Dissent Channel.” The FAM precludes the use of the official Channel to address “non-policy issues (e.g., management or personnel issues that are not significantly related to substantive matters of policy).”

#

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder: The Ticking Bomb in the Foreign Service

Rachel Schneller joined the Foreign Service in 2001, serving in Skopje, Conakry and Basrah, where she was a Provincial Action Officer from 2005 to 2006. In the January 2008 issue of the Foreign Service Journal, she wrote a piece about her personal struggle with PTSD  (See Recovery: When  Surviving Isn’t Enough, FSJ, p. 35). That same year, she was awarded the William R. Rivkin Award for Dissent. The excerpt below is from her 2008 FSJ article:

Since returning from Iraq over a year ago and being diagnosed with the disorder, I’ve gotten a crash-course on the subject. So perhaps I can contribute to the dialog in a way others cannot, by describing what it is like to recover from PTSD.

My PTSD came about due to the conditions I endured while on assignment with the State Department, but State left me to fend for myself when it came to seeking treatment. In June 2006, after having worked in Basrah for several months, I took leave to return to Washington for a few weeks. A Foreign Service National employee in my office had been murdered, and I’d dreamed of hanging myself from my office light fixture.

During leave, I asked the Medical Services Bureau for help and they referred me to an in-house social worker. While telling him about the whole horrible situation, including the dream about killing myself, I broke down in sobs. The social worker was nice but offered me no actual treatment. He did not refer me to a psychiatrist for an evaluation; he did not offer me medication for my depression; and he did not address my thoughts of suicide. Disappointed, but fearful of being labeled a “quitter” or worse, I chose to return to Iraq.

When I think about how poorly State treated me when I sought help, I am outraged. After all, I was in no condition to make decisions about my own well being, any more than an alcoholic can make a well informed decision in a liquor store. Any competent, qualified mental health care provider would have known this. I had requested help but found only more danger. It was as if the ambulance coming for me in my elevator dream not only did not stop for me, but ran over me in the process. I — and everyone else  serving our country in a war zone — deserve much better.
[…]
In any war zone, some people going through the experience will likely come out of it with PTSD. But if the State Department is going to post its employees to war zones, it should be prepared to deal with the mental health aftermath and offer treatment to those who need it.

I completed my Iraq tour at the end of July 2006 and returned to Washington, where I began my next assignment, long-term training at the Foreign Service Institute. After all I’d been through, I was grateful  to be home alive and in one piece, reunited with family and friends. But soon I just stopped functioning normally. I was unable to sleep. I started getting lost on my way home from work, waking up in a sort of fugue state blocks away from my apartment in Georgetown. I don’t remember precisely how, but I burned myself several times so badly that I scarred — yet I didn’t feel it. I only noticed the burns the next day. Rage overwhelmed me. I nearly attacked another person in one of my FSI training classes, but walked out of the class in time and had a meltdown in the bathroom. (That poor woman had no idea how close she came to being strangled by me for making a completely innocent comment.) I couldn’t keep up the  pretense of being normal any longer.

Regions of the brain affected by PTSD and stress.
National Institutes of Health

Last week, I posted about a grievance case by a Senior Foreign Service Officer who claimed PTSD and whose suspension was affirmed by the Foreign Service Grievance Board. In its FSGB filing, the State Department contends the following:

“Grievant served approximately one year in [REDACTED], [REDACTED] and returned to the U.S. on August 11, [REDACTED].  He served nearly seven months at the [REDACTED] without incident, and then, on March 2, [REDACTED] was assigned as Office Director to the Bureau of [REDACTED] and his misconduct began. Grievant waited until almost six months after he was removed from [REDACTED] to seek any medical advice.”

The Foreign Service Grievance Board in affirming the suspension writes:

“The year and a half referred to by the social worker encompasses the first seven months after his return to the U.S. from [REDACTED] when grievant served at the [REDACTED] apparently without incident. Grievant has not stated what he did in {REDACTED]  or what experiences he had that could have caused PSTD. He has presented no testimonials from others at the [REDACTED] or prior to his service in [REDACTED] to support his claim that PTSD accounted for his “out of character” behavior afterwards. There was no evidence that the claimed PTSD impacted any other aspects of the grievant’s life beyond the threatening and demeaning and bullying behavior that formed the basis for the discipline in this case.”

See, nothing happened in seven months, so how could he possibly have PTSD?

I don’t know how knowledgeable is the FSGB about PTSD, including an occurrence described as Delayed Onset PTSD, which can happen anywhere after six months to four years of the traumatic event. Or much longer than four years in some cases.  In fact, according to the LA Times, just a few weeks ago, Tech Sgt. Stanley Friedman, 92 was finally compensated for PTSD by Veterans Affairs (it was called shell shock or battle fatigue when he served nearly 70 years ago) for his service during World War II.  Our Foreign Service folks have not only served in war zones but have been subjected to  terrorist attacks, natural disasters and other traumatic events overseas.  I fully expect that the FSGB will be called on many more times in the foreseeable future to adjudicate cases relating to PTSD in the Foreign Service.

There is no question that the State Department needs to do a better job at screening for PTSD in the Service rather than its “cursory 3 hour High Stress Debrief session” plus handouts or one-day High Stress Assignment Outbrief Program, MQ-950 (which appears to be available only to employees and not/not to family members).  And by the way, spouses/partners who may be working in high-stress posts will not necessarily be working when they are back in the U.S., so they would presumably fall under the Non State Employee category.  The tuition rate for that category for taking MQ-950 is $260.

Rachel commented about the grievance/PTSD blog post, which I am highlighting below.

My heart goes out to everyone involved in this case. The employee having served in a PRT in what must have been extraordinarily difficult circumstances. The bewildered employees who felt threatened by the disturbing behavior of their boss. The State Department system, which has so little capacity for dealing with situations like this, which will only become more prevalent as more and more of us serve in combat zones. And come back.

A couple of things- a diagnosis of PTSD is your best defense, and can only be made by a qualified professional. A social worker cannot diagnose. If you have served in a combat zone and come back acting weird, please do everyone a favor and go see a psychiatrist or psychologist who can actually give you a diagnosis. You will not know you have a PTSD when you come back. You will just feel different and angry all the time. Trust me, get diagnosed. It is the only way to get good treatment.

Second, PTSD is a ticking time bomb. It is completely to be expected that someone with PTSD will come back from their service in a combat zone and be able to hold it together for a while. Luckily for me, I lost it only a few weeks after coming back and so was able to get treatment quickly. But in many cases, someone will not “lose it” for months or years afterward. You get triggered by something and BAM! You are right back in the war zone. That trigger may happen soon or it may not happen for a long time.

Third, you are an adult and so even if you have PTSD, you still are responsible for not attacking people or otherwise breaking the law, and you can and will be held responsible. PTSD is not a license to break the law. It does not make yelling at people OK. The soldier who “lost it” and killed all those innocent Afghani civilians a few months back? He probably had major PTSD, but he also killed a bunch of innocent people. Getting suspended from State is a good thing, because if you have PTSD you need to get treated, and this is your wake-up call.

And State, this sort of situation is going to keep happening. We need to do a better job of handling this sort of PTSD situation. It is only a matter of time before someone comes back and instead of yelling at their employees, actually does someone, or themselves, physical harm.

While I do believe that the State Department has the responsibility for conducting more effective PTSD screening for returnees, I also agree with Rachel’s point that mental health is an individual responsibility.  As she puts it plainly, “if you wait for State to get its act together on PTSD, you will be crazy for a long time.”

Wednesday, June 27 is PTSD Awareness Day. DiploPundit will be blogging about this topic the whole week.

Domani Spero