AFSANEWSBRIEFS
USAID BY FRANCISCO ZAMORA
A
F
S
A
AAFSW Reconstitutes
Forum Committees
Ifamily members and past and present
n January, Foreign Service employees,
Family Liaison Office staff met in a forum
sponsored by the Associates of the
American Foreign Service Worldwide to
discuss making the FS bureaucracy more
family-friendly.
After a lively discussion of ideas sent in
from all over the world, the AAFSW
forum decided to concentrate on three
areas:
• Improving access to information by
family members, by enabling home computer access to unclassified information
regarding pertinent subjects such as
post reports, training and the availability
of part-time employment.
• Facilitating EFM employment, both
by centrally funding positions from State
and by increasing allowances for professional book shipments and space for
spouses who wish to work from home.
• Creating more humane maternity/
paternity policies for Foreign Service
members and family members.
AAFSW encourages people to continue
to send their ideas for making the
Foreign Service more family-friendly
to Forum Chairs Judy Felt at JaJuFelt@
aol.com and Ann La Porta at a_laporta@
yahoo.com. Please indicate if you would
be willing to work on a committee.
The Foreign Service’s
Poor Cousin
N
E
W
S
It is hard not to feel neglected when compared to State
Department employees. USAID Foreign Service officers, from the start of their
employment, are treated like poor cousins. In spite of the fact that these new employees have been selected from thousands of highly qualified applicants, they are made
to feel lucky to have been offered a job at all. Many
are experiencing real financial hardship, forcing
them to borrow from family and banks just to
survive their Washington stay.
AFSA has been fighting the tendency of the
agency to do business “on the cheap” on the backs
of our employees. While we can point to several successes, much more must be done. For example, due to our advocacy, salaries for entry-level
officers are no longer restricted to the FS- 6, step
1 level, but can be set at step 14, which can translate into as much as a $20,000 increase. We have
also influenced the agency to pay for expenses
involved in the initial interview process in
Many are experiencing
real financial hardship,
forcing them to borrow
from family and banks
just to survive their
Washington stay.
Washington, whereas in the past interviewees “ate
the cost.” In addition, the agency has responded to our requests to restart the Student
Loan Reimbursement Program, which provides thousands of dollars of relief for new
officers burdened by student loans.
All of this is good, of course, but there is still a long way to go to achieve parity
with the State Department. During the USAID town hall meeting on Jan. 7, which
was netcast worldwide, Administrator Henrietta Fore and Gene George, head of human
services, committed the agency to compensation parity with the State Department for
USAID employees. An e-mail question submitted during the event from an FSO in
Liberia pointed out that State Department employees in certain countries were receiving increased differentials in salary through the Difficult to Staff Incentive Differential,
a program no longer available to USAID officers. The administrator expressed her
concern over that inequity and promised to address it. Mr. George stated that USAID
is trying to reinstitute this benefit by summer 2009 at all posts where it is offered by
the State Department.
Do We Have Your
Correct Address?
AFSA Governing Board elections are
coming up, and we'll be sending out
ballots to AFSA members in April.
Please make sure that we have your
correct mailing address. To update
your address, visit us online at www.
afsa.org/addressChange.cfm or send
an e-mail to member@afsa.org.
However, other areas still need attention to bring the agency in line with the State
Department. For example, while State A-100 entry-level officers receive per diem benefits, new USAID officers in the junior officer intake program are denied them. Instead,
the agency provides them with locality pay, justifying this by claiming these new employees are assigned to Washington. In reality, this arrangement saves the agency money
and forces the new officers to subsidize the government during their time here. Given
that we plan to bring in close to 1,000 new officers during the coming years, we need
to change this unfair system. We cannot afford the enormous morale issues engendered by these miserly policies.
The new administration is in a unique position to correct some of these longstanding
problems. In so doing, they can clearly underscore their support for our most valuable asset: human resources.
