It Isn't Just Ambassadorial Appointees Who Are Waiting

You would think that with all that is going on in Ukraine and the need for diplomacy to help keep this from escalating to World War III that our Congress would prioritize, at least for a few minutes, the Foreign Service.

And you would be wrong.

I get it. I have ranted plenty about political appointee ambassadors and how there are too many of them and that some, especially recently, have been, shall we say, underwhelming in the qualifications department.

So I had considered blogging about the recent articles in the Washington Post about the backlog of ambassadorial appointments that are just sitting, waiting for Senate action. But I hadn't done it yet. Because I get it. They want to make a point about the sometimes profoundly unqualified donors selected to be ambassadors to important allies. But I also know they were sitting on career appointees too, who generally (but not always) do know about the countries to which they are headed. This leaves a lot of posts without an ambassador...some 28 ambassadorial vacancies in Central and South America, and 10 of 40 posts in Africa are also waiting. Most of these are not posts given to political appointees. Some of these folks have been waiting for nearly a year, (for the wait times, look here) and for the usually decidedly not wealthy career appointees (a career in government service in NOT a path to wealth unless you are serving in Congress), this means trying to find temporary jobs and housing while they wait. It is expensive for them, hard for posts, hard for the jobs they sit in waiting to leave, hard for our diplomatic relations with those countries....basically, hard for everyone but Congress.

So the post was coming...I just hadn't written it yet.

And then I get an email today from AFSA, the American Foreign Service Assocation, our "union" of sorts (they can bargain for us but we can't strike).

It seems that the Senate is not just sitting on ambassadorial appointments.

According to the email, the Senate is now holding up the commissioning, tenuring and promotions of some 1,700 folks in the Foreign Service. They do say that "progress has been made," but I don't read that as they have actually released the hold.

Come on now people.

We aren't talking about Ambassadors here. We are talking about the average Joes working in the Foreign Service. And for most of these, we are talking about the absolutely most junior diplomats. Commissioning usually happens short after you come on board and finish A-100. Tenuring usually happens within your first three to five years in the Service. It has to happen within five years or you are out (so if Congress holds up approving tenure for these officers too long, people who we want to keep will be forced out). So we aren't talking about folks who have been in a long time. Lots of these folks are sitting in visa mills, making sure people can come visit the U.S. (and spend their money here), making sure you can get home from overseas when your passport is stolen, making sure you are cared for in an overseas hospital or jail should bad things befall you on your trip. They are the lowest ranked, lowest paid of the exceptionally bright and motivated people we bring into the Foreign Service each year.

This seems like a good way to keep them from remaining motivated.

And the promotions? Those can range anywhere from those newly minted diplomats getting administrative promotions to senior Foreign Service. But let me assure you, the numbers of promotions at the upper level pale in comparison to those at the junior and mid-level. (ON EDIT: I was told the promotions are only Senior Foreign Service).

You are hurting solidly middle-class Americans who are deeply devoted to this country and want to serve it.

Stop it.

I Got It!

The tenure cable finally came out. I'm tenured!!

Tenuring Troubles

Yes, I am still waiting. Impatiently. I have been refreshing the ALDACS cable que every few minutes. And sometimes it won't refresh. Maybe between me and all my A-100 classmates, we have broken it.

Like I said before, lots of really good officers don't get it the first time around, and largely for reasons beyond our control. I think that is one of the most frustrating things about this process. They could deny you tenure the first time for not going to Iraq, or not doing our consular work, or doing too much consular work, or having only one boss or not getting a hard language...and we have zero say in whether we get any of that. Our first two tours are directed, completely at the will of the Career Development Officers (CDOs). And yet this decision is made as though we had some part in the decision-making process.

One of my classmates suggested they just tenure everyone who did a good job, since they know they will eventually anyway. A part of me suspects they don't do that because they need to be able to direct people to Iraq or passport duty, and they can't really force tenured officers to go.

The longer it takes, the more edgey I get. It got worse last week when several of my classmates, all of whom I consider good officers deserving of tenure, got emails from their CDOs saying they had been passed over for tenure this time. I am cautiously optimistic because I got an email from my CDO saying I would NOT be getting such an email from her office.

But you never know until the cable is out.

I think I'll go refresh the queue again.

Anticipation

I have been trying to convince myself that I didn't care if I got tenure this time around. In the State Department, tenure is basically the same as in academia. If you have it, it is really really hard to fire you. So its job security basically.

You get considered for tenure at the first tenure board that meets after your 3-year anniversary of service. That was March 4 for my class, and the next tenure board met in late May/early June. But it takes a while, usually a couple of months, for the results to come out.

And for most of that time, I haven't given it a second thought. But now that the tenure cable is due any time now, I can think of little else. In my head, I know that it is quite likely I won't get it the first time around. You have to get it within your first five years or they kick you out, but having what the boards want is like shooting at a moving target. So some of the best officers I have served with did not get tenure the first time around and it had nothing to do with them. Some boards don't give tenure to folks who had long-term language training, some only give it to those with long-term training. And some people just have the misfortune of having bosses who couldn't write their way out of a paper bag, much less do a good job on an EER. So it is a crap shoot.

But that said, I know if I don't get it the first time around, I am going to take it personally. I shouldn't. I know I shouldn't. But I will. And what will be even more depressing is that those who get tenure this time get to go up for promotion immediately. But the promotion board, unlike the tenure board, only meets once a year. Sigh.