Below is the letter I sent to Senators Jim Webb and Mark Warner, and Congressman Gerry Connelly. I used a template provided by AFSA here, via Life After Jerusalem and modified it to make it more personal. I urge all of you to take the time and write in. It's long, I know, but I hope that some staffer will take the time to read it. This isn't ill-will on the part of our leaders in Congress. I honestly believe there's no desire to "stick it to the Foreign Service." This is ignorance. This is a product of our own modesty, as Donna at E-Mails From The Embassy stated so eloquently. DOD and other government agencies don't hesitate to toot their own horns and share their life stories. It's time we do the same.
Dear Rep./Senator:
My name is [Four Globetrotters] and I am a State Department Foreign Service Officer in the United States Foreign Service. I joined the Foreign Service in 2001 and have served in Uganda, Togo, Nigeria and Washington, D.C, and am currently posted in Tunisia. I am also your constituent, and it is in that capacity that I reach out to you now to ask for your help.
I, like all of my colleagues, support efforts to eliminate wasteful and unnecessary spending across all our federal agencies as part of the effort to reduce our national deficit. I understand why we will not be receiving cost of living adjustments over the next two fiscal years. However, I am concerned by current legislative proposals that call for reversing a carefully considered bi-partisan plan to modernize the pay system of the Foreign Service that is in the process of being implemented. I have to assume that it is because our mission and our sacrifices are not sufficiently known to Americans, and even to our own representatives in Congress. To that end, I would like to share part of my story.
I swore in to the Foreign Service two days after graduating from college summa cum laude with a degree in Political Science. I passed on a number of other opportunities because I knew, and have always known, that I wanted to be in the Foreign Service. It was an easy decision for me, after all I was raised in the Foreign Service and followed my parents around the world from the age of three.
I was supposed to fly out to my first post -- Kampala, Uganda -- the afternoon of September 11, 2001. On that day, the world changed, and I changed too. I lost my youthful idealism as I sat on a hill at the National Foreign Affairs Training Center in Arlington, Virginia. I watched the smoke billow from the Pentagon just a few miles away while my suitcases sat next to me -- I had checked out of my hotel early that morning. I knew then, more than ever, that I had to be overseas. It was only through changing the hearts and minds of the world that something like this could be prevented from ever happening again. My colleagues and I embraced this newly defined mission.
Over the course of the past ten years I, like many of my colleagues, have sacrificed, and it is those sacrifices that I would like to share with you. I missed countless school recitals and parent teacher meetings while doing things like accompanying then-Secretary of Treasury Paul O'Neill to an AIDS orphanage or serving as control officer for a CODEL. I feared for my daughter's life as I tried desperately to reach our medical personnel located in another country when she, then one, developed amoebic dysentery and had diapers full of blood. I held my son when he was three years old and had raging nightmares brought about by the mefloquine that we were required to give him to prevent cerebral malaria. I spent months separated from my children when I was dispatched to Sudan to assist the mission there. I celebrated my 30th birthday in Darfur.
I spent my first Christmas in the Foreign Service at the morgue identifying the body of an American citizen who had been killed in a home invasion. I spent another Christmas in the putrid morgues of a small sub-Saharan African country searching frantically for the wife and two children (ages 4 and 7) of an American citizen who had been aboard an aircraft that crashed upon take off. I loaded my children onto a plane bound for Sierra Leone --where my parents were stationed -- when the situation in Togo, my second post, devolved rapidly after the death of President Eyadema. We may actually be the only people ever to evacuate family to Sierra Leone.
When a member of Congress and her staff were abandoned during this unrest at a downtown hotel by their Government of Togo hosts, I was the only American besides my then-husband, the Regional Security Officer, who could drive an armored vehicle. The Ambassador dispatched me, and I drove through barricades and crowds to reach her and her staff and transport them safely to the Embassy. My husband couldn't go because he was off responding to a distress call from one of our Embassy families. Their house was being invaded.
The mother and two children were holed up in the safehaven while a frenzied group of thugs destroyed their home and personal belongings and worked to break into the safehaven where they were hiding. All of us at the Embassy listened as the frantic calls for help came in over the radio, the children crying in the background. My colleague wept as he heard his wife and children, helpless. My husband knew he had to try and help, even though it would come at great personal danger. He arrived at the house, unarmed due to a policy that did not permit him to carry his service weapon, and engaged at least two dozen thugs. Relying on his training as a former marine, he quickly disarmed one person and used that weapon to disperse the remaining looters. There is no doubt in my mind that had it not been for his intervention, the wife would have been raped or worse, and there is no telling what would have happened to the two children. I waited, bordering on hysteria, by the radio to hear that my husband was okay and that our three children would not be left without a father. He rightfully received the State Department's Heroism Award for his actions on that day.
I, like countless of my colleagues, have defended the United States and had close encounters with those who wanted to do us harm. I remember vividly the day I, a second-tour junior officer, gazed across the bullet proof consular window at a young Nigerian man who simply wanted to go the United States to "visit". I determined he did not meet the standards to qualify for a visa to the United States, and denied him. His name was Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a.k.a the underwear bomber.
Most recently, my children and I returned from Morocco where we were safehavened following the uprising in Tunisia. During that uprising three of my colleagues -- a married couple and a single woman -- had their houses looted and both residences are uninhabitable. They lost thousands of dollars of personal property. Those losses are not covered by their insurance. At the height of the revolution, the streets were packed with rioters, soldiers and tanks. Every night for a week my children cowered in a corner listening to the shooting going on around us. There is no 911 over here. If people had chosen to attack our home we -- a single mom with three children -- would have been helpless. Our own armored security vehicles were unable to respond to distress calls. When I was finally able to drive to the Embassy for our evacuation flight, I was stopped at a military check point and had a rifle pointed at my head by an overly eager young soldier.
The Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 was adopted as a way to reduce the government-wide disparity between the public and private sectors and is a basic component of salary for all civilian Federal employees, based on annual survey data collected by the Department of Labor. As a result of this law, every federal government employee working in the United States received “locality pay” as part of their salary. Until 2009, the only United States government civilian employees who did not receive this part of their salary were entry-level and mid-level Foreign Service personnel serving their country overseas. All others, including senior level State Department officers, and other agencies represented overseas, such as CIA officers under State Department cover, DOJ and DHS, have locality pay factored into their base salary.
Locality pay for Foreign Service personnel and other federal employees serving in Washington, D.C. is now approximately 25%. Under the law prior to 2009, Foreign Service personnel serving abroad sacrificed this part of their salaries and took large pay cuts to their base salaries. Those posted in Washington earned more money than colleagues posted in Pakistan, Yemen, and Beirut to name a few. As a result, because retirement packages are based upon base pay (including “locality pay”), Foreign Service officers representing their country abroad received smaller retirement packages than their colleagues who stayed in Washington. This was not sustainable and in 2009 a bi-partisan solution was found to correct this policy problem. Closing the pay gap is not a pay raise -- it is a correction of a 17- year-old unintended inequity in the worldwide Foreign Service pay schedule—an inequity that grew every year.
Today thousands of Foreign Service employees serve in hardship assignments around the globe, which now constitute nearly 60% of all posts. As I write this letter, my colleagues in neighboring Libya, including one colleague who is eight and a half months pregnant, have just evacuated and our Embassy there has been closed. The number of unaccompanied posts has increased more than fivefold in the decade since I took the Foreign Service Officer's oath and received my commission. Our oath is pretty similar to another oath I know you are familiar with:
"I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
Assignments overseas are increasingly challenging, difficult and in many instances, dangerous. There has been strong bipartisan recognition that it is time to invest in diplomacy and development. Penalizing Foreign Service employees -- specifically those of us at the junior and mid-level -- whose mission is to serve overseas to advance and protect our national interests by cutting our base pay undervalues the importance of our work, widens the gap between those of us serving in the United States and those of us facing hardships and sacrifices overseas and creates real disincentives to serving on the front lines of American diplomacy and development.
I am proud to be a public servant and honored to be a member of our State Department Foreign Service. I hope that you will support the Foreign Service and help ensure that we are not penalized for our service overseas.
Sincerely,
Dear Rep./Senator:
My name is [Four Globetrotters] and I am a State Department Foreign Service Officer in the United States Foreign Service. I joined the Foreign Service in 2001 and have served in Uganda, Togo, Nigeria and Washington, D.C, and am currently posted in Tunisia. I am also your constituent, and it is in that capacity that I reach out to you now to ask for your help.
I, like all of my colleagues, support efforts to eliminate wasteful and unnecessary spending across all our federal agencies as part of the effort to reduce our national deficit. I understand why we will not be receiving cost of living adjustments over the next two fiscal years. However, I am concerned by current legislative proposals that call for reversing a carefully considered bi-partisan plan to modernize the pay system of the Foreign Service that is in the process of being implemented. I have to assume that it is because our mission and our sacrifices are not sufficiently known to Americans, and even to our own representatives in Congress. To that end, I would like to share part of my story.
I swore in to the Foreign Service two days after graduating from college summa cum laude with a degree in Political Science. I passed on a number of other opportunities because I knew, and have always known, that I wanted to be in the Foreign Service. It was an easy decision for me, after all I was raised in the Foreign Service and followed my parents around the world from the age of three.
I was supposed to fly out to my first post -- Kampala, Uganda -- the afternoon of September 11, 2001. On that day, the world changed, and I changed too. I lost my youthful idealism as I sat on a hill at the National Foreign Affairs Training Center in Arlington, Virginia. I watched the smoke billow from the Pentagon just a few miles away while my suitcases sat next to me -- I had checked out of my hotel early that morning. I knew then, more than ever, that I had to be overseas. It was only through changing the hearts and minds of the world that something like this could be prevented from ever happening again. My colleagues and I embraced this newly defined mission.
Over the course of the past ten years I, like many of my colleagues, have sacrificed, and it is those sacrifices that I would like to share with you. I missed countless school recitals and parent teacher meetings while doing things like accompanying then-Secretary of Treasury Paul O'Neill to an AIDS orphanage or serving as control officer for a CODEL. I feared for my daughter's life as I tried desperately to reach our medical personnel located in another country when she, then one, developed amoebic dysentery and had diapers full of blood. I held my son when he was three years old and had raging nightmares brought about by the mefloquine that we were required to give him to prevent cerebral malaria. I spent months separated from my children when I was dispatched to Sudan to assist the mission there. I celebrated my 30th birthday in Darfur.
I spent my first Christmas in the Foreign Service at the morgue identifying the body of an American citizen who had been killed in a home invasion. I spent another Christmas in the putrid morgues of a small sub-Saharan African country searching frantically for the wife and two children (ages 4 and 7) of an American citizen who had been aboard an aircraft that crashed upon take off. I loaded my children onto a plane bound for Sierra Leone --where my parents were stationed -- when the situation in Togo, my second post, devolved rapidly after the death of President Eyadema. We may actually be the only people ever to evacuate family to Sierra Leone.
When a member of Congress and her staff were abandoned during this unrest at a downtown hotel by their Government of Togo hosts, I was the only American besides my then-husband, the Regional Security Officer, who could drive an armored vehicle. The Ambassador dispatched me, and I drove through barricades and crowds to reach her and her staff and transport them safely to the Embassy. My husband couldn't go because he was off responding to a distress call from one of our Embassy families. Their house was being invaded.
The mother and two children were holed up in the safehaven while a frenzied group of thugs destroyed their home and personal belongings and worked to break into the safehaven where they were hiding. All of us at the Embassy listened as the frantic calls for help came in over the radio, the children crying in the background. My colleague wept as he heard his wife and children, helpless. My husband knew he had to try and help, even though it would come at great personal danger. He arrived at the house, unarmed due to a policy that did not permit him to carry his service weapon, and engaged at least two dozen thugs. Relying on his training as a former marine, he quickly disarmed one person and used that weapon to disperse the remaining looters. There is no doubt in my mind that had it not been for his intervention, the wife would have been raped or worse, and there is no telling what would have happened to the two children. I waited, bordering on hysteria, by the radio to hear that my husband was okay and that our three children would not be left without a father. He rightfully received the State Department's Heroism Award for his actions on that day.
I, like countless of my colleagues, have defended the United States and had close encounters with those who wanted to do us harm. I remember vividly the day I, a second-tour junior officer, gazed across the bullet proof consular window at a young Nigerian man who simply wanted to go the United States to "visit". I determined he did not meet the standards to qualify for a visa to the United States, and denied him. His name was Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a.k.a the underwear bomber.
Most recently, my children and I returned from Morocco where we were safehavened following the uprising in Tunisia. During that uprising three of my colleagues -- a married couple and a single woman -- had their houses looted and both residences are uninhabitable. They lost thousands of dollars of personal property. Those losses are not covered by their insurance. At the height of the revolution, the streets were packed with rioters, soldiers and tanks. Every night for a week my children cowered in a corner listening to the shooting going on around us. There is no 911 over here. If people had chosen to attack our home we -- a single mom with three children -- would have been helpless. Our own armored security vehicles were unable to respond to distress calls. When I was finally able to drive to the Embassy for our evacuation flight, I was stopped at a military check point and had a rifle pointed at my head by an overly eager young soldier.
The Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 was adopted as a way to reduce the government-wide disparity between the public and private sectors and is a basic component of salary for all civilian Federal employees, based on annual survey data collected by the Department of Labor. As a result of this law, every federal government employee working in the United States received “locality pay” as part of their salary. Until 2009, the only United States government civilian employees who did not receive this part of their salary were entry-level and mid-level Foreign Service personnel serving their country overseas. All others, including senior level State Department officers, and other agencies represented overseas, such as CIA officers under State Department cover, DOJ and DHS, have locality pay factored into their base salary.
Locality pay for Foreign Service personnel and other federal employees serving in Washington, D.C. is now approximately 25%. Under the law prior to 2009, Foreign Service personnel serving abroad sacrificed this part of their salaries and took large pay cuts to their base salaries. Those posted in Washington earned more money than colleagues posted in Pakistan, Yemen, and Beirut to name a few. As a result, because retirement packages are based upon base pay (including “locality pay”), Foreign Service officers representing their country abroad received smaller retirement packages than their colleagues who stayed in Washington. This was not sustainable and in 2009 a bi-partisan solution was found to correct this policy problem. Closing the pay gap is not a pay raise -- it is a correction of a 17- year-old unintended inequity in the worldwide Foreign Service pay schedule—an inequity that grew every year.
Today thousands of Foreign Service employees serve in hardship assignments around the globe, which now constitute nearly 60% of all posts. As I write this letter, my colleagues in neighboring Libya, including one colleague who is eight and a half months pregnant, have just evacuated and our Embassy there has been closed. The number of unaccompanied posts has increased more than fivefold in the decade since I took the Foreign Service Officer's oath and received my commission. Our oath is pretty similar to another oath I know you are familiar with:
"I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
Assignments overseas are increasingly challenging, difficult and in many instances, dangerous. There has been strong bipartisan recognition that it is time to invest in diplomacy and development. Penalizing Foreign Service employees -- specifically those of us at the junior and mid-level -- whose mission is to serve overseas to advance and protect our national interests by cutting our base pay undervalues the importance of our work, widens the gap between those of us serving in the United States and those of us facing hardships and sacrifices overseas and creates real disincentives to serving on the front lines of American diplomacy and development.
I am proud to be a public servant and honored to be a member of our State Department Foreign Service. I hope that you will support the Foreign Service and help ensure that we are not penalized for our service overseas.
Sincerely,
Beautifully written and I thank you for sharing. I would like to link to this if you don't mind.
ReplyDeletethank you for writing and sending this. incredibly moving. I have goosebumps from your many harrowing FS stories - the skirt suit story pales in comparison! let's see if we can educate some Congresspeople about the work the FS does!
ReplyDeletePlease feel free. Write your story too! We need to educate congress.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Sadie. The skirt suit story is pretty good. I have a couple more to share when I start feeling funny again. :) The Foreign Service provides awesome opportunities for compiling them, that's for sure!
ReplyDeleteExcellent letter and amazing history. Thanks for sharing.
ReplyDeleteI am a new FSO (in A-100) and I am in awe of the challenges you have overcome and your service to the US! Thank you so much for sharing!
ReplyDeleteLoved it! Most FSO's have moving stories of what we have missed and sacrificed for our service and we need to share them. Your examples are first-rate. Will steal large parts for my own letter to Congress. You didn't even mention all we went through during Darfur Peace Talks in Abuja! I'll put that one in my own letter.
ReplyDeleteBeautifully written. Thank you for sharing and I have also written my senators. Thank you too, for your service.
ReplyDeleteThat is one bad ass letter. I hope they read it. I really do! Great job!
ReplyDeleteYou should forward this to as many people as possible--just wonderfully written!
ReplyDeleteI sincerely hope someone reads your letter!!
ReplyDeleteYou are amazing.
ReplyDeleteYou amaze me. You have really been through a lot.
ReplyDeleteWow - what a life story! If it's okay, I'm going to post it on my blog and link back to you. I am humbled by all you have done for your country.
ReplyDeletePlease feel free. Best regards, FG
ReplyDeleteI can't stop thinking about this letter after reading it yesterday. I truly can't believe what you've been through. Surely a nice quiet post is in order? (I know...that's what Tunis was supposed to be...). And I can't fathom the courage of your ex to go in and take on those thugs. Thank you to both of you for your service.
ReplyDeleteDear Four Trotters:
ReplyDeleteWith due respect and appreciation for your work abroad, I too have been working overseas for much of the last decade, except for US-based humanitarian organizations. Almost all of my time has been in some of the worst places in sub-Saharan Africa, such as DR Congo, Chad and Uganda.
Working for an NGO, my pay is a fraction of yours, as a foreign service officer. I have no pension, no gold-plated retirement, and a paltry amount of annual vacation compared to yours. I don't even have the job-for-life security you have as a Foreign Service Officer; due to politics at the highest level of the aid game, my organization lost its funding in an area we are desperately needed, and thus after having to lay off our local staff, I am now unemployed.
During my time abroad, I have encountered many of your Foreign Service Officer peers, and have always been amazed at the standard of living Uncle Sam provides for them (individual housing, allowed to bring their families -who else gets to bring their family to Kinshasa-, educational allowances to send your kids to swanky private international schools, numerous other benefits) while I have always slummed it in a team house with 5-14 other expats I barely knew, sacrificing friendships and relationships to work for something I believed in. My previous job would barely allow me to get married and live together with my special Mrs, let alone have three toddlers follow me around the globe like yours does. And I won't even talk about how the first $85k of your salary is TAX FREE.
Like you, I have been in dangerous situations, have had soldiers' guns pointed at me on numerous occasions, have survived tropical diseases, infections, horrible living conditions and (when I had my job that paid a fraction of yours) I still loved it, came to work with a smile each day, committed to the cause I was working for, bettering the lives of the citizens of the country I was working in.
I know you wow the crowd on this website with your war stories, but being an expat aid working, I call a spade a spade. I know what happened to you is par for the course, when you sign up for the line of work you are in. I have equally compelling stories that I'll keep in the closet unless you really want to get into one of those pissing contests about whose-is-bigger-than-whose. You know as well as I do that in the overseas aid/foreign service job spectrum, the Foreign Service is about the best paying government job there is. You want to see who has it tough? Go talk to the MSF crowd, who get paid about $1500/month or maybe the local missionaries, who have been in those hardship locations for longer than you have been alive, working for free to promote God and Western interests.
While I'm not quite at that level, I've done it almost as long as you have, for less, in worse conditions. And it is my taxpayer dollars that are paying YOUR salary. We're all underpaid, but please don't tell me you need more money.
Indeed, go back to your roots, and the idealism, which is presumably what drove you to the Foreign Service. You talk out one side of your mouth about being a defender of our interests but your next breath is "more money, better pension....." Something just doesn't compute. And when I look at the state of our deficit and our national debt and you crying out for more money from your posh overseas job, I hope you understand why I am against it.
Mr./Ms Cabot you're wrong that the first $85K of an FSO's salary is tax-free. As a Federal Government direct hire, all of their salary is taxable.
DeleteCabot: Greetings and welcome. Thanks for stopping by to share your thoughts.
ReplyDeleteI understand where you are coming from -- your experience is certainly different than ours. I believe the issue here, at least for me, isn't that we aren't paid well enough. The issue here is that the rules are not applied uniformly across the board for all federal employees. I say either we all get locality pay factored into our salaries, or none of us do. That's fair. But right now the only group excluded are junior and mid-level foreign service officers serving overseas and it has long-term implications for our retirements. That is not fair.
And you're right. I chose this job -- with all of its benefits and sacrifices. And you chose yours. You are happy with your choice and I am happy with mine. No one is asking for a whose is bigger than whose competition. I have a lot of respect for the NGO crowd and what it is you do. Over the course of my career I've been fortunate enough to work with a number of them.
But just to correct one quick thing from your response, I'm not sure who told you we don't pay taxes, but NONE of our salary is tax-exempt. I receive a W-2 and pay taxes on my entire salary, just like everyone else. I also contribute to social security and medicare. Additionally, I'm on the hook for state taxes.
All the best to you wherever you are, FG
Hi FG -
ReplyDeleteIf it were me, I'd trim all federal employees to your level, instead of the opposite. I know within the USA, I am nobody, and my opinions certainly won't be popular, but looking at the horrific state of our government debt, its what we have to do. The alternative may be a Wisconsin-style situation, nation-wide. Federal government employees do not realize how fortunate they have been, especially in the last recession. Unfortunately the gravy train is coming to an end, its either that or out nation hits a financial wall.
You won't get far complaining to me or most other Americans about your pension & retirement benefits - as our 401ks have been decimated and we'll probably have to work well into our 70s to afford a meager retirement. Sorry, thats just the way it is. Social Security will be bankrupt by the time you and I get there, medicare likewise, and quite possibly the country as well.
Step into the real world, to see how the rest of us are living. You were very fortunate, to have been hired by the Foreign Service straight out of college....a rock solid government job, complete with generous benefits that you can hold literally until the day you retire.
What others jobs have you worked? Have you ever dealt with issues that people in the private sector such as the foreclosure crisis, company wage cuts or bankruptcy. You write a very eloquent essay about small tweaks to a gold-plated pension you have coming......I've been contributing 15% or more to various 401ks for over a decade and at the rate it is going, it'll be barely able to feed my cat.
No disrespect intended....I just have seen first hand the lifestyle a Foreign Service Officer salary affords. If the biggest problem in your life is a small change to your pension plan, then you are a very fortunate person. Either that, or go back to Washington and deal with the endless layers of bureaucracy that we expats love to despise.
Good luck to us both.
C
The first $85,000 being tax free is for those overseas NOT WORKING FOR THE US GOVT, but on the local economy. Those of us overseas for Uncle Sam pay the same taxes, on the entire salary, as if we were in the states.
ReplyDeleteI have to say, I am with Cabot. Even if he got some of the facts wrong, I think the general idea is right. All of us who work overseas in unstable places have stories - and I try to keep mine quiet, because why I do what I do is not to impress people with what dangers I have faced. I have also made another sacrifice, as Cabot points out - I do not have children, because I have chosen this life, and it is not possible to take them into such places safely.
ReplyDeleteThe bottom line is, though, that, at least where I work in Afghanistan, the high pay given to foreign workers of any type hurts their image, and this applies not only to FSO. Locals know how many of the foreigners make huge paychecks, and they are acutely aware of their own poverty and that of their countrymen. The pay rate for a local and a foreigner working in the same office can differ by several thousand dollars monthly. It is referred to as hardship pay or danger pay or whatever - but people living there put up with hardship and danger every day, and the US does have some fault in this situation.
All in all, I think it would be more appropriate, rather than appearing to ask for more money, you ask that locality pay be done away with.
Cabot - you are free to take the FS exam!
ReplyDeleteGreat letter to Congress and response to Cabot.
ReplyDeleteThere seem to be some misconceptions in regard to "Gold-plated retirement" and "Job for life" and especially the unmentioned "first 85K being TAXFREE" That applied to you, Cabot. - not the FSO's working overseas.
ReplyDeleteFourGlobeTrotters also pointed out that number of unaccompanied posts has increased 5-fold overseas - that means leaving your family behind.
Cabot,
ReplyDeleteI know that I won't change your opinion, but it is important to understand what Comparability Pay is, and how it is calculated.
Contrary to what you might believe, the U.S. Government is not the highest paying employer in the US. Federal salaries are set by OPM at the 60th and 70th percentiles, depending on skill code. That mean that, in the US, between 60 and 70 percent of private-sector employees with similar job descriptions earn less than we do, and 30 to 40 percent earn more than we do, sometimes much more. Those salaries are based on an annual survey conducted by the Department of Labor, and are reset annually based on that survey. That means that 2011 salaries are based on a survey of 2010 private-sector salaries actually paid to private-sector employees, regardless of our recession.
Prior to 1990, Federal employees were paid much less. One result was that the quality of government work, and government workers, was not ideal. Comparability Pay (pay comparable to private sector employees) was conceived as a way to attract more qualified people to government service and to keep them in government service as they rose through the ranks. That Comparability Pay is what keeps the federal pay schedule at the 60th to 70th percentile. Comparability Pay is based on an annual survey conducted by the Department of Labor, and again, is reset annually. 2011 Comparability Pay rates are based on actual 2010 private sector salaries, not on some idealized pre-recession utopian ideal.
As for pensions, since 1986, Federal pensions are based roughly one third on TSP (our 401k), one third on Social Security, and one third on a defined benefit pension. Our defined benefit pension is based on our 60 to 70th percentile salaries, and is calculated more or less exactly the same way private sector companies do it. Our TSP (401k) has gone down just as much as many private 401ks, and many government employees have had, as you say, to put off their retirements because they don't have the money to retire. And our social security is the same as your social security. If yours goes bankrupt, so does ours.
And all of that is moot to the question of OCP. The real question is not: Should government employees be paid more than you are, Cabot, but rather, should employees who work overseas be paid less than employees working in the US. More importantly, should employees who work for agencies whose mission is overseas, be paid less for doing what they were hired to do (work overseas), than for working at headquarters? And should the 13000 FS members working overseas be paid less than their 2.75 million Federal counterparts across the United States?
A applaud those who wrote that they have put off having kids, or chosen to work for less because of their own idealism, but it is unrealistic to expect most people to do so. Nobody joins the Government to get rich, but government employees are no less deserving of the right to raise a family, or to fair compensation, than any other American.
FG: Great letter. I hope many others follow suit. There is also a template on my AFSA webpage.
Best regards,
Daniel Hirsch
AFSA VP
This is such a powerful essay. I would love to see similar contributions from soldiers, nurses, doctors, teachers, firemen, policemen, farmers, fishermen, foresters, workmen, waitresses, pilots, professionals, garbage collectors, grocery clerks, .....representative of so many US citizens devoted to and proud of the work they do, shamed and sorrowed by the image of Americans shared by so many today.
ReplyDeleteOur foreign invasions and misadventures followed by Wall Street's financial crisis made our country look like a gaggle of greedy, self-serving morons. It is wonderful to see this profile of active, dedicated people
Hi 4Globetrotters, or Daniel Hirsch:
ReplyDeleteCould you provide me figures as to the pay AND benefits for someone in the foreign service, at the 1, 5, 10, 20, and 30 year level.
Here was my salary as a humanitarian aid worker in sub-Saharan Africa, from the middle of the last decade until this past summer:
Background: Me = BA with Honours from a respected liberal arts college (equivalent to some extent to your BA Summa Cum Laude, although my particular college didn't give those fancy latin designations to graduates). Had five years of work experience in a field stateside before that work experience qualified me to became an aid worker....
Pay: Initially $1800/month, rose to $2500/month, then $2800/month, and eventually ~$4300/month, when I was promoted to site manager, overseeing our entire project operation (this was only for a very brief period of time). At that point, I was responsible for a staff of over 50 local and expat staff, achieving program objectives, dealing with oversees authorities as an organizational representative, reporting to headquarters, and ultimate decision making of numerous other tasks regarding our day-to-day operation such as security, HR, finance, etc....
Benefits: Fully paid medical plan, 4% company match on 403B plan. Meals provided at team house. Occasionally depending on location I was provided with a perdiem of between $6 and $15 per day. 1 roundtrip ticket to my US home per year.
Living conditions: Was provided with a room in a team house.
Other benefits: One week R&R every three months (organization provided plane ticket up to a certain amount I want to say $600) and a small daily allowance.
I am curious as to how what you make stacks up to what I made.
I have read through your blog some, and followed some links you provided to like-minded blogs. Though they all resonate with that same "pay us more" theme - ALL are short on specifics and figures of what you guys are actually making. So put your cards on the table so we can know what type of salary an FSO actually makes....from pay to benefits to housing allowance to perdiems to school allowance to plane tickets for your family to retirement contributions to medical insurance.
Cabot
An entry level FSO starts at about 35-40,000 dollars a year, and the highest level, for those who do not become ambassadors or enter the Senior Foreign Service (i.e. for most people) maxes out at 130,000 overseas or 160,000 domestically. It is difficult to say what salary would be on different yearly milestones, because FS members get promoted at different rates, and a number top out at the FS-03 level, roughly 80,000 per year after a 20-25-year career. Typically, for one to start at the bottom and rise to the top, as I did, takes 20-30 years. There are plenty of FS members better-educated than you, and with more experience, who earn about what you earned when you were a manager. Unlike you, we do not get a fully paid medical plan. A typical FS member contributes about 350 dollars a month for a family plan. Unlike you, we do not get paid meals. We pay for our own meals. We do get housing, which typically ranges from a 1000 sq ft apartment to a 1800 sq ft house, though it can be a bunk in a two-person modified shipping container or a hotel room in a run-down hotel. I spent six months of a tour in a hotel where, in a Central Asian winter (below freezing for four months straight) there was no hot water, and the warmest spot in the room was inside the refrigerator. I slept fully clothed, in my overcoat, under a quilt. I showered at the embassy. We do not get per diem, except when we are traveling on a short-term TDY. Employees in a hardship post get one R and R every two years, and in Afganistan, Iraq and Pakistan (only), they get what you got. With regard to TSP (401k), the government matches our contributions up to 5% of salary. Incidentally, the UN, the World Bank and many other international organizations get salaries and benefits nearly identical to ours.
ReplyDeleteOur salaries and benefits are public knowledge, published in the Federal Register, on OPM's website, and here, among other places:
http://www.state.gov/m/dghr/pay/
http://www.careers.state.gov/officer/benefits
Once again, however, this is not about how our salaries stack up to yours, but rather about how our salaries stack up to those of our fellow USG professionals, including those who are in every way identical to the FS members serving overseas, except that they are working domestically. More precisely, it is about how FS members serving overseas are the only (repeat: the only) civilian USG employees who do not get a salary component that every other (repeat: every other) federal employee, without any other exceptions, receives.
FG: Sorry to hijack your blog. I'm bowing out of this dialogue, at least on your blog.
I fail to see how what you made is relevant to whether public servants working abroad should make the same or less as public servants working in the US. However similar some of your experiences have been to that of the blog owners, the fact remains that you work for very different organizations with very different budgets and mandates, and cannot expect that pay scales are similar.
ReplyDeleteAs well, while you may be comfortable with the choice of forgoing having a partner and children, many people are not. If employment in the foreign service were to be conditional on not having a family, it would very quickly become difficult if not impossible to find qualified, interested candidates for the job.
Cabot,
ReplyDeleteI just stumbled across the page tonight and see your posts. I am not an FSO, but honor the work they -and you- do.
But the point isn't "who makes what," it's Job A in the US is paid XX% more than Job A in a foreign environment. That is the part that's not fair.
Fine if you believe everyone makes too much, but this isn't about that. It's about equal pay for equal work in the same organization. The other conversation is one to be had with your congressman about how you feel that A) there are too many government employees and B) pay should go down across the board -- an admirable position, to be sure in many parts of government.
Thank-you very much for this post, it was forwarded to me by my political science professor, though I think now I will start going back through your previous posts. I'm a college junior who aspires to work for the foreign service. This post has given more insight into a life of an officer than anything I've found in websites and brochures, its very sobering, but at the same time inspires me and solidifies my resolve that I want this kind of career. I hope your letter truly reached someone in congress and I look forward to reading future posts.
ReplyDeleteI think you are a bit off target here Cabot. I'm more than willing to give up my locality pay. I just want everyone else to do so too.
ReplyDeleteCabot,
ReplyDeleteI would argue that most aren't saying "pay us more." They are saying make it fair. You are right that choosing aid work over government work has its costs and its benefits. I think there are few jobs that offer as much in the way of true satisfaction as the road you have chosen. I commend you for it. I am sure that it is frustrating to be laid off right as your hard work and education is finally paying off. NGO/non profit work can pay very little for so long and is often fickle because of funding. I am sorry that you have had to deal with being laid off right as your sacrifices were finally paying off in a more monetary manner. The beginning/upper pay disparity seemed quite stark to me in non profit/NGO work. It is such a hard field to find a living wage in until you get up pretty high. (It does have its share of overpaid consultants too.) I hope you are able to find something else soon.
Personally, I have no problem with the US gov't making cuts to my husband's pay. We have lived on far less (working for a domestic non profit where management made far more than other workers). However, the issue that I see and that I think others see is that simply cutting overseas pay to FSOs is no more than a hat trick. It does not really solve the problem. As suggested, I think writing your reps makes a lot of sense. Let them know how you feel. I care about my country and I am fine with a pay cut if it is part of a comprehensive plan to cut federal pay across the board and truly reduce spending long term. Congress also needs to reign in its own costs quite a bit before it rails on overcompensated federal employees.
Perhaps the stories shared may seem a bit overboard. I think some FSOs and their families are using this as a chance to educate. The American public is very uninformed about what the diplomatic corps does. I'd encourage you to also educate the public about what you do. The funding has to come from somewhere and I know I am more likely to give to an org when I know what is happening on the ground. We don't live like many aid workers, true (though some aid workers with a great deal of education and experience are well compensated monetarily). We also don't live like expat businesspeople. I think that Congress tends to see us more in the expat businessperson range, which is incorrect. Again, thanks for your service. I hope you find something else soon. If working for the federal government looks like something you'd be interested in, USAID might be a good fit for you. If not, I wish you luck in your chosen field.
Just wanted to inform you that I linked to your post on my blog.
ReplyDeletehttp://webtexans.wordpress.com/2011/02/28/writing-my-senator/
To "Anonymous" who would be willing to give up locality pay, but wants everyone else to as well. As my first boss once said, "worry about yourself and keep your nose out of other people's business." I would help you good people fight the good fight here, but not if you're going to whine like a little baby that your sibling got more candy than you. Grow up.
ReplyDeleteAll, I think the point is that for those of us who have some familiarity with the perks that FSOs receive, I guess in my book the paid housing alone could be that gapfiller between the US-based and overseas based officers. When you look at total compensation--which I think Cabot was inviting us all to do above--some might not automatically agree that overseas folks are paid less than us-based folks. Thus, wouldn't agree with the basics of the argument. I am totally open to being surprised, and concluding that FSOs overseas are indeed paid less. But my perspective on it right now is that is not the case.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Cabot. All USG servants need a pay cut and to live more closely with middle class Americans abroad.
ReplyDeleteI'm an American and worked for an Embassy. I was qualified well beyond my FSO superiors and was compensated a tiny (emphasize: TINY) fraction of what they were because I was hired locally and was not hired through the FSO process. I did the job because I thought it was interesting even though Uncle Sam raped (emphasize: raped) me economically.
Let's face it: you can say that salaries overseas are lower than in the U.S. But the only place I've ever been able to save money is when posted overseas with my free housing, free utilities, and the host of other overseas benefits. My pay may go up when I'm in the U.S., but my true income goes way, way down.
ReplyDeleteWell I really have nothing to add except the person that was held up in that house was our replacements, a Marine family that was on MSG Duty. I don't begrudge anyone what they get paid for the hardships or sacrifices of living and or fighting overseas like my husband does, lots of my friends do and his pay raise was the lowest since the 1970's this year. I think what FG is trying to do is let people know what it is the State Dept folks actually do overseas. Most Americans know what military does, I would bet most don't have a clue what SD does or NGO's..
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous:
ReplyDeleteIt seems a bit strange to me that you would write that Uncle Sam raped you economically. Really? Did you not enter into a work agreement (contract) of your own free will? Could you not have asked about anything affecting your economic well being? Isn't it your responsibility to do your homework before entering into any agreement?
I really appreciate the thoughtful conversation here and am grateful for the contributions of Cabot to the discussion. As a Foreign Service officer, I appreciate both the perks that sharing facilities with military colleagues provides (such as access to a commissary when the local market is insufficient or use of the military post office) and the challenges that other expats without the same support network must face.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I think it is worth noting that there are many reasons why people in the NGO community don't join the State or USAID Foreign Service, even when they are perfectly capable of doing so. My expat and journalist friends realize as well as I do that being a diplomat forces one to give up many freedoms, and they wouldn't take my job for any salary. As diplomats, we live in a no-man's land, in homes that are not our own, in countries where we don't belong. We must get special permission to visit friends in foreign countries, and it isn't always granted. We are targeted by terrorist groups and hostile intelligence services everywhere we go. We are not free to choose our own words or even the furniture we sleep on. We live our entire lives on duty; overseas, a diplomat's workday never ends. For every benefit one receives form the Embassy support system, there is a cost.
If these sound like minor struggles, I exhort you to join the Foreign Service. We need talented people from all backgrounds - from office management to communications strategy to information systems - who can handle the challenging lifestyle. Just keep in mind - you must go where the Foreign Service needs you, which isn't always where you or your family wants to be. You must stay in places you hate and leave the places you love. You will probably take a significant pay cut. But you will serve your nation in ways you cannot begin to imagine. There is no job description that captures the responsibilities you may have, from conducting tedious but critical visa interviews to demanding protection for religious minorities, usually in a foreign language. You do not yet know the names of the diseases you and your children will be exposed to, nor of the inspirational figures you will meet.
Cabot and others know that there is more to living a satisfying life than getting paid well - otherwise there would not be so many upstanding Americans who give up their lives to work overseas for causes they believe in. It is an honor to serve my country, and I would gladly do it for less pay. What I really want is to know that the sacrifices I have made in my personal and professional life are valued by Congress and my compatriots - even if I wield a pen and not a gun, even if my uniform is a suit.
Amazing post and I am really enjoying following the conversation in the comments. I linked to this post on Cyberbones@blogspot.com If you would like me to remove the link, I will.
ReplyDeleteI've quoted you and linked to you here: http://consul-at-arms2.blogspot.com/2011/02/re-my-letter-to-congress-regarding.html
ReplyDeleteThe quotes of one of the Anonymi above applies not only to the Anonymous American FSN referred to in the comment, but also to all members of this debate. From that comment:
ReplyDelete"Did you not enter into a work agreement (contract) of your own free will? Could you not have asked about anything affecting your economic well being? Isn't it your responsibility to do your homework before entering into any agreement?"
FSOs and other overseas Americans can ask themselves the same questions. We do the work because we think it's interesting more probably than seeking a pay check, although the picture at the header of this blog seems to indicate a fondness at least for some of "the good life." The pay check is nice, but depending on our employer and the circumstances of our employment, some are paid more, and much more, than others. FSOs are probably near the top of the food chain, so it irks others when FSOs complain about cuts to their taxpayer-funded compensation while other Americans are slogging out an uncertain living doing something that they equally love for equally good reasons for very unequal compensation (and in many cases paying for the lifestyles of the privileged USG Americans in the country through U.S. taxation).
With all due respect, it sounds a bit pretentious to say that FSOs want recognition for their overseas sacrifices, as many people sacrifice more for less "recognition" (ie pay) such as humanitarian workers, missionaries, enlisted soldiers, etc. FSOs have a powerful lobby in Washington, so probably they have an edge over other well-meaning Americans overseas. When will missionaries be able to complain about a proposed cut in their gold-plated pensions? Or humanitarian workers be able to complain about not being able to send their kids to hyper-elite international schools? Or locally based Americans complain about not having a business class round trip return ticket back to the United States every year? Unfortunately, from each according to their abilities and to each according to their needs has already been determined to be un-American so it's no use arguing along those lines.
So, in conclusion, accept your place in the hierarchy of overseas Americans as the world is not fair and so is compensation for overseas Americans.
I just retired from the FS after only 12 years (second career) due to poor supervisors resulting in limited promotion. As a former military member, working for the FS doubled my pay. Overseas assignments allowed me to actually pay off my townhouse (in VA) and pay for a new vehicle. A few of the blog comments are dead on - Education Allowance (private school anyone?), free housing, transfer allowances, danger pay, hardship pay, COLA...it all adds up. My primary complaint was the disparity not between DC and overseas, but between singles and married-with-children.
ReplyDeleteI too chose not to have children and as a singleton, felt many blows dealt to single employees from those of married-with-children, from watching them get bigger/better houses with pools, to vacation time,,,,hey, you're single, so we get first dibs on June/July vacation time!
All in all, FS life to me was what I expected and I loved living overseas. So if you CHOSE to join the FS, then live with the choice. Yes, DC and overseas are different pay scales. To that I add - do your domestic tour and get your turn at long hours, long commutes, and crisis action duty. Then, get over yourself.
FG,
ReplyDeleteBeautiful. Thank you :)
This was an AMAZING post. Thank you so much for writing it. I have stolen some of it and re-posted it, and I just wanted you to know:
ReplyDeletehttp://adaringadventure.typepad.com/blog/2011/03/a-call-for-more-transparency-let-the-heroic-courageous-gripping-stories-be-told.html
Thank you, again, and peace to you.
I wonder if the same people calling for State Department cuts are willing to cut the pay of our military leaders? Having spent time overseas on military bases, I know that Colonels and up get a private car and driver issued to them, a very posh house, free travel, etc. etc., but nobody seems to mind about this.
ReplyDeleteAs another poster mentioned, a lot of NGO workers would not willingly join State for any price because you must give up so much freedom, not just in where you live, but WHAT YOU SAY. You can't just state your opinion, you have to toe the line and repeat policy, even if you don't agree. I don't imagine a lot of missionaries would be willing to do that.
As for this post, it made me cry. I only wish the public was as aware of the acts of heroism by FS personnel as they are by the military and other service members. These stories definitely need to be heard!
I don't really know much about this particular subject. I apologize and I will rectify the situation.
ReplyDeleteI have read your (along with many other FSO and their families) blogs as preparation for my husband taking exams and hopefully entering the foreign service.
It was wonderful to read a very honest letter about the good and hard parts. Thank You for sharing. I hope me and my family can make a difference as you have.
This was an excellent post and my introduction to this blog. As a third-tour officer now in DC after two hardship posts that weren't so hard, I'm very torn on this issue. I understand the pay disparity between agencies overseas and between FSOs at post vs. in DC...but honestly, I can't bring myself to get that worked up about it.
ReplyDeleteLike some of the commentators mentioned, we are not exactly slumming it overseas. I managed to save $25,000 in ONE year during my FIRST tour without even trying, simply by NOT having to pay for housing. I've been in DC for the past year, and my savings rate is negative some months. My rent is $1850 for a modest apartment smaller than the lamest ELO digs, plus another $200 or so in utilities. All services, from dental to veterinary to beauty, are more expensive than at my two Asian posts. Yes, I love living down the street from Whole Foods -- I did have some favorite-food-deprivation hissy fits overseas...but we didn't join the FS to have access to an olive bar and imported cheese everywhere we go, right?
In other words, I cannot wait until my next assignment. I would gladly have my paycheck shrink a few hundred dollars each month in order to have my actual disposable income increase by $2000 a month. Yeah, I know I'll get the worst house in the housing pool because I'm single and do not have kids. It'll still be better than what I can afford in DC. Yeah, I know I'll probably always be single unless I find the magic unicorn that is the man who is willing to toss his career aside in order to be a trailing spouse. Or maybe I'd still be destined to be a crazy cat lady even if I permanently settled in one city.
The work is amazing and I'd do it for less pay. The fact that I don't HAVE to do it for less leaves me eternally grateful. And I don't think ill of my colleagues from other parts of the government who may be keeping their DC locality pay while overseas, because more likely than not, they will have only one or two overseas assignments in their entire careers. Meanwhile, after a few more tours, I'll be able to buy a DC-area home IN CASH.
Perhaps my experience is skewed by being at posts where US diplomats were by far the most coddled and well compensated of expats and widely derided for walling themselves off from the local community. Perhaps I'd feel differently if I were to be posted in Europe or Dubai or someplace with a high concentration of six-figure businesspeople. Even then, I STILL wouldn't be paying for housing, so I would still be faring better than staying in DC.
Thank you for reading an opposing view.
at the risk of sounding like a commie and losing my security clearance, S - O - L - I - D - A - R - I - T - Y, people! The battle here is not between NGOs and FSOs; nor between young single FSOs who are delighted to longer be interns and middle aged FSOs whose spouses haven't found a decent job for 3 tours and whose mortgages back in the Fairfax County are very real even when they're out of the US; nor between State and its cousin agencies.
ReplyDeleteThe battle is between those Americans who have ppts and those who do not. Between those who mistakenly believe we spend 50% of the US budget on foreign aid and those who know the real figure is <1%. Between those who are afraid of the world and those who want to live in all of it. This discussion is interesting, but we're losing the forest for the trees.
The only issue I have with this, is that if DOS employees get the especial pay, so should the rest of USG employees overseas. DOD employees make great sacrifices too.
ReplyDeleteI am impressed by your service. I also think you should have parity with your colleagues.
ReplyDeleteAs for the comment about how you are doing what you want to do and don't have to face foreclosure or bankruptcy, I am sorry, having been through bankruptcy and foreclosure, I would much rather have gone through that than have had to live in fear of rape or death or having my children cower from the sound of nearby gunfire.
The economy sucks, but people shouldn't be punished for doing their jobs.
Cabot raises some interesting points, but is the essay's underlying point undermined by the fact that there are people working for non-profits abroad for low wages, or that there are missionaries working for free? At my law school, despite the recession, the median starting salary for new graduates is still $160,000/yr, and that's before bonuses. Alumni as law partners in relatively lifestyle-friendly firms are earning $400,000 a year or more, corporate counsel $200,000 or more. (not to mention the small number of partners in the sweatshop firms making millions)
ReplyDeleteIn the scheme of things, as a law student in a top-10 school, an editor of the flagship law review, and near-native fluent in an SCNL (S-4) -- a career in the future with State still seems like an attractive option. On the one hand, I could be doing business transactions work, making six figures or more. But I'd be doing not much more than helping rich corporations get richer, and lots of drudgery would be involved. I'd also be working long hours, 60, 70 or more hours a week. I might not have a lot of time to enjoy the good salary.
A career with State would allow me a much more interesting career. Just doing public service is more rewarding; it's the shift in the mindset from "create value" to "serve the public" (I've done public service work before). It's also the array of important issues and interesting work with which public servants are involved, which the letter author gets at much better than I do. On the other hand, the pay cut would be very substantial. Coming down from $250,000 a year down to the $63,000 level is a big cut, and legal work is very interesting in itself. I've heard from many other attorneys and business people in the hiring pipeline decide not to join State for the same reasons - the private sector offers very interesting work, lots of exit options, and a much better salary. Even if it's structured finance, creating corporate structures, finance vehicles, and doing secured transaction agreements, it's sophisticated and intellectual.
This is a point I think Cabot is missing. In the big picture, we really need to ask ourselves if, as a country, it is much more important to create incentives for young people to choose careers in public service, whether as diplomats or as teachers, or if the superior route is to steer them towards investment making, M&A, finance, or corporate governance work. After all, the same kind of stuff I've been involved in is precisely the same sort of activity that has created such stunning increases in wealth inequality in America and led to the economic crash. Those old practices are now starting to return and corporations would pay me well to help them do it. Certainly, it would be much more valuable to use my international background and education to further the national interest rather than help powerful investors use the law to rig the economic system again. But that is not what the salaries say.
Cabot raises valid points, but ultimately it's not much more than needless infighting between public servants in their respective non-profit and government fields. Frankly, we as citizens should push for better government supports for both types of public servants. Looking at what much of the private sector is engaged in, the foreign service and non-profits both deserve to be commended and rewarded far more than they are already. With executives ruining companies and escaping with golden parachutes, the last people that deserve Congressional ire are the foreign service facing risks abroad to serve our country.
-A Law Student
(The author attends a "top" law school and will be working in corporate and commercial law in private practice over the summer and after graduation. )
Just wanted to let you know that I have linked your post to my blog. http://webtexans.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/behind-the-scenes/
ReplyDeleteI just stumbled across your blog today, not 30 minutes ago, and I really appreciate it. I am about to start A-100, after working for the DoD for nearly 7 years, 2 1/2 of those I spent overseas at an Embassy. And for the Anonymous poster who said that DoD employees also make sacrifices and should earn the locality pay -- I can tell you, do not worry about your DoD civilian brethren, they do. Overseas I earned not only the DC locality pay on top of my base salary, but also the State Department determined COLA and Post Differential for my location. Now that I am joining the Foreign Service I am essentially taking a pay cut because my locality pay, or Overseas Comparability Pay, is only 2/3 of what I earned with DoD. When I applied for the Foreign Service, passed the oral exam, and waited for all my clearances and the final appointment letter, I was unaware that I would be earning less locality pay as a FSO than I earned as a DoD civilian overseas. I was glad to hear the OCP was coming into effect to correct this, then a bit concerned when the budget talks took a turn towards not only stopping the correction, but reversing it completely.
ReplyDeleteI am a USAID FSO, with a PhD in the same field I am working in at USAID, many years of experience but was hired at the lowest level 06/01 which has a base pay of about $38,000 because my work experience was before I got my PhD and USAID only looks at your past three years to match your salary and doesn't care about your education.
ReplyDeleteWOW pretty eye opening....facing death...poor living conditions....I know Police Officers in the inner city of Chicago making 60K a year with no housing or meals paid for that go into war zones to work every night...they have seen their pensions cut, duties and responsibilities increased, and yeah they pay all of their "utilities" too....Looks like FSO pay, allowances, and benefits all need to be reformed
ReplyDelete