UNITED STATES Department of State 864-B United States. This country has made a major effort to bring peaRSITY OF MICHIGAN the region, and the recent agreement between Israel and E an encouraging sign of progress. The United States, in concert with veloping nations alike. The United States is committed to work mic system that ensures stability and progress for both developeNITED STATES OF AMERICA e other industrial nations to assure the rapid recovery of their es, to accelerate completion of trade negotiations, t reform, and to foster economic growth i Outlays for international affairs 977 and $7.8 billion in 19 The General's Letter CONGRATULATIONS, BUT.... This year's Foreign Service promotion list, while its early release abbreviated the annual suspense, was nevertheless again the source of gratification for some, of questioning for others and, as well, the object of widespread analysis in search of its "true" psyche and purpose. This year, for the first time, I cannot get by with joining in this arcane sport. My present position provides me the vehicle of this letter for congratulating all of you who won well-earned promotion. It also, however, lays on me an obligation to share not only my satisfaction at what our Foreign Service promotion process has accomplished but also my concern at what it has not, and the dilemmas with which it faces us. It seems almost hackneyed to say that the promotion system, however imperfect, is deeply rooted in the principle of merit and in practices built around collegiality and thorough safeguards. These principles and practices arise out of thirty years of experience under the Foreign Service Act. But even after thirty years, we find ourselves frustrated by the knowledge that the process, if it does not itself create inequities in our reward system, does not prevent them: that it is sometimes seen as providing rewards unequally and not solely by merit. More fundamentally, I fear that it becomes a source of divisiveness among the functional groups in the Service. Differential rates of promotion among cones or among professional sub-categories raise searching questions of fairness or of the institution's objectives and priorities in administering the Service. Some of the burden which the promotion system bears in providing equitable rewards is thrust upon it by outside factors. The distressingly low promotion rates this year among secretaries and communicators stem in part from unusually low attrition in retirements and resignations, but in part also from the so-called linkage issue raised by the President's guardian of federal pay systems. Discussed in the October 1975 NEWSLETTER, the problem arises out of a judgment that position levels in these two professional fields are classified above those elsewhere in government for comparable responsibility. We are still seeking a resolution but, until the issue is successfully resolved, we are barred from providing a normal measure of promotions to these two groups of people. The undesirably unequal rates of promotion and of time in class among the FSO functional groups flow from a heritage of failure in our system in past years to adjust inflow to need. As a result, until 1970 our selection process did not tailor FSO intake by background to the Service's professional requirements or to anticipated vacancies. The imbalance between the functional focus of officers' careers and the positions to be filled underlies the problems of this year's and previous lists. It also raises questions of the objectives which promotion should serve and of its guiding principles. Until the cone system gave explicit form to the idea of functional groupings in the FSO corps, promotions were granted without specific regard for career focus and, in fact, sometimes without strict regard for the need for officers at given grades. The cone system, in seeking to relate skills to Service needs, introduced a new factor into the promotion process-the socalled functional promotion, which related opportunity to the Department's functional, rather than overall, needs. While this factor has not governed all promotions, it has nevertheless injected an element into the promotion process which affects the central principle of advancement by merit. Since this principle is both set down in law and founded in the career basis for our professional corps, any step which may abridge the rule of merit needs to be examined. In fact, however, any rational promotion system is built on need or opportunity. In the classic rank-in-job systems such as in the Civil Service, promotion typically comes with incumbency, and merit principles relate, actually, to selection for a position rather than to the promotion itself. In the rank-in-person system such as in the Foreign Service, promotion is not tied to incumbency, but to an evaluation process which, within the limits of human frailty and a set of guidelines, operates on the direct merit principle of open competition among peers. As against the individual vacancy of other systems, it is the sum of vacancies-actually projected vacancies-which sets the numerical limits and boundaries of the annual Foreign Service promotions. If inequalities of opportunity arise out of the role of function—that is, cone-in determining numbers of promotions, the fault lies not in the process itself but in imbalance between our needs and our human resources and in the limits on our ability to measure these accurately. If these were in balance there would be no inequality of opportunity, and we could promote by merit within separate promotion categories while matching the Service's human requirements by grade to its resources. But the imbalance does exist, as do inequalities of opportunity which may persist until we have made repairs which cannot be completed quickly if they are not to be made ruthlessly. I gain little satisfaction in the knowledge that the merit principle is maintained despite the inequalities and external difficulties which disadvantage some groups in the Service. The fact is that these professionals are performing at levels of quality and responsibility which, by reasonable standards, justify promotion at rates above those now possible. For the secretaries and communicators so affected, a cure can come only as we work out the difficulties which face us. I can only assure you of our commitment to seek solutions which best serve our interests within the limits imposed by the situation. For the FSO's whose progress is affected by unresolved systemic problems, I will spare you further exegesis on this subject or on the cone system. It is small comfort that we are no longer commiting the sins which spawned those problems, or even that we are trying to spawn solutions. These will, in any event, demand accommodation on both sides. Some officers may decide-as some already have-to shift their careers into areas where need and opportunity are greater. Others will serve for a time-as some now do in positions outside their main competence. Nevertheless, the burden must also be on the managers. Under the contract which is formed by a professional's commitment to our career, the discipline of service earns a promise of earned reward. This involves an obligation of which my associates and I will remain aware. Carse C. Laran FEBRUARY 1976 NO. 176 FSO DETAILS FOR DOMESTIC SERVICE 2 3 4 10 16 22 30 36 DEPARTMENTS AND FEATURES Assignment: America FSOS to State and local governments would offer enviable experience. . . . These assignments will make us more sensitive to the values, Pearson amendment provides for FSO details to state and local interests, and priorities of the country governments, the Congress, other public institutions In June 1950, one of President Harry S. Truman's top aides wrote him a memorandum suggesting that the Department of State detail Foreign Service officers to state governors' offices for up to a year. This proposal received a warm response from President Truman who noted at the bottom of the memorandum "I have always thought all FSOS should be brought home at least one year in four . . . and assigned to their home states to study our political system. The idea suggested in this paper should not be interred-it has merit. Let's follow through. . . .” However, the Department's attempt to assign a limited number of FSOS to governors' offices was not well received by Congress. Congressional concern about the State Department sending its own "Ambassadors” to some or all of the governors resulted in language which became part of every Department appropriation bill from 1953 to 1975; no part of any appropriation could be used to pay the salary or expenses of any person assigned to an office of the several states. Twenty-five years later, a proposal months. They may be on a reimbursable basis. The Secretary must submit a report to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the Senate. Foreign Relations Committee describing the steps he has taken to carry out the provisions of the Pearson Amendment. The first report is due by April; the reports are to be submitted annually thereafter. In proposing this Amendment, Senator Pearson argued that such assignments would be an effective way to strengthen the Foreign Service in representing America abroad. It is the clear intent of Congress that assignments made under authority of the Pearson Amendment will provide at least one year of training and experience in domestic activities that will broaden an FSO's understanding of American society and increase his or her sensitivity to various facets of American life. In his June 1975 speech on "The Department and the Foreign Service," Secretary Kissinger stressed the same theme by noting that the assignment of we represent. The Director General has designated such assignments as Domestic Service assignments. A working group of representatives from PER, M, H, PA, and CU is now preparing recommendations for action to implement the Pearson Amendment. The group will make specific proposals on a reimbursement policy, selection of participants and identification of jobs. The number of positions to be allocated for Domestic Service assignments has not been finally determined. The Department's goal is to identify Domestic Service assignments that offer opportunities for significant managerial or program directional responsibilities. An important aspect of these assignments would be their importance in building and improving lines of communication between the Department and the American community. The overall objective is to provide assignments with solid and substantive content in which an FSO can make a useful, practical contribution while enhancing his or her own professional development. by Senator James B. Pearson (R. Background investigations to be speeded up Kans.), enacted by the Congress in November 1975, completely reversed the Congressional attitude of the early 50's. The Pearson Amendment provides for the assignment of a "substantial number' of Foreign Service officers in the United States, or any of its territories or possessions, "for significant duty" with a State or local government, public school, community college, or any other public organization" designated by the Secretary. The officers may also be assigned to a Member of Congress, or to an office of the Congress. However, of the total number of officers assigned under the amendment at any one time, not more than 20 percent may be assigned to Congress. Although the Pearson Amendment provides for the assignment of the officers before their 15th year of service, Subsection (f) points out that the provisions apply only to a Foreign Service. officer who has completed 10 years of service on or after October 1, 1975. To the extent practical, assignments shall be for at least 12 consecutive Deputy Under Secretary for Management Lawrence S. Eagleburger has approved a revision of the Department's procedures for security background investigations which will reduce the amount of time needed to investigate prospective employees. The new procedures will enable the Department to expedite offers of permanent employment to qualified candidates. The Office of Security (A/SY) has for some time recognized the need to revise its procedures, principally because long, extensive background investigations have impeded the Department's efforts to be competitive in recruiting and employing the most qualified people. It wasn't until Congress passed the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act, however, that the Executive Branch questioned its procedures on security background investigations. Project Ten-the Task Force on Personnel Investigations and Adjudications of the Domestic Council Committee on the Right of Privacy-was formed and recommended certain standards for background investigations. Given the "green light," the Office of Security analyzed over 700 cases to find out which elements in its investigatory process needed to be retained or revised in determining whether an applicant is employable by the Department of State. A/SY incorporated those elements with the Project Ten standards to form the Department's new investigation procedures. Basically, the new system reduces the coverage of the employment candidate's background from 15 to seven years, emphasizes corroboration of residence(s) and education from records instead of actual neighborhood and school checks, and deletes the requirement to verify periods of employment or residence of less than 60 days. Although the new procedure is abbreviated when compared with former background investigations, A/SY is convinced from its study that the integrity and value of the investigation will not be reduced. The state of our foreign policy In his State of the Union address, delivered on January 19 before a joint session of the Congress, President Ford included the following remarks on foreign affairs: Today, the state of our foreign policy is sound and strong. We are at peace, and I will do all in my power to keep it that way. Our military forces are capable and ready. Our military power is without equal, and I intend to keep it that way. Our principal alliances with the industrial democracies of the Atlantic community and Japan have never been more solid. A further agreement to limit the strategic arms race may be achieved. We have an improving relationship with China, the world's most populous nation. The key elements for peace among the nations of the Middle East now exist. Our traditional friendships in Latin America, Africa and Asia continue. We have taken the role of leadership in launching a serious and hopeful dialogue between the industrial world and the developing world. We have helped to achieve significant reform of the international monetary system. We should be proud of what America, what our country, has accomplished in these areas, and I believe the American people are. The American people have heard too much about how terrible our mistakes, how evil our deeds, and how misguided our purposes. The American people know better. The truth is we are the world's greatest democracy. We remain the symbol of man's aspiration for liberty and well being. We are the embodiment of hope for progress. I say it is time we quit downgrading ourselves as a Nation. Of course, it is our responsibility to learn the right lesson from past mistakes. It is our duty to see that they never happen again. But, our greatest duty is to look to the future. The world's troubles will not go away. The American people want strong and effective international and defense policies. In our constitutional system, these policies should reflect consultation and accommodation between the President and the Congress. But, in the final analysis, as the framers of our Constitution knew from hard experience, the foreign relations of the United States can be conditioned effectively only if there is strong central direction that allows flexibility of action. That responsibility clearly rests with the President. I pledge to the American people policies which seek a secure, just and peaceful world. I pledge to the Congress to work with you to that end. We must not face a future in which we can no longer help our friends, such as Angola, even in limited and carefully controlled ways. We must not lose all capacity to respond short of military intervention. Some hasty actions of the Congress during the past year, most recently in respect to Angola, were, in my view, very shortsighted. Unfortunately, they are very much on the minds of our allies and our adversaries. |