Return to Article: Rice answers diplomats' revolt over forced Iraq postings
-
36487
"Only those with compelling reasons, such as a medical condition or extreme personal hardship, will be exempt from disciplinary action. Diplomats forced into service in Iraq will receive the same extra hardship pay, vacation time and choice of future assignments as those who have volunteered".
Here we go again....hear that sucking noise, thats the noise of "some" of the FSO's racing to their doctors office's. They're going to have their doctors write them a medical hardship note, to get them out of serving in Iraq. "Some" other FSO's will maufacture family hardship stories, to keep them from serving as well. To keep the proccess fair,if FSO's are "ORDERED" to serve in Iraq, they should be selected strictly by using seniority or time in service. I don't think its fair when you start using medical, familiy, or any type hardship to keep people from serving. The FSO's that can't come up with a "hardship" are going to be the ones facing the "hardship" when they are selected to serve in Iraq. Lets keep the proccess totally and completely "FAIR"
-
36465
It is one thing to take an Oath of office to serve the Constitution; it is another to know that you may need to put your life on the line in a foreign country. These people are not in the military.
So, all of those complaining about the civilians who do not want to go, try to understand. Unless you are in the military where you know up front that you may have to go to war and possibly lose your life, I suggest you have some compassion.
Being in the federal government does not mean that all of us are required to go to a war zone.
-
36464
It is one thing to take an Oath of office to serve the Constitution; it is another to know that you may need to put your life on the line in a foreign country. These people are not in the military.
So, all of those complaining about the civilians who do not want to go, try to understand. Unless you are in the military where you know up front that you may have to go to war and possibly lose your life, I suggest you have some compassion.
Being in the federal government does not mean that all of us are required to go to a war zone.
-
36460
The US FSOs should be ashamed. Truth is, most of the FSO don't like Bush and disagree with the WAR. While I understand these feeling this does not relieve FSOs of their duties. Suck it up or resign!
-
36456
"...to defend the Constitution of the United States." If we fire everyone who violates their oath of office, then wouldn't we need to start with the President and V. President?
-
36451
For those Foreign Service Officers who are willing serve with dignity (when ever and where ever they are asked too); I salute you. For those that are whining about the possibility of having to go to Iraq; shame on you. I bet none of the FSO's raising this stink ever served in the military. Further, from my view point, they are nothing less than traitors and are not worthy of retaining any jobs within the Federal system. How do you people sleep at night?
-
36443
Wow, what an opportunity for all you Republicans to do more than vote the party line. Surely there are FSO's that voted Republican - forget putting your money where your mouth is, put your ass on the front line!
President Bush could lead the charge by publicly encouraging his daughters to enroll as State Department FSO's & volunteering for Iraq since they don't seem interested in military service. Another Republican voice, Sean Hannity seems glib & claims to be a "Great American", well here's his chance too. Come to think of it, VP Cheney's daughter could also serve via this route. I don't believe there is any prohibition against gays in the FS and besides, should anything happen (God forbid) to her, I'm positive Lynn Cheney would raise their grandchild.
Come on NEOCONS take a step beyond lapel pins and magnetic car ribbons - enlist today. One more thing, the benefits are great, take the pay structure for instance; all you need to do is stop by the Pentagon and ask about NSPS - if the diplomatic core doesn't have something like it, I'm sure they will soon!!!
-
36441
Well I did not think it was possible, but once again the State Department has succeeded in embarassing itself once again. What did these "diplomats" think they were signing up for... this is similar to all the reserve doctors who balked at being called up during Desert Storm... you don't get to collect the benefits and the perks only to run away when called. If you don't like it, then resign, if not shut up and put up! Stop sounding and acting like a bunch of cowards.
-
36436
All Federal employees take an oath as stated below:
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) 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 that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
It might be a good idea for all State Department diplomats to repeat their oath of office so American Citizens will know what to expect for the taxes we pay.
-
36430
If these position descriptions include the possibility of involuntary postings, similar to DoD emergency essential positions, then it's pretty simple - the incumbents agreed to the conditions of employment when they accepted the appointments. If the incumbents subsequently refuse to comply with the requirements of the position description, then the appropriate agency action is dismissal, and MSPB will uphold you all day. I sympathize with individuals who don't want to run the risk of getting blown up, but if that's the case they ought to resign their positions.
-
36426
These are supposedly the best and brightest, recruited from east coast colleges. What a bunch of gutless wonders and no one is even asking them to fight. Living overseas I have seen the results of some of their "diplomatic" efforts, Condi needs to clean house and or change the criteria on how these twits are hired.
-
36425
I am a civil service employee serving with the US Army in Iraq as I write. I will be happy to take an FSO position and transfer to the Embassy in Baghdad.
The state department should fire the whiners.
-
36419
The last time something like this happened Reagan fired the ATCs and put and end to it. They took an oath and knew full well what they were steping into. I am sure there are plenty of people that would go if given a nice Government job! Make some room.
-
36416
As a Foreign Service Officer serving in Iraq and not in the IZ or Green Zone I am deeply disturbed and embarrased by these comments. We are making significant differences here in Iraq especially in the embedded provincial reconstruction teams. Life here is austere and nothing like the comforts of those in IZ. It is our duty as Foreign Service Officers who signed a world wide duty agreement to take the good with the bad. If our country needs our capabilities in difficult locations around the world we must accept the responsibility to serve. With distinction and honor.
-
36410
Oh, THAT'S right, they've taken an OATH. Could it be that they are so into themselves and so cavalier on their "oath-taking" that they have totally forgotten what we, the American people EXPECT of our Foreign Service Officers?
I'm strongly in favor of "GO, or GET OUT!"
-
36403
Nobody in his right mind, civil or uniformed, could have foreseen this lame-brained foreign entaglement -- bungled as it has been for years by the incompetent chickenhawks that are this Administration.
Oh, and you won't find too many competent people willing to "replace" them on their current orders. Talk to the military recruiters. End the madness. End the war. Let the Iraqis find their own way. Energy independence now.
-
36400
While I can understand some of the public anger against State Department employees not wishing to accept a mandatory assignment to Iraq, I think that there is a fundamental misunderstanding between military duty and civilian duty. I think that everyone agrees that Iraq is a war zone. Expecting military duty in a war zone is a no-brainer. Requiring civilian duty in a war zone needs to be explored further. Congress recognizes the inherent danger to military duty and has developed a compensation and benefits package that recognizes this hazard. Civil service benefits are paltry in comparison to military benefits. Contrast military inflation protected retirement with no required employee contributions for 75% of final adjusted salary for 30 years service with a 30% final adjusted salary civil service employee contributory retirement (FERS) with limited inflation protection for the same period of service. Free military health care for life compared with civilian employee funded healthcare. Military gets tax free housing allowance, tax free food allowance, tax free personal shopping, tax free subsidized grocery shopping, taxpayer subsidized recreation facilities, and a host of other federal and state tax benefits, etc. The forgoing addresses normal peacetime remuneration, what about combat duty such as Iraq? All military income in a war zone is tax free with combat pay, separation pay, and special duty pay. In contrast all civilian pay is 100% taxed. Yes there is civilian hardship pay and additional pay supplements, however for starters civilian base pay immediately is reduced by about 13% for accepting an overseas assignment (no locality pay). If you are injured in the line of duty, you will not receive the lifetime veteran care which is afforded to our military. If we really are in a global war against terrorism, force the State Department employees (and other civilians, including DoD) to go to Iraq to get the mission done, but give them a compensation system comparable to the Military system to recognize their sacrifice to meet our national goals. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary of Defense regularly go to bat to Congress to champion improved military benefits. When was the last time that the Secretary of State or anyone else representing civil service employees did the same?
-
36390
It is infuriating to me to hear this kind of BS from Federal Workers in general and those in the State Department in particular. Pathetic!! I have zero sympathy for these jerks...... and the sorry "Union" that represents them. Fire them. It won't be a problem to find replacements.
-
36389
Here's what I don't understand. They've taken an oath and they knew that their positions are deployable. No-one forced them to take that job or even stay in that job. If they don't like it, they can always leave. They should be so lucky to even be able to complain. What about those military members that are over there? They have children too and who will raise their children if they die. Those FSO's are lucky. At least they have the choice to leave the State Department if they don't want to go. Try being an Airman, Marine, Sailor, or Soldier. They don't have a choice....oh wait a second, yes they do. They can go to war or go to jail.
-
36382
It's time to do housecleaning. Those who can not live up to their oath should be prosecuted.
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
FEBRUARY 9
Driving Government Performance
FEBRUARY 24
Making Data Actionable and Accessible
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.