[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 71 (Friday, June 9, 2000)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E970]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE RESERVE OFFICERS

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. MIKE McINTYRE

                           of north carolina

                    in the house of representatives

                          Friday, June 9, 2000

  Mr. McINTYRE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my thoughts on an 
issue that has been brought to my attention by a constituent of mine in 
southeastern North Carolina.
  My constituent and his colleagues were Senior Foreign Service Reserve 
Officers, until they were involuntarily converted out of the Foreign 
Service by the Foreign Service Act of 1980. These officers were, in 
general, specialists in professional fields other than those commonly 
associated with overseas assignments.
  When Congress wrote the law that was to become known as the Foreign 
Service Act of 1980 (``FSA''), Members of Congress spent many hours 
debating the question of providing safeguards for the careers of the 
Foreign Service Reserve Officers whose personnel status would be most 
affected by the newly drafted legislation. Therefore, the FSA 
guaranteed the permanent preservation of the grade and benefits of the 
employees.
  Please allow me to read an excerpt from the Report of the Committee 
on Post Office and Civil Service, regarding the Foreign Service Act of 
1980:

       Converting employees from their present positions to new 
     pay schedules and different personnel systems, including the 
     Senior Service, cannot be accomplished without some 
     difficulties. The policy governing this chapter is to 
     minimize the disruption to the individual employees and to 
     preserve the rights and benefits of employees subject to 
     conversion. The Committee recognizes that minimizing 
     disruption and saving rights and benefits entail cost to the 
     Government. These costs are justified in view of the fact 
     that by forcing conversions the Government, as the employer, 
     is altering the legitimate expectations of the employees. 
     Fairness requires that the Government cushion these employees 
     against the hardships which will come in wake of forced 
     conversion . . . Employees converted are provided with 
     permanent saved grade and tenure rights comparable to what 
     they had.

  The Department of State did fulfill their obligation to protect the 
earned rights of these senior officers from the date of the Act until 
early 1990. Executive Order 12698 increased the salary of the Senior 
Foreign Service Officers (``SFS''). However, the Department of State 
did not adjust the salary of my constituent and his fellow SFS-4 
officers. No explanation was given to the affected officers for this 
arbitrary action of the Department of State.
  At about the same time, the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act 
(``FEPBA'') became law. This law eliminated all Civil Service grades 
above GS-15, substituting the designation of Senior Level (``SL''), and 
authorized the agencies to pay SL's a salary as high as SFS-6.
  Initially the Department of State proposed to designate these former 
SFS-4 officers as Senior Level 8, at a salary equal to that of SFS-4. 
Without explanation and contradictory to the intent of Congress in the 
Foreign Service Act, the Department of State issued personnel actions 
designating these long-time, professional and dedicated officers as SL-
00, at a salary $13,000 below that of SFS-4. This was, and is in my 
opinion, a distorted interpretation of the Foreign Service Act as 
passed by Congress and signed into law.
  These officers then followed prescribed procedures to effect an 
administrative correction. The ruling of the Agency's Foreign Service 
Grievance Board stated that it lacked jurisdiction to interpret Section 
2106 of the law, but they then denied the officer's claim, without a 
hearing.
  These officers, frustrated by the Department of State's refusal to 
uphold the law that protected what they had earned as senior officers 
of the Department of State, filed an action in the Federal Court for 
the District of Columbia. The Department of State attorneys with the 
assistance of lawyers from the Department of Justice resisted to a de 
novo hearing of the facts. After months of delays, the presiding judge 
dismissed the case without granting a hearing.
  I am equally concerned that the Department of State did not provide a 
copy of a June 25, 1991, Memorandum from the Office of the Legal 
Advisor of the Office of the Director General when responding to a 
request for production of documents by the attorney representing these 
officers. That document had a direct and dire effect on the status of 
these officers. The document was kept secret from these officers, and 
an attempt was made to suppress the document in court. The document, 
contrary to the clear intent of the law, stated, ``Owing to their 
conversion to the Civil Service, their rights are governed by the Civil 
Service statutes and regulations.'' This appears to be the authority 
used to justify the improper personnel actions that deprived these 
former Senior Foreign Service officers their guarantees as stated in 
the Foreign Service Act of 1980.
  I seek the support of my follow colleagues, especially those who also 
have former Foreign Service Reserve Officers living in their districts, 
to assist me in putting forth an effort to bring about the restoration 
of the rank and benefits to which officers are entitled.
  I hope that Secretary Albright, in keeping with her May 21, 1996 
Department Notice to All Under Secretaries, Assistant Secretaries, 
Ambassadors, Principal Officers dealing with long term employees 
disputes, will take a direct interest in resolving this matter and 
avoid the necessity of remedial legislation.

                          ____________________