Wow... How did you find this all out? After years of working at State I'm still trying to make sense of it all. Both the postings and the comments have confirmed some of my own experiences with HR - particularly the sense that HR officers can sometimes let there own opinions and experiences influence the guidance they give.
One thing that comes to my mind as problematic when I think about HR that has not been mentioned really is the divide between Civil and Foreign Service. It's a divide in HR resources and so much more.
It's not just foreign service officers who have problems. I worked as a civil service employee and there are plenty of issues - from pay, benefits, hiring processes, promotions, favoratism, etcetera. THe split makes it even more complicated, bureacratic, and likely for HR problems. (Let alone employees who lose motivation.)
I learned last year that there are two separate "associations" and grievance offices with different staff for dealing with civil and foreign service HR grievances. THere also appears to be different procedures, regs, and waiting periods for getting the investigation done. That means an FSO and a CSO could go to completely different sources to file complaints against the same HR office and the incidents are kept separate!
While each group does have unique characteristics, needs, and issues - each group also expects and wants a system that gives rewards and benefits fairly. Imagine if someone investigated ALL the HR grievances together.... I hope in the future the two services are better connected and can lobby for change as employees of the same organization.
JV
