bout de papier, Vol. 9, No. 1 (1992) — Winter 1992 // Hiver 1992, pp. 6–7
The Department of External Affairs has made laudable strides in recognizing the particular problems placed on spouses of Foreign Service staff serving abroad. To its credit, it has been gradually implementing solutions as a result of both legal requirements and administrative means. We went from a period when spouses were merely extensions of the employee to the implementation of directives (FSDs) which fully recognized the existence of the very real difficulties which individuals encounter and which significantly affect their relationships and their lives when working abroad in the service of their country.
The general public has long held false conceptions as to what life abroad is really like. Possibly, at one time, the Department was negatively influenced by these public myths and considered it dare not provide “advantages” to a group already deemed advantaged by an ignorant public. But we knew the truth because we had to live it. We can be thankful that it is now the employee’s best interest which drives departmental changes in the Foreign Service Directives, for it is not so certain that the average Canadian, even now, understands the professional uprooting as well as the living and financial difficulties which go along with living abroad in the Foreign Service today.
The focus has also been extended to common-law relationships when dealing with the non-employee half of couples, thus recognizing that most elemental fact that employees will naturally choose to settle with lifetime companions, whether or not they are bound by a legal document. To be human is to prefer to share with another human being one’s life, experiences, joys and sorrows.
It would have been unfair and uncaring of the Department to continue ignoring this when revising and adapting the FSDs. Clearly, the Department was protecting its own best interests, dealing with employee needs above any unwarranted public prejudice which might potentially be lurking in the background.
Imagine what it would be like if your lifetime companion were deemed not to exist at all in the eyes of the Department. Would you abandon him or her? Of course not. Well then go on to think what it might be like to have to pursue your entire career, especially when living abroad, under such circumstances. In fact, imagine all the worst experiences which couples suffered in the past when little or no recognition or assistance was provided to help ease the uprooting and difficulties for the non-employee half. Then, to make it a real nightmare, imagine not being able to reveal that she or he is living with you and consequently having to pay all costs related to him or her accompanying you at your post (although all such costs could be generously covered for your dog under FSD15); having to make all the administrative and financial arrangements, unassisted, for some type of visa; and not having any possibility of including him or her within any of the directives (such as) aimed at easing the burden of living abroad, sometimes in very difficult or culturally very foreign environments. The list of unending difficulties and frustrations can be left to the reader’s imagination. But for a significant number of employees the point, and the shame of this article, is that a good many of these “ghosts” do live among us. There may be a few common-law relationships in the Department, but there can be absolutely no doubt that there are significantly more gay relationships.
The Department has always been aware of the fact that the number of gay support and officer members in its ranks was significant. For example, it is known that not so many years ago, when ignorance and prejudice made our “security’ services their own worst enemy, a plan for identifying and then firing gay personnel had to be abandoned after preliminary investigations unexpectedly revealed a significant level of gay staff, including some of the brightest and most prominent individuals of the time. At least we can be thankful that those dark and awful days have gone. Being gay no longer prevents one from being hired, security-cleared, and being able to contribute as a professional to the work of the Department.
But it still makes one’s life terribly complicated and frustrating if one shares that life with another human being of the same gender. As most Foreign Service employees, I only really know colleagues in my own stream. But even in that limited spectrum, it has been obvious from my own experience that despite all difficulties a good number of departmental personnel have continued to maintain long-standing gay relationships. And this has been despite the Department’s and the staff unions’ inability or unwillingness to come to grips with this reality and their mandated responsibilities. I recall an earlier posting at a larger mission where I knew of six Canada-based gay employees (one secretary, two clerks and three officers) all living with a companion with whom they had been sharing their lives for three to ten years. I am in touch with other similar couples at a variety of posts because they happen to be my friends. Total numbers would be most revealing to those who have chosen not to see the obvious. But what do numbers have to do with doing what is right and what is fair?
At a time when minority rights have become a priority in advanced societies such as ours, when the governments of the two major provinces of Quebec and Ontario recognize equal rights for all lifetime relationships among their employees, when some countries have already shown that it is only prejudice which stands in the way of easing the burden silently carried by gay Foreign Service couples, and when the Department has shown its ability to play a leadership role and use imagination to meet the real needs of its employees in general, and its minorities in particular, one can only wonder why, and for how long, management and staff unions will continue to remain silent and to ignore the plight of all employees serving their country abroad while having to share their lives with a “ghost”
The triannual FSD review will finish shortly. It is an exercise of major importance for the well-being and the morale of all rotational employees irrespective of level. To be at all meaningful and sincere, neither management nor the unions can any longer accept or permit that the employees of the Department of External Affairs and International Trade continue to be subjected to conditions of life and work abroad which are based on their lifetime companions remaining as ghosts among us.
Editor’s Note: Although it is not the policy of bout to print articles by unnamed individuals, both our Senior and Editorial Boards have unanimously agreed to print this particular article by an individual who is clearly an employee of EAITC. Our policy is, on request, to withhold an individual’s name as long as the author personally provides a valid reason for doing so to the Editor.
View the original scanned pages →
Originally published in bout de papier, Vol. 9, No. 1 (1992) — Winter 1992 // Hiver 1992, pp. 6–7. Read the rest of this issue →
