Women who reached USAID’s top ranks allege gender pay discrimination

A group of women who have served at the highest level of the U.S. Agency for International Development’s foreign service has been waging a five-year legal battle with the agency over what they argue is gender-based pay discrimination.

The women leading the case say that they were hired by USAID decades ago at salaries lower than those of many of their male peers. While they were promoted quickly through the agency’s foreign service ranks, their pay increases never corrected for starting salaries that consistently placed them at the lower end of their compensation brackets — something they only realized after reaching the pinnacle of their careers.

The specific goal of their suit is to have their salaries adjusted retroactively with back pay from three years before they made the complaint, which is the legal limit. One of the most significant implications of that change would be to their retirement packages. The women calculated a difference of up to $400,000 in lost pension over the course of their retirement, said Beth Paige, a former USAID career minister who spent three decades at the agency and led multiple country missions and is now spearheading the complaint.

While the financial implications of their lawsuit are significant, the women — and other USAID employees who spoke to Devex — say the case is also the latest chapter of a career-long struggle to navigate a system of government service that was originally designed for men and which still retains some of those preferential features.

The women allege that while USAID has done away with policies that were overtly discriminatory against women, it has not fully addressed inequities they experienced earlier in their careers. They also argue that while USAID’s recent leaders have made strides in building a more equitable and inclusive agency, women still face disproportionate career tradeoffs and still encounter subtler forms of gender bias.

“Looking back, I realized we fought that battle for 30 years,” Paige, who is 61, told Devex, citing her peers’ efforts to improve agency policies, such as those that affected pregnant women and mothers. To find out at the end of their careers that they were making considerably less than just about everybody else in the senior foreign service was the “final insult,” she said.

Paige found a willing partner in Monica Stein-Olson, 63, who had also served as mission director in multiple countries and reached the rank of career minister, and who joined her in openly pressing the pay equity issue.

Four women ultimately joined the lawsuit. As career ministers, they ranked among the top 16% of all USAID senior foreign service officers, yet their salaries were in the bottom 26%, according to their own analysis, which they provided to Devex. For one of the female career ministers that joined their case, in 2015 there were 10 equally ranked men at USAID with significantly higher salaries, and 48 lower-ranked men with higher salaries, they allege.

The women provided Devex with spreadsheets of salaries from their final years at the agency. In 2017, Paige’s annual salary was $173,861 and Stein-Olson’s was $172,362. The highest-paid members of USAID’s senior foreign service earned $187,000. The spreadsheet shows that among career ministers earning more than $180,000 in 2017, 10 were men and three were women.

Paige told Devex there are a small number of male foreign service officers in the same situation, but that senior women who joined the agency at a time when their starting salaries were comparatively low are disproportionately affected.

In response to questions from Devex, a USAID spokesperson wrote that the agency has not found that gender factors into foreign service pay or promotion decisions.

“While we cannot comment specifically on ongoing litigation, USAID has not identified differences in the salary or pay increase process based on gender. Foreign Service Officers receive standardized annual or biannual pay increases,” an agency spokesperson wrote to Devex.

External analyses of gender-based pay differences arrive at mixed conclusions.

A Congressional Research Service report published in January 2021 found that in both USAID’s civil and foreign services, “the portion of women and racial and ethnic minorities declines at the higher rungs of the pay scale, raising questions about efforts to promote and retain these populations.”

A Government Accountability Office report from June 2020, on the other hand, found that differences in promotion rates between USAID’s male and female foreign service officers were not statistically significant.

Both reports based their analyses on data beginning in 2002.

Raising the issue

As USAID’s mission director in Jordan from 2011 to 2015, one of Paige’s duties was to calculate year-end bonuses for her staff. In 2015, Paige was looking over employee salaries at her mission when she noticed something strange: Her deputy director, a man two ranks lower in USAID’s foreign service and who had joined the agency after her, was making more money than she was.

Paige brought up the issue with the internal USAID office that handles compliance with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Act, but they wrote it off as an “anomaly,” she told Devex.

She was prepared to move on, but in the spring of 2016, after hearing of similar discrepancies from other colleagues, she found a website that posts salary information for federal employees. Looking through it she became convinced that the pay disparity was not just a fluke but in fact a recurring problem.

She pulled the data together and shared it with other women at the high-ranking career minister level of the USAID foreign service, some of whom joined her in pressing the issue. At the time, there were only eight women at USAID with that rank. Four of them decided to pursue an official complaint, while the other four decided not to, citing fear of retaliation or hope that they might be included if a class action lawsuit went forward.

They found little traction within USAID’s human resources offices but were encouraged that they had a legitimate case after speaking with the National Women’s Law Center.

“We asked for meetings with senior leadership in the agency who basically said, ‘Oh, we're outraged. We will fix this,’” Paige said. “And then didn't.”

Fearing that their concerns might go ignored after former President Donald Trump took office in January 2017, the women filed a formal complaint to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that same month.

“When we talked to the agency leadership, one of them asked us, would we please postpone filing the formal complaint after [Trump’s inauguration] so it wouldn't show up on their records from the Democrats’ side,” Paige said. “To which we said no.”

They filed the complaint on Jan. 19, 2017, former President Obama’s final day in office, alleging that USAID paid them less than similarly situated men.

Devex spoke to USAID’s administrator at the time, Gayle Smith, who said she had no knowledge of any request by a USAID official to delay the complaint, and that such a request, if it were made, would have been inappropriate.

“I received a letter … in the last quarter of my tenure as administrator, and I instructed my senior front office team along with the relevant department and office heads in the agency to do a thorough review of all the data pertaining to their salaries and everything that impacts salaries so that we could ascertain all the facts, because it’s a serious allegation,” Smith said.

“That process was put in motion, and it was not completed by the time I left the administration, but I did inform the Trump transition team that that data review was underway,” she said.

When Paige, Stein-Olson, and their colleagues first filed their complaint, they were told by USAID that it would be sent to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, a federal agency that enforces civil rights laws, and assigned to a judge. They said they waited months without hearing anything, and when they finally contacted the EEOC in the fall of 2017, they were told the commission had no record of their complaint.

“It cost us a year,” Paige said.

Documentation of the case by USAID’s legal team, which Devex obtained, shows that the agency forwarded the complaint to the EEOC on March 13, 2017.

Paige said USAID’s lawyers requested copies of official emails that the women no longer had access to since they retired from the agency, and threatened punitive action when they did not provide them. “It got to be comical if it wasn't so serious,” she said.

The women opted to have their case decided through a "Final Agency Decision," which would be handled by USAID instead of by the EEOC.

On May 12, 2020, USAID denied the complaint in a final decision that Devex obtained. It includes extensive analysis of USAID’s foreign service and senior foreign service salary and promotion policies. It also presents a comparative summary of individual promotion histories at the root of the women’s allegations — including for Paige and her deputy.

USAID’s legal team argued that disparities in pay were not the result of discrimination based on gender, but appeared to result from historic aberrations in pay increase rates between USAID’s foreign service and its senior foreign service. One outcome of those differences was that employees who were promoted to the senior foreign service more recently entered at higher salaries due to the prior pay increases they had received.

Three of the four women appealed USAID’s decision to the EEOC. On Nov. 9, 2021, the commission’s appellate body ruled in their favor on the basis that USAID’s office of the general counsel had been inappropriately involved in a process that should have been handled by the office of civil rights and diversity, which handles EEO complaints.

The EEOC did not rule on the merits of the women’s case but sent it back to USAID for further review. Paige and Stein-Olson told Devex they are expecting another final agency decision to be issued shortly.

Words vs. actions

Paige and Stein-Olson say they have invested over $100,000 of their own money in legal fees — they have received additional funding from outside support groups. They say they have spent countless hours responding to requests, answering questions, and sorting through “a tsunami of documents” — which they believe is part of a “scorched earth approach” by the agency’s lawyers to deter their case and drive up costs.

Paige, Stein-Olson, and current USAID officials who spoke to Devex on the condition of anonymity, all acknowledged that the agency’s leaders have appeared genuine in their desire to build a more diverse and equitable workforce, and have made progress in some areas. But they said their experience with this complaint speaks to a major disconnect between USAID’s stated principles on issues of gender equity and the agency’s processes for adjudicating individual cases.

“We say we take these things seriously, but when an individual says, ‘Ok, now let me tell you that I am negatively impacted. You say you're serious about this. Now come and help me.’ That is when the entire force of the U.S. government still comes after you,” a current senior USAID official who was not authorized to speak to the press told Devex.

“If we are serious about some of these things, we also have to make sure that we are listening to the individual, and every time an individual comes forward, we don't make it incredibly difficult for them to actually move through the process,” the senior official added.

Asked about the allegation that USAID response to the complaint has appeared punitive and discouraging, the agency spokesperson wrote that USAID’s handling of such cases adheres to all legal requirements and regulations and reflects its commitment to gender equity.

“USAID defends all cases in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and pursuant to the facts of the case. Gender equity, and sex discrimination more broadly, is a top priority for the agency, and the Agency has a zero tolerance policy requiring that every allegation of sex discrimination is taken seriously and acted upon in line with published procedures for resolving such reports,” the spokesperson added.

For the last year, the women’s case has overlapped with President Joe Biden’s elevated focus on diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility within the federal workforce. In June 2021, Biden signed an executive order that, among other things, directed agencies “to build processes that are fair and impartial to ensure that employees are fairly compensated for their work, and paid equitably.”

According to an internal USAID digest shared with Devex, the agency has taken a number of steps in response to that order, including “a preliminary assessment of the current state of DEIA in its human resources practices, policies, programs, and workforce demographic composition.”

That assessment led to the conclusion that USAID should, “expand DEIA training for hiring managers and selecting officials to reduce potential bias in hiring and promotions,” the digest reads.

To fulfill the requirements of Biden’s executive order, USAID will update and submit to the Office of Management and Budget its diversity, equity, and inclusion strategic plan by March 23, 2022, to align with the U.S. government-wide plan, the digest reads.

Those backing the women’s case hope it compels USAID and other federal agencies to take a hard look at fairness — past and present — in their payrolls.

“If successful, this case would send a clear message to U.S. Government agencies that they must review their senior pay policies and correct pay disparities that have persisted over time,” according to a summary by the American Association of University Women, which is supporting the case.

An ongoing battle

Paige and Stein-Olson both joined USAID in the late 1980s. They describe themselves as part of a cohort of women who entered the agency in greater numbers, and of whom many went on to navigate foreign service careers alongside family responsibilities.

The foreign service was created with the career paths of men, either single or with families who supported their career prospects, in mind. One glaring example: until 1971, women who joined the U.S. foreign service — as diplomats at the Department of State or development professionals at USAID — were forced to resign if they got married.

“The women before us weren't married, they didn't have children, and they kind of broke the glass ceiling. But Beth and I were like those working mothers that joined USAID and joined the workforce, and we tried to have it all,” Stein-Olson said.

While many overtly discriminatory practices have been abolished — thanks in large part to career-risking advocacy efforts by pioneering women — Paige, Stein-Olson, and other women who spoke to Devex described ongoing battles to command the respect of their coworkers and overseas counterparts and stated their belief that implicit and explicit bias still lingers.

“They still make rules along the way that fit the circumstances at the time without really thinking through the ramifications. Then they make exceptions when situations come up that they had not thought of which leads to perceptions of (or real) inequity,” a second senior USAID official told Devex on the condition of anonymity.

“While the data is anecdotal, there is a very real perception among many senior women and minorities in the Agency that exceptions and allowances are made easily and more often for men. This has happened historically with assignments, bonuses, promotions, the conversion process from civil service to foreign service and exceptions to allowing civil service or political appointees to occupy foreign service positions,” the senior official added.

The same official pointed to the use of past salary history as a factor in determining compensation as a practice that contributes to unequal pay among men and women.

The USAID spokesperson wrote to Devex that the agency is “no longer relying on salary history when setting pay for new Foreign Service Officers.”

“This decision followed numerous studies across the nation that concluded that reliance on salary history has led to gender-based pay disparities for many. USAID’s decision to stop using salary history supports the Agency’s commitment to eliminating any vestige of systemic discrimination in its hiring practices,” the spokesperson wrote.

Others point to broader career incentives, promotion criteria, and cultural issues within the USAID foreign service that affect women and men differently. One of those is a perception inside the agency that taking a domestic assignment dims a foreign service officer’s prospects for promotion.

“You very often hear that you cannot get promoted out of Washington,” the first current senior USAID official told Devex.

That can put female foreign service members who face disproportionate pressure to balance career and family in a bind. The current senior official described witnessing multiple women wrestle with those decisions — and many forgo international assignments that might lead to faster promotion.

Those are persistent inequities that exist throughout society, but USAID’s foreign service has not found a way to address them yet, the senior official said.

“People's lives right now are becoming very different, and we don't have a system that has caught up with the times.”