Nepotism as a form of patronage or favouritism Nepotism is one specific form of a conflict-of-interest situation. According to Transparency International , Nepotism is a form of favouritism based on acquaintances and family relationships whereby someone in an official position exploits his or her power and authority to provide a job or favour to a family member or friend, even though he or she may not be qualified.
This means that public officials should not use their public position to directly influence or secure benefits relating to human resource management, such as recruitment or promotion, for family members or business associates. For example, a risk of nepotism could arise if your brother-in-law applies for a job in your company and you can make the decisions whether he is hired.
Nepotism can have negative impacts on the public service Nepotism in the public service can. In Slovakia, it is prohibited to employ any close relatives in mutual direct subordination or superiority of the close relatives or if they would be subjected to the control of the financial operations or the control of the accounting operations by a close relatives.
Act No. Police Slovensky Contacts. Sections MI SR. Anti-corruption E-learning Program. Introduction to the Anti-corruption e-learning program. Topics of the Anti-corruption e-learning program. Introduction to Public Integrity. One of the most basic themes in ethics is fairness, stated this way by Artistotle: "Equals should be treated equally and unequals unequally.
In the public sphere, favoritism, cronyism, and nepotism also undermine the common good. When someone is granted a position because of connections rather than because he or she has the best credentials and experience, the service that person renders to the public may be inferior. Also, because favoritism is often covert few elected officials are foolish enough to show open partiality to friends, and family , this practice undercuts the transparency that should be part of governmental hiring and contracting processes.
Probably the biggest dilemma presented by favoritism is that, under various other names, few people see it as a problem. Connections, networking, family-almost everyone has drawn on these sources of support in job hunting in the private spherre. And everyone can point to instances where cronyism or nepotism is an accepted fact of life in political sphere, as well.
John F. Kennedy, for example, appointed his brother Robert as attorney general. Every president and governor names close associates to key cabinet positions. Mayors put those they know and trust on citizens committees and commissions. Friends and family can usually be counted on for loyalty, and officeholders are in a good position to know their strengths.
The first issue is competence. For cabinet level positions, an executive will probably be drawn to experienced, qualified candidates, but historically, the lower down the ladder, the more likely for someone's brother-in-law to be slipped into a job for which he is not qualified.
The American Civil Service Act was passed in in large part because so many patronage jobs, down to dogcatcher, were being filled by people whose only qualification for employment was their support for a particular party or candidate. Also, the appearance of favoritism weakens morale in government service, not to mention public faith in the integrity of government. Reasonable people will differ about the appointment of friends and family in high-level positions, but public officials should be aware that such choices can give the appearance of unfairness.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 19 state legislatures have found the practice of nepotism troubling enough to enact laws against it. Others may restrict the hiring of relatives or friends in more general conflict-of-interest rules.
Public officials should also note that dilemmas involving favoritism extend beyond hiring and contracting practices to the more general problem of influence. Golfing partners, people who come over for Sunday dinner, members of the same congregation all are likely to exert a greater influence over an official than a stranger might.
Council members, mayors, and legislators must make special efforts to ensure that they hear all sides of an issue rather than just relying on the views of the people they know. Further, many conscientious lawmakers have discovered that they must change their patterns of socializing when their work involves many decisions affecting friends and associates. At the least, they may choose to recuse themselves from votes where social relationships may exert undue influence. Conflicts of Interest in Government.
0コメント