Nepotism seems to be more a matter of taste than other conflict provisions. Everyone knows that it looks bad to hire members of one's own family, but many people feel that government is like business, and in business people do this all the time. What is family for?
What are your thoughts on including nepotism in a municipal ethics code, and what are your experiences with such provisions and with the conflict itself?
100(13). Nepotism
-
Unless he or she obtains a waiver pursuant to 213, no official or employee* may appoint or hire his or her spouse or domestic partner*, child or step-child, sibling or step-sibling, parent, or member of his or her household* for any type of employment, including by contract (unless competitively bid pursuant to 103), with the city.
- No official or employee* may supervise or be in a direct line of supervision over his or her spouse or domestic partner*, child or step-child, sibling or step-sibling, parent, or member of his or her household*. If an official or employee* comes into a direct line of supervision over one of these persons, he or she will have six months to come into compliance or to obtain a waiver.
Nepotism and the Public Interest
Many children choose one of their parents' professions, and there is great pride in this. A retired Topeka, Kansas Fire Department administrator, and son of a former Topeka fire chief, is quoted in a recent article as saying "I am proud to follow in the footsteps of family."
In fact, 25 Topeka firefighters had members of their families in the department when they joined.
Would a rule against nepotism (even one that grandfathered in these firefighters and others like them) be in the public's best interest? When employees do not make decisions that greatly affect the community, why is nepotism harmful?
For one thing, it makes it harder to bring in minorities. If a sizeable percentage of new hires are of the same color as current employees, the racial makeup of a firefighting force will change slowly.
Also, problems are created when it comes time to give raises and promotions. How can newcomers know that they are being passed by only because they're not doing as good a job? The public interest is harmed by nepotism when qualified outsiders do not apply for jobs or leave when passed over.
Nepotism can also be very bad for morale on a daily basis. The one time I experienced it in the workplace, a wife took advantage of her husband's position in the company and created such bad feeling, she had to leave the firm. Bad morale means inefficient government.
From another perspective, officials and employees are put in an awkward position when required to choose between a family member and others. Whatever they do, they lose unless, of course, they don't feel a conflict at all, but feel comfortable putting their family obligations ahead of those to the city's residents.
And nepotism, even if everyone acts fairly, looks bad. Governments are supposed to treat everyone equally. Nepotism is a slap in the face of equal treatment. It undermines public trust in government and leads unconnected people to not consider government service.
The best solution is for people to go into the same profession, but do it somewhere else or do it in the private sector. However, in sprawling modern cities, it is harder to work for another city or town than it is in older cities, where they're closer to home. But then one must decide whether staying in the same community is more important than being in the particular line of work. If one's own desires are all that matters, if one must have it both ways, that should be a sign that the person is not cut out for government service.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research, City Ethics
rwechsler@cityethics.org