Nepotism In The Workplace

1755 Words8 Pages

Nepotism is since a long time ago considered as a practice in securing occupation or a vocation benefit for a close relative. As a student majoring in Public Policy and Public Administration, I would like to start tackling the issue in my own field of perspective; nepotism constitutes such a discriminating issue to associations that it is tended to by legislation in a few states in the United States of America. It appears glaringly evident that public officials are obliged to keep up an appearance of unbiased attitude, and a formal anti-nepotism policy appears an intelligent decision to address this issue in extensive government agencies, but since the majority of the people who support members of parliament financially do own huge organizations …show more content…

However, managers may think about whether a nepotism policy is truly fundamental or imperative for a little business - Practice of naming relatives and friends in one's association to positions for which outsiders may be better qualified - Notwithstanding its negative essences, nepotism (if applied sensibly) is a critical and positive practice in the startup and developmental years of a firm where complete trust and eagerness to buckle down (with little or no reward) are basic for its survival. Yet, is it never right to give uncommon thought for reasons other than merit? Not so much. For example, numerous universities will give particular treatment to candidates whose folks are alumni’s or employees. Similarly an employer may give particular treatment to the children of his employees. These practices may aide in creating more loyalty and commitment, and it might benefit the university and/or the employer.

In Calum Murray article: Nepotism: ‘The Rich Man’s Burden’, he talks about his experience with nepotism, and how his future job was decided explicitly on the fact that he is his father’s son: “I’m fully aware that my most preeminent credential is that I am my father’s son”. He believes that it is not …show more content…

And could rational agency be effective in the resulting world? When answering the first question, one might conceive a world where nepotism actually becomes a universal law, and that is the current circumstance, as many people just like Murray believe that if it’s directed in the right path, it’s not a harmful thing. However, when answering the second question, can I actually will a world that looks like this? What if I don’t have the means or connections? Why should others have such an opportunity while I and some others don’t? And even if I do have the connections and will a world that is based on only merit, that makes education and merit negligible or even redundant for that matter. Everyone then would only hire the people close to him or his relatives; all organizations then would be ‘family businesses’. Therefore, according to Kant if one of the questions is answered with a no, then our maxim becomes

Open Document