Dear Editor,
Last Sunday our newspapers carried reports of “children and relatives” of the head of a public organization being employed in the same organization thus raising questions of potential managerial and staff relations’ improprieties. The very next day the head of the organization responded (also in the said newspapers) that “my children were not given any special or peculiar treatment in terms of position, salary or status and were subjected to competitive interviews before being employed,” etc, etc.
Issues regarding the employment of relatives in the same organization, whether or not the organization is headed by a relative, has always been quite contentious and, as far as I know from my fairly wide experience, the dilemma will continue especially in small societies that are prone to suspicion, rightly or wrongly, of malpractice. This is especially the case among executives and leaders, despite the protestations and swearings to the substance of ‘due process’ in the employment function. It is a conundrum that goes to the heart of the age old doctrine of ‘letting justice be done and be seen to be done’ with greater emphasis on the ‘seeing’ as opposed to the ‘doing.’
Some organizations have a written policy on the subject; the United Nations, for example, of which I have firsthand knowledge, expressly prohibits the employment of children and “blood relatives.” Others do not expressly prohibit it but set out exceptional conditions or extenuating circumstances and safeguards (for example, proving that no other suitable candidate is available and that there would be no direct reporting relationships, etc).
Other organizations are silent on the subject, supposedly preferring to leave it up to the wisdom, judgment and maturity of the respective managers, the labour market context and similar socio-economic factors. In the case of Guyana one may also have to be cognizant of the plurality and well-known prejudices in the society which might strongly invite serious consideration of the maxim: ‘Discretion is the better part of valour.’
Yours faithfully,
Nowrang Persaud
