Is this scenario an example of an ethics violation?

[Redemptionman]

Jurisdiction

Louisiana

I would like to know if spouses work for the same company, one is in management for the same department that the other spouse works in but a different location. If they collude and work together to bring in one of the significant others employees into the same department that the spouse works in would this be a possible ethics violation of nepotism? Even though the employee does not directly report to the other spouse, they work in the same department that the other spouse managed so they worked together to move an employee from one spouses department to the others.

So, this would be sort of unethical, not sure if it would be nepotism or preferential treatment but colluding to move an employee from one spouses department to another is a clear sign that something went on.

 

[welkin]

So, this would be sort of unethical, not sure if it would be nepotism or preferential treatment but colluding to move an employee from one spouses department to another is a clear sign that something went on.

Does the move benefit or hurt the company? By that, I mean is the person qualified for the position they were given.

I don't think you will find any laws that would prohibit it. Whether or not it would be considered nepotism or an ethics violation in that company, is dependent on the company's policies. Does the company have an employee handbook?

The use of the word colluding may be somewhat misleading because it means to work together secretly especially in order to do something illegal or dishonest. Do you know, for a fact, that it was done in secret? Did the management know of or approve the move? If they did, your concern is moot.

 

[Redemptionman]

Does the move benefit or hurt the company? By that, I mean is the person qualified for the position they were given.

I don't think you will find any laws that would prohibit it. Whether or not it would be considered nepotism or an ethics violation in that company, is dependent on the company's policies. Does the company have an employee handbook?

The use of the word colluding may be somewhat misleading because it means to work together secretly especially in order to do something illegal or dishonest. Do you know, for a fact, that it was done in secret? Did the management know of or approve the move? If they did, your concern is moot.

It doesn't have to be illegal or dishonest to be an ethics violation if it could break the companies ethics policy. This person did the same job under the spouses department in a different division so they are definitely qualified. The optics of it appears that the other spouse worked through a nepotistic process to get their employee on the team, if you will. By using the spouse in the other department as a cheerleader for the transfer. While all the other employees know that the only reason they are there is due to the fact the management spouse wanted to move the employee to the other spouses team thus blocking others from getting a lateral move or equal position.

It just appears to be not an honest and fair selection process which resulted in an employee who worked for one spouse benefiting from the relationship thus getting the job over other equally qualified individuals.

 

[welkin]

It just appears to be not an honest and fair selection process which resulted in an employee who worked for one spouse benefiting from the relationship thus getting the job over other equally qualified individuals.

It is up to the company's management to determine if the actions violated company policy. It really doesn't matter what it looks like or your feelings of impropriety. Assuming this is a private company without a CBA, or civil service status, they can hire and fire or move around whomever they want.

Suppose a company decides they want a new director of customer service. They already have a director and others that work in the department that could be elevated to director. But the company brings in someone new that has 30 years of experience as a director. The new director says that they want to hire someone from the company they came from to fill a position rather than move an existing employee into the slot. Do you think that is dishonest or that a fair selection process did not take place?

You still haven't said how one spouse benefited from the relationship over other equally qualified individuals.

 

[Redemptionman]

It is up to the company's management to determine if the actions violated company policy. It really doesn't matter what it looks like or your feelings of impropriety. Assuming this is a private company without a CBA, or civil service status, they can hire and fire or move around whomever they want.

Suppose a company decides they want a new director of customer service. They already have a director and others that work in the department that could be elevated to director. But the company brings in someone new that has 30 years of experience as a director. The new director says that they want to hire someone from the company they came from to fill a position rather than move an existing employee into the slot. Do you think that is dishonest or that a fair selection process did not take place?

You still haven't said how one spouse benefited from the relationship over other equally qualified individuals.

Right I agree, again I said it is the optics of it. It does not look right for the significant other who works in the different department not having a role or hand in coordinating the transfer of the other spouses employee to their department. The company has a strict nepotism/ favoritism policy with an anonymous way to report the issue. While there is no direct benefit other than the coordination of transfer of the employee it just appears that it may not have happened without the connection, and it definitely influenced who they hired for the role. If there wasn't an inside connection there then this would or could have played out differently and there would be no reason to question it. However, when a spouse or significant other influences a hiring decision to move an under-performing or knot on a log employee (if you will) to another location where their spouse works then it is clearly not on the up and up. Maybe the benefit is the management spouse gets rid of an average to under-performing employee or that they get to say hire this person since they work for my spouse. Who knows the actual reason, but without the connection and the inside track it would not have been possible for this employee to do this.

 

[army judge]

So, this would be sort of unethical, not sure if it would be nepotism or preferential treatment but colluding to move an employee from one spouses department to another is a clear sign that something went on.

Something is never not happening.
Something is always popping.

Just because someone THINKS something is shady, doesn't mean the person can PROVE its shady.

I've seen many things over the decades the Lord has allowed me so far.

I've learned many things over those decades.

One of best things I've learned is NOT to poke my nose into business that doesn't involve me.

I'm not a one person police or law enforcement agency.

I'm happy to hold the rank of PFC, Army slang for PROUD F***ING CIVILIAN.

What others do, as long as it doesn't affect or impact me, I don't see, speak, or hear.

I adopt the three wise monkey view.
Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.
Bottom line, one is better off minding only her/his business!

 

[adjusterjack]

The company has a strict nepotism/ favoritism policy with an anonymous way to report the issue.

Then report it anonymously and see what happens.

 

[Tax Counsel]

So, this would be sort of unethical, not sure if it would be nepotism or preferential treatment but colluding to move an employee from one spouses department to another is a clear sign that something went on.

Ethical standards vary from one organization to the next, and from one individual to another. It's up to the company leadership to establish the ethical standards that will be applied. If the situation you described is unethical, I don't see the ethics problem occurring because they are married. Instead, the problem is two employees colluding to create an arrangement that may favor them at the expense of the company. That act should be seen as unethical regardless of the relationship between the two. The two might be siblings, cousins, good friends, members of the same lodge, alumni of the same college or fraternity, members of the same church, or any number of other ways people get together. The harm would be the same whether the two employees were related or not.

 

[Redemptionman]

Then report it anonymously and see what happens.

Nah, I do not care enough-- nothing that is what would happen

at least it would make them aware of it

 

[EeeeekitsaMouse]

Nah, I do not care enough-- nothing that is what would happen

at least it would make them aware of it

Obviously, you DO care about it or you wouldn't be bringing it up. Did you want this position that the person got?

 

[Redemptionman]

Obviously, you DO care about it or you wouldn't be bringing it up. Did you want this position that the person got?

No thanks, but it is for the sure the optics of it. If someone else from anywhere else in the organization had received the position it wouldn't look this way. However, since someone did from a relative related to someone already working there. Well I guess you all know how it looks.

 

[army judge]

Well I guess you all know how it looks.