References : NEPOTISM

CSC REMINDS INCOMING GOV’T OFFICIALS: AVOID NEPOTISM

Published: 01 July 2016

At the onset of a new administration, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) reminds
elective and appointive officials to observe civil service rules on appointments,
particularly those that prohibit nepotism.

Book V, Title I(A), Chapter 8, Section 59 of Executive Order No. 292, also known as the
Administrative Code of 1987, prohibits nepotic appointments or those made in favor of a
relative of the appointing or recommending authority, or of the chief of bureau or office,
or of the persons exercising immediate supervision over the appointee.

The word “relative” under the said Code refers to those related within the third degree of
consanguinity (relationship by blood) or affinity (relationship by marriage) such as
spouse (1st degree), children (1st degree), sibling (2nd degree), nephew and niece (3rd
degree), and uncle and aunt (3rd degree).

Under Section 79 of the Local Government Code of 1991, the prohibition extends to the
appointing or recommending authority’s relatives within the fourth degree of
consanguinity or affinity, such as first cousin or first cousin-in-law (4th degree).

The CSC said that nepotism is a form of corruption or abuse of authority that violates
Article IX(B), Section 2(2) of the 1987 Philippine Constitution which states,
“Appointments in the civil service shall be made only according to merit and fitness to
be determined, as far as practicable, and, except to positions which are policy-
determining, primarily confidential, or highly technical, by competitive examination.”

CSC Chairperson Alicia dela Rosa-Bala said, “Generally, appointments in the civil
service should be based on merit and fitness to ensure a competent and professional
workforce. There are rules and qualification standards that must be considered when
choosing to appoint people in government.”

The rule on nepotism covers all kinds of appointments whether original, promotional,
transfer and reemployment, regardless of status, including casuals and contractuals.

Exempted from this rule, however, are teachers, physicians, members of the Armed
Forces of the Philippines, scientific and technology personnel under R.A. 8439, and
primarily confidential positions such as Administrator (Provincial/City/Municipal),
Executive Assistant, Private Secretary, and Chauffeur/Driver.

Also exempted are those involved in the personal security of elective or appointive
officials; as well as the personal staff of elective officials, department heads, other
Cabinet officials whose tenure is at the pleasure of the President, and chairpersons and
members of commissions and boards with fixed terms of office.

Chair Bala added that because nepotism favors a few individuals, fairness in the hiring
and promotion process in government is compromised. This degrades the morale of
incumbent civil servants and excludes other, possibly more qualified individuals from
being considered for employment.

The CSC warned that nepotism is classified as a grave administrative offense

punishable by dismissal from the service.

Policies Restricting Nepotism in Government

Nepotism implies favoritism in the workplace

•••

BY 

MICHAEL ROBERTS

Updated October 31, 2019

Nepotism is something of a buzzword, and it's generally seen in a negative light,

particularly in government. Merriam-Webster defines the term as "favoritism based on
kinship." Most organizations avoid nepotism because it's seen as unfair and it brings to
mind more sinister concepts like cronyism and the spoils system.

Many companies prohibit nepotism, but it remains rampant in business, sports, and
entertainment. Donald Trump's children are executive vice presidents of his companies,
and, as President, his daughter, Ivanka Trump, was his senior advisor. National Football
League owners Jerry Jones and Robert Kraft also placed their children in executive
positions with their respective franchises. The children of Hollywood producers and A-
list actors are often cast in roles based on their family connections.
Countless laws and policies prohibit nepotism under particular circumstances in the
public sector. The prohibitions most often deal in the areas of human resources and
procurement. These are hot-button areas because of the money involved in hiring
personnel and awarding government contracts.

Nepotism Is Not Simply Working Together

The key word in Merriam-Webster's definition is "favoritism." It's certainly not uncommon
for family members to work for the same company, and in and of itself, this doesn't have
to be a negative thing. Ultimately, it's the terms of the workplace relationship that set the
tone for charges of nepotism. 

Common Nepotism Rules

Nepotism can be somewhat difficult to avoid in small local governments given the small
applicant pool and the likelihood that there are few other employers nearby. In medium-
sized and large governments, nepotism policies tend to be nuanced around reporting
structures. Family members might not be prohibited from working within the
organization, but there may be prohibitions on a few actions, such as hiring a family
member or serving on an interview panel where a family member is an
applicant. Directly supervising a family member is typically against the rules, as is
working in the same line of supervision as a family member

Nepotism rules often require that job applicants and potential contractors disclose their
relationships with any employees up front.

Family members of elected officials, appointed officials, and chief government

executives are often prohibited from working within the organizations their family
members lead. This happens because those individuals are at the top of the
organization so all employees fall in their line of supervision. Additionally, the mere
appearance of impropriety among those in high levels of authority can
cost politicians elections.

Nepotism in U.S. History

Approximately 40 of President Ulysses S. Grant's family members and family
connections benefited from his presidency. In the Encyclopedia of White-Collar and
Corporate Crime, Lawrence Salinger cites instances of Grant and Mrs. Grant's family
members being appointed to public office.

Additionally, Robert F. Kennedy served as United States Attorney General under his
brother President John F. Kennedy.

Nepotism is bad for the economy

but most people underestimate it
orruption is rampant in Indonesia but so is nepotism, or favouritism granted
to family, friends and individuals. Many believe corruption is worse than
nepotism.

There has yet to be a lot of studies of nepotism. But, recently, studies have

looked at the impact of nepotism on the performances of family-
owned business and cooperation.

The studies show that nepotism have resulted in bias in decision-making,

unfair treatment and losses to company’s performances in the long term.
Recent studies also prove that nepotism makes people feel demotivated,
lacking in confidence and alienated. It also hinders competition and
innovation.

These consequences can weaken an organisation and eventually will impact

economic development as a whole.

Nepotism affects the performance of organisations. However, the lack of

research on this topic could potentially mean the impact is far greater than we
thought.

Nepotism is indeed bad for the economy but my recent research suggests most
people in Indonesia underestimate it.

Nepotism in Indonesia
Corruption is the abuse of power for private gain. Nepotism means the abuse
of power is extended to support a specific group’s interest, usually based on
personal greed.

In Indonesia, the term nepotism became popular in the late 1990s. Student
protesters demanding the end of Suharto’s corrupt and authoritarian
rule coined a popular abbreviation KKN. It stands
for korupsi, kolusi and nepotisme, or corruption, collusion and nepotism.
Even after Suharto was no longer in power, the practice of favouritism based
on kinship remained very strong. Many political parties were formed based on
family ties, such as the Democrat Party and Berkarya Party

Nepotism also exists in local governments. In Banten and South Sulawesi, for
example, the governors ran their administrations based on family favouritism.
Even though these leaders are no longer in power, their political influence
remains strong.

These cases show that nepotism appears in every level of bureaucracy in

Indonesia.

Individual perception on nepotism

Similarly to corruption, nepotism is everywhere in Indonesia’s political and
social system. But how does an Indonesian perceive nepotism? To answer that
question, I conducted a survey involving 237 participants from May to June
2018. I also interviewed ten participants between July and August 2018. Some
90% of the respondents were university students.

The research finds most participants agree that corruption is bad. These
respondents also rank corruption, including bribery, embezzlement, abuse of
authority and money laundering, as worse than political dynasties, collusion
and politic cronyism, and nepotism.

Even though 73% of respondents state that it is wrong for the elite officers to
give opportunities to their own families, nepotism is considered less damaging
than the others.
Respondents’ responses based on which act is worse than others.

Respondents’ responses to the elites giving job opportunities to their relatives.

Despite the numbers, the interviews show that nepotism has worse
consequences than corruption.

Seven interviewees considered nepotism to be acceptable, arguing it was

human nature for people to choose their own family or friend as their trusted
officer/staff because they know them better than anyone. In addition, they
would not have to worry that the person might betray them.
These respondents also argued it is their responsibility to ensure that their
relatives have a stable job with a good salary. Even when they do not have
sufficient skills, the respondents believed they should still be supervised in
their work.

Meanwhile, three other respondents who were against nepotism argued that it
closed opportunities for others to work and compete fairly. They said the
presence of nepotism made them believe there was no point in studying and
working harder if merit counts for so little.

The unfair career treatment as a result of nepotism triggers these people to

become lazy. It means nepotism removes competition and stymies people’s
motivation, making innovation impossible to achieve.

Nepotism a natural tendency

Nepotism can be found not only in workplaces and government, but also in
social animals like wasps, bees, ants, termites and monkeys.

In natural science, Neo-Darwinian scholars agree that nepotism significantly

affects the behaviour of social organisms.

A queen bee, for example, selects individual workers to stay inside or outside
the queen’s cell based on her preferential genotype.

For humans, nepotism also operates in any social classes and influences how

people determine other socioeconomic rankings based on their preference on
skin colours, looks and style.

Nepotism starts early. It begins with parents’ favouritism towards their

children. This kind of favouritism is embedded in the children’s unconscious
mind and will influence their future behaviour.

A study from Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business and

research firm Penn Schoen Berland showed the high prevalence of favouritism
in workplaces. In interviews with 303 senior executives, researchers found
that 84% confirmed that favouritism existed in their organisation.

Similar cases also happen in government bureaucracy where many people are

selected based on personal validation instead of quality and qualification. As
long as the selected individual fulfils the qualification, they consider nepotism
an acceptable act.
Justifications for nepotism can influence how a country perceives it. In a
developing country such as Ghana, nepotism is considered to be simply part of
human nature.

In a developed country such as Italy, nepotism does not appear until a person
goes to higher education. During university enrolment, students from a
powerful family in politics will get bigger chances to be supervised by an
influential professor.

There is no easy way to end nepotism in Indonesia because it persists in every

level of society. The public needs to understand the consequences of nepotism.
At the same time, the government should enact anti-nepotism law to prevent
the practice in the bureaucracy.

The non-disclosure of a close personal relationship with someone being interviewed for
employment results in a conflict of interest between an employee and an employer and is a
dismissible offence.

In Coega Development Corporation (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for Conciliation, Mediation and
Arbitration and Others (2016) 37 ILJ 923 (LC), the Labour Court found that a senior employee
was under an obligation to make full disclosure of her close personal relationship with two
applicants for employment before the selection occurred.  She was required to recuse
herself from the selection process.  Her failure to do so, placed her in conflict with her
employer’s interests.
The employee in question was the unit head of Safety, Health, Environment and Quality
operation.  She was a senior manager earning around R 1 million per annum and had
approximately 20 subordinates reporting to her.

The employee assisted in the appointment of two applicants, namely Coetzer and Ebrahim. 
These appointments were tainted by her personal relationship with Tony Corleoni who was
the cousin and brother of Coetzer and Ebrahim respectively.  She assisted both candidates
by making the relevant enquiries with Human Resources and by sitting as a panellist during
their interviews.

After being charged with conflict of interest amounting to gross misconduct, the employee
was dismissed.  The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration found that her
dismissal was substantively unfair because she was not guilty of misconduct. 
On review, the court found that the employee’s actions amounted to serious misconduct. 
Accordingly, the dismissal was found both procedurally and substantively fair for the
following reasons:

 Employees are under an obligation to make a full and frank disclosure of any personal
dealings with applicants for employment;
  The failure to make such a disclosure places the employee in a conflict of interest with
the employer;
 A personal connection with an applicant results in a favourable enhancement of the
employment application;
 Treating job applicants with favouritism amounts to serious misconduct; and
 The sanction of dismissal is warranted in cases of conflict of interest which amounts to
serious misconduct.
The Labour Court said the following:

“It amounts to nepotism and corruption to become involved in the recruitment process of
people to whom you feel favourable, in circumstances where you do not make full
disclosure.”

Conflicts of interest and nepotism can be avoided when employees remain impartial in all
dealings with the appointment of applicants for employment.  Therefore, both employers
and employees should be vigilant regarding such practices and the sanctions warranted in
the circumstances.