Re: Nepotism in the workplace

[Cazz]

Please can anyone help with some views on this. I work in a small GP surgery approx 30 employees.

Recently due to build up of work caused by staff absence we have had both of the Practice Managers daughters working here

on a temp basis.

Now we hear our newly appointmed reception supervisors daughter who works at a practice nearby maybe also employed on a temp basis.

What are your views?

[DJKillaQueen]

Are there any laws that require postions to be advertised? Otherwise the practise I guess can employ who it likes. Nepotism happens everywhere. It's only natural to help family and friends first. There are some laws I think for public sectors jobs.

[giggirl]

Presumably there are no agency fees involved. Agency fees can be big bucks so it's cheaper to employ someone direct rather than through an agency. If I had a temp job opening and an eye on the bottom line I would definitely look to fill it without using an agency.

[womanofdulwich]

I work for quite a big company of 400 plus and we always ask friends and family first- saves agency fees- we get an introductory bonus if it works well and everyone is happy. You would not recommend anyone if you thought they would not work out. Now I look at it your way I see why you might feel it is unfair , but I think that is how life is -so you have to get out there and network like crazy!!

[Earl Aelfheah]

In theory, it probably consitutes indirect discrimination, which is unlawful. However, in reality one would have difficultly making a claim.

Pretty poor practice though and unlikely to ensure that you're employing the best person for the job. Goes on all over the place unfortunately, especially in the media (which I guess explains T4 presenters).

[JohnL]

Its the way it works - sons/daughters of staff come for work experience, then have a bit of experience if a first rung type job comes up. Happens with our, much larger, company all the time.

womanofdulwich Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I work for quite a big company of 400 plus and we

> always ask friends and family first- saves agency

> fees- we get an introductory bonus if it works

> well and everyone is happy. You would not

> recommend anyone if you thought they would not

> work out. Now I look at it your way I see why you

> might feel it is unfair , but I think that is how

> life is -so you have to get out there and network

> like crazy!!

[stevebailey]

As unfair as it may seem, as there is actually no position to be filled, i.e nobody has been sacked/resigned, no external advertising needs to take place.

The staff absent due to health will be receiving their statutory sick pay and have a job to come back to (should this not be long term sick) so providing the daughters are being paid properly, i.e payslip, tax and ni contributions covered by both sides then nothing illegal is going on.

I'm with you though, there are plenty of people willing to work out there who would quite happily take a temp position to feed their families/selves, unfortunately this is just the way it is.

Sorry.

[Brendan]

This is just the way it is?

The amount of times in history that phase has been ejaculted out to justify all sorts foulness. It is a mindset that allows the type of injustice that permeates society to continue. Injustice perpetrated by the type of filth that should be given no quarter and treated as criminals yet are somehow allowed to continue living, seemingly free of culpability.

[Moos]

So... are you saying that someone that offers their daughter a temporary position within a GP surgery rather than advertising the job is filth who should be given no quarter? Just checking whether that's a general or a specific statement.

[Brendan]

No it?s the type of attitude displayed. ?That?s just the way it is, sorry.? Whether it?s someone going on about why certain people get opportunities in business over others or why a black kid who grows up on an estate sharing a room with 2 siblings is going to get pissed on all his life by the kids who grow up in big house in the next suburb no matter how hard he tries to make something of his life.

Situations may be different but the psychology behind the attitude is exactly the same. How far it goes just depends on the boundaries within the specific society it is happening in.

In America 200 years ago slavery was ?just the way it is?

In South Africa 20 years ago apartheid was ?just the way it is?

In this country your nasty little class system has always been, ?just the way it is?

Should I go on to Germany, China, Ireland etc.

Different places where the boundaries as to what happens are different but the same base attitude by the same type of bastards.

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Get some caffiene down you Bren, then surreptitiously put the cricket on your computer - it'll all look different then.

[Brendan]

Sorry I?m going off topic and venting my general anger at the self serving, exploitative, nastiness of humanity. I?ll leave this alone and go contemplate starting a threat about why arseholes are arseholes.

[Moos]

OK, thanks, just checking.

[SteveT]

In Brazil there is a German speaking town where everything works like clockwork, not at all like the rest of Brazil.

The secret is that to get a job there, you have to be fluent in German.

If you drop in to Chinatown they employ Chinese, are they racist?

As for your "arseholes" Brendan, many employers would argue they employ far too many, and pay them far too much, being 'common as muck' as you might say.

[Jeremy]

Sometimes I think you must mix with the wrong people, Brendan! Surely there must be very, very few people out there who wouldn't be in favour of more social mobility? Who says that the class system is "just the way it is"?

[Brendan]

Arseholes Jeremy.

Something that Steve thinks I have more than one of.

[SteveT]

I think that we all put up with far too many of them in life, in fact in every job I ever had I was surrounded by them many on higher rates of pay too, useless bar studs!

The place is full of arseholes, but watchagonnado?

[SteveT]

When I was employing people I would ask my employee's if they new anyone first and foremost to fill the vacancy.

I always thought it would be more harmonious if recommendations were used, and it was cheaper than agencies plus the person recommending would over-see their protege to prevent them from failing.

[Smiler]

Cazz,

If you know of people who could do a better job, why not suggest them to the people who do the temp recruiting?

[RosieH]

We're just animals - in terms of evolution, just one tiny step away from chimps - and self-interest is just doing what comes naturally.

That isn't to say that we shouldn't aspire to do things differently, but in essence, we're just promoting our own gene pool. Not sure how many generations it's going to take to breed in genuine altruism.

[Brendan]

Well there?s a philosophical point I disagree with. Not your point about looking out for our own gene pool but the bit about alturism not existing.

True altruism does exist. Even if it evolved out of self interest. Which I don?t think it did. It more than likely evolved from us being pack animals not individuals so putting the needs of the group before our own was natural instinct even if there is some multifaceted subconscious motivation that we (as highly evolved yet inexplicability still bloody stupid animals) perceive as selfish.

The pack, troop or family group was around long before self awareness. We naturally relied on being part of a group long before we could even conceptualise that we were individuals (although men who do research with crows may disagree with me here). So altruism is more than likely the more natural state and selfishness a modern adaptation as we developed intellectually.

This idea that everything we do is motivated by selfishness is too often just used as an excuse by selfish people for being horrible human beings. It?s so prolific that there are entire social and political movement based around the concept. They try to drag everyone else down to their level by suggesting that decent people being good and kind to one another are actually just acting selfishly. But the theory only makes sense from arguments based on assumption and general ignorance of what humanity is rather than fact.

[pk]

but people/animals don't join the group to just give and not take. the benefits are for all and if you accept the view that the purpose of life (particularly before self awareness) is an innate wish to pass on your genes (which you might not acccept) then the group helps protect you and your genes (in relatives and offspring) and as such serves your own purpose (as well as that of others, incidentally)

following from rosie's point about breeding altruism - i guess you could argue that it can never happen - evolution concentrates genes that offer a competitive advantage and can being truly selfish ever do that?

(written in a hurry so apologies if it's nonsense)

[Ridgley]

Not sure on this, as my sister worked for a particuler charity, and told me that there was a job advertised I applied like everyone else got the job,

[KidKruger]

I've seen nothing above to suggest people are being taken on REGARDLESS of their skills and REGARDLESS of the likelihood of their ability to blend withthe existing staff. Often, knowing or knowing OF someone can pre-empt potential issues such as interpersonal conflicts / hiring a difficult person or understanding actual ability (not ALWAYS easy in interviews because interviewers are not always qualified / experienced enough to conduct objective interviewing [in itself a huge issue in my mind, tantamount to Brendan's concerns]). The implication of following a 'due process' for recruitment is that it's expertly done, by people who know what they're doing, and totally understand the business's needs. Far from always the case in IMO.

Not saying that's the only reason to recruit personal contacts, but, besides saving on agency and middle-man fees, it's another advantage of using that approach. You know (have an idea of) what you're getting.

I have actually interviewed people in the past, had suspicions about their stories and (after checking with contacts at other organisations) discovered disasters waiting to happen. These people were politely omitted from my search, never knowing that I became aware of their deceit. Some of these interviewees were favoured by others on the interview panel because of their demeanour or warmness, absolute disasters waiting to happen (assuming success of the company is your objective). We'd have had to prove their failures and wrap a lot of time and money around their exit, then start the search all over again.

Some people roam company to company doing shite work, taking the money AND the p!ss. A company needs to keep it's business running and the huge costs for recruitment and recuitment mistakes are tough to swallow at best of times.