Labor Law: City of Richmond report shows risk of nepotism in workplace (2024)

AJune 11, 2024, investigative report from the City of Richmond determined that the General Registrar and Deputy General Registrar violated city policies to include policies on the Employment of Relatives and Code of Ethics.

According to the report, the office employed relatives and contracted with a spouse without using procurement processes, in addition to ethical concerns around the use of a city credit card. There was purportedly a “Nepotism Tree” describing the hiring of the Registrar and Deputy General Registrar’s siblings, grandchildren and those associated with the grandchildren and relatives.

Generally, it’s a mess, and has caused the registrar’s office to come under scrutiny just before a presidential election. Allegedly, employees were hired or promoted without a fair and transparent process.

One of the recommendations states, “The Office of Elections shall implement transparent and fair recruitment processes, enforcing anti-nepotism policies, and ensuring that hiring and promotions are based on merit and qualifications.”

Terms like “relative” and “nepotism” are broad terms. Relative is defined as, “a person connected with another by blood or affinity.” Nepotism is defined as, “the practice among those with power or influence of favoring relatives, friends, or associates, especially by giving them jobs.”

Because these terms are broad, employers must be specific in setting policy for hiring practices. Managers should avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest.

The employment of relatives causes concerns of conflicts of interest, favoritism, lack of transparency, lack of accountability and ethical considerations.

In my practice, I’ve witnessed multiple examples of impropriety in hiring and promotions processes due to the relationship between the hiring manager and the candidate, whether it be a romantic relationship, family member or someone associated with the family member.

Organizations can avoid these issues by developing a policy against the employment of relatives, which should be defined, at a minimum, to include spouse, child, parent, grandparent, aunt, uncle, niece and nephew including step-relationships and in-laws.

A relative should not report directly or indirectly to another relative, other than in a family-owned business where it is well-established that the nature of the business is that it is run by family members.

Even where there is no direct reporting relationship, the ability to hold relatives who work in the same organization accountable can be problematic. It also makes confidentiality difficult.

Organizations should also make sure that all hiring and promotions practices and processes are transparent, and well-defined.

When I have seen these situation arise, even where there was a defined process, the hiring manager seeking to make an improper hire will try to manipulate the process or convince others that the person they seek to hire is qualified or the best candidate, even when it is clear this isn’t the case.

Under no circ*mstances should a hiring manager have free will to violate hiring or promotions processes, and skip relevant screening and recruitment steps, to hire or promote someone. Rarely does the hiring manager disclose the improper motive or relationship at the time, so employers should be suspicious when a hiring manager tries to avoid screening procedures and push through a hire or a promotion.

Organizations that permit hiring of relatives and nepotism need to accept the fate of poor morale, a belief that some people are untouchable, and the potential for conflicts and ethical violations, even in family-owned businesses or family partnerships.

If an organization needs to implement a new policy, it should grandfather in the current relatives employed in the organization, but make sure there is no direct line of supervision.