My nonprofit routinely hires the children of staff as summer students. Do you think this is ethical?

Like any good ethics advisor, I often give answers of “it depends” because details matter, and I rarely have all the information. I help people identify and think through issues and options rather than giving the “right answer”. It gives them better skills for the future, and ownership of the decision.

But this one does not need more details. If children of staff are “routinely” hired, out of the applicant pool of teenagers in our communities, then they are probably being hired just for their connections rather than for their merit or relationship to mission. And this is wrong. Absolutely, bluntly, wrong.

It is also very common, and people excuse it by saying that all the summer jobs go to kids with family connections. If they do not help their kids, their kids will get nothing.

And I answer with these points against:

1. The organization exists to provide a public benefit, not a private benefit. The whole community being served deserves access to services and both volunteer and paid roles without discrimination. It is a violation of their purpose and probably their stated values to discriminate in hiring this way.
2. For example, unless the staff already reflects the full diversity of the community, hiring their children reduces diversity within the organization, when diversity and inclusion are often stated values of a nonprofit.
3. The staff members are probably not well paid, but they have jobs and are not likely to be at the bottom rung of the socio-economic ladder. What about the kids whose families are among the poorest? They need the work most, and their families usually have no connections at all to help them. Giving preference to family members violates values such as social justice, anti-poverty and anti-oppression.
4. The organization, and especially its board, is required to be fiscally responsible and use its resources prudently toward mission achievement. Failure to hire based on merit, and thereby achieve the best results, is a waste of public resources. The board, in failing to give direction against such hiring, is negligent in its fiduciary duty.
5. The staff are taking unfair private advantage of their role. It is no different than if they bypassed intake rules to give family members better service or gave discounts on fees to their family (and yes, some do this too, and it is also unethical).
6. Privately-held companies are entitled to waste their monies as they see fit, and many provide full-time work to family members who could not cut it anywhere else. Publicly held companies are responsible to shareholders and allowing hiring based on connections rather than merit violates their duty to shareholders. In other words, it is not just wrong in nonprofits; public companies should open up their summer hiring too, and many do. It should go without saying that nepotism is wrong in government, and an improper use of tax monies.
7. In many cases, summer student hiring is funded at least partially by government, and the grants may require open competition (and if they don’t, they should). So the hirings may also violate the grant and make it repayable if the organization cannot demonstrate objective screening and selection. Such documentation is essential anyway in case of a human rights complaint.
8. The staff are in an excellent position to coach their kids on how to apply, prepare for, and be interviewed for nonprofit positions. They are also the first to learn about the openings. So even with the best of intentions for open competition, family members have an edge. If that edge is not enough, then they REALLY do not merit hiring.
9. Family conflicts and roles may be brought into the workplace, and this is rarely a positive for the rest of us. I had the good fortune to work with an excellent mother/daughter team for several years, but I believe them to be the exception.

On the other side:

I have not, you will notice, said that all hiring of family members is wrong. They can compete on merit, provided no family member is involved with the hiring. There may also be circumstances that make family hiring preferable. For example, if the work is at a remote location without transit, and the students are unlikely to have cars or driver’s licenses, then having them commute with a family member saves the cost of a van or commercial transportation. If the nonprofit does not have the funds for such transportation, the position might have to go unfilled.

Young people with limited work experience may come out fairly equal in an evaluation. If merit is therefore not an issue, and the staff are already diverse, hiring some family members may help morale. If the young person has volunteered at the organization because of a family connection, thus demonstrating support for the mission, that adds to their merit.

Another factor to consider is whether the mission relates to supporting families, and whether the summer job would strengthen family ties. Or whether the mission is about serving people with a particular disease, disability or other special need, and the family member works there partly because their child is affected.

I do suggest, persuasively I hope, that the children of managers and executives not be considered, regardless of merit or other criteria. Their presence sets a bad example, and it is difficult for staff to interview them without feeling pressured. The managers and executives have connections elsewhere and can help their children learn of openings in other nonprofits instead.

This may be one of my least popular columns, as it challenges a long-standing practice dear to the hearts of many parents. So be it. I only wish the question had arrived a couple of months earlier, before the hiring for the summer of 2007 was completed.

So remember it for next year, and for cooperative placements, internships and other chances to put living the values ahead of helping oneself. Or challenge my opinion!

Since 1992, Jane Garthson has dedicated her consulting and training business to creating better futures for our communities and organizations through values-based leadership. She is a respected international voice on governance, strategic thinking and ethics. Jane can be reached at jane@garthsonleadership.ca.

To submit a dilemma for a future column, or to comment on a previous one, please contact editor@charityvillage.com. For paid professional advice about an urgent or complex situation, contact Jane directly.

Disclaimer: Advice and recommendations are based on limited information provided and should be used as a guideline only. Neither the author nor CharityVillage.com make any warranty, express or implied, or assume any legal liability for accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information provided in whole or in part within this article.