E-mail Story
Print Friendly
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Proposed Nepotism Policy May Loosen Rules
Copyright © 2010 Albuquerque Journal
By 2010 Dan McKay
Albuquerque Journal
Journal Staff Writer
Bernalillo County's proposed nepotism policy might actually loosen some restrictions currently in place on employees who work with, or for, relatives.
The new policy would create exemptions from nepotism rules for employees who work in corrections, fire and rescue and law enforcement and for any "pre-existing family relationships" that predate the new policy.
The County Commission is expected to discuss the proposed changes later this month and in September. The county administration has been working throughout the summer to revise a host of employment regulations and policies.
The move follows a county-funded investigation that revealed that a son of then-Deputy County Manager John Dantis had been hired in violation of the county's nepotism rules.
Also, the union representing county deputies has complained of nepotism between Sheriff Manny Gonzales and his brother, sheriff's Lt. James Gonzales. And earlier this year, it came to light that Metropolitan Detention Center Director Ron Torres has several relatives under his chain of command.
But, in some ways, what's proposed is less restrictive than what's in place already.
At least two commissioners, Maggie Hart Stebbins and Michael Brasher, say they see little need, if any, for an exemption on pre-existing family relationships. The county administration has surveyed its supervisors to discover whether they work with relatives and is taking action to transfer them or address the issue in some other way, officials say.
So there shouldn't be a need for an exemption, Stebbins and Brasher said in separate interviews.
Brasher said he needs more time to review the new and existing regulations before offering fuller comments. But he added that the new regulations are supposed to be more stringent.
"The thrust was not to make the policy more lenient," Brasher said.
Stebbins said she wants one nepotism policy in place countywide, rather than having it vary by department or union contract, but said relatives working in law enforcement or similar fields may deserve special consideration in some way.
"Those are careers where it can be a family tradition," Stebbins said.
The county should find a way to acknowledge that, she said, but still draft meaningful nepotism rules.
"We don't want to keep people out of the profession," Stebbins said, "but we can't have family members making hiring decisions, disciplinary decisions or promotion decisions that involve their family members."
The proposed changes say there's a need for a law enforcement exemption, because it's a profession that attracts families.
But it also says that, when promotions are considered, the supervisor or official in question should confer with the county manager to "attempt to minimize the instances of direct supervisory oversight in order to maintain employee morale. However, if it is not practicable to adjust schedules or assignments due to operational necessity or rights secured through a collective bargaining agreement an exemption is created by this Policy."
The Journal couldn't reach County Commission Chairman Art De La Cruz for comment Wednesday.
Commissioner Michael Wiener said he needs more time to review the proposed changes before commenting. Commissioner Alan Armijo wasn't present at this week's commission meeting, where the policies were presented for the first time.
The commission is expected to discuss the changes again Aug. 24 and take final action in mid-September.
The proposal "is not final by any means," Stebbins said.
The current rules, meanwhile, say: "Near relatives or unrelated persons sharing a spousal relationship shall not work in the same department when there is a supervisory relationship between them, or if the employee is in the near relative's or unrelated person sharing a spousal relationship's chain of command."
Nepotism is defined as "the practice of giving preferential treatment to near relatives or to unrelated persons sharing a spousal relationship in areas of employment including, but not limited to: selection, benefits, pay, promotion, and discipline."
The proposed policy contains similar language. It also says an employee cannot work in a position that involves "an audit or control function over the relative."
You also can send comments via our comment form
|
|
