Skip to content

Archives for nepotism

See all posts in the network tagged with nepotism

Family Ties and Chain of Command

Here is today’s burning question: I have been volunteering with a small rural fire district for about 11 years. I was promoted to lieutenant by the previous chief, but since he left 7 years ago I have had nothing but trouble with the new chief. I won’t bother you with the details, but my problem is this: My wife joined the department last summer. Last week out of the blue my chief told me that although she is allowed to volunteer, she is not allowed to respond to incidents where I play a supervisory role! I make about 60% of all of calls and was hoping this would allow my wife and I to spend more time together.  Now she can only respond to calls that I cannot make. Is it legal to deny someone to volunteer based on marital status / family relationships?

Answer: You need to get some local legal advice. To fully answer your question an attorney will need to look at your state laws, perhaps local ordinances, fire district regulations, fire department rules and regulations, etc. In addition, whether your department is a municipal entity (fire district) or a volunteer fire company funded by a fire district could make a huge difference. Without knowing all of that – any advice I could give you would be half-baked at best.

I agree, given your strained relationship with the chief, it sounds like he may be using your martial status as a way to harass you – but there may be a valid reason for it as well – such as nepotism laws that prohibit a person from reporting to an immediate family member. Most of those nepotism laws apply to paid employees, and you did not indicate if you are paid on call, or fully volunteer. Again the devil will be in the details.

You would be completely within your rights to ask the chief for some additional information on the martial status rule, such as when the rule was adopted and what it was based on (state law, local ethics commission ruling, attorney’s advice, etc.). If he is bluffing, these questions may be a way to smoke him out. On the other hand if he is sincere, acting on advice of counsel and trying to do the right thing it offers a way that you can be assured he is not out to make your life difficult.  You would also be within your rights to ask that the rule be put in writing  (if it has not yet been) to make sure it is applied to everyone equally.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Posted in Burning Question, Conflicts of Interest, Ethics, Volunteers

Tagged ,

No comments Posted by on February 21, 2013

Springfield Fire Cited By State Civil Service Commission

The Massachusetts Civil Service Commission has handled down a decision that harshly criticizes the selection process used by the Springfield Fire Department to hire 21 new firefighters. The Commission was responding to the complaints of four candidates who claimed they were improperly bypassed.

To fully understand the decision, it is important to understand that in Massachusetts, municipal hiring decisions are governed by the state’s civil service commission. The multitude of decisions that go into  the hiring process must all be done in accordance with state requirements, creating a bureaucratic nightmare for those unfamiliar with the system.

The thrust of the commission’s ruling had to do with the role played by Deputy Chief Jerrold Prendergast in the selection process. Chief Prendergast’s son Zachary was among those hired by the process. While Chief Prendergast was not involved the interview process or in making the final appointments, he was involved at various points in assessing the qualifications of candidates to advance to the interview process.

The commission’s decision stated: “Deputy Chief Prendergast’s direct involvement in the review and selection process compromised the Fire Department’s ability to ensure open consideration of all candidates for the position of firefighter… To ensure that all candidates were given open consideration and to remove any appearance of impropriety, Deputy Chief Prendergast should have removed himself from this particular hiring round.”

The commission ordered that all non-selected candidates be contacted to determine their interest in being added to the “top of the next Certification” list where they will “remain… until such time as they receive at least one consideration for appointment.” They will also be granted retroactive seniority to same date as the 21 hired.

Here is the commission’s decision: Springfield-Fire-Department-Investigation

Springfield’s Fire Commissioner Gary Cassanelli issued a written statement concluding “I very much disagree with opinion of Chairman Bowman regarding his review of the Springfield Fire Department’s 2010 firefighter hiring process.”

Here is the official Springfield Fire Department response to the decision: Springfield FD Response

More on the story.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Posted in Discrimination, Ethics, Labor Law, Politics

Tagged , , , ,

No comments Posted by on January 5, 2012