To think this isn’t nepotism?

[Abergatwenty]

I work for the IT department of a solicitors firm in a large town. We are currently switching from one IT system to another - this means that we’re having to manually transfer a lot of data from the old system to the new.

To help us do this, we have eight 18-21 year olds (including my daughter) working for us for 2 weeks to do the transferring. They are all the children of various people who work for the firm - I just sent out an email asking if anyone had any uni student children home for the holidays who wanted a bit of summer work. We’re paying them minimum wage.

This afternoon in town I bumped into the mother of a girl who my daughter was at school with. She asked what my daughter was up to and I told her she was working at the solicitors with me for a couple of weeks. This mother got very angry about this and thought it wasn’t outrageous that we hadn’t “properly advertised” the jobs so that anyone could apply and had just asked our own kids.

AIBU? The work is time consuming but completely unskilled - we didn’t need to waste time shifting through CVs and A level results to find the most academic people. The only quality required is that we can trust them - we all trust our kids, and we don’t have time to conduct interviews.

Plus, given the number of applications that would come flooding in for anything that even resembles ‘legal work experience’, assessing each applicant and selecting 8 people would have probably taken longer than the actual data transfer job!

And it’s not like the work is going to lead to full time positions - it’s just a 2 weeks, unskilled, minimum wage summer job.

Definitely nepotism! Pretty much the definition of it!

No, it isn't legal work experience, but in the OP's opinion, the role would have been highly sought after; the reaction of her acquaintance also bears out the theory that in the OP's locality, this would have been seen as a desirable temporary job.

So the fact that people have told you over and over again it counts for nothing will not sway you from the notion that this is a highly covetable opportunity rather than a shit job they just want done quickly and cheaply. Righto.

The conversation's a bit pointless when you have had people who recruit for magic circle and big four firms telling you that it doesn't matter and yet you're doggedly sticking to your position.

I will leave you to your simmering resentment

It is perfectly possible to hold the view that this wouldn't be a very significant opportunity whilst also accepting that lots of people would think it might, and apply accordingly. They're not mutually exclusive.

Bluntness - you do realise you've kinda contradicted yourself in your own post?

"Will it give them an unfair advantage, not really, not -a significant one anyway."

"But it's a nice point to have on there." If it's not significantly advantageous, why is it 'nice' to have on cv? Why even put it on at all?

Ikeep - that does genuinely surprise me. Round here they'd get their hand bitten off! We've lost several MAJOR employers inc half our high street in recent years here and I'm hearing similar from friends and family around the U.K. Inc SE.

That said regarding the PA position at the pest control company I can appreciate there may be a certain level of snobbery, but as someone who is germophobe with Dx OCD and who has worked as a PA I would not apply there for that reason. I suspect there are more germophobes than is officially recognised too. In addition depending on the layout of the offices (and applicants may not even go as far as to find out) there may also be concerns Re the chemicals used and allergies. My mum wouldn't apply there either as she's phobic with small animals and would (quite possibly unnecessarily I accept) be concerned there may be small animals around there. I've a friend who rescues ill and injured small animals inc rats, mice etc and she regularly comes across people who won't go in her car or home.

I can understand the issues with a job inc weekends, I think you'll find it's less likely to be a case of they don't WANT to work weekends but that they CAN'T work weekends if they're parents of young DC. I've been a Lp 15 years, in 3 different uk locations inc a large city. NONE had any childcare at weekends available unless I'd hired a nanny which I couldn't afford to do. Admin is still predominantly staffed by women - more likely to be Lp, more likely to be expected to adjust their working hours around childcare if in a relationship - surely you know this?

I worked in nursing before having dd and worked all hours, inc Christmas etc. Part of the job. But a lot of nurses leave (even if only temporarily) when they have DC or move into the community sector - mon-fri hours. Retention is a big problem.

Re nepotism - what irks me is not just the act of nepotism but that those who benefit RARELY appreciate or ADMIT that they got where they did NOT just as a result of 'hard work'. It's offensive to people who work just as hard if not harder but don't do as well as they haven't had the same advantages.

Im not sure this is particularly relevant to the thread but to all those asking, the type of inheritance I was talking about is the type that is substantial enough to skew the playing field over many generations . Yes I do think hard work should be rewarded and I understand an aspect of that reward is feeling you have secured the future of your loved ones but my view is that there comes a point where wealth and opportunity become completely divorced from merit and hard work as generations of the same families are just handed things on a plate. That's about as far away from a meritocracy as you can get and I just can't support it.

Bumpity. I think the thread had probably already derailed anyway! You didn’t quite answer my question. What in your opinion is an acceptable level of inheritance?

You also didn’t answer the other question in terms of what you suggest would happen with property etc if it crossed your threshold?

It's the OP who has presented the role as highly covetable, by saying applications would have flooded in, and describing the anger of someone who coveted it for her own DC having no opportunity to apply. My opinion of the role, or how it might be presented to or appear to a recruiter, isn't really relevant.

If the role hadn't been desirable, the OP would have had no need to avoid the process of sifting through an excessive number of applicants by recruiting family members.

If her dd had been asked to do it, it wouldn't have been nepotism...

Sorry I wasn't clear. If the angry woman in the OP had had a chance for her dd to have exactly the same opportunity described through one of her family members, she would have jumped at the chance and not been angry.

Olivia. Spot on...and I genuinely don’t believe that any parent would insist their DC turned down an opportunity because it hadn’t been externally advertised.

I don't see a problem.

Plus, surely everyone (or most) have contacts they can leverage.

On the other side of the coin, I run a shop with my partner and we would never hire a friend or family member, as it would be awkward to sack them if they were shit at the job. Likewise, regular customers, we've had bad experiences with that in the past for the above reason. Also, they seem to have bizarre preconceived ideas about what the job entails which makes them impossible to train up properly.

Graphista
they CAN'T work weekends if they're parents of young DC

that would only apply to a very few single parents, who don't have free family childcare, not that many people in the grand scheme of things.

The reality is that people don't want to work weekends, especially when it's a regular shift and they don't get overtime for going on Sunday whilst their mates are drinking in a pub.

I know some people who only work at weekend, but it's a childcare issue, slightly difference.

The most common thing I hear among people desperately trying to recruit is "where are the bloody candidates"! It's getting harder and harder.

I don't think it's an issue and of course it happens everywhere.

I take people for work experience in the civil service, which is highly sought after, but I only take people I know. I can't risk someone going to the daily mail with some juicy gossip so I have to know and trust them to do this.

*BumpityBump
*
To answer your question directly, in an ideal world I probably would have more regulation in place to prevent nepotism and this would probably have what you would consider to be an adverse impact on family businesses

It would mean I closed my business when I reached 65. End of , and enjoyed the fruits of my labour.

Who benefits ?

Alternatively I employ 23 people, amongst them are 6 family members, 6 friends , 3 friends kids and 8 others.

What do you think is better ?

So OP has only been back to clarify a couple of points but not to address the question as to why she doesn't think it's nepotism when I think a majority of posters here think it is? Although many think an understandable use of it. I hate it when that happens. Come back and explain!

I take people for work experience in the civil service, which is highly sought after, but I only take people I know

If this is true it is very wrong, and very different from the OP's case. My taxes are paying you, and if I found you were giving jobs to the boys, or girls, or boys and girls' dcs, I would have this investigated.

Lots of ignorance on this thread about factors impeding social mobility.

Civil Service, Public bodies and charities are NOT the place for nepotism. These are employers where the person recruiting has no financial responsibility towards the people they recruit.
The tax payer/donators do.
Therefore open and fair recruitment every time.

Large inheritance tax is bad for the economy.

I can't really comment on it, but the evidence is the transfer of wealth through generations is bad for society in general (see Spirit Level, Piketty, etc)

It’s is nepotism but such is life. Dh and I realised this very early on and put in a lot of time and effort building relationships and cultivating a strong network in order to help our business and our dc in the future. We’ve had friends ask for work experience for their dc and when ours are older we won’t hesitate to do the same.

@fontofnoknowledge
I would need to understand your business and the sector you operate in to answer that question. A business closing doesn't always lead to more people unemployed as presumably your competitors would expand to meet the demand that your business was no longer fulfilling or potentially someone else could start a business to meet that demand. Potentially you shutting your business could generate jobs for people that weren't your friends and families so those people could benefit.

Large inheritance tax doesn't affect the super rich who put everything in trust anyway.

I agree. But in practice it happens evwr

A very mild and benign case of nepotism, yes. I had zero help in my life from anyone, but absolutely don't begrudge those who did.
What it is quite likely fells foul of, if temp unskilled staff are tasked with copy-pasting clients' data, is GDPR :)