- Introduce the case.
- List out the options available to you.
- Write the best course of action with reasons.
The above case presents an ethical dilemma between professional integrity and compassion & empathy. While compassion & empathy tells to give job to the helpless, professional integrity prevents it on the ground of merit.
- Ignore the MIC and proceed with the due process of selection : Since the MIC is a public representative, ignoring will be against the ethos of democracy. However, I shall try to persuade him and make him understand that selection without following the due process will mean undermining merit. It erodes transparency and hence faith in the institution. However, I shall assure him that I may consider the candidate if any post is reserved for appointment on compassionate grounds.
- Appoint the candidate to the post: Directly appointing him/her negating the due process will be a clear violation of rules, which I ought not to do. Such appointment will be unfair to other deserving candidates. This will promote mediocrity and culture of nepotism. The candidate should be appointed only if he/she is found to be suitable for the post.
- Speak to superior and seek guidance: Seeking guidance will enable me to have greater clarity, as they have more experience. Hence, I can deal with the issue tactfully.
Best Course of action : I shall, therefore, humbly ask the MIC to make the candidate apply for the post, and that the selection process cannot be compromised. I shall carry out the prescribed procedure for selecting the suitable candidates – upholding objectivity, integrity, and impartiality. In case she is unable to qualify, I shall try to find out other vacancies, especially if any on compassionate criteria or having special provisions. I will extend all my support to help him/her get a job fitting his/her merit, at the earliest.