1. Introduce the case.
  2. List out the options available to you.
  3. 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.

Options Available:

  • 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.

Legacy Editor Changed status to publish September 14, 2022