This is an interesting view-point to a phenomenon which is generally classified as unethical. I am still open on the issue.
If suppose you are sick, in hospital, and you desperately need money. Whom will you contact? Of course a relative, or someone you know. Definately, you will not expect any stranger to help you. Or, for example, you are in Ahmedabad and want some work to be done, in person, at Mumbai and you somehow cannot go there. So who will you contact? Again, a relative in Mumbai. Now suppose you are a big businessman and that relative comes to ask for job, along with other prospective employees too. Whom will you give the job to?
It has generally been maintained that anyone who gives jobs to his/her relatives, is unethical. "Merit" creeps into the debate. It is true, that the relative might not be as good as other candidates. Lets say the "relative" is just 80% as effective as the other "stranger" candidates. But the businessman gets 30% more from him through the channel of his relations. So who is more economical or profitable to the businessman? Yet when he does give a job to his relative, he is deemed as unethical.
I do not advocate suppressing merit one bit. In fact, I am a strong supporter of it. But somehow, this whole issue of choosing candidates on basis of merit only, seems to have a loophole. When a father dies, why does he leave all his wealth to his family? How does merit come into the picture? Is it true that not one single person in the whole universe deserves money more than the family? Why was a huge business industry given to the two owner's sons? Why is a political party still earning brownie points on the basis of one "relative" who fought for our freedom? Where is merit featuring in these cases?
When someone needs help, why isn't "merit" of his plea herded to? Why do we only listen to plaints from "relatives"? Where does "merit" figure there? Isn't it a bit strange or hypocritical to talk of merit when it comes to our "gains" (like our appearing for a job), and then switch over heart and soul to "relations" when it comes to our losses, or more appropriately, "expenditure" of time, money or anything else (like relative needing us during crisis)?
So, what is ethical or unethical? I would like to see this view-point debated upon. Till then, I hope some yet-unknown wealthy relative of mine notices my "merit"!!
Cheers!!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I do have a reasoning for the case of the businessman, and have also seen it at work however the rest of your essay seems obfuscating...probably like the word I last used :))...can you clarify your view and then I might be motivated to key in what I have thoughtn about it..
Man, the point of the whole "essay" as you call it, is that "is giving jobs to relative instead of the so called "meritorious" studnets really unethical?"
"Humans are epitome of hypocrites.
We tend to be myopic at our own will and benefits"
So when it comes to our benefits, we easily switch over to unethical means of favour and all. And when it comes to our loss, we start shouting for so called ethics.see its very simple.
And thas how world goes..its upto u, u can go for “ethics” or so called EHTICS..
Cheers!!
Post a Comment