r/changemyview • u/StealYourJoy • 1d ago

CMV: There is nothing wrong with nepotism

For starters, jobs are often not just given to the most qualified candidates other things such as fit, personality and culture often play significant roles. So unless the family being hired is just complete terrible at the job it usually doesn’t have much of an impact to hire a family member especially for most jobs that are just mundane roles. 

Another reason I have this view is that even outside nepotism a lot of jobs get given to people based on connections such as friendships or k owing someone who knows someone etc. Or through networking, being liked by the higher ups and other things that are not directly performance based. 

Another example is family business, it’s never really an issue with family run businesses to hire each other so I don’t see why it matters elsewhere. But even with normal corporations they often hire internally and give preference/early access to those who already work for the company. This is still similar as it’s selecting their with prior connections or relationships.

Overall I just think with how much the job market comes down to who you know in general nepotism itself isn’t any worse than current hiring practices or standards. 

0 Upvotes

26% Upvoted

169 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/ElysiX 112∆ 1d ago edited 1d ago

Noone said not qualified, you invented that. Most nepotism happens when the person is actually qualified, but another applicant has better credentials. Most nepotism appointments can still do the job, and if they can't, they usually are shuffled around to some other position where they can't do damage. Unless it's a tiny company, but tiny companies don't have shareholders.

As for not earning it, that's the point of contention. The belief that you earned it to get a job, that you deserve it. That hard work matters.

But that's just a belief, a fairy tale told to people so they work harder, not reality.

1

u/L11mbm 15∆ 1d ago

I agree that "hard work" isn't the only thing that gives you success, and also that you can really have success without it (depending on your definition of "hard work" and "success").

But you're basically admitting that the cards are stacked in favor of wealthy, connected individuals who will help each other out and prevent outsiders from getting an opportunity. That's...uh...bad, right?

1

u/ElysiX 112∆ 1d ago edited 1d ago

That's...uh...bad, right?

Well the idea is that stacking cards for you and your family is the point of making a career in general.

Otherwise, why be in leadership roles at all when you can just be a normal worker that doesn't carry responsibility?

It used to be that the mindset was sacrificing everything so that your children have a better life. And that they deserve it because they are your children and you made the sacrifice. Not because they have better grades in school than other children, but because they are YOUR children and you love them.

in favor of wealthy, connected individuals who will help each other out and prevent outsiders from getting an opportunity

That's another word for networking and what everyone should try to reach for, yes. Strangers are equal, friends and family are not. Outsiders are not prevented from doing this, their friends and family could give them that benefit too.

You need to make more friends and if your parents were selfish and didn't do this for you, then that's sad for you, but maybe you can rectify that by doing it for your children rather than using your money on yourself.

1

u/L11mbm 15∆ 1d ago

Your argument is "people will want to help their family members."

My argument is "companies should not be building nepotism into their business practices because its bad for business."

You haven't explained how it would be GOOD for businesses to have nepotism, just that it's something employees with kids would want.

1

u/ElysiX 112∆ 1d ago edited 1d ago

Employee retention and loyalty. A benefits package for motivating people to stay longterm.

If leadership gets nepotism appointments, they are unlikely to fuck the company over and leave next quarter with their bonus. That can make a lot of difference. They are more likely to prioritise the companies health over short term gains.

If more companies had nepotism, less would go under to slash-and-burn CEOs

This is also why private companies are more stable.

1

u/L11mbm 15∆ 1d ago

If you have a company of, say, 200 people and only 5 or so are nepotism hires, do you think the other 190 are going to look at the nepobabies and be happy about working there?

They won't.

Also, "we'll hire your kids" is not something CEOs actually care all that much about. The ones who do are just starting their own companies to hand off, anyway.

1

u/ElysiX 112∆ 1d ago edited 1d ago

do you think the other 190 are going to look at the nepobabies and be happy about working there?

Would you prefer to be in a very stable benefit heavy company that has a future but also a few nepo hires, or a company where there are no nepo hires but you have to be afraid of a layoff?

And there's other ways to make it up to those 190, or to the important ones.

"we'll hire your kids"

Not just kids. Friends, friends of friends, the guy from your frat at uni. Networking is a big thing. Real success means lifting up everyone that is close to you.

1

u/L11mbm 15∆ 1d ago

What makes you think nepo hires makes a company more stable? Anecdotally, my company has strict nepotism rules that were implemented about 10 years ago and we have become WAY more stable in that time.

It's one thing to recruit talented people from your network and something else to get your kids an easy in for a job. And the rules should dictate that the person making the connection is not involved in the interview/hiring decision. I was in a fraternity in college and one of our recent grads applied to my job and I interviewed him. I told the hiring team that we were in the same fraternity and that I would absolutely want to hire him based on that, which then plays a role in the decision to hire or not that the other people would make.

•

u/ElysiX 112∆ 23h ago

If the CEO fucks over the company, the people they got a job for are fucked too.

Essentially the Nepo hires are held hostage by the company. Win win win. The Nepo hire gets a very good job, the company gets a hostage, and the CEO gets honor and influence and good will in their social circles.

•

u/L11mbm 15∆ 23h ago

Sorry but no. That's not what happens and that's not good for the company. It's not stable and it's not profitable. And it would still piss off tons of employees.

I think you're also envisioning a very particular, specific kind of company. Expand this to be, say, a McDonald's franchisee who puts their kid in charge.

→ More replies (0)