You have been hired as an employment consultant by the governing body and are asked by the president of that body to assist with the selection of a new director of public works. Subsequently, you discover that (a) one of the applicants for the position is a sitting member on the governing body; and (b) another applicant is the daughter of the president of the governing body who still lives with her parents. The president has privately intimated that she “would really like to see her daughter get the job.” By happenstance you overhear a discussion between two members who want to “terminate your contract if you come up with the wrong recommendation.” You believe that of the 20 rsums you have received, three should be seriously considered. Of the three, one is the president’s daughter, but the sitting member is not qualified and shouldn’t be considered further.
Discussion QuestionsDissect the ethical maelstrom produced by the fact pattern. Explain whether you should disclose to the governing body the comments by the president and the two members you overheard.
