EU opportunity for good jobs < nepotism; albeit DE

Nepotism: favoritism shown to relatives: favoritism shown by somebody in power to relatives and friends, especially in appointing them to good positions.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/49146152

While Koffi, a 22-year-old communications grad, has herself benefited from the system, she still wishes connections weren't so decisive in finding employment. "In the U.S.," Koffi said, "people give you a chance because of what you are."

 "Youths from modest backgrounds have great difficulties finding internships compare to those from the middle or wealthy classes because of more restricted family networks,"

So all their programmers are belong to US(A)?

Germany may be an exception to the trend of European talent taking flight or being stymied in realizing professional dreams. In former communist East Germany, who you knew in the party apparatus was very important to climbing the economic ladder. But in today's united Germany, connections are not seen as a major part of corporate culture.

We are happy in the USA that merit is championed more than "who you know", but most small businesses here are handed down to (majority incompetent) offspring (often with disasterous results).

In the USA, "who you know" will get you an interview, but if "who you know" doesn't write the interviewer's pay check, there's no guarantee of a job.

In the USA, nobility and class are effectively wealth disassembled, and families don't retain a standing seat among the wealthy for more than a few months if they go broke.

I've always imagined any opportunity-depriving cultural norms in the EU stem from the legacy of nobility and class system. Is this true?

Recovery will be doubly hard for EU given the cultural norm of upper class entitlement. Immigrants can build wealth here in the USA, it is encouraged, and they can own property. Nice.

Nepotism is something I've only come across once in the UK; someone I graduated with already had a job lined up at a London investment bank where his dad worked so didn't really bother to do the course-work and ended up with a 3rd class degree, not that it mattered at that point. In the UK it seems to be more something that happens in the upper-classes and is linked more to which exclusive school you went to.

Other than that it's not something that's ever affected me or anyone I know -- every company I've worked for (mostly small to medium sized) has looked exclusively at CV content when selecting for jobs.  Although we often get CVs from friends and we have been known to give an interview to prevent offence, I've never seen nepotism in action.

Herbie

Nepotism certainly still exists in the world, but much less so now than it used to be. There was a time when (as Dr Herbie mentioned) it was possible to get pretty far up the greasy pole with no skill and just family connections.

Nowadays thankfully those times have passed in big business. Small businesses - are a different matter of course, where family run businesses are still commonplace in Europe and elsewhere.

Big businesses on the other hand tend to have centrally managed HR departments, outsourced recruiting and formally managed career progression, which, although they have their own problems, tends to eliminate or at least substantially reduce the risk of overt discrimination and nepotism getting you to to the top rather than aptitude.

There is still one place that stands out for nepotistic practices, and that's politics. If you look in the UK, half of the cabinet met each other at school, not in their career, and in the US and you believe that everyone has an equal chance of becoming President, then you must think that the Bushes and Clintons are very lucky families indeed.

@blowdart: In my mind, nepotism includes friends. The Justice Dept. article you note shows the opposite of your refute, namely that nepotism in public employment in the US is prosecutable, is it same in the EU? From what I read, the southern EU culture, Spain, Italy, Greece, are rife with nepotism. I would also argue that Kawasaki is plagued more with modesty than guilt.

Any individual can act nepotistically, it is then up to their overseers to correct it, if they're interested in correction. There are many corrections in US public employment, not so much in private corporations - but their bottom line always is more important and for the most part, so that those incompetent children they had to hire are set in a corner and ignored. I never said nepotism is non-existent in the US, but after reading the article I linked above, I began to wonder how things may be different in EU, especially in Spain and Italy.

EDIT: regarding political families: there are only so many citizens in the USA who would not RUN AWAY AS FAST AS POSSIBLE if handed the presidency. The nepotism you sense therein is due to political parties, not Presidents handing their scepters to their offspring or hunting buddies. Nepotism in politics may be necessary for candidates to exist at all, certainly doesn't bug me.

Not sure what to make out of it because it is natural to favor people you already know and trust than a complete stranger.  The policy of hiring stranger tends to be a luxury that happens in large organization where they have way more positions to fill other than friends. The only thing to fix this is simply increase opportunities, so, they can afford more luxury candidates.

... namely that nepotism in public employment in the US is prosecutable, is it same in the EU? ...

Not sure about the rest of the EU, but in the UK there are specific laws to prevent dishonest nepotism and policies to prevent subconcious nepotism.

In the first instance, nepotism is specifically prohibited and protected against by government policy. Government officials are not allowed to directly manage, comment on the promotions of, or be part of a recruitment panel when the subject is a relative or friend of theirs. Breach of this policy could lead to disciplinary action up to and including summary dismissal.

At a senior level, some of this policy is additionally overseen by the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments. This office ensures that board members, senior civil servants and QUANGO directors and so on are all appointed fairly.

In the event that nepotism occurs dishonestly, that is to say, perhaps an official hid his relationship to another employee and gave him/her special treatment, the criminal charge of Corruption (in the case of promotion/recruitment) and/or Bribery (in the case of contracts) may apply - both of which carry a maximum sentence of life-imprisonment.

In both cases, the additional charge of Misconduct in Public Office would also apply, which is an aggravating factor when deciding on sentencing.

Needless to say, there are sadly exceptions in the public sector. Government policy on nepotism applies to official appointments - not to ministerial appointments. Ministers can, and do hire friends to head inquiries, appoint their mates to the House of Lords and can personally intervene in the choices of heads of QUANGOs and so on.

It's a shame. I strongly believe that the country would be better governed if the cabinet were more than just a bunch of Dave Cameron's mates from school.

Is it really nepotism or is it government protectionism of the working class?

In Europe it's HARD to fire an employee. Especially in Holland, you need to have a file three thumbs thick and then a judge can still rule against you.

So unemployment always hits the youths, who want to start working or work with a temp contract, first.

If you are better connected, sure, you will get a job sooner. But I believe the gross of the unemployed youth are not being hired because of the regulations protecting the worker.

Make it easier to hire and fire employees, then you will see unemployment will spread out evenly.

Firing public employees in the USA is also quite difficult.

Honestly, I read the article and wonder how EU is different than USA.

Is the EU as still struggling with the legacy of Nobility and its trappings or not? Is that the attitude that the upper class carries and levies upon "the gross"? None of that here... just monied attitudes.

The major difference between the US and the EU is the mentality of the people.

If you can't get a job here in the EU, you blame not yourself, not the stupid rules that create a stalemate, but you blame the people that are successful. You call those perceived problems fancy names like nepotism,. So you yourself are obviously not responsible and call for government intervention to help you out at the expense of the successful. And all that that does is create what it set out to destroy.

In the USA the mentality is still that you are the master of your own success. But socialists like Obama are rapidly creating an society where being successful is a bad thing, because you know; "You didn't build that, somebody else made that happen." and it's time you pay those other people their due diligence.

If you continue down that road, you will wind up exactly like the EU. Blaming everybody else but yourself for your own failures and where success depends highly on government protection (nepotism).

3 minutes ago, Maddus Mattus wrote

*snip*

In the USA the mentality is still that you are the master of your own success. But socialists like Obama are rapidly creating an society where being successful is a bad thing, because you know; "You didn't build that, somebody else made that happen." and it's time you pay those other people their due diligence.

Calling Obama a socialist? LMAO! You put the Teabaggers in the US to shame. You should move over here to one of the red states like Texas. You'll feel right at home watching Fox News and clutching your gun as you await the government's arrival to steal your money by force.

And isn't being successful bad if only 1% of the population can become successful? You see nothing wrong with CEOs making several hundred times as much as their workers? You see nothing wrong with an economic system that fosters 99% of population to be failures? What happened to your "lift people up from poverty" bullshit you keep spewing about capitalism? We have 50 million people living on food stamps now.

@cbae: I don't get Fox over here.

And I do not belong to the Tea Bag movement, whatever that may be.

Got anything constructive to add, or are you just trolling again?

1 minute ago, Maddus Mattus wrote

@cbae: I don't get Fox over here.

And I do not belong to the Tea Bag movement, whatever that may be.

Got anything constructive to add, or are you just trolling again?

Calling Obama a socialist is as constructive as a turd in a toilet bowl, so practice what you preach.

@cbae:

He wants to tax the rich, to give to the poor.

He thinks that government is responsible for the success of the American people.

He thinks that spending gazillions of tax dollars is going to save the economy.

He thinks that everyone is entitled to health care.

He's a socialist all right. If you think being a socialist is bad, then you obviously do not like Obama. Welcome to camp Romney Cbae!

I really don't care for either one of them, they are two sides of the same coin. One wants to cut the pie differently then the other, I want to turn the pie into a donut.

And I really don't see why calling someone a socialist is a bad thing, if it walks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck. Why do you take so much offense to the term, when you obviously have no problem calling people that don't agree with you names like Tea Bagger.

So you see my dear friend, I am practicing what I am preaching.

3 minutes ago, Maddus Mattus wrote

@cbae:

He wants to tax the rich, to give to the poor.

He thinks that government is responsible for the success of the American people.

He thinks that spending gazillions of tax dollars is going to save the economy.

He thinks that everyone is entitled to health care.

Even if the statements are true, which is not the case, how is any of that socialism? Where is he advocating social or government ownership of the means of production?

And you didn't answer any of my questions. Do you see nothing wrong with the egregious wealth imbalance that we are witnessing today? What do you think the average CEO in the US makes compared to his/her own workers?

Good, I see you edited some constructiveness into your post.

And isn't being successful bad if only 1% of the population can become successful?

No. Because in the wake of that 1% will be the 99% who get wealthier (not rich, wealthier).

You see nothing wrong with CEOs making several hundred times as much as their workers?

No. You get paid close to what you produce. If that is little, you get paid little.

So if a CEO employs a million people and he takes 1%, he will very fast make hundred times more then they do. But they still earn close to what they produce and if they don't like the percentage, they are free to move elsewhere. 

What do you propose? A tax on the top? So that he has to take even a bigger share of the income, so that the little guy get's even less wage, but now he is dependent on government, who also takes a cut?

You see nothing wrong with an economic system that fosters 99% of population to be failures?

No. It's a profit and loss system, we can't all be winners.

What would you like as a solution? Everybody wins? How would you go about implementing that? Communism?

What happened to your "lift people up from poverty" bullshit you keep spewing about capitalism? We have 50 million people living on food stamps now. 

Yes, and you are willing to spend even more of their money on stimulus packages to give to large corporations, KUDOS!

Or did you miss that the FED is going to print 40 BILLION a MONTH bailing out the banks and their CEO's?

The solution is not MORE government control, but LESS.

Make sure you don't have to learn the lesson we are learning over here.