# Should I violate my ethics to appease my husband?



## Cinnamon153 (Jun 18, 2015)

Hello, 

I need some objective opinions for my situation. 
My husband applied to work at the same place that I work (I had no problems with that). He asked me if I could 'put in a good word' for him. I told him that I didn't feel that it was something that I can do for the following reasons: 

1. The place that I work values equality and hiring people based on inter-personal relationships is highly frowned up (we are unionized, so on top of that, there are very strict rules added to the hiring process). I felt very strongly that I would be judged negatively for attempting to create a situation of favoritism. I really enjoy the place that I work and I have a good reputation, I didn't want to do anything to jeopardize that, especially for something so trivial as a job. 
2. The position he applied for is several grades above mine and I do not deal with the people that he would have been working for. They barely know me, so my input would be meaningless. 
3. I feel quite strongly that it is wrong. I have worked in places before where there were staff that were hired solely because they knew someone there and these people were not the best for the job. I don't want to work with people because they are married to 'so and so' or 'so and so's' daughter; I want to work with people because they are competent and there was absolutely no favoritism involved. I think that you should be hired based on your resume. If they like you, then your references are your 'good word'. 

Long story short, he didn't get called for an interview and when I told him that they had started interviewing for the process he immediately started to act incredibly melancholy and treating me like it was somehow my fault. 
We've had a huge blow up fight today because when he asked me again if I put in a good word I told him that of course I hadn't. I told him that I didn't feel good about doing that right at the beginning. 
He just flew off the handle saying things like "so, there are limits as to what you'll do for me?". Well, of course there are. I'm not going to break the law for him and I'm not going to violate the ethical beliefs that I hold because I'm the one who has to deal with that in the future, I have to look myself in the mirror and feel good about myself and how am I supposed to do that if I felt that I broke my own values?

My question is, should I have just done as he asked? Was he wrong to ask me? 
It is very possible that this situation is the beginning of a divorce and I'm not sure who is right and who is wrong (or if maybe we're both right and wrong in our own way?). 

I would really appreciate some objective opinions. 

Thanks,


----------



## kristin2349 (Sep 12, 2013)

He was wrong for expecting you to "put in a good word" you are his wife, you've never been his employer. If his resume and work experience doesn't get him an interview, that is his issue. 

If this is an issue that leads to divorce as you fear, your relationship is pretty fragile. 

You did the right thing, I can understand him being disappointed but he shouldn't take that out on you.


----------



## GTdad (Aug 15, 2011)

Seems like a pretty small thing to divorce over, unless there are other, bigger issues in play.

My take is that it may not have been a big deal for you to go ahead and put in a good word for him, but as you point out, it wouldn't have carried much impact.

The fact is that if your H had been an attractive candidate, he would have likely gotten an interview with or without you. For him to blame you for failing to get an interview is unfair and probably a little self-deceiving.


----------



## Openminded (Feb 21, 2013)

If they felt he was qualified then they would have contacted him. 

He's being childish.


----------



## Yeswecan (Jul 25, 2014)

No, your H was wrong for putting you on the spot. 

Did he stop and think maybe they know he is your H and having your both at the same place of employment is not a good idea? Possible conflict of interests could develop.


----------



## Me Vietare (Nov 26, 2014)

I think it's incredibly disrespectful for you to withhold public approval of your husband and I can see why he is so disappointed in you. Yes, "public approval." You are an insider in the organization and as a hiring manager my self previous to my retirement, I would welcome the "good word" of a spouse in the consideration of a candidate for the job. In fact, if I knew the couple I would think withholding such an effort would be indicative of a rift, marital turmoil or some disqualifying reason. 

You were wrong. You should apologize. And you should stop being such a high and mighty judgmental wife who can't be counted on to love and HONOR her husband.


----------



## TRy (Sep 14, 2011)

Cinnamon153 said:


> I felt very strongly that I would be judged negatively for attempting to create a situation of favoritism. I really enjoy the place that I work and I have a good reputation, I didn't want to do anything to jeopardize that, especially for something so trivial as a job.


 So you did not want to jeopardize your current job situation for something as "trivial as a job" for your husband? You just said that when it comes to you, a job is important, but when it comes to your husband a job is trivial. Well at least your husband knows where he stands in your ranking.



Cinnamon153 said:


> The position he applied for is several grades above mine and I do not deal with the people that he would have been working for. They barely know me, so my input would be meaningless.


 If your husband got this job, he would have been making good money for your family household. If you viewed the two of you as a team, you would have viewed that as a good thing.



Cinnamon153 said:


> I feel quite strongly that it is wrong. I have worked in places before where there were staff that were hired solely because they knew someone there and these people were not the best for the job. I don't want to work with people because they are married to 'so and so' or 'so and so's' daughter; I want to work with people because they are competent and there was absolutely no favoritism involved. I think that you should be hired based on your resume. If they like you, then your references are your 'good word'.


 People expect a spouse to say good things about their spouse and to put in a good word for them. When the spouse does not do this, right or wrong, many will interpret this to mean that there is a problem and that they should pass on hiring the spouse. Because of your silence, he would have had a better chance if you had not worked there.


----------



## Cinnamon153 (Jun 18, 2015)

Hi Me Vietare, 

I understand where you are coming from. You sound very biblical (no offense intended, my family is incredibly religious but I denounced religiosity very soon after leaving the nest. It is not right for me but I don't begrudge anyone else's personal choices). 
My organization has strict rules regarding the hiring process and approaching the manager involved the hiring to tell her my husband applied as is a good candidate would have directly broken our ethics value. If you were a hiring manager in a company with well defined ethical values, would you feel good about hiring the spouse of an individual who directly defied the organizations ethical boundaries?
Given that, was I still wrong? 

Thanks


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

Cinnamon153 said:


> Hello,
> 
> I need some objective opinions for my situation.
> My husband applied to work at the same place that I work (I had no problems with that). He asked me if I could 'put in a good word' for him. I told him that I didn't feel that it was something that I can do for the following reasons:
> ...


You were absolutely right and he's acting childish. If his position is several grades higher than your's, you aren't even qualified to give a meaningful recommendation. If you were qualified to pick a candidate for that position, you would be working in that position or above it. Your "good word" would have carried little weight and would likely have done him (and you) more harm than good. I would take an extremely dim view of a candidate for an important position who sent his wife in to talk him up. I would also take an extremely dim view of an applicant for a leadership position who pouted and took his disappointment out on his wife and blamed her for his failure. 
Maybe you should have applied for the position. You seem more emotionally mature and values-driven than he does. "You mean there are limits to what you'd do for me?" In his childish mind, I suppose you would be expected to help him commit embezzlement, maybe hide dead bodies? Your husband wouldn't want your boss interfering with his marriage relationship so he shouldn't expect your marriage relationship to be permitted to contaminate his employee/employer relationship. An attempt to do so shows disrespect for both relationships.


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

Seriously? Who would put any stock in "a good word" coming from a spouse? How about calling their mommy?

He wasn't called at this point. He may be called in the future. His skills need to speak for themselves. The wife doesn't want to jeopardize her position if he should behave so petulant on the job.


----------



## Morcoll (Apr 22, 2015)

" Because of your silence, he would have had a better chance if you had not worked there."

what a joke.


----------



## CantePe (Oct 5, 2011)

Me Vietare said:


> I think it's incredibly disrespectful for you to withhold public approval of your husband and I can see why he is so disappointed in you. Yes, "public approval." You are an insider in the organization and as a hiring manager my self previous to my retirement, I would welcome the "good word" of a spouse in the consideration of a candidate for the job. In fact, if I knew the couple I would think withholding such an effort would be indicative of a rift, marital turmoil or some disqualifying reason.
> 
> You were wrong. You should apologize. And you should stop being such a high and mighty judgmental wife who can't be counted on to love and HONOR her husband.


That is your hiring method in your company.

I'd be hard pressed to accept a position from a company with an HR that pulled stunts like this. It's called favouritism.

You're the first HR I've ever encountered who actively hires like this (or at least admits to it openly).

Not good hiring practice in my opinion (I run a family business).


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

Anyone who posts with the avatar of a meth dealer has to expect blow back.


----------



## CantePe (Oct 5, 2011)

Blondilocks said:


> Anyone who posts with the avatar of a meth dealer has to expect blow back.


??? I'm utterly confused...


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

Well I see two problems. One your Husband didn't listen well. Many men (myself included) tend to stop listening to objections when they are focused on a goal. Second, although you value your job and take action to protect it, you find your husbands search for a similar job to be trivial. I would recommend that you work on your problem and let him know what he needs to work on. There is still time to avoid the Big D.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

Me Vietare said:


> I think it's incredibly disrespectful for you to withhold public approval of your husband and I can see why he is so disappointed in you. Yes, "public approval." You are an insider in the organization and as a hiring manager my self previous to my retirement, I would welcome the "good word" of a spouse in the consideration of a candidate for the job. In fact, if I knew the couple I would think withholding such an effort would be indicative of a rift, marital turmoil or some disqualifying reason.
> 
> You were wrong. You should apologize. And you should stop being such a high and mighty judgmental wife who can't be counted on to love and HONOR her husband.


Really? How would that look, what form would it take? An email? "Hi, I am just emailing to let you know that my husband is applying for a Director position. I don't know anything about the Director position at this company, but I do think he'd be a great fit!"

I can see him putting her down for a character reference and then having an HR person contact her; an unsolicited "good word" though is another story. It would not fly at my company. I'd lose credibility recommending someone for a job several levels higher than me.


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

Me Vietare. The avatar is the lead character in 'Breaking Bad'.


----------



## ExiledBayStater (Feb 16, 2013)

Much depends on the organizational culture. There are some places where you have to know someone to get in through the pile of applications, and almost nobody is hired without a referral. There are others, like the company where I work, that welcome referrals but they aren't the be-all-end-all. If your referral is hired the company gives you a bonus. We have a well established procedure, and making an extra call to HR or the hiring manager would be improper. Then there are employers where the hiring process is highly methodical and regimented, like your employer. 

If you worked in a company in one of the first two categories I mentioned, I would say you should help your husband get his foot in the door. But you don't. It might help if you make it less about your values and more about the nature of the path into the company. Is he unemployed or grossly underemployed?


----------



## Me Vietare (Nov 26, 2014)

In my organization, a multi-billion dollar public institution of higher education, HR didn't do hiring. They did administrative work, shuffled papers, sent out ads, collected and created packets for review by the actual line managers who were the hiring authorities. Basically, they were/are the pilot fish congregating around and taking scraps from the big fish who actually do something to move the organization forward.

People who want jobs, campaign for the jobs...particularly at more senior levels. Where at a clerk or associate wingbat level, "influence" might be unwelcome, at senior levels knowing how an individual moves, who his or her associates, including spouses and SOs, are and how they support candidacy for a position is all important. At senior levels, you're hiring a team, not an individual. 

And after all, if a wife can't put in a good word for her husband, what kind of person can he be? That'd be my thought. And if you were to feel awkward supporting your husband, how does that reflect on your relationship with him. Looks like sabotage, and so no wonder he didn't get asked for an interview. 

And no OP, I'm not a "religious" person, so you're wrong there too but you stated it as a negative judgment...perhaps being religious offends your ethical standards? Spiritual yes. Organized religion no.


----------



## Thound (Jan 20, 2013)

I applied for job where my wife works, and her boss was a very respected "wheel" there. I told my wife not to tell anyone there that I was applying, because if I was going to get hired, I wanted it to be because I was the best applicant. When her boss found out later he was kind of upset that my wife didn't tell him before hand.

Now I did get the job, and a lot of people said it was because of her, but I know it was because of my past experiences, and the fact that I taught a college course in my field of work.

Now when you work where your spouse works it makes things somewhat awkward. When there are meetings or parities we don't sit together to avoid nepotism. Then I see her sitting next to some guy and talking it bothers me deep down. I see her in the hall talking to a guy or some guy in her office talking to her makes me jealous. I have come to realize I was the one with a problem. It was my own insecurity that was the problem. My point is maybe it's a good thing he didn't get the job. I think you did the right thing. If he was the best candidate he would have got the job. Another thing is HR may have a nepotism policy. I know some companies will not hire spouses.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

CantePe said:


> ??? I'm utterly confused...


Me Vietare's avatar is the "Walter White" character from the TV series Breaking Bad. The character is a high school chemistry teacher turned meth cook and meth dealer... and add all kinds of other crimes to that to include murder.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

I work at a large, multi national company. 

They do not take personal recommendations from employees. It's looked down in our corporate culture.

Since the OP's husband was applying for a position above her pay grade, like she said, she is not known by them.

This is not her putting her job above his job search. This is that she knows the company and knows how far her influence would go.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Me Vietare said:


> And after all, if a wife can't put in a good word for her husband, what kind of person can he be? That'd be my thought. And if you were to feel awkward supporting your husband, how does that reflect on your relationship with him. Looks like sabotage, and so no wonder he didn't get asked for an interview.


I'm not exactly sure what a good word by somebody's spouse is going to accomplish. They're going to be rather biased, so the words are effectively meaningless.

Besides, I get the impression that OP would have found the whole thing rather awkward. Her husband was applying for a job a few levels above hers. It's unlikely she knows, or works closely enough, with those people to feel comfortable talking to them about that. And if she's not at that level, then what does she know about the position that he applied for, or why he'd make a good fit?

So at the end of the day, his resume was not selected for one of two reasons: there were better candidates OR they wanted to avoid hiring the family member of a current employee.

Neither are OP's fault, nor her problem.

If he truly stuck out from the rest of the applicants, then perhaps they would have considered him in spite of his wife currently being employed by them. But her silence, or refusal to "recommend" him had nothing to do with him not being selected for an interview.

And as somebody pointed out above, if he puts the blame on others (ie. his wife) for not being selected for an interview, then he wasn't cut out for that job anyway, and he's not a team player.


----------



## Pluto2 (Aug 17, 2011)

As to the general question in the title, no you should not violate your ethics to appease your husband. Once, my ex asked me to help him write a letter to a prospective employer explaining a gap in his employment, except the explanation my ex wanted to put in was a flat our lie. I mean a not even close, easily verifiable lie. I refused. He threw a fit. Some things you just don't do. I don't think your H's request rose to this level. But you explained to him why you could not meet his request. I don't believe it impacted whether or not he got called in for an interview. Now if you had warned HR not to hire him, that would be another matter. But you didn't.


----------



## toonaive (Dec 13, 2012)

Does he blame you for other things that don't go his way? Nepotism never works out well in business.


----------



## Satya (Jun 22, 2012)

Since she was the one employed there already, I think she's adequately knowledgeable of the culture there and what they would/wouldn't tolerate. Add to that her personal value system and ethics, and she made a conscious decision.


----------



## thatbpguy (Dec 24, 2012)

Sure, I would have. I have done so for family where I work.


----------



## Yeswecan (Jul 25, 2014)

To be honest....of what use would your "good word" be anyway? It is biased from the get go. The recruiter would expect nothing but a glowing review from you about your H. What? Are you going to throw your H under the bus concerning anything about him? Of course not. Recruiters understand that. 

Your H needs to grasp that idea.


----------



## VermisciousKnid (Dec 27, 2011)

Me Vietare said:


> In my organization, a multi-billion dollar public institution of higher education, HR didn't do hiring. They did administrative work, shuffled papers, sent out ads, collected and created packets for review by the actual line managers who were the hiring authorities. Basically, they were/are the pilot fish congregating around and taking scraps from the big fish who actually do something to move the organization forward.
> 
> People who want jobs, campaign for the jobs...particularly at more senior levels. Where at a clerk or associate wingbat level, "influence" might be unwelcome, at senior levels knowing how an individual moves, who his or her associates, including spouses and SOs, are and how they support candidacy for a position is all important. At senior levels, you're hiring a team, not an individual.
> 
> ...


My wife works in a multi-billion dollar private institution of higher Ed. (You're talking about the endowment, right?) Higher Ed, for all of its lofty ideals, is very behind the times when it comes to HR policies, so I'm not surprised that a relative would be able to locate a hiring manager in that environment to "put in a good word". They're all very "clubby" in that environment and are often more concerned with what school a candidate went to and who they worked for at their last position. It's incestuous. I'm sure they miss many good candidate that way.


----------



## manfromlamancha (Jul 4, 2013)

In my opinion I guess the best that you could do is say (honestly) what his good points were as a husband, father (if applicable) and person and mention that you know he is applying for the job and that you would endorse him for any position where, for example, commitment, integrity, drive, energy etc are requirements. That is is a public statement of support for your husband.

Would it have made a difference ? Who knows?


----------



## fitchick1961 (May 5, 2015)

The persons avatar is from breaking bad, the series about a meth dealer. That's his pic, lol


----------



## ET1SSJonota (Dec 25, 2012)

Yeswecan said:


> To be honest....of what use would your "good word" be anyway? It is biased from the get go. The recruiter would expect nothing but a glowing review from you about your H. What? Are you going to throw your H under the bus concerning anything about him? Of course not. Recruiters understand that.
> 
> Your H needs to grasp that idea.


On the contrary, as mentioned in others, her NOT going to them to put in "the obvious good word" could also be a mark against him. His own wife didn't recommend him, so he's a no-go. As a hiring manager, I'd have similar concerns about someone with a family member that didn't seek to put in a good word (and I've had anti-recommendations from family members of applicants before). 

That being said, you shouldn't have to violate your personal ethics, and while he's understandably upset at not getting the job, it shouldn't be put on you. A rational, adult conversation about this is in order.


----------



## Yeswecan (Jul 25, 2014)

ET1SSJonota said:


> On the contrary, as mentioned in others, her NOT going to them to put in "the obvious good word" *could* also be a mark against him. His own wife didn't recommend him, so he's a no-go. As a hiring manager, I'd have similar concerns about someone with a family member that didn't seek to put in a good word (and I've had anti-recommendations from family members of applicants before).
> 
> That being said, you shouldn't have to violate your personal ethics, and while he's understandably upset at not getting the job, it shouldn't be put on you. A rational, adult conversation about this is in order.


Could. Highly unlikely.


----------



## ET1SSJonota (Dec 25, 2012)

Yeswecan said:


> Could. Highly unlikely.


I strongly disagree that it is "unlikely". However, the results of the lack of good word are irrelevant if it violated her morals and she didn't agree to make such contact. That's the bigger point here - she was unwilling, and he turned that into the entire reason he wasn't hired (at least in his actions, if not in words). That needs addressed to help the OP- not a debate on the potential influence of family members in the hiring process at company XYZ.


----------



## VermisciousKnid (Dec 27, 2011)

This is bizarre to me. If a family member visits the hiring manager to put in a good word, then in 99.9% of those cases it will be a highly biased assessment. Why would you ever expect a family member to be completely objective? In other words as a competent manager you would have to disregard it completely. 

The family member's visit only tells you whether they think they have a chance of influencing the hiring decision. It tells you nothing about the candidate's quality. In a Mickey Mouse company I guess they do have the ability to influence. In larger companies that wouldn't be the case. 

Reminds me of when I worked on the IT staff at the state university. Everyone was trying to get their uncle or aunt or nephew on the payroll. Every candidate who was hired that way perpetuated the practice when they had the opportunity. It was the biggest bunch of losers and greedy pigs I've ever seen in one place.


----------



## Yeswecan (Jul 25, 2014)

VermisciousKnid said:


> This is bizarre to me. If a family member visits the hiring manager to put in a good word, then in 99.9% of those cases it will be a highly biased assessment. Why would you ever expect a family member to be completely objective? In other words as a competent manager you would have to disregard it completely.
> 
> The family member's visit only tells you whether they think they have a chance of influencing the hiring decision. It tells you nothing about the candidate's quality. In a Mickey Mouse company I guess they do have the ability to influence. In larger companies that wouldn't be the case.
> 
> Reminds me of when I worked on the IT staff at the state university. Everyone was trying to get their uncle or aunt or nephew on the payroll. Every candidate who was hired that way perpetuated the practice when they had the opportunity. It was the biggest bunch of losers and greedy pigs I've ever seen in one place.


I have never been nor will be a fan of hiring on friends and family. They expect things over and above what others are getting. Favoritism.


----------



## ET1SSJonota (Dec 25, 2012)

VermisciousKnid said:


> This is bizarre to me. If a family member visits the hiring manager to put in a good word, then in 99.9% of those cases it will be a highly biased assessment. Why would you ever expect a family member to be completely objective? In other words as a competent manager you would have to disregard it completely.
> 
> The family member's visit only tells you whether they think they have a chance of influencing the hiring decision. It tells you nothing about the candidate's quality. In a Mickey Mouse company I guess they do have the ability to influence. In larger companies that wouldn't be the case.
> 
> Reminds me of when I worked on the IT staff at the state university. Everyone was trying to get their uncle or aunt or nephew on the payroll. Every candidate who was hired that way perpetuated the practice when they had the opportunity. It was the biggest bunch of losers and greedy pigs I've ever seen in one place.


Simple human self-interest. It's not complicated at all. And I completely agree to your assessment that it means diddly squat about the competency of the candidate. 

I have to respectfully disagree with the complete lack of influence in "larger companies", as having worked for several billion dollar companies (and the government) I can tell you the practice is alive and well, including in non-"Mickey Mouse" companies (as well as the government at all levels). I personally would never take it into consideration.

All that being said, the point I was making was that a hiring manager used to token comments about Uncle Joe being a "great guy" would find it odd for an applicant with a spouse on the payroll that DIDN'T get the support might arouse suspicion. 

And even further to the point, even if the hiring manager came to the OP and said "I didn't hire your husband because you didn't tell me how awesome and fantastic he was.", the husband would STILL not have a leg to stand on. He asked her to violate her own ethical code, she demurred. End of story. He needs to learn to deal with that.


----------



## Roselyn (Sep 19, 2010)

You did the right thing. I'm a career woman and in my professional position for 25 years. You do not want to jeopardize your integrity for yourself and your colleagues. I was chair for a search committee on a university faculty position and a colleague pushed her friend to me for special treatment. I am bound by law not to do so. I lost respect for this colleague and would not listen to what she had to say on any committees (that we were on) as I see her as without ethical values.

When all is lost to you, you have your dignity to hold on to. Your husband was not the best candidate or he would have been called. You are unionized and there are legal rules that you must follow. You made the right decision.


----------



## VermisciousKnid (Dec 27, 2011)

Yeswecan said:


> I have never been nor will be a fan of hiring on friends and family. They expect things over and above what others are getting. Favoritism.


The last two companies I have worked for have strict conflict of interest rules about hiring relatives or giving contracts to relatives who work at other companies. Not disclosing the relationship to management is grounds for termination. Disclosing the relationship triggers a review by the compliance department. 

One thing they are concerned with is the appearance of impropriety. When you hire a relative people assume that something fishy is going on. So those hires get extra attention by an impartial third party to make sure that they aren't receiving favoritism.


----------



## zillard (Nov 13, 2012)

I work for a global multi-billion dollar company. Every employee is required to take ethics training every year. 

If a relative, even second cousin, is applying we are required to stay out of the hiring process completely. 

Violations can be grounds for termination. 

I completely agree with that policy.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ExiledBayStater (Feb 16, 2013)

Me Vietare said:


> In my organization, *a multi-billion dollar public institution of higher education*, HR didn't do hiring. They did administrative work, shuffled papers, sent out ads, collected and created packets for review by the actual line managers who were the hiring authorities. Basically, they were/are the pilot fish congregating around and taking scraps from the big fish who actually do something to move the organization forward.
> 
> People who want jobs, campaign for the jobs...particularly at more senior levels. Where at a clerk or associate wingbat level, "influence" might be unwelcome, at senior levels knowing *how an individual moves, who his or her associates*, including spouses and SOs, are and how they support candidacy for a position is all important. At senior levels, you're hiring a team, not an individual.
> 
> ...





EleGirl said:


> Me Vietare's avatar is the "Walter White" character from the TV series Breaking Bad. The character is a high school chemistry teacher turned meth cook and meth dealer... and add all kinds of other crimes to that to include murder.


Now I'm just thinking of William Bulger


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

ExiledBayStater said:


> Now I'm just thinking of William Bulger


Have you watched Breaking Bad? It's a really good series. It was filmed here in New Mexico/Albuquerque where I live. So it's kinda fun seeing it from that perspective. They did a really good job of portraying the meth "business" and what that kind of life does to a person. It was not glorifying the drug trade or illegal activity. 

When Walter White died on the show (the character not the actor), the local newspaper ran a obituary for him. There is also a grave for him in a local cemetery. LOL


----------



## ExiledBayStater (Feb 16, 2013)

EleGirl said:


> Have you watched Breaking Bad? It's a really good series. It was filmed here in New Mexico/Albuquerque where I live. So it's kinda fun seeing it from that perspective. They did a really good job of portraying the meth "business" and what that kind of life does to a person. It was not glorifying the drug trade or illegal activity.
> 
> When Walter White died on the show (the character not the actor), the local newspaper ran a obituary for him. There is also a grave for him in a local cemetery. LOL


I have watched Breaking Bad. I thought it was very well crafted.


----------



## AFallenAngel (Jun 10, 2015)

NO. You should never go against your conscience. Also if he treated you like that in the privacy of your own home regarding working for the same company, how would he treat OR talk to his coworkers about you? Office politics are hard enough. Would you really want that?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## TRy (Sep 14, 2011)

AFallenAngel said:


> NO. You should never go against your conscience. Also if he treated you like that in the privacy of your own home regarding working for the same company, how would he treat OR talk to his coworkers about you? Office politics are hard enough. Would you really want that?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


 First, this was not a moral issue that was a matter of conscience, as no one faults a spouse for saying something nice about their spouse. Second, if that is the way that she feels about her husband, why would he want to be married to her? Why would he really want that?

Too many on sites like this, accept the self justifying spin of each OP without trying to look at the facts free of spin. Free of spin, she is not a team player with her spouse. A spouse is suppose to have your back, otherwise you are nothing more than FWB.


----------



## AFallenAngel (Jun 10, 2015)

TRy said:


> First, this was not a moral issue that was a matter of conscience, as no one faults a spouse for saying something nice about their spouse. Second, if that is the way that she feels about her husband, why would he want to be married to her? Why would he really want that?
> 
> Too many on sites like this, accept the self justifying spin of each OP without trying to look at the facts free of spin. Free of spin, she is not a team player with her spouse. A spouse is suppose to have your back, otherwise you are nothing more than FWB.


I'll restate. If you are not comfortable for WHATEVER reason and concerned about Union rules and office politics, you need to go with your conscience. Period. You are not required to do that for family or friends and they should be able to get at least a call based on the impression they gave from their resume and any other contact. No spin there.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## TRy (Sep 14, 2011)

AFallenAngel said:


> I'll restate. If you are not comfortable for WHATEVER reason and concerned about Union rules and office politics, you need to go with your conscience. Period.


 The wife is not high enough in the organization to even be able to do anything that would break union or company rules. Saying something nice about your spouse does not break any rules; trying to call it an issue of conscience is just bull. Period. 



AFallenAngel said:


> You are not required to do that for family or friends


 You have the spouse ranked in there with all the other "family and friends". This is where we see the world differently.



AFallenAngel said:


> they should be able to get at least a call based on the impression they gave from their resume and any other contact.


 In the real world, many good candidates, that would have otherwise been hired, have their resumes die in HR because the HR person does not understand what the hiring person is really looking for, either because the job order was poorly written or because the HR person is overworked.


----------



## VermisciousKnid (Dec 27, 2011)

ExiledBayStater said:


> Now I'm just thinking of William Bulger


BayStater. He's a perfect example of the kind of characters you can see in high places when connections and favors are valued more highly than skills and character.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

I believe it would be an ethical violation. I expect loyalty from my employees and loyalty would mean an employee who stood to personally gain from a recommendation would refrain from making it. A wife certainly stands to gain from her husband getting a high paying gig. If my wife were a private contractor, I couldn't ethically (or even legally) recommend that my city employer do business with her. It's a very obvious conflict of interest. In my military role, I couldn't recommend or otherwise pike government business over to my wife. If the OP speaks to her boss as an employee, her boss has the right to expect that he holds her primary loyalty and that she's not using their special relationship to butter her own toast.


----------



## synthetic (Jan 5, 2012)

Not every good person can be a good spouse, and not every good spouse needs to be a good person.

A wife who refuses to do something as trivial as recommending her husband for a job is not a good wife. 

Your husband should always always always be placed above your ethics. That's what makes you a 'wife'. Giving priority to your husband over everything and everyone else (except maybe your children).

To avoid answering the obvious question:

If your husband commits murder, it would be ethical for you to report him to authorities, but it would not make you a good wife. You chose to be a wife when you said "I DO". Now be good at it.


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

"If your husband commits murder, it would be ethical for you to report him to authorities, but it would not make you a good wife. You chose to be a wife when you said "I DO". Now be good at it."

Balderdash! Since when does being a good wife include covering up a murder? And a woman who helps her spouse cover up a murder in no way could be described as 'good'. Those wedding vows are really being pushed to the limits. Limits which were never intended to be a part of vows.

The op's job contributes to the household and it is her responsibility to see that she keeps it. Just as it is her husband's responsibility to get his own job on his own merits.


----------



## WorkingWife (May 15, 2015)

Cinnamon153 said:


> Hello,
> 
> I need some objective opinions for my situation.
> My husband applied to work at the same place that I work (I had no problems with that). He asked me if I could 'put in a good word' for him. I told him that I didn't feel that it was something that I can do for the following reasons:
> ...


I think your husband is being unreasonable and childish in his reaction. 

But I don't think a job is "trivial" at all and if you communicated this sentiment to your husband that may have really insulted him.

You say it's ok with you if your husband works there but I wonder if it really is, because I don't know what is unethical about putting in a good word for someone you know - as long as you have legitimate reason to believe they are good at the job and would be an asset to the company.

It's not fair and bad for morale when a company hires people simply because they are related to someone. But I think it's smart business to hire people that existing existing employees can personally vouch for as good employees.

I wonder if you think your husband isn't that good a worker and maybe he realizes that and that is the real source of tension.

BTW - it's probably too late now, but if your husband had paid attention to your objections he could have just included you as a reference along with your place of employment. HR would have seen you worked there and could have solicited your opinion on him if they wanted to. Then you would not have been put in the position you consider unethical of being expected to go up to them and say "hey you should hire my husband."

Good luck, I hope it all gets resolved.


----------



## TRy (Sep 14, 2011)

Blondilocks said:


> Balderdash! Since when does being a good wife include covering up a murder?


 Federal law, as well as the law of every state, holds a person's obligation of loyalty to their spouse so high, that it protects married people from being called to testify by the prosecution against their spouse (the defendant) even in murder cases. It is called "Spousal testimonial privilege".


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

TRy said:


> Federal law, as well as the law of every state, holds a person's obligation of loyalty to their spouse so high, that it protects married people from being called to testify by the prosecution against their spouse (the defendant) even in murder cases. It is called "Spousal testimonial privilege".


So? It won't help him if she files for divorce. Who would want to be married to a murderer?

No wonder the OP hasn't returned. Some of these responses are really cuckooforcocoapuffs.


----------



## TRy (Sep 14, 2011)

unbelievable said:


> I believe it would be an ethical violation. I expect loyalty from my employees and loyalty would mean an employee who stood to personally gain from a recommendation would refrain from making it.


 It would be an ethical violation for a wife to say "hire this guy because he is my husband", but it would not be an ethical violation for a wife to say that "my husband is a hard worker and has just submitted his resume for position X, which he thinks he would be a good fit for." I also have employees, and I actual would think it fishy if they did not disclose this possible conflict of interest to me so that I could insure that it was handled fairly. My practice, which is a common practice, is to at least look at the resume of someone that is referred from someone within the company, but to evaluate the resume purely on its merits alone.


----------



## TRy (Sep 14, 2011)

Blondilocks said:


> So? It won't help him if she files for divorce. Who would want to be married to a murderer?


 So are you saying that a black woman living during segregation should testify against a black husband that was charged with murdering a white man, even if she believes her husband when he says that he did it in self defense? She may have seen him do it, but she knows without proof that he is telling her the truth as to why. You may think that she ethically has to testify, but fortunately the federal and state laws of our land do not agree.


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

No. Don't put words in my mouth. If she doesn't want to testify, she doesn't have to. But, to insinuate that a wife is not a good wife if she doesn't help him cover up the murder is reprehensible. 

To insinuate that the OP is not a good wife for not putting in a good word is also reprehensible.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

My husband also works for a multinational. I decided I would never hassle him about helping me to find a job at his employer. 

OP, you should remind her husband that even getting an interview is not a guarantee for a job. A lot of hiring managers will interview someone just to get the referee off their back. "hey, I interviewed him ,are you happy now?" and they may even double down with some insulting excuse as to why they are not suitable for the job.

There are a lot of good reasons for husband and wife to work at different employers. If one spouse gets embroiled in office politics, there isn't the risk that the other spouse has to endure it. If one employers is going through a cost cutting measure, both spuses could be affected. And also, you just don't want the feeling that one or more co-workers believe that you owe them now.


----------



## TRy (Sep 14, 2011)

NextTimeAround said:


> There are a lot of good reasons for husband and wife to work at different employers. If one spouse gets embroiled in office politics, there isn't the risk that the other spouse has to endure it. If one employers is going through a cost cutting measure, both spuses could be affected. And also, you just don't want the feeling that one or more co-workers believe that you owe them now.


 If that was what the OP said, then we would be having a different conversation, but instead the OP said in her first post that "My husband applied to work at the same place that I work (I had no problems with that)". Thus the OP's position is not she that it is a bad idea for him to work there, but that she thought it to be somehow unethical to put in a word for him.


----------



## zillard (Nov 13, 2012)

Another important word in the title of the thread is "my". 

Due to that, I think the subject here is subjective ethics. 

Our ethics may differ, as company ethics differ.

One may view ethics in a marriage as standing by your spouse, to the point of covering for a murder. Another may not. 

In that sense, I feel nobody should violate their own ethics to appease a spouse.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## TRy (Sep 14, 2011)

Blondilocks said:


> No. Don't put words in my mouth. If she doesn't want to testify, she doesn't have to. But, to insinuate that a wife is not a good wife if she doesn't help him cover up the murder is reprehensible.


 Don't put words in my mouth. I never said that she should "cover up the murder". I said that if "she knows without proof that he is telling her the truth as to why" ("self defense"), that ethics and the law does not compel her to "testify against" him. There is a big difference between not testifying against him, which is passive and in keeping with the law, and doing something to "cover up the murder", which may be active and against the law. To falsely imply that I may be advocating breaking the law is reprehensible.


----------



## AFallenAngel (Jun 10, 2015)

TRy said:


> The wife is not high enough in the organization to even be able to do anything that would break union or company rules. Saying something nice about your spouse does not break any rules; trying to call it an issue of conscience is just bull. Period.
> 
> You have the spouse ranked in there with all the other "family and friends". This is where we see the world differently.
> 
> In the real world, many good candidates, that would have otherwise been hired, have their resumes die in HR because the HR person does not understand what the hiring person is really looking for, either because the job order was poorly written or because the HR person is overworked.


Neither a husband or wife is under any obligation to reference their spouse and it seems your comments should be directed at the OP and not someone like me who answered.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

TRy said:


> First, this was not a moral issue that was a matter of conscience, as no one faults a spouse for saying something nice about their spouse. Second, if that is the way that she feels about her husband, why would he want to be married to her? Why would he really want that?
> 
> Too many on sites like this, accept the self justifying spin of each OP without trying to look at the facts free of spin. Free of spin, she is not a team player with her spouse. A spouse is suppose to have your back, otherwise you are nothing more than FWB.


There is another way to look at it. He is not a team player asking her to do something that could hurt her job.

You have no idea where the OP works or the culture of where she works.

Many of us have stated that where we work, it would reflect badly on anyone who did what her husbands wants her to do. It could hurt her job in such an environment.


----------



## LonelyinLove (Jul 11, 2013)

You were right...I wouldn't have said a word either. H can get the job on his own merit, not on a "hint" from me.


----------



## LonelyinLove (Jul 11, 2013)

Me Vietare said:


> You are an insider in the organization and as a hiring manager my self previous to my retirement, I would welcome the "good word" of a spouse in the consideration of a candidate for the job.


This would be illegal where I work, and absolutely no consideration would be given to the word of any family member.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

NextTimeAround said:


> My husband also works for a multinational. I decided I would never hassle him about helping me to find a job at his employer.
> 
> OP, you should remind her husband that even getting an interview is not a guarantee for a job. A lot of hiring managers will interview someone just to get the referee off their back. "hey, I interviewed him ,are you happy now?" and they may even double down with some insulting excuse as to why they are not suitable for the job.
> 
> There are a lot of good reasons for husband and wife to work at different employers. If one spouse gets embroiled in office politics, there isn't the risk that the other spouse has to endure it. If one employers is going through a cost cutting measure, both spuses could be affected. And also, you just don't want the feeling that one or more co-workers believe that you owe them now.


I agree. I would not want my husband to work in the same company with me for these and other reasons.

To me it's like diversifying your assets. If both work for one company, then the hit on their financial wellbeing is twice as large if something goes down hill.

For example, one get fired for what employer says is cause. But both spouses believe it was unjustified, does the one who was not fired say on working for the company? Or is that not being a good spouse?

It's just to full of issues.

I know that some people do it. But I would not like it.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

TRy said:


> People expect a spouse to say good things about their spouse and to put in a good word for them. When the spouse does not do this, right or wrong, many will interpret this to mean that there is a problem and that they should pass on hiring the spouse. Because of your silence, he would have had a better chance if you had not worked there.





> *It would be an ethical violation for a wife to say "hire this guy because he is my husband", but it would not be an ethical violation for a wife to say that "my husband is a hard worker and has just submitted his resume for position X, which he thinks he would be a good fit for." I also have employees, and I actual would think it fishy if they did not disclose this possible conflict of interest to me so that I could insure that it was handled fairly. My practice, which is a common practice, is to at least look at the resume of someone that is referred from someone within the company, but to evaluate the resume purely on its merits alone*.












What I get from this is.. he must NOT have a good record.. she is NOT HAPPY with his work performance or ethically feels he would not do a good job and therefore make her look bad.. (if this IS TRUE , I CAN understand her hesitation).. if it is NOT TRUE, however.. I don't see how her speaking something good about him is Unethical in any way. 

Speaking as a wife who would JUMP to get my husband hired because he is an outstanding employee that would be an asset to ...well a blue collar job more so.. but yeah.. I would most certainly put in a good word... for whatever it was worth.. 

It sounds Respect has been lost in the marriage somewhere.. and it's headed for trouble..


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

I cannot imagine a situation in which anyone would take a recommendation from a spouse seriously. How could it possibly be objective? This is almost as silly as the "helicopter parents" who accompany their children on job interviews!


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

For all those who say or do anything on the basis that their high morals/ values / standards / whatever compels them to do so, please be sure that you are consistent in applying your values.

For example, in this case, let's hope that the OP, a year from now or longer doesn't let slip to her husband "honey, you know that college studnet in your Sunday Bible school class that youteach, well, he mentioned that he's applying for a job at my employer. He's such a good kid, I put in a good word for him"

Ooops, try explaining how that situation is different.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

technovelist said:


> I cannot imagine a situation in which anyone would take a recommendation from a spouse seriously. How could it possibly be objective? This is almost as silly as the "helicopter parents" who accompany their children on job interviews!


I'm sure every working situation / atmosphere is different.. in my own mind -answering this question... I am not imagining high powered jobs making 6 figures.. everyone yaks about their spouses on the job anyway.. heck.. everyone would already KNOW what they are like -even before a Job became available... I guess for this reason.. I don't see it the same way as others... and my response may well not APPLY at all for the Original poster....

If an employee has a reputation for honesty ...if they truly feel their husband is qualified... I guess I don't see that as a Joke... all I am saying is.. I'd do what I could get to the best man or women a job -*IF I had any pull*... 

Where my husband works... in the past, they had a number of family members getting hired.... it got out of hand.. now this is frowned upon, it won't be taken into consideration...kinda sucks for our sons ... 

If there is a company policy to NEVER hire relatives.. it should be respected, of course.. but if it's typical for others to speak on behalf of someone they know...who they feel would be an asset to the company....if it could help in any way.. I would not understand this argument of ethics.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

Speaking of Walter White here, the character Saul, who was his lawyer in Breaking Bad and is now the main character in the prequel Better Call Saul, had to come to terms with the fact that his brother, honoured partner at the law firm, didn't want him to work as lawyer there. (he was fine in the mail room......)


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

NextTimeAround said:


> For all those who say or do anything on the basis that their high morals/ values / standards / whatever compels them to do so, please be sure that you are consistent in applying your values.
> 
> For example, in this case, let's hope that the OP, a year from now or longer doesn't let slip to her husband "honey, you know that college studnet in your Sunday Bible school class that youteach, well, he mentioned that he's applying for a job at my employer. He's such a good kid, I put in a good word for him"
> 
> Ooops, try explaining how that situation is different.


There is no conflict of interest for recommending someone who is not related to you, unless you have some business transaction going on with the kid from Sunday School.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

RoseAglow said:


> There is no conflict of interest for recommending someone who is not related to you, unless you have some business transaction going on with the kid from Sunday School.


Then hopefully, your husband will understand that difference.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

Cinnamon153 said:


> I need some objective opinions for my situation.
> My husband applied to work at the same place that I work (I had no problems with that). He asked me if I could 'put in a good word' for him. I told him that I didn't feel that it was something that I can do...


I can see how, "putting in a good word" for a family member could easily be regarded as a lapse in judgement, but I'm struggling to see the ethical issue. There's nothing inherently unethical about a personal recommendation even when it's unsolicited, although as you point out, coming from a spouse, it would probably be regarded as less than worthless.


----------



## ExiledBayStater (Feb 16, 2013)

OP, does your husband have no other connections there or anywhere else he would want to work? If that is the case, that is a much bigger issue than your refusal to engage in nepotism.


----------



## VermisciousKnid (Dec 27, 2011)

ocotillo said:


> I can see how, "putting in a good word" for a family member could easily be regarded as a lapse in judgement, but I'm struggling to see the ethical issue. There's nothing inherently unethical about a personal recommendation even when it's unsolicited, although as you point out, coming from a spouse, it would probably be regarded as less than worthless.


This is true. If she was the hiring manager and she hired her husband, did his performance evaluations, determined his raises, etc., that would be a conflict of interest, therefore unethical. 

What she is describing is a company culture that frowns on nepotism, and she doesn't want to go against that.


----------



## kjm (Jan 8, 2011)

My wife knows that I do not lie, and I will not violate my ethics. In my divorce, after spending more than double what I earned in a year on legal bills, my attorney needed me to exaggerate a wee bit and he was confident I would have gotten full custody of our children. We already had my ex on several lies. I simply could not lie for any cause- not even my children, so my wife knows I wouldn't violate my ethics. She desperately wants to work for my employer and is very miserable in her present job, but I simply cannot violate ethics and I applaud you for the same thing. In the long run, your husband knows that you have a good moral framework and that is the foundation of a good marriage. He may be angry now, but he knows you are honest.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

VermisciousKnid said:


> What she is describing is a company culture that frowns on nepotism, and she doesn't want to go against that.


I can see that. There are plenty of companies out there that will not hire the spouse of a current employee for any position, even if it's in a different department, because the appearance of something untoward can potentially be as damaging to morale as the real thing.


----------



## Cinnamon153 (Jun 18, 2015)

Mr. Nail said:


> Well I see two problems. One your Husband didn't listen well. Many men (myself included) tend to stop listening to objections when they are focused on a goal. Second, although you value your job and take action to protect it, you find your husbands search for a similar job to be trivial. I would recommend that you work on your problem and let him know what he needs to work on. There is still time to avoid the Big D.


Hi Mr Nail, 

Yeah, no, we're not getting divorced over this one. He had thrown out something like "if we can't agree over this big thing, how are we going to go on, you know what the next step is right?". I took that to me a divorce, but he is adamant that is not what he meant....

Anyways, I wanted to clarify what I meant by 'trivial'. I don't think that my husband's career or his search for a new position is trivial. I think that 1 job in a sea of 100's is trivial. Tons of people apply for positions and get turned down everyday. I understand being disappointed for not getting an interview at a place that you really wanted, but I think that his reaction was completely inappropriate and I don't believe that he understands the culture enough to understand why I didn't go to management and say some nice words about him. His work culture is very '1950's' and mine is very current. The values that he's been instilled with over the last few years by the management at his company wouldn't fly here. I have no doubt that he can learn and adapt, but he's not there yet. 

Thanks,


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

ExiledBayStater said:


> OP, does your husband have no other connections there or anywhere else he would want to work? If that is the case, that is a much bigger issue than your refusal to engage in nepotism.


Strictly speaking, nepotism is the use of power to bestow favors upon relatives. The word itself is a direct cognate of the Latin, "Nepos" (Nephew) and referred to the practice of appointing the illegitimate offspring of clergy to cushy positions. 

In business, nepotism is the unfair hiring or use of power to influence the hiring of relatives over more qualified applicants. 

The OP described the situation thus:



Cinnamon153 said:


> The position he applied for is several grades above mine and I do not deal with the people that he would have been working for. They barely know me, so my input would be meaningless.


...which actually precludes nepotism.


----------



## Cosmos (May 4, 2012)

I think the real question ism was fair for your H to place you in a situation like that, and the answer is No. I'm sure you explained the company's hiring policy to him, and how awkward it would be for you to put in a good word - particularly for a position several notches higher than your own, and where your word would carry little or no weight with the people concerned...

IMO, he's taking his disappointment at not being called for an interview out on you. Also, it might be a good thing that he's not going to work for the same company as you, particularly as you enjoy it so much...

I hope he finds a new position very soon, OP, and you can both move beyond this.


----------



## sapientia (Nov 24, 2012)

GTdad said:


> Seems like a pretty small thing to divorce over, unless there are other, bigger issues in play.
> 
> My take is that it may not have been a big deal for you to go ahead and put in a good word for him, but as you point out, it wouldn't have carried much impact.
> 
> The fact is that if your H had been an attractive candidate, he would have likely gotten an interview with or without you. For him to blame you for failing to get an interview is unfair and probably a little self-deceiving.


I agree^. The only additional comment I would make is that resumes occasionally get lost in the HR system or aren't evaluated well. Most people who get an offer have a contact within an organization before they send a resume to HR. Run of the mill HR folks are gatekeepers, managers of process and sometimes knowledgeable about labour laws -- they work in HR, afterall. They don't have ability to evaluate technical or executives. If they did *they* would be the executive.

The way I would have handled it would have been to make an introduction to someone in the department I knew he was interested in, and then bow out. As the saying goes, "its all about relationships" these days and if he can't manage that well, that's his learning journey.

If I was new to the company myself however, I would never do this. One has to have some history and credibility in an organization before doing this kind of thing.


----------

