2009-10-22 / Front Page

Council continues hiring practice revisions

By DAN PELTON Staff Reporter

Orangeville council is continuing efforts to find acceptable revisions to a policy that prohibits hiring relatives of councillors while the councillors are still in office.

At Monday night's public meeting, Mayor Rob Adams said council should "strive to find a reasonable middle ground without totally altering the policy," suggesting that relatives be prohibited from applying for higher-level positions but still be eligible for others.

Relatives or significant others are defined in the Town's existing policy to include a partner, parent, step-parent; child, step-child; grandparent, step-grandparent, grandchild or step-grandchild; brother, sister, step-brother or step-sister; or the spouse or same-sex partner of a child or step-child.

The "Employment of Relatives Policy" was first implemented in 1998. The provision that prohibits the hiring of relatives of a council member, while that member is in office, came about in 2005.

On Monday, council voted to refer the matter back to staff, who will present more comprehensive recommendations as to what positions for which a council member's relative can or cannot apply.

Despite a recent town staffconducted survey's findings that 14 of 20 surveyed municipalities allow such hiring, council was divided on whether it should change the current policy.

At the public meeting Monday night, Councillor Gary Kocialek spoke in favour of allowing councillors' relatives to apply for positions with the town.

"It's important to have the best person for the job," he said, adding that a relative should be considered if he or she undergoes the standard hiring process and is considered the most qualified.

Councillor Gail Campbell, on the other hand, spoke against the change, fearing that, if a councillor's relative was hired, it "would put the family in an awkward position.

"Staff could be in a difficult position when it comes to a case of discipline," she said; suggesting that dealing with a particular employee might be compromised by the knowledge that the employee's close relative on council is also partly in charge of the town's purse strings.

As well, Ms. Campbell added, a family member might question if he was hired for what he/she knows, or for whom he/she knows.

Return to top

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.