You are here
Waivers and Ironies
Saturday, November 13th, 2010
Robert Wechsler
This post will be of special interest to those who enjoy the occasional ironies
that arise in the world of government ethics. According to an
article in today's New York Times, the woman named to be New York
City's new schools chancellor has decided to resign from her positions
on the boards of Coca Cola, IBM, and Hearst Magazines (where she is
chair), at a great financial cost to her. Of these three, only IBM has
contracts with the city.
What is ironic is that the reason she is doing this is exactly the opposite of the usual reason high-level officials should resign their positions with companies. Most high-level officials have spent their lives in the field, and their corporate positions raise all sorts of possible, ongoing conflicts. They tend to argue that their expertise outweighs all the possible conflicts they have.
The new school chancellor has no background in education. It is her lack of expertise that is the problem. Why? Because without a background in education, she needs to get a waiver from the state department of education in order to accept the position. She wants to make it clear that she is willing to bend over backwards for the job, even at a serious financial cost to herself, in order to get that waiver.
If she chose, the new schools chancellor could have sought a waiver from the city's Conflicts of Interest Board, and she most likely would have gotten waivers for the Coca Cola and Hearst positions (although being Hearst chair would likely be too much of a commitment). But in order to get the job, she felt it would be better not even to try.
If only those with expertise were equally willing to bend over backwards for their government jobs, removing themselves from as many real conflict situations as they could. I suppose this case shows the value of an effective, independent waiver system, one that forces government officials to make a case for themselves and their conflicts, if they want to preserve them, before they can accept an appointment.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
What is ironic is that the reason she is doing this is exactly the opposite of the usual reason high-level officials should resign their positions with companies. Most high-level officials have spent their lives in the field, and their corporate positions raise all sorts of possible, ongoing conflicts. They tend to argue that their expertise outweighs all the possible conflicts they have.
The new school chancellor has no background in education. It is her lack of expertise that is the problem. Why? Because without a background in education, she needs to get a waiver from the state department of education in order to accept the position. She wants to make it clear that she is willing to bend over backwards for the job, even at a serious financial cost to herself, in order to get that waiver.
If she chose, the new schools chancellor could have sought a waiver from the city's Conflicts of Interest Board, and she most likely would have gotten waivers for the Coca Cola and Hearst positions (although being Hearst chair would likely be too much of a commitment). But in order to get the job, she felt it would be better not even to try.
If only those with expertise were equally willing to bend over backwards for their government jobs, removing themselves from as many real conflict situations as they could. I suppose this case shows the value of an effective, independent waiver system, one that forces government officials to make a case for themselves and their conflicts, if they want to preserve them, before they can accept an appointment.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
