With-holding Information--Is It Ethical? Ethics Moment August 2007

You are a candidate for a very competitive, high profile city manager job. During the search process conducted by a reputable consulting search firm you are asked: “If we conducted a thorough background check on you, would we find anything in your background which might embarrass a future employer?”

You pause for a moment as your mind flashes back to an allegation that was made about you when you were a city manager of a small community.  It was alleged by two staff members of the community hospital where your wife was terminally ill that you slapped and verbally abused her.

The police investigated the allegation as did the Department of Children and Family Services (DCF). During the investigation you assert that the staff members misinterpreted a situation in which your wife was choking and you were helping her. Your wife states to the investigators that you did not abuse her. Neither the police nor the DCF investigations report that there is any physical evidence (e.g., redness on the face) that you had slapped her. Nonetheless, the investigative report is sent to the State Attorney to determine whether or not to press charges. The State Attorney declines to pursue the matter due to a lack of evidence. Thus the allegation is unsubstantiated.

Decision #1: How should you reply to the question asked by the search firm?
Should you or should you not disclose the incident?

Let’s assume that you reason that the incident was entirely personal and was found to be

unsubstantiated. Therefore, you decide to respond “there is nothing in my background

that would embarrass a future employer?”

You receive an invitation to interview.

During the interview, you stress your honesty and high ethical standards.

Decision #2: Do you or do you not disclose the incident to the city’s HR staff and the city commissioners?

Once more you decide to not disclose information about the incident for the same reason you did not disclose it to the search firm.

The interview goes very well. City commissioners are impressed and decide to offer you a $170,000 job contract. The local newspaper reports the story with the byline—“Ethics and experience bring Jones to the fore.”

On the day the contract is to be voted on, city commissioners receive information that you were accused of slapping and verbally abusing your wife in the hospital where she was terminally ill.

The Commission decides to call an emergency meeting to discuss the situation. You are invited to appear before the commission and answer their questions.

Decision #3: Do you accept the commission’s invitation?

You decide “yes” as the air needs to be cleared and you need the full trust and confidence of your new bosses.

During the questioning, you assert “I haven’t lied. I have not told an untruth.”

One Commissioner asks: “why didn’t you tell us about this allegation?”

Decision #4: What do you say?

1. I forgot.
2. I didn’t think anyone would find out.
3. You didn’t ask me.
4. It was merely an unsubstantiated allegation as my wife and I had a very loving relationship right up to the moment of her death.
5. With-holding information is acceptable under these very personal circumstances.
6. I thought the allegation, although untrue, would place my candidacy in jeopardy if it became public.

Outcome:

The commission decides to postpone approving your contract for two weeks while they seek more background information about you.

Meanwhile, you have withdrawn as a city manager finalist for several other positions and are now worried about ending up without any job.

You muse, “Am I being treated fairly by the city commission? The media? I know I haven’t done anything wrong. Why am I being subjected to such scrutiny?”

Based on a real case reported in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, June 2 and 5, 2007.