If This Isn’t Nepotism, What Is?

As a result of the “marriage in management” at the Child Support Division, the D.A.’s office has initiated a number of special arrangements specifically to accommodate the Troms.

The plan is to remove the child support ombudsman from the office and put her in a location completely separated from the child support function. Also, a newly created classification awaits her (in order to fit in with the organizational chart that has been renovated).

The dictionary defines “nepotism” as undue favoritism and/or special treatment shown to a relative.

Is this not special treatment for an individual based on her marriage? Mr. Trom is the managing attorney-D.A./Child Support, but there is now a child support employee who is no longer answerable to him. Is this not a change to his responsibilities required as a result of his marriage?

Finally, the “investigation” by the personnel department was conducted jointly with the D.A.’s office. As Mr. Bradbury has openly supported the waiver of the rules for the Troms, how can the study be considered objective?

I prefer to consider the situation for what it is, a special treatment of certain employees due to their family relationship. In a word, nepotism.

PATRICK C. SQUIRES

Ventura