In an article that you should really read; link sub req
A whistle blower at UNM filed a complaint alleging cronyism
in hiring and promotions.
UNM investigated itself; found more irregularities than you
can shake a stick at,
and concluded that they had done nothing wrong.
Why are these people allowed to investigate themselves?
Why isn't the spending of public trust and treasure
subject to impartial audits?
Except in the interests of the corrupt and the incompetent?
Thursday, June 26, 2008
UNM finds no cronyism
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Isn't the attorney who investigated the allegation of cronyism, inside counsel for UNM? Hence he actually REPRESENTS UNM? His job, in effect, is to protect UNM and its interests! Even if he had wanted to be unbiased, he reports to some of whom were being pointed at. Aren't these type investigations normally made by uninterested (and unvested) outside parties. UNM in effect investigated itself regarding cronysim! Do you see the irony there? This only appears to support the allegations. There was mention of lack of documentation in some files - doesn't that support the claim of cronyism? I don't really think you would find documentation in a file stating: "Hired because I worked with them in legislation and they are my friend!" or even better, "Raise given because they have good DNA!" And who exactly was questioned in the course of said "investigation"? The very same people who got thier friends & colleagues the positions in the first place? Or the people who were awarded said positions? What about looking at how people at the University are related (no, not actual blood ties) and where past jobs & friendship circles overlap. Where exactly their paths crossed prior to working at UNM and how they came by the very positions they now hold? Or howabout talking to those lower down the ladder (with no title or high positions) that know the facts but lack the titles? Either this piece was written on behalf of the the Univeristy or no one was actually looking for facts to support this claim. But then again, an outside party did not infact DO the investigation did they?! How can it be that MOST of the University is up in arms about this? Are ALL these allegations unfounded? Or maybe it is that the lowly Univeristy employees are ALL disgruntled employees? I also find it odd that David Harris would press to punish the whistle blower? SERIOUSLY is the man daft!! Why the upset if there is nothing to hide, Harris? Now, if the investigation were done by an outside party NOT affiliated with or vested in the University in any way, I might be willing to swallow this bitter spoonful of bile, however I truly can't see that happening, then who would cover up? I would say the article only proved what most at UNM are already aware of - cronyism is alive and well (hiden) at the Univesity.
Post a Comment