The ethics of ambition
Re: CEO resignations are governed by responsibilities, Howard Levitt, Aug. 24
Mr. Levitt’s latest column attempts to convince us that Jennifer Keesmaat’s mayoral candidacy is tainted by faulty ethics regarding her previous employer. As he eventually admits, however, her employer is not a business per se, but rather, an organization set up and paid for to take advantage of government programs, in this case, public housing. She has merely spent five months well-employed (albeit at taxpayer expense, actually) preparing for one very important aspect of her future position.
Would it be ethical for her previous employer to sue her for leaving her post with so little notice? If they wait until she is mayor to do so, the lawsuit would be funded by taxpayers, against taxpayers. That doesn’t sound very ethical at all. Such a suit would divert taxpayer funds away from the very programs they have already funded. That is also unethical. Would it be ethical of lawyers to even propose such a lawsuit in the first place?
It is a stretch for any of these well-paid individuals to complain about Keesmaat’s behaviour. What she has done is a slight inconvenience — it is but a drop in the very deep barrel of funds they all use to keep their plans percolating, and a very tempting prospect for any lawyer who wants to help them launch a lawsuit. We can all console ourselves with the fact that if she is elected, she will know precisely how to proceed on at least one important portfolio.