Q. Should tribal governments ban the acceptance of gifts from contractors or vendors?A. Historically, Native Americans and tribal governments have been very generous in sharing their limited resources with others. Bestowing tokens of appreciation to those in social and commercial relationships has become an accepted part of the culture and tradition of most tribes. Also, many tribal leaders feel that it is important to protect this gesture of gratitude.
However, the receipt of gifts by tribal governments from contractors and vendors has become increasingly common, especially among gaming tribes. Unfortunately, gift giving to targeted tribal and / or casino decision-makers is often a simple but effective method for vendors to “influence” the flow of business. The danger from the tribe’s perspective is that there is often no bright line distinguishing a “gift” from a “bribe”. In other words, the “gift” may create a conflict of interest for the employee. If a tribal / casino decision-maker awards a contract to a vendor based upon something other than the value of the service or material provided, the tribe and its members are victimized. Tribal / casino employees have an ethical obligation to act in the best interest of their employer.
To prevent even the appearance of impropriety, many tribes have adopted a code of ethics that restricts gift giving by contractors and vendors. Typically, employees are required to report receipt of any gift exceeding a nominal value (e.g. $50 or $100) and are prohibited from retaining such items. Such a restriction prevents employees who are in a position to award lucrative contracts from being influenced by the receipt of “gifts” from applicant vendors. Often, such ethical prohibitions on gift giving must be provided to contractors and vendors so that they will not attempt to distribute unauthorized gifts. If gifts are still received by the tribe / casino, codes of ethics often require that the gift be given randomly as a prize to a tribal member or to charity. Gift giving poses a serious conflict of interest and should be controlled by the tribe to prevent abuse.
Joseph M. Paiement is a tribal attorney and an instructor for Falmouth Institute, teaching Ethics, Tribal Constitutions and American Indian Law.
Have an ethics question? Post it in the comments section and we'll address the best questions in future blogs.
And Donna Erwin, Principal Deputy Special Trustee would say.....?
ReplyDeleteawww come on now?
ReplyDeleteYou will speak of ethics in one side of your mouth but you won't allow a comment on the unethical behavior of the number two at Office of Special Trustee, who by the way was identified by the Office of Inspector General as having violated ethics and maintaining the "arms length" required of her relationship with Chavarria, Dunne and Lamey? http://www.doioig.gov/upload/CD&L_WEB06_19_061.pdf
Donna would be proud of you guys...sadly.