The ethical standards through which the conduct of employees is gauged has been quite successful as they have ensured that the public receives the best and an unbiased treatment from these officials. The officers working in the public offices have, therefore, acquired standardized behaviors which enable them to be transparent during their engagements. This has been very effective and has, indeed, facilitated the availing of quality services to the society. By instituting provisions which aim at facilitating benefits to the public officers, the officers have been empowered to work with devotion, a situation that has enabled the public to restore confidence in public offices. In fact, such empowering eliminates vices such as favoritism, and everyone feels that his/her needs are addressed in an adequate manner (Svara, 2007). The improvement of work ethics eliminates the possibility of having exploitative relationships between the public service employees. Additionally, these standards solve some of the issues which result into conflicts of interest, and this eliminate the chances of having a single individual serve in multiple positions.
The desire to enhance ethics in the public service has necessitated the assignment of duties on the basis of the skills individuals possess. Nevertheless, enhancing this would be a step forward towards the improvement of service, and it would also serve to eliminate inadequacy which results when incompetent individuals ends up taking prime positions in the public service. There would also be adequate avenues for enforcing standards and, therefore, appropriate penalization would be accorded to those who contravene these standards (Svara, 2007).
Ethical Standards and Expectations
Enforcing ethical standards would facilitate the realization of the public expectations that public servants are impartial, especially as they undertake those duties that have been allocated to them officially. Employees working in the federal government are expected to maintain relationships which further teamwork and performance, and not those that advance personalized relationships. In order to avoid controversy, employees are expected to seek approval of their seniors before engaging in those activities which may be, for some reason, be perceived to usher in partiality (Menzel, 2007). These activities include contracting as well as investigations which may be touching on matters of finance and staff payroll. For instance, there are those who may consider the contracting of close family members, former employees, as well as friends to be an indication of impartiality of favoritism. Florida is one of the states where the enforcement of ethical standards does restrict public officers from engaging in those services which would influence unfair practices. This would avert instances of misuse of the public positions in a manner that may involve giving preference to relatives.
There is a set of standards which bar staff members from accepting any form of appreciation which can be valued above $10,000. The idea behind this is that high valued rewards would, indeed, act as a hindrance to the normal activities instead of encouraging them. This is strictly observed in the state of Florida. In the state of Florida, no employee working in a public organization or the local government is allowed to accept gifts, loans, or any other favors that may influence his engagement in the entrusted position. This regulation does also apply for those who work as election officials. While the Federal government outlaws gifts with financial benefit, the state of Florida bar anyone from accepting, as indicated above, gifts, loans or other forms of favor that may influence the conduct of duties. Moreover, unlike with the federal members of staff, the state of Florida outlaws any form of severance payment as officials perceives it to have the possibility of influencing conduct and, consequently, performance (Menzel, 2007).
The ethical standards which guide the conduct of the federal government employees as well as those who have been commissioned by the state of Florida facilitate the enhancement of accountability in the public service. In this regard, official or institutionalized favoritism is effectively averted. This ensures transparency, and the members of the public are served without any form of prejudice. The state of Florida and the federal government in general, has been enacting those regulations that would bar employees who are perceived to be prejudiced from working in sensitive positions. In this case, it becomes difficult to influence the outcome during an engagement unfairly. This is meant to ensure that the members of the public are not blackmailed or treated unfairly whenever they attempt to seek the services of a government employee (Menzel, 2007).
For the purpose of ensuring complete, efficient, and effective service delivery by the government officers, employees’ conduct is restricted to those activities that they can deliver to their best. Employees are required to restrict themselves to single job positions as engaging in multiple activities would divide their attention and, therefore, result into poor job performances. This ensures that members of the public are accorded complete attention, a situation which enables them to receive the best and unbiased service from the government (Hackerott, 2003). Employees are also not expected to offer gifts to one another as this would influence official engagements through the creation of personalized relationships. It may also damage the relationship between workers and, in some instances, result to harassment which may, at times, be sexual based. Nevertheless, employees are not bared from offering gifts to one another especially when there are celebrations or special occasions. Offering gifts in such circumstances would, indeed, enhance positive friendliness which would, in effect empower teamwork. The federal government and the government of the state of Florida have instituted those ethical standards that govern the conduct of employees so as to enhance transparency during official engagements (Hackerott, 2003). Good conduct instills trust and confidence amongst the members of the public, and it also facilitates the elimination of several vices and misconduct during official engagements.