NEPOTISM OR PERSONNEL POLICY: JOB PLACEMENT AT THE LAVRA MUSEUM OF CULTS AND LIFE/ALL-UKRAINIAN MUSEUM TOWN (BASED ON LETTERS TO PETRO KURINNYI)

Abstract

Letters to Petro Kurinnyi, a head of the Lavra Museum of Cults and Life (since 1926 – the All-Ukrainian Museum Town) in Kyiv, containing information on job search, employment, senders’ and addressees’ qualification and motivation, are introduced into scientific use. It is explicated that from the time of the appointment to the position until the arrest and dismissal in 1933, Petro Kurinnyi actively formed the museum staff. It is revealed that he used his acquaintances from his studies, teaching and museum work in the Uman region to fill vacancies, and listened to the recommendations of his colleagues and friends. It is shown that the head of the Lavra Museum /Preserve received many letters of request for employment: former students (Andron Hihlavyi, Vasyl Bahach, Lesia Tsivchynska, Vasyl Chyzhskyi, Yakiv Kazshchuk) sought to hold at least technical positions in the Kyiv Museum (a guard/ a watchman) to arrange their residence and higher education; specialists with higher education and practical experience in museology were looking for interesting and sustainable work (Kost Shtepa, Mykola Kasperovych, Petro Pinevych, Kost Petychynskyi, Stepan Drozdov-Myshkivskyi, Fedir Maslun, Volodymyr Parkhomenko, Valter Fokht, Borys Pylypenko, Semen Pidhainyi and others); the authorities/big brass (Volodymyr Balanin, Klym Konyk, Serhii Minkevych) expressed their wishes to fix the right people, including relatives, up for a job, etc. At the same time, Petro Kurinnyi himself addressed directly to proven administrators, leading historians and art critics (Ivan Oleksiiev, Oleksandr Yakubskyi) with proposals to join the Lavra intellectual community. It is clarified that a certain part of the addressees received the desired place in the staff of the Lavra Museum/Preserve. It is emphasized that Petro Kurinnyi’s administrative decisions should not be considered as indulgence in the service of friends or relatives to the detriment of the case, as the main criteria for employment were the ability to perform job responsibilities, education, professionalism, experience, motivation, ability to interact effectively. The director’s personnel policy was level-headed and partly pragmatic, a kind of balance between finding the best museum specialists, giving a chance to former students to make a living and satisfying the «whims» of officials of the UkrSSR.