I think it's fine in a true "family business" e.g. you wholly own a hardware store or a restaurant and you have your family working there and eventually you hand it off to your children (assuming they want it).
In large public companies or institutions that have shareholders or state owners then it's unfair for an executive or senior administrator to carve out a job for a family member. He's giving them something he doesn't own, unlike in the family business example.
Even in the family business, there should be limits. What if the family business becomesand empire worth >20% of a contries GDP - e.g. Samsung. It is absolutely not reasonable to pass this amount of wealth to children of the founder.
Shareholders can put pressure on the board to fire the exrcutive. If they don't, that means they're fine with the situation.
What fraction of ownership would make it okay?
100% ? 50% ? Something in the middle?