Romance at Work

By Sheldon Marks

Workers complain about policies that prohibit dating and loudly proclaim that it is an infringement of their human rights. Others ask, “What ever happened to democratic principles?” It is only after the relationship is over that employers and employees willingly agree with the basic principal of having a policy against dating in the workplace.

The corporate world is not democratic. This may be difficult to understand, but it’s true. Benevolent dictatorships, perhaps. Paternalistic management, perhaps. Maybe even more fair than unfair. But democratic, no. Even with “empowerment”, someone always has more power than another. So, don’t call your union: dating co-workers is not protected as any kind of right—civil or otherwise.

Two policies in the workplace
There are two types of policies on dating or establishing relationships in the workplace. First, there is the anti-nepotism policy: “While we appreciate referrals of relatives, we cannot hire when there is or will be a direct or indirect reporting relationship between the parties.”

The second policy, non-fraternization, is much more direct and perhaps draconian, at least from the perspective of the dating population. “If a personal relationship creates conflicts of interest, causes dissension, interrupts the work flow of the parties or other employees, or creates a negative work environment, one or both parties may be asked to resign from the company.”

If the company is large enough, the policy might state that one of the parties may be transferred to another department or location. If there are no other locations or departments where the relationship would not be perceived to bring about the same problems as the initial policy, both parties may be asked to leave. 

Discrimination: Is romantic love not above discrimination? After all, one cannot discriminate against an employee because of marital status. This is true, but most relationships do not end in marriage. In addition, the anti-nepotism policy is not against marital status, but against conflicts of interests or perceptions of favouritism. (The non-fraternization policy has nothing to do with marital status.)

Why Is a Policy Necessary?
There are many reasons for having a policy in the workplace. Among them are:

• favouritism
• perceptions of favouritism (and the ensuing rumour mill)
• conflicts of interest
• confidentiality (as in nondisclosure agreements)
• a hostile work environment
• sexual harassment

Consider these real-life examples that illustrate the need for policy:
A manufacturing firm: A woman is an Accounting Manager, and a man is a sales rep. His travel expenses are always paid first and, when it turns out that he’s cheating on his expenses, both were terminated.

A high-tech company: Two programmers begin a relationship that fails after three months. When it does, she “stalks” him by not leaving him alone, leaving Post-It Notes all over his cubicle, and sending hundreds of emails to his computer. The relationship not only screws up an entire project that the two were working on, but disrupts the work of others. She is fired and continues to “stalk” him at home, which lead to bigger problems. The situation is still a corporate concern because it was affecting his work, and his work was key to a new product. Ultimately he had to be terminated as well.

A bank: A male vice-president begins to date a female AP clerk. They move in together. Six months later, she throws him out and he finds all of his clothes out on the front lawn, so he confronts her at work. She slaps him and he hits back. Harassment claim big time! But to make matters worse, another accounting clerk, having to work in the office with the two of them, files a claim of a hostile work environment.

Another high-tech company: In this company with a 24/7 environment, some employees even have sleeping bags. While pictures of programmers wearing bunny slippers and sacking out in a lounge may be motivating to some, it should strike fear in the hearts of company officials. In this particular instance, two claims of sexual harassment were filed against one individual. Three others decided not to testify.

And the worst case a sales manager who turned over a complete client list to his “significant other” who worked for a competitor. Based on these vignettes, dating can be hazardous to the health of an organization.

Acceptance
Certainly we have to face the fact that the workplace is now the place where we often meet our significant others. The workplace has taken the place of college, discos, bars and clubs. Employees are younger on average and marriage takes place later. If a relationship begins at work, should you use a “don’t ask, don’t tell” philosophy? This is probably as effective as the war on drugs. What do you do as a company? If the examples above don’t scare you, then by all means, leave things as they are. If you want to prevent a problem, however, then establish the fairest policy that you can.

And what do you do as an individual? Well, start by being discreet. If the relationship does become “serious”, and there is a policy in place, accept the fact that one or both of you will either have to transfer or be terminated. Or perhaps the company will accept the relationship if you are open about it, have a strict working relationship while on the job, and do not have a reporting relationship. Perhaps what fertilizes the grapevine fastest is the attempt to hide a relationship which, if open, might be accepted. Most grapevines have root rot, but it seems to be the biggest weed that thrives on garbage.

If you are forced to leave, it might be considered unfair. But it is just another condition of employment that you agree to when you join a company. You can rail about the unfairness of it all, but that’s the nature of the workplace today.

This article was originally published in Your Workplace magazine issue 12-1