Messing around at work

I would not want employees letting personal affairs keep them from doing professional quality work. In my own case, I would take it on a case by case basis. But I can see a company forbidding it altogether.

One former boss fell in love with a coworker. They sat in the office most of the day, visiting. I would have fired them both. When finally both were gone, they felt they had to retaliate against the company. It was ugly.

Most corporations do have sexual harassment policies, at least in the US. And a lot of those = no dating. But people think with their hormones and are too stupid to RTFM. In this case, it's the employees' manual.

People also conveniently forgot how hard it can be to find a job, or to pay bills. Then the relationship ends and the lower-level person inevitably is the one who needs to leave, and then they have nowhere to go. It's just dumb.

Yup. Young waitress with child (unmarried) seduces the boss's son. He's married with 4 kids all under age 9 (!!) He leaves wife (no sex, he says - that's his excuse)

Result a year later? He got taken to the cleaners. He lives in a small apartment, gets the kids e/o weekend. Car repossessed. Had to file bankruptcy. His little chickadee dropped him after the divorce.

^^This.

I've been thinking about this thread all morning. Remember past events during my work years.

Never personally even went on a date with someone from the same company. This causes me to feel I can look at this more rationally. I've got no skin in the game emotionally.

This is such a big subject. Are we talking about a company with 2 employees besides the owner, a multinational conglomerate, or any of the points in between?

Are we dealing with two 18 year olds who think the other is hot, or 2 people who known each other for years, and a relationship either developed over time, or, as happens, blossomed more quickly from some trigger during that long standing professional relationship?

If one was to judge strictly from what gets posted here, from people who come on asking about "what did that cute co-worker mean when he said...?" etc., you could come to the conclusion it's a horrible idea.
Then again, you have to wonder about the maturity and problem solving skills of someone who needs to announce this to complete strangers across the interweb, soliciting advice of an unknown quality.

I have seen spectacular success, plural. Thinking of 3 in particular, there was a common theme of the parties being very dedicated to their work, and finding a common bond through their passion for what they do. Two of these couples have now been married more than 10 years, with twins, the other with a son, the house, mini van, and are stable and happy. The other was a more unorthodox situation, but they too are now married for several years.

There was another situation, that sadly ended in the death of one of the parties. It ruined a marriage with children, led to drug addiction, failed health and death. Long and complicated and still hard to talk about. The person still with us is probably out there ruining someone elses life, or lives right now.

Ok, sorry, enough about those success stories of obviously mature individuals for whom it worked.

I believe if 2 people are dating to the point that it is either obvious to others they are an item, or they themselves make it know, there needs to be a meeting with management and documentation.
They need to be advised that any work issues that arise due to these 2 people bringing their personal lives into the workplace will be met with stated consequences.

I don't believe if a person is performing their work in a satisfactory manner, their out of the workplace relationships are anyones business.

Again, I've seen 2 co-workers sitting in a conference room together over reams of work related material, brainstorming and working on important work issues, as well as people discovered having sex in the bathroom. I cannot see losing 2 valued employees over the messed up lives of 2 others. The latter case was someone who needed to be cut adrift anyway, and this was the opportunity.
That's the thing. How great an employee were they in the first place if they let work romances get in the way of their purpose for being there?



For many people, work is also their primary source of friendships. It's where they spend most of their waking hours They are already with the type of people they enjoy being with, and finding someone special amongst them is a no brainer. Is it right to force someone to go out of their personal comfort zone to find a compatable person, when those people are already all around them?

Let's think about other work relationships. Parents and children working for the same company first comes to mind. Also siblings get jobs at the same place and work together. Cousins, aunts uncles, the list goes on. There's just a much potential for huge problems when dealing with family dynamics. Isn't there?

So, dealt with on a case by case. When possible,one person not being the direct supervisor of the other to avoid unequal power. If that accomodation can't be made, being clear that work infractions will not be tolerated.

The idea of a company or business forbidding personal relationships between employees is barbaric and unthinkable.

See, situations like this, to me are totally irrelevant.

First, why is is necessary to mention the waitress is young, or has a child?

One person seduced someone who was willing to be seduced. It's not like he was a helpless party in this. If not "seduced" by someone in the workplace, it could have happened with someone apart from work.

The guy was an ass, cheated on his wife, and paid the consequences. It's being accountable for your own actions.

Calling attention to her age, the fact she has a child (oh, and let's not forget unmarried), and calling her "a little chickdee" speaks more to the lack of intelligence on the mans part, not her. Is is a man, right? Not just "the owners son"? Not sure what the fact that the owners son has to do about it?

Was the owners son also employed by the company? This might make it more for a cause to not permit parent/adult child situations in the workplace. I mean, if the son wasn't allowed to work there because his father was the owner, he may never have met the chickadee.

This actually brings up one more point I should have put in my previous post. Sometimes the problem isn't with the 2 people dating, but the response/reaction/gossip of other people who work there. It doesn't feel right that 2 people be prohibited from a personal life if they are keeping it separate from work, when others few them as water cooler talk with no cause.

You and EdgarB make good sense here.

The friend of mine who disobeyed her corporation and dated and then married the sales rep (sort of a strange no-no but I can see the company's view re the rep trying to sell them stuff and potential bias to his company) has been with him now at least thirty years. If I remember the denouement (I don't remember the timing, might have been a while after the marriage), she got a new and better job. She was head nurse in a dialysis unit at that company, not that the exact job matters, but to add to your point about a person's maturity. No problems in disruption of the workplace, since they were quiet about it.

Agreed.

What are talking about? Vassals, thralls, indentured servants? Or self governing adults?

I don't think it's barbaric if they are screaming at each other across a crowded room, or flirting as some posters say they do the live long day, day after day - those distractions are a problem, however amusing at first glance., but not cute for long. Thus my buying of maturity as a useful concept.

I've no idea what sociologists/psychologists who study work places think. I presume there are many books on workplace behaviors.

I don't think it's barbaric to have some rules if they are screaming at each other across a room filled with a working biochemist or two, plus helpers, or flirting as some posters say they do the live long day, day after day, when a boss is trying to write a paper - those distractions are a problem, however amusing at first glance, but not cute for long. I would guess firing usually happens, if not always. Thus my buying of maturity as a useful concept.

I've no idea what sociologists/psychologists who study work places think. I presume there are many books on workplace behaviors. That is part of why I started the discussion, to hear views.

You're a lawyer, you would set aside time to RTFM (I love that). Most people at the most scan and read the parts that are of specific interest to them and their situation. Yeah, I know, tough if you didn't read it. But, I wonder if these "no dating" policies would be as prevalent if people Did RTFM.

Ok, here's my thoughts on hiring. You just got offered a job, you're thrilled, or at least happy. Here, read the manual and sign. You actually DO read the manual and understood all of it. When you read the part about no dating, your mind is nowhere near thinking "I can't wait until I meet someone on the job and become attracted to them." I'm sure there are those who do go into the workplace thinking they are going to cozy up to the person in power, and reap the rewards, but I don't believe that's a general thing. Office romance is not on your radar when reading and signing your new employee paperwork.

Is that fair on the part of the employer? They are approaching you at a time when you haven't even thought about "but what if I meet someone?"
Let's just say when you do read that it does then occur to you "Wait a minute. I'm an eligible single person. What if 2 years from now I do meet someone?"

Are you going to say "I can't sign this, I can't work for you. I don't know what's going to happen during my tenure here."

Or are you going bring up to them "Hey, this part about no dating. For real? What if I meet someone here?" Now you've labled yourself someone who isn't there to work, but to find romance....but you're not, you just want to understand if this is really a thing.

I think it's pulling the rug out from someone if let's say years into your employment this happens, and you are referred back to something you signed during the same week you weren't even sure where all the restrooms were.

Oh yeah, you have to sign a new manual every year. Talk about being treated like a child. "Are you still being good employee?"

Why not something more like saying they have a policy that discourages this sort of thing, BUT if it happens, both parties will sign an agreement that if it doesn't work out both parties will sign a no harrassment/no retaliation agreement. Also perhaps with the understanding that quarterly for let's say a year both parties will be required to report the status of the post romance relationship.

With some people perhaps it is just hormones. Probably the case with people who ask about office romances here. But what about the valued mature employees that don't want some corporation in their bedroom?

Also, in case anyone is kidding themselves. This type of policy doesn't apply to those in the highest ranks. They are apparantly more grown up about this, and can handle it.

I get revision of older rules and probably agree with you, though I take it I am on your ignore for years on end. How did you find the title of this thread?

Well, you and I both know a lot of the stuff in the manual is to assure the company isn't sued, or at least they have a semi-viable defense. They also want to steer clear of anyone having even an inkling that it might be okay (of course it isn't) to trade sexual favors for raises or better hours or to be able to keep a job at all.

I get that people spend a lot of time at work and it's inevitable that people will meet and may have relationships. But I think folks need to consider what happens if it ends, as most relationships do. Are they prepared to look for another job, or get a transfer, if it's too difficult to hang around?

Yeah, I totally agree with you Jes. It's such a slippery situation.

It would suck if, even if nothing was being done against you by an ex, you just felt you couldn't handle having to be around that person.
Then again, it's the same for any couple who break up but they have many common places they go, perhaps children, joint property, etc.

People stay in poor (relationship wise) marriages because one or both realize that on their own, they couldn't sustain the lifestyle they are accustomed to. Unless there's active abuse of some sort, for many it's a lot more comfortable to live in a nice home with adequate food, healthcare, rather than living in a one bedroom apartment over a Chinese restaurant. Exponential if you have kids.

In the workplace, if it comes to that, one might come to the conclusion it's not that difficult to hang around the ex. Or at least it's tolerable until they get something else. People also dread going to work because they can't stand someone else there who can't be avoided. Yet, they don't just up and quit.

Asking your opinion on the following.

What if, as I suggested, you are required to let management know if you are dating someone, agreeing if it doesn't work out you will not retaliate in any way, and will be monitored on a regular basis for a set amount of time if the relationship ends, and both of you remain in employ?

If they don't tell the employer they are dating, the relationship ends, and nastiness commences. The employer could state they were never aware of the relationship in the so they breached their employment contract and they are not in as strong a position to help, or keep them around.

For people who wouldn't tell an employer because they are married, well, no one forced them to cheat.

Would be be more paperwork for HR? Yeah. But could it help prevent lawsuits against the employer? That's a lot of HR hours and money too.

Thank you all for the comments re HR people, I don't personally know about them, but interested. Not all of us lived corporation life.

The bestist place I worked had one owner, one secretary, and eight designers., two of us running the jobs, aside from him, the best designer I've ever known and I've known quite a few. The boss was not overbearing and not clugeing on a woman he liked: we saw the mutual interest. He had good reason, as we all had trouble city when the wife showed up, hard for her too. She had been a Moonie, was a tad or more odd. But, nada, just long talks. (Ok, trust me on this one, I think.) She also had a husband and a rottweiler.. I do think they were sharing stories.

Point is, what is out there for accepted modes in small businesses?

If anyone shut his door it was me when he put on an opera star.

Some time later, I changed my tune, when a fellow designer went for a vacation to his family region in southern italy. He gave me a tape he made at the Baths of Caracalla, the three tenors concert. A no no to do that.
I still have it. Silly, but now loved.

When my mate was working at the social in Southampton two bull dykes had a proper fist fight over another member of staff who after that decided to go back to her husband.

It livens up the day.

I don't think it would ever really fly to require people to reveal relationship stuff to employers. This means both gay and het relationships. If someone loses their job not too long after a revelation of a gay relationship at work, then it's a potential discrimination suit. And this is so even if the relationship is het but an affair (e. g. let's say one of the parties is a minority or disabled). Or the employer is a religious organization and they don't approve of premarital sex - even if that isn't in whatever is revealed to the employer.

It's not my employer's business who I date, but it is their business whether I do my job properly. It's also their business if I use my power and position to force people to do my sexual bidding in order to keep their jobs or get favors at work. A blanket provision in the HR manual is a lot easier to follow and enforce and defend in court than a case by case basis.

Good points. I'm understanding better the complexities.

I just rankle at the thought of one's employer dictating my private life.