Work Problem

[Plutonius]

I have never worked in the private sector - only education, and government (or for international bodies).

Thus far, the discussion on dating has focussed on firstly, the possible negative effects for others (as expressed so well by @GrumpyMom - and I have seen this played out in practice) if one party of the happy couple dislikes a subordinate, 2) by the perception - as mentioned by several - that the junior partner of the subordinate couple may be considered to have been the recipient of unfair favour, and 3) as correctly pointed out by @yaxomoxay - if and when the happy couple fall out, the damage they can leave in their wake - especially if jointly they allowed abuses of power or authority to exist - can be considerable. (This, too, I have witnessed).

There is a fourth dimension which I have seen also play out in some international contexts and it is this: An individual holding a senior position - usually male and middle aged, or older - seeks to date a (younger, female) subordinate who reports to him. (And I have seen that one play out, too). In truth, it is exceptionally difficult for her to turn him down, not without adverse repercussions.

I agree there are many problems / issues with the dating within the company and it almost always turns out bad.

I was only questioning if companies really try to restrict your actions outside your working hours by listing dating restrictions in the HR manual. Is it even legal for them to do so ?

 

[D.T.]

I have never worked in the private sector - only education, and government (or for international bodies).

[doublepost=1483491189][/doublepost]

I agree there are many problems / issues with the dating within the company and it almost always turns out bad.

Dated one our project managers ... then married her

 

[lowendlinux]

The US military has strong opinions on dating between officers and enlisted personnel, and - from what I have read - actively discourages it.

Some police forces will transfer personnel once they start dating, especially if there is a difference in rank, or grade.

Again, if the happy couple work in different departments in an organisation, or hold the same grade/rank, potential problems are a lot less pronounced.



Something tells me that the less senior individual is the person let go, or transferred, or who has been got rid of in this situation.

The military has strong rules on all sorts of fraternization but they have been less stringently enforced since the wars broke out. If an officer and enlisted got married one would have to change units, the same would apply if a junior enlisted and NCO we're to get married. Dual military marriages do happen but they're not all that common IME usually one gets out likely because dual military and kids don't agree plus there are issues with stationing.

 

[BeeGood]

I was only questioning if companies really try to restrict your actions outside your working hours by listing dating restrictions in the HR manual. Is it even legal for them to do so ?

Dating restrictions aren't an attempt to control your personal life. They're designed to keep employees' personal lives from interfering with what's going on at the office. That is perfectly legal.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Dating restrictions aren't an attempt to control your personal life. They're designed to keep employees' personal lives from interfering with what's going on at the office. That is perfectly legal.

Excellent distinction and one which needs - badly - to be made.

They - dating restrictions - are not interfering with your personal life: Rather, they are trying to ensure that your personal life cannot have a negative impact on their professional life, or that of the company.

More to the point, an employer has a duty of care to other employees, not just the happy couple.

If the lives of other employees are being made miserable, either through an office seething with resentment at an unjust (or perceived unjust) favour to a colleague as a result of a relationship, or, if an office has been unsettled by altered and unjust power relations, and abuses of authority and power as a result of a happy couple uniting (as argued by @GrumpyMom) to freeze out someone one of them dislikes, or, if an office has been torn apart as collateral damage when a happy couple break up, - employers have a duty of care to other employees to make sure that they are not caught up in - or injured - professionally - as a result of such activities.

Likewise, in relationships where there is a significant difference of rank, (where eyes are often averted) it is important to try to ensure abuses of power do not occur. It is difficult to turn down the advances of an immediate superior - someone you report to, who signs off on your PER, who writes your reference, or who approves your promotion, without having to suffer adverse consequences.

 

[BeeGood]

Dated one our project managers ... then married her

That's really cool, I'm glad it worked out that way.

My wife and I were both part time bank tellers in college for the same bank, but we weren't ever allowed to work at the same branch. After our first son was born, I put school on hold and worked full time in the bank's commercial lending department so she could finish school. When she graduated, she ended up getting a job as a credit analyst in the same department on the same floor. It was pretty awesome.

 

[Donoban]

Most companies that I know of - in my discussions with peers about this issue - do not allow it; I get a sense of a general trend for most companies to require one person to leave the company, or at the very least leave that group/division so there is no conflict of interest.

I think I mentioned this before but i should say again that for the last couple years, it hasn't been a problem - they've kept it out of the office and handled it pretty well - but it becomes an issue when the subordinate has (or perceives) an issue with someone else in the office, as seems to be the case now.

In any regards, back to work tomorrow.

I know I'm late here but this topic is very close to my heart so I just want to add my thoughts based on my experience. I can't tell you what to do but after reading your epic post here are some comments,

If you're not where you want to be after 5 years in this company then it's time to go.

Why do people leave jobs? They don't, they leave you ( the people running the place ).

The more likeable you are and the less value you deliver the further your career can progress? Crazy but I've seen it happen many times. Humans aren't logical.

I wouldn't do any of the options you listed, you won't change anything and hr won't care either. Just knuckle down and look for the next stage in your career.

When you find that next job, you'll wonder why you stuck out your current situation for as long as you did.

I like the posted meme, let the hate run through you. Lolz! What is important is what you hear yourself telling yourself. I promise you your boss and his girlfriend aren't thinking about you. You are good enough to do bigger and better things.

Leadership is an art, and management takes skill. Not everyone is cut out for it, even though they may hold such a position in a company.

You are learning what not to do when running a team, these will be useful lessons in the future.

 

[kschendel]

For those in private industry that have the rule against dating other employees, is it written down as company policy in the HR handbook or is it just an unofficial rule that is followed ?

It's been written down in the HR policy the last 4 or 5 places I've worked. My current employer uses wording that says relationships between an employee with supervisory authority and a subordinate, not necessarily in the same reporting line, "may compromise company policy" and may create a conflict of interest. Supervisors are supposed to report any such relationship to HR; whether that's actually happened, I have no idea. So, there's no absolute prohibition, but a strong caution.

 

[Plutonius]

It's been written down in the HR policy the last 4 or 5 places I've worked. My current employer uses wording that says relationships between an employee with supervisory authority and a subordinate, not necessarily in the same reporting line, "may compromise company policy" and may create a conflict of interest. Supervisors are supposed to report any such relationship to HR; whether that's actually happened, I have no idea. So, there's no absolute prohibition, but a strong caution.

Thank you. I can understand that and wonder if that's as far as a company can legally go.

Is there anyone else here that has a relationship policy written in their HR handbook or is it just an unwritten rule ?

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Thank you. I can understand that and wonder if that's as far as a company can legally go.

Is there anyone else here that has a relationship policy written in their HR handbook or is it just an unwritten rule ?

It may be unwritten but that does not mean it is not understood, known about and enforced, - even if the official reason cited is not quite the same as the real reason - or the main reason - a specific action had been taken.

 

[Roller]

Romantic work relationships were a frequent topic in episodes of The Office. Though intended as comedy (they were often very amusing), they also illustrated the harm that such relationships can cause participants and other workers.

 

[BeeGood]

Thank you. I can understand that and wonder if that's as far as a company can legally go.

Is there anyone else here that has a relationship policy written in their HR handbook or is it just an unwritten rule ?

You seem to be stressing what is "legal" and what is "explicitly written" in a plociy handbook.

First, what's legal. Nearly every state in the country is an "at will employment" state, meaning you can be terminated without cause unless you have an employment contract that says otherwise. So, yes legally you most likely can be fired if your employer isn't OK with your relationship with a coworker depending on your state.

Second, policy. Be careful not to rely on policy to "cover you". See above. Also, just because something is omitted doesn't mean it's not grounds for termination. There is nothing in my employee handbook that says I can't walk around the office with a megaphone and use that to have conversations with people, but I guarantee you if I did that I'd have a lot more time to post here.

It doesn't really matter that much what the handbook says. If it becomes a problem, you won't get fired because of the relationship itself, you'll be fired for whatever the observed problem is, and that problem will certainly be one that is covered in the handbook.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

You seem to be stressing what is "legal" and what is "explicitly written" in a plociy handbook.

First, what's legal. Nearly every state in the country is an "at will employment" state, meaning you can be terminated without cause unless you have an employment contract that says otherwise. So, yes legally you most likely can be fired if your employer isn't OK with your relationship with a coworker depending on your state.

Second, policy. Be careful not to rely on policy to "cover you". See above. Also, just because something is omitted doesn't mean it's not grounds for termination. There is nothing in my employee handbook that says I can't walk around the office with a megaphone and use that to have conversations with people, but I guarantee you if I did that I'd have a lot more time to post here.

It doesn't really matter that much what the handbook says. If it becomes a problem, you won't get fired because of the relationship itself, you'll be fired for whatever the observed problem is, and that problem will certainly be one that is covered in the handbook.

Excellent post, well wroth reading, and very well argued.

 

[samiwas]

Almost daily, I celebrate the fact that I have never worked a day in corporate America, and don't plan to. Office dramatics and power-hungry corporate drones just do not appeal to me in the least bit.

If I need a day off, I just find someone to cover me for the day and tell them I'm taking off.
[doublepost=1483904745][/doublepost]

You asked about working from home. Boss said that's what vacation was for. It should have ended there - or at the very least, take the vacation day and ask the boss or HR for clarification in person when you get back. Something often gets lost in translation when too many emails go back and forth.

I'm curious though...if one is working from home, how on earth is that a vacation day??

 

[Tomorrow]

I'm curious though...if one is working from home, how on earth is that a vacation day??

Good question, but it's apparently the boss' policy, not mine.

 

[Donoban]

Almost daily, I celebrate the fact that I have never worked a day in corporate America, and don't plan to. Office dramatics and power-hungry corporate drones just do not appeal to me in the least bit.

If I need a day off, I just find someone to cover me for the day and tell them I'm taking off.
[doublepost=1483904745][/doublepost]

I'm curious though...if one is working from home, how on earth is that a vacation day??

Hey champ. Very curious now man. So what do you do and where?

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Hey champ. Very curious now man. So what do you do and where?

Not all who post here are from the US, and nor are they subject to the whims or needs of corporate America.

 

[D.T.]

Almost daily, I celebrate the fact that I have never worked a day in corporate America, and don't plan to.

Me too, I've been, I guess you could say "near" the typical corporate machine, but always on my terms, my company, my rules (re: my comment about my PM and marrying her, that was my company, so yeah, there weren't any issues )

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Not all who post here are from the US, and nor are they subject to the whims or needs of corporate America.

Exactly. A big mistake on MR is the assumption everybody here is American and is affected by American issues. You could say I'm part of corporate Europe, whatever that means? lol Then again I watched the US version of 'The Office' and struggled with how the jokes transferred so perhaps office environments are indeed very different this side of the pond?

I have enough problems with Skype calls between colleagues in the Netherlands and Germany when my sense of humour is greeted with bewilderment lol.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Exactly. A big mistake on MR is the assumption everybody here is American and is affected by American issues. You could say I'm part of corporate Europe, whatever that means? lol Then again I watched the US version of 'The Office' and struggled with how the jokes transferred so perhaps office environments are indeed very different this side of the pond?

I have enough problems with Skype calls between colleagues in the Netherlands and Germany when my sense of humour is greeted with bewilderment lol.

Agreed, and yes, exactly.

In my case, I haven't worked for one minute of my life in the private sector, let alone surrendered to the soulless world - and questionable values - of corporate America.

My entire work life has been academia, government, and international - or supranational - organisations.

I do find the unquestioning assumption that everything is American and derives its set of values from that world that you often find on MR, sometimes, a bit trying.

There are other continents and there are other perspectives.

 

[Tomorrow]

Exactly. A big mistake on MR is the assumption everybody here is American and is affected by American issues. You could say I'm part of corporate Europe, whatever that means?

Another big mistake is to assume that we all work for corporations. My last two employers were both multi-million dollar companies, but they were LLC's.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

I've spent my entire working life working in the private manufacturing sector. It can be pretty cut throat and I've been on the sharp end of that on a couple of occasions. The company I work for now turns over about £45m a year and my environment is pretty corporate. I have worked for companies with only 15 staff though. It's been nice to see the difference. I'm at a point where I'm lucky as I've had employers contact me offering me positions for my skills but firstly I have to be interested in a product and obviously money has to be competitive.

The downside of this business though is there are plenty of personality clashes and people wanting to further themselves at your expense. You have to learn to cover your back lol. I've had more than a few times where big meetings have been turned around to attack my department only for email trails to totally backfire on the moron trying it on lol. This is only the inside. When you've got competitors trying to rip off your products or taking you to court for patent infringement it can make you ask why you don't just try a more relaxed profession

 

[Donoban]

Not all who post here are from the US, and nor are they subject to the whims or needs of corporate America.

oh, so you're saying you've never worked for an American corporate because you don't live in America.

But I'm sensing you still work for a corporation of some description rather than running your own business?

I think the best way to escape any corporate setting is to go into business for yourself. Easier said than done. The safety of a regular full time job can not be understated.

 

[samiwas]

Hey champ. Very curious now man. So what do you do and where?

I work in the TV and film industry as a lighting programmer, but have been in other facets of entertainment lighting for over 20 years. My current job only exists when I am at it. I do not have to think about it when I'm not there. There are no phone calls or emails to deal with. There are no deadlines. I spend a good bit of my day working on personal projects or surfing the internet since I'm only busy during setups. There's no tiptoeing around HR policies. If I want to take a day off, I tell them I can't come in, find someone to replace me for the day, and go. Oh, and I generally get fed all my meals and endless snacks. It's hourly, but with minimums and benefits, and pays very well. With my pay and rental income from my equipment, I hit the top 6% in 2016, and had the equivalent of 80 days off plus weekends.

I would never give this up to sit in some corporate office and deal with office politics unless I absolutely had to. My previous work was more demanding, but it was still entertaining and fun.

Not all who post here are from the US, and nor are they subject to the whims or needs of corporate America.

I am in the US, but I do not work in the standard office setup.
[doublepost=1484083522][/doublepost]

Another big mistake is to assume that we all work for corporations. My last two employers were both multi-million dollar companies, but they were LLC's.

Pretty sure we were all just using "corporate America" as an all-encompassing term for general office-type business.
[doublepost=1484083699][/doublepost]

I think the best way to escape any corporate setting is to go into business for yourself. Easier said than done. The safety of a regular full time job can not be understated.

That can be more work and more stressful than the corporate world.