That incident was a boss-subordinate relationship. If they had been peers it wouldn't have been as big a deal. |
| What’s going on in this company that this message needed to be spoken out loud? |
That one was messy in every respect -- power differential, they were married (tho she at least was divorced), it was being kept a secret. Also was the concert itself a work event? I think it was, and IMO engaging in physically affectionate behavior at work events is also dicey because it tends to make others feel uncomfortable -- it's one thing for your colleagues to have a romantic or sexual relationship outside of work, it's something else to be required to watch your colleagues make out or wrap themselves around each other at a work function you are required to attend. |
but as other PPs have mentioned, the professional roles evolve and a peer can advance to leadership. Also any type of relationship can reach a level of messiness that can impact work performance. It’s just not a smart thing to do and there are so many other people in the world to date. |
| It's not reasonable to completely forbid sex between coworkers when everyone spends so much time in the office. You definitely wouldn't be able to recruit the best sales team with such a rule. |
| I worked for a company in the 90s and I was clueless about the level of sexual activity. A few years after I left I had lunch with two former colleagues and they told me all about it. Most of the people were single but there were married people and boss/subordinate affairs. I guess I was pretty naive or just working too hard. |
|
I'm not totally opposed to workplace romances but I will admit that the most awful, toxic workplace I've ever been in involved a ton of relationships between the staff and it was a huge problem. It makes people very unprofessional. Breakups also caused huge difficulties. And yes, people being in relationships and then getting promoted was an issue. In one case a woman was promoted and agreed to break up with the on-again, off-again person she would now be managing, but I don't think it mattered? Their prior relationship obviously impacted their working relationship and she continued to play favorites. There was another situation that was even worse, where two manager-level people had been dating before they came to work there, and then continued to date, but then broke up and both started dating other people in the company. Neither were direct supervisors to the people they were dating, but it was hella messy and uncomfortable and also fed an already overactive office gossip culture.
Just a nightmare. That was when I realized why some companies have anti-fraternization policies. But most place I've worked the relationships have been more minimal and people were able to be mature about it. |
| How does the federal government deal with the no sex rule between supervisors and subordinates? |
Ask Bill Clinton! It didn't work out to well for him. |
Ten years later the OIG will go after them if it's a toxic environment and the subordinate was obviously promoted because of it. But I mean now you have Cabinet level employees harassing multiple subordinates or buying agency jets to have sex with coworkers. |
| And I thought this thread was about a rule forbidding sex in the actual office. |
DH and I got in trouble once for kissing in the hallway outside the call rooms .
|
Right? For every Jim and Pam, there is a Dwight, Angela, and Andy. |
Yes. Boss gets fired. When I was at Lockheed Martin corporate office they were always removing leaders across the operating companies for affairs with subordinates. Hell - even their named new CEO got fired for an affair right before he was to take over. Made national news. |
That depends on what the definition of "it" is. |