Love in the Air...err Office!!!

Romance is the glamour which turns the dust of the seemingly dull office life into a golden haze. The effectiveness of grapevine communication channel multiplies manifold in cases of any news about an Office Romance. With the considerable increase in the amount of time people spend working together and sharing at least one common interest, the possibility of an office liaison cannot be denied. Neither is it a new phenomenon. According to surveys by careerbuilder.com, nearly 40% of the workers have dated a co-worker. And of course office romance is nothing short of a perfect ingredient for any melodramatic TV serial.

However can the firms be allowed to become romantic gateways of sorts for the employees? This is the one question which the case of Pritam and Jagruti highlights. Can the organization allow a relationship to bloom in its own vicinity? Or is it entitled to put some control over how its employee relate to each other? To answer this question we have to understand several issues, some of which my colleagues have already talked about!

Office liaison can spell trouble for not only the parties involved but also the employer. Consider for example a case when a subordinate may file a lawsuit against her superior for coercing her into a relationship if the relationship fails. In such cases were a certain hierarchy is involved, organizations may have to pay a heavy price in cases of cupid misfire!! Another case in point is the famous Clinton-Lewinsky scandal. As Abhimanyu and the others as well point out the issue of preferential treatment in such cases. There are many more relevant issues which often raise concern like the impact on the employer’s productivity and morale, any effect on the business; individual privacy and scope of managerial surveillance; and the undeniable linkage between workplace romance and possibility of sexual harassment.

Therefore the organizations have to be immensely cautious while framing a policy for regulating the employee behaviour in such cases. However, according to Society for Human Resource Management, barely 1/4^th of the companies have policies on fraternization. Love Contracts are a mechanism which can be used in cases like this. They basically declare that the relationship between the employees is consensual. But is a written document enough in this case? Can human nature be controlled? Can few policies deter people to pursue their romantic interests? Can a prohibitive policy also prevent employees from sneaking around? How will the organization decide if or not they are interfering into the personal lives of their employees? All these questions have to be answered by the organization before formulating any contract or legally binding document for the employees.

Therefore I would suggest the following:

1. Organization should step in only when the relation results in disruptive behaviour and becomes a distraction. Employees working in the organization are mature individuals who may be actually serious about the relationship they are having. Every single incident cannot be judged with respect to a certain predefined standards.

2. Reallocation of responsibilities can be considered to avoid the possible preferential treatment.

3. Standards of expected professionalism should be clearly specified.

4. Provision of sexual harassment training to employees

In case of any unavoidable or unforeseen circumstances, effective communication channel and perfect confidentiality should be provided to bail the victimised employee out of the situation.

On their part, the employees should also behave in a discreet and professional manner. In the lecture today, Prof. I. Chakrabarti talked about firms always having emotional content. I guess that holds justified in these case. So as he puts it, the onus is on us to “Cognize and professionally deal with it”.