Interoffice relationship policy example

Transparency and employee buy-in are key to setting up policies that to disclose any inter-office relationships that might have a conflict of interest for example, managers must disclose relationships with direct reports. Here's a sample fraternization policy that covers all the bases. This Dating Policy Prohibits Certain Relationships Among Coworkers. Individuals involved in a relationship covered by this policy may be asked to sign (for example, overt physical displays of affection and using sexual language).

Managers and supervisors should be comfortable coaching co-worker couples if their behavior results in low morale or productivity. They should apply policy consistently and take measures to avoid real or perceived favoritism.

Human Resources

In some states, the interpretation of sexual harassment laws includes third parties: If an employee views a supervisor as favoring a subordinate, the employee can sue the company. Encourage transparency and squash gossip. Office relationships often inspire gossip, which can impede productivity and damage careers.

interoffice relationship policy example

Promote an open, transparent environment, so that employees are less inclined to hide their relationships—and coworkers are less likely to gossip. Make it easy to report inappropriate activity.

6 Tips for Crafting an Employee Dating Policy

Sexual comments and disruptive behavior can render a workplace uncomfortable and unproductive. Employees should feel OK reporting activity that puts the company at risk.

Relationship Advice: Should You Date A Coworker? Should I Date A Guy I Work With? Office Romance❤

Company Culture Inter-Office Dating What Your Company Should Know Romance in the workplace can land your company in hot waters, especially in the absence of thoughtful HR policies. Getty Images If you own a company, chances are you've had to decide and at times reassess whether to allow consensual dating and romantic relationships among your employees -- or, in legalese, whether and to what extent to adopt an office "non-fraternization" policy.

Although there are no laws which outright prohibit interoffice relationships, as shown in the news of late, they carry obvious riskssuch as: On the other hand, many view workplace relationships as an inevitable byproduct of today's interconnected world.

This trend may continue to gain steam.

hrsimple | Workplace romance

For example, polling suggests millennials are much more open to office romance than their older counterparts. Given these competing concerns, how can you craft employment policies which protect both your employees and your business? The Law and Workplace Dating Again, there are no laws which prohibit employee dating per se. Employees who engage in personal relationships including romantic and sexual relationships should be aware of their professional responsibilities and will be responsible for assuring that the relationship does not raise concerns about favoritism, bias, ethics and conflict of interest.

Romantic or sexual relationships between employees where one individual has influence or control over the other's conditions of employment are inappropriate.

6 Tips for Crafting an Employee Dating Policy

These relationships, even if consensual, may ultimately result in conflict or difficulties in the workplace. If such a relationship currently exists or develops, it must be disclosed: The other employee involved in the relationship is encouraged to disclose the relationship to either the next level of administrator, Employee Relations or the EAD. Refer to previous page. These relationships must not jeopardize the effective functioning of the University by the appearance of either favoritism or unfairness in the exercise of professional judgment.

interoffice relationship policy example

Efforts by employees to initiate these relationships are also prohibited. Violations of this policy by an employee is grounds for the Performance Management process, up to and including discharge. Consensual sexual relationships between a student and an employee who is not in a position to exercise direct power or authority over that student may also be inappropriate.