A LOVE ABRIDGED BY VOWS OF CONTRACTS AND CLAUSES

The story of Pritam Singh and Jagruti was an accident waiting to happen. Unlike their self-narrated description of “Love Contract” as a thunderbolt that hit them, the reality is it is hardly a novelty in today’s time. Companies adopt such doctrines and norms as standard procedures and culture that needs to be adhered to by the entire hierarchy from top to bottom in the company. Intermediaries technology is in fact a quintessential IT company that has to survive on two main fronts – Ward off its competitors and second, Preserve and then try and swell up its clientele base. A striking feature of the IT revolution in India is almost all IT companies seem to have similar culture. Or else how would you explain employees frequently changing companies or hardly any reports of an employee saying he is finding it hard or its taking him a long time to get used to the culture. So as such there is hair breadth difference between all rival firms and IT companies in particular.

Its no surprise the companies want a clearly laid out contractual terms and conditions and clauses explicitly stating their scope and breadth of its reach. They would prefer all rules and regulations of the company’s work ideology and corporate governance in Black and White with minimal human intervention needed to address issues. Everything needs to be specified and accounted for in the company’s own “Manual Of Policies”.

In the given case, it is quite a curious fact to note the GM(HR) in fact endorses Pritam Singh’s abilities. What he doesn’t endorse is his relationship with Jagruti and within the office promises. Hint of jealousy! The GM(HR) feared Pritam’s love for his work and career is being diluted and superseded by his growing fondness for Jagruti. In fact his attitude clearly reflects his bias when he asks if one is to quit among the two, it has to be Jagruti, the Software engineer. What is puzzling is why bring up such a “Love contract” now and enforce it with immediate effect. Wasn’t he aware such a situation could arise? and if not create a clause banning Dating and any kind of Romantic relationship in the office is a decision taken in haste and definitely not in good taste. There are some contexts that will enumerate a company’s hypersensitive reaction to any discrepancy in employee behavior.

First up let’s consider the movie Philadelphia in 1993. I am doing so because let’s not get caught up only in the Love contract issue but also analyse certain parallel scenarios where the company’s behaviour has been questionable. The movie deals with Andrew Beckett, a senior associate at the largest corporate law firm in Philadelphia. Once he contracts AIDS, the clients that once called him as their “Friend” now desperately want to wash their hands off him. In one such case when he is supposed to file complaints for a case, he leaves it with his assistant while he undergoes emergency treatment. To his horror he is accused of not submitting the complaints in time and fired from his job for inefficiency. Surely there is more to these lines than meets the eyes. All these measures depict the firm’s resolve to show the world and its clients that it is clean and safe. There are no AIDS patients out here even if they have been loyal over the years. This depicts a company’s myopia in foregoing the reality and relying excessively on the doctrine of clauses.

Much has been said of the vices of such a “Love contract”. Now let us imagine some scenarios where such a contract may not be all that questionable. In this case Pritam Singh and Jagruti are involved in a romantic relationship and they hug and kiss and have no inhibitions when it comes to demonstrating their affection in public. All said and done what if they break up tomorrow over some irreconcilable differences. Will the bitterness vanish and both will move on without hampering their performance. In most cases No. Indians are more circumspect in getting involved in a relationship and for sure less adept at getting over a relationship gone sour and move on unlike the West. Mr. Pritam can then use all his reach and influence to harass and block Jagruti in her career growth within his capacity.

Again there is every chance Mr. Pritam will look to favour Jagruti than her colleague in cases of promotion and preferential project allotment. It is easier said than done to maintain absolute and transparent distance between professional and personal life. Then there is this case of Pritam being considered for promotion to Detroit office. Surely she would like to follow him and pressurise the company into sending her abroad too. And this there will be constant hedging by both of them to be posted in same city which is only an added nuisance to the company. As such certain firms even base their recruitment criteria on the mobility of the employee like Sales oriented job or Banking job and yes IT jobs. So such a development will severely curtail the mobility of Pritam and Jagruti. And if the company refuses to oblige there is every probability she will quit her present job and go job hunting at place where Pritam is based. So right under the company’s nose, a high performing resource is at risk of defection and another employee is no longer as open in absorbing the company’s ensuing course of action.

All in all the company wants to stress there is only one code-like Napoleon’s war cry. The soldier is not supposed to form his own tactics, he has to blindly follow the General’s order. The company has one big, integrated plan and it discourages any small individual plans that don’t comply to it. Such Love Contracts only prove contracts are neither water-tight nor strictly they strictly adhere to employee’s rights , rather they are an instrument that is used by the Top brass to make, break , mould and rewrite all in their interests. A couple owning and running the business is acceptable but a couple as employees of the firm is a source of consternation. Finally I would conclude by saying that the very origin of “Love Contracts “ is an apt diagnosis for any future crisis and organisational diseases that may arise like the Bill Clinton sex scandal or the stalking of co-employee by Infosys’ Phaneesh Murthy,” Love contract” in itself is a flawed solution and a remedy that goes bust in addressing the core issue of how best to make the employees internalise the company culture without alienating them.

Contracts.....Love or Marriage

The thought which comes to my mind after reading the case is that :

Love contracts appear to be a intrusion into employees personal lives and one can have a stark contrast to married couples working in the same organization without needing one.

Many companies have started promoting the idea of marrying within the organization by providing incentives to the employees in doing so...Infosys is an apt example...

With such radical and open minded HR policies in vogue attaching much importance to love contracts is an effort in vain. It only maligns the image of the company and achieves much less in terms of safeguarding the interests from cases of physical and sexual advances.

First of all, the question is what are we trying to achieve with the love contract?

Are we focussed narrowly in safeguarding the interest of the company against possible consequences of a romantic relationship brewing in office premises OR much significant issues like attrition rate (which is bound to increase by the presence of these contracts) and creating a healthy work culture in the organization.

As a matter of fact, promoting the idea of marrying within the organization is fruitful for the company as well as for the employees and shows a healthy and mature approach to this issue than making the prospective couples sign the love contract !

The relationship between Pritam and Jagruti is just another instance of people getting attracted towards someone from the opposite sex. There are many organisations wherein such relationships among employees prevail. There is nothing wrong with it at all; until and unless it does not affect the organisation. There can be both pros and cons of such pairs working in the same organisation.

Pros...

There are various examples in different industries wherein couples make the best of colleagues due to the rapport that they share with each other. Moreover, working in a team also becomes easier since they like to work with each other. The environment may seem much more comfortable to them.

Cons...

It may so happen that they become too busy with their personal affairs and it adversely affects their work life. Any tensions in their relationship will have an impact on their working together in the same firm.

If the relationship is healthy, the firm will gain a lot from the co-ordination between these people. But if the reverse happens, it is better for the organisation to take strict measures so as to keep the personal and professional life of the employees separate.

If it is found that the organisation is suffering due to these sorts of relationships... it is absolutely justified on their part to safeguard the interest of the firm, by binding them into any suitable contract.

So far the employees are concerned, it is not very easy for anyone, not to get influenced by the relationship that a person has with its colleague. If the couples are very sure that come what may, they will not let their performance to get hampered, then it is suitable for them to work in the same organisation. If not, then they themselves should separate their professional paths for the benefit of themselves and the organisations they work for.

To Love or not to love!

"Love at workplace" is not a new thing. People spend a lot of time in office and if it is the case of bachelors , many times they come home just to eat and sleep. Office is their second home. And given the amount of time one spends in office with one's colleagues, its not unnatural to develop closeness and relationships. What's new is how organisations are handling this workplace phenomenon. Some work place ethics have always been there which have decided the rules at workplace. There can be no nepotism, favouritism etc in any reporting relationship. There can't be any discrimination on basis of religion, community, region or gender. These things are difficult to prove though. But cases of sexual harassment can attract heavy penalties and even termination.

But the point being discussed here is not only from an individual employee’s point of view but also from the organisation’s point of view. Why would an organisation go for such a thing as a “ love contract” which two people in a romantic relationship have to sign?

Love contract policy

A love contract policy establishes workplace guidelines for dating or romantically involved co-workers. The purpose of the policy is to limit the liability of an organization in the event that the romantic relationship of the dating couple ends. The main component of the love contract policy is a love contract.

The love contract is a required document signed by the two employees in a consensual dating relationship that declares that the relationship is by consent. Additionally, organizations may include guidelines on behaviour appropriate at work for the dating couple.

Love contracts eliminate the possibility of a later sexual harassment lawsuit when the relationship ends.

Can we do without a Love Contract Policy

At several companies, however, the sexual harassment policy states clearly that romantic relationships between co-workers are none of the company's business unless fallout from the office romance affects the workplace. If this happens, Human Resources staff, of course, and their manager in conjunction, would have to address the behaviour.

So right conduct at workplace can be enforced even without a contract.

A manager, however, should not become romantically involved with nor date a reporting staff member. If a manager chooses to do so, he or she has to notify Human Resources. In these instances, the manager will be the employee who needs to change jobs in the company, assuming a position is available.

This policy, in conjunction with a strong sexual harassment policy and an effective reporting and investigation policy will protect the workplace from litigation.

What Love Contract cannot solve

Increasingly co-workers are litigating over the differential treatment the employee in the romantic relationship received from the manager.I don't believe a love contract will solve the litigation issue. Plus, employees can always charge that they were pressured into signing the love contract at a sensitive time during their employment.

Also any love contract policy requires disclosure of a romantic relationship to Human Resources.Same sex couples, people who are attempting to keep their relationship secret and people who are married to a different party are unlikely to disclose the relationship to public scrutiny.

Even though many attorneys believe a signed love contract lessens the organisation's liability, I prefer the above recommended solutions rather than a love contract policy and a love contract.

Love Contract

Romantic relationships at the office can be a very tricky issue. An employer obviously would like to have an environment where people feel friendly and are comfortable with each other. The need for rules and regulations are bound to make working for an organization less appealing. However, it is important that when a relationship does unfold, it does not affect the decision-making process of either of the involved individuals and, more importantly, does not affect the other employees. This is what causes such a dilemma when it comes to romantic alliances in the workplace.

People work longer hours today, which creates fewer opportunities to meet others outside of the office. Many people meet at work because that’s where they spend the majority of their time. It would seem that the most common place for socializing would be at work, where people with similar interests are together for the majority of their time. Therefore, “it’s no surprise that budding romances blossom among those with whom we spend the most time,” said Leemor Amado, an associate practice consultant at American Management Association (AMA). “Company initiatives that foster employee socialization, work teams that bring different groups of people together to collaborate, as well as casual dress codes may help to create environments where colleagues feel more comfortable dating.”(amanet.org)

However, there are special risks in any sexual or romantic relationship between individuals in inherently unequal positions of authority, and parties in such a relationship assume those risks. In a college context, such positions could include teacher and student or senior faculty and junior faculty. In a work environment it could be a supervisor and employee. Because of the potential for conflict of interest, exploitation, favouritism, and bias, such relationships may undermine the real or perceived integrity of the supervision and evaluation provided.

Therefore as a minimum, every organization needs to have a policy designed to regulate dating or office romances. There should also be certain rules and regulations designed to protect the company against sexual harassment liability and ensure a professional work environment. Following are the issues to be taken into consideration in designing such a policy -

1. Acceptability — the policy should exactly define what types of relationships will and will not be tolerated. Most human resource professionals recommend establishing policies that prohibit supervisors from dating a direct report due issues such as have been discussed above. Policies may also note that staff members are expected to behave professionally and that romantic trysts should be kept out of the work environment.
2. Penalize, if need be — It should define what actions will be undertaken if the policies are violated — transfer, demotion, termination.
3. Zero tolerance policy for sexual harassment — It should be clearly stated that any alleged sexual harassment will be handled in a legally proper manner. Managers must make employees aware that the company has a zero-tolerance policy on sexual harassment. The policy should provide adequate information about the consequences of such behaviour. Companies may even require that their employees sign documentation indicating that they understand and will abide by the policy.
4. Privacy – The policies should never overstep boundaries of employee privacy. A company needs to make it abundantly clear that workplace performance is its primary concern.
5. Open communications — the policies should be accommodating and request employees to disclose a relationship if it becomes romantic. This may be a difficult task for employees if the penalties for such a relationship are severe. If, on the other hand, the company is willing to work with the couple then it is more likely that they will communicate their involvement in an appropriate manner.

Thus, if employers should introduce a policy to regulate dating or office romance of employees, the employees should also maintain the dignity of the employer and treat office as professional work environment and disclose their relationship.

Bitten By Love Bug?

In my previous post, I emphasized on loving your work so that it becomes easy for both the employee and the employer to have a healthy and productive employment relationship. But when it is extended beyond the work, it may give rise to certain complexities in the employment relationship equations the measure of which is very difficult to predict. Yes, we are talking about ‘Love Affairs at workplace’. It may sound interesting and seem to be the source of some meaty gossip for most of the people, but it actually has a serious aspect to it. If not from the employee, for sure the employers are taking it into consideration. And the funny thing is that there exists a contract for this too, called ‘Love Contract’ related to the issue.

Before we discuss what the main purpose of the contract is, we might want to look into the factors or situations which breed romantic relationship among the co-workers. First and foremost, when you spend more than 8 hours per day with the same set of people at same workplace, you tend to develop an emotional bond with them. In some cases, it crosses the line and makes you feel the need to be with them, to share your personal things with them and gradually you become dependent on them, emotionally at least. This, in some cases, leads to a romantic relationship between the co-workers. Also in many cases, people tend to get fed up by their own problems and seek some respite in fellow workers. This often is a symbiotic relationship which gradually, in some cases, takes the form of a romantic affair. Other factors like financial security and desire to succeed and other self driven motives are what make Love Affairs at Workplace commonly visible in organizations today.

Coming to the contract itself, like any other contract, this one also requires some agreements and norms specified in advance. The contract specified in the context talks about some kind of promise that the employee is expected to keep; a specific behaviour he or she is expected to demonstrate and the steps that the employer might take in case of non-adherence to the agreement. What can be the main motive of the employer to have such an agreement? Is it only about the effects on the performance of the involved employee or is it also about preserving a culture which discourages any kind of romantic relationship between employees because of other reasons? Let’s see from both the sides. Yes, there is a possibility of the performance of an employee going down because of his/her romantic interests within the company. It can be possible but then it is upto the employer to make sure that the ‘couple’ is assigned work wisely, in the same team or different teams. Today’s world leaves very little scope for anyone to take the risk of fooling around with his/her job which further reduces the probability of the performance deterioration of the employee due to ‘this’ reason.

The companies might also want to have such a contract to keep themselves on safer side. There have been many cases of sexual harassment in the industry and every time such an issue rises, it does no good to the reputation of the company. So, to avoid all that, the company might think of using that contract in case something like that crops up between the ‘romantically involved’ employees.

Also, it may provide the companies a ‘cause’ to delay promotions, cut salary hikes and even terminate the services of an employee as it was already written in the contract. In such case, there is very little the employee can do because neither can he disprove the claims by the employer nor can he call it as a ‘no cause’ notice.

But there are some exceptions to this also. The multi-national company where I used to work had a policy of rewarding its employees who marry other employees within the organization. In the sense, for all ‘in-house-couples’ there was some pre-fixed bonus which was given to them. No wonder there was nothing called ‘Love Contract’ in the company. In fact, the company encouraged the employees for such things. This only makes us feel that there is wide range of policies being followed in the industry regarding the same.

There is not much an employee can do in such situation. There is even stronger pressure of performing on him. And not only performance, the employee has to ensure that none of his/her acts within the company promotes favouritism. The best thing that the employee can do is to limit his/her relationship outside the premises of the company and in case he has signed such a contract with the employer, he/she should pay utmost attention on his/her behaviour and conduct towards his/her ‘love interest’ within the company. Such a contract is legal/illegal, moral/immoral; the discussion is not going to end soon. So, wise thing is to regulate self conduct and try being professional all the time.

It is important to keep personal and professional relationship separate.But it is easier said than done. Two co-workers in a relationship might feel that it is their personal choice and that their professional relationship is not affected by it .However employers might not buy that .Employers might be sceptical about the situation especially if the two people are in different levels of hierarchy in the organisation.

But can they really enforce the love contract as the one given in our case? It might be very difficult to prove that and which is why we see that the employer in this case is trying to force Pritam and Jagruti to sign the agreement just at the time of promotion. Suppose the employer manages to get the two sign on the contract .But is it a viable option? Can they extend the same to all workers in the organisation? Needless to say the impact it will have on the employer-employee relationship. After all our job is not our whole life. Every employer is entitled to a social life beyond work and the company cannot dictate that. Employer has to trust employee to maintain professional integrity is such cases.

Love is in the air !!!

Love contracts are written acknowledgement stating that the workplace romances are consensual. This limits the liability of the organisation in case of any problem arising out of the relationship.

As stated by many participants, a survey report states that 40% employees in US have dated with their co-workers and 31% of them have gone for marriage.

Love contracts include the following aspects:

a) The relationship is consensual

b) No display of affection in work place

c) Both of them should waive the right to claim for sexual harassment.

d) Both of them should be able to withdraw from the relationship without any fear of professional backlash on them.

Before discussing the love contract, let us have a discussion in which love develops in the work places now days. In many companies (mostly knowledge companies), which employ a large number of young employees, love among the employees is quite common. In fact, one can find couples sitting in parks, food centers etc and chatting with each other. This public display of affection, at times, leads to embarrassment and also encourages gossips like what is going on between Mr. X and Miss. Y. This may encourage “amorous” distraction among other workers. This may reduce the working efficiency of the employees indirectly or directly. Moreover, cases have been reported where the love blossomed in a parasitic manner (one partner using the other for his/her own selfish needs).Moreover this may result in preferential treatment in job assignments and pay rises (After all, LOVE is BLIND). This results in burden on the employee and reduces his/her efficiency. Moreover, once such false love dream is over, the exploited “lover” is completely shattered. Another facet of love at work place is that if break-up occurs then the employee may file sexual harassment case on the other employee which may malign the image of the company. At times this leads to physical violence. Moreover, love at work, reduces efficiency in other ways like the lovers spend much time spending emails, chatting or using office phone for their personal talk.

But on the other hand, love is after all not that bad. In fact many companies promote marriage among employees by giving financial and non-financial incentives to the employees. in many organisations the work environment is very demanding and people have to stay very late till night. In such a situation, a person wants to get respite from the stress. At times this becomes the breeding ground for love. Love brings in a synergy among the employees and the complement each other. The duo of the employees can produce better results than total of the two employees individually. Moreover, a person in love remains happy and a happy person is very committed to his work and produces better results.

Taking into consideration the above facts one has to decide whether Love Contracts are actually needed. Because having a Love Contract means adding a guilt factor. This may have a negative impact on the employees. Love contracts can be used as a supplement to a company’s anti-harassment policy. The contract can cover issues like one employee will not accept any post that directly supervises the other. At times people feel that such contracts are personally invasive and difficult to administer. But the truth is that love at work place is a reality and it cannot be totally banned. So, the love contract should be administered to safe-guard the interest of the organisation. In addition to this the company may provide counselling to the “lovers”.

What is the issue - the love contract or the way of implementation?

Love contract is an unfamiliar concept in the Indian corporate world. But in the Western world it is very common. The primary reason may be because of the barrage of law suits filed against corporates there. In order to preempt the law suits, the companies are adopting love contracts. The intention behind this type of contracts could be,
1) To prevent any professional favoritism by one employee (Senior) to the other (junior)
2) It may prevent any attempt by the senior employee to harass the junior employee directly or indirectly incase their relationship takes a sour note. It may preempt any law suit by the junior employee against the company on the pretext of harassment or discrimination.
3) It may preempt any attempt by the junior employee to sue the company in case she breaks up with the senior employee and afterwords fired for genuine reasons.
The second and third reasons make this type of contract more pervasive in the western world as there are many precedence of law suits on the similar pretext in those countries. But in India this type of law suits are rare. The adoption of this type of contract by Indian companies can be attributed to their operations in the geographies where similar contracts can save big bucks and their reputation. In India, the main reason behind having such contract could be to prevent favoritism.
Similar contracts exist in Indian companies but in a different form. Infosys has a policy which prohibits near relatives (spouse, fiancee, first relatives) of the employees from being under his/her direct supervision. Change of project or change of business unit of employees due to this reason is a common occurrence in Infosys. Dr Reddy’s Lab has “Near relative policy”, which forbids the first relatives (Spouse, brother, sister etc…) of an employee to apply for a job in the company.
I have personally witnessed the impact of this policy in Infosys. In my very first project, the girl friend of the Senior Project Manager was a senior team mate mine. Her peers were very discontent with the matter that she was getting good ratings because of her clout rather than performance. The issue was escalated and she was transferred to a different Business Unit.
Another instance in the same company; one of my friends, who was a project lead, fell in love with a girl who was directly reporting to him. They decided to get married. But my friend had to conceal the news. Because, if he had disclosed it, one of them would have to move to a different project, and as the appraisal was around the corner, he didn’t want his boss to construe his feedback on his girlfriend as biased, so that both of them get a fair deal in the appraisal.
In the first situation the policy on personal relationship helped to prevent favoritism in the team. From the second case it can be inferred that everybody doesn’t voluntarily disclose his relationship. So it is very difficult for a Manager to apply this policy. They have to read between lines, look for clues, take feedback from the team members to find out whether there exists any romantic relationship between any of his team members.
In Love contracts effective communication and implementation of the contract is very important. In the case in focus, the company failed on both of these parameters. The GM HR tried to implement the contract without any notification to Pritam and Jagruti, he even didn’t want Pritam to read the contract. He used coercive and blackmailing techniques to get the contract signed. This situation could have been handled in a lot better manner. If Pritam is treated in this way, will he give his best for the company? That too he is a HR Manager and suppose to ensure the implementation of policies and handle Human Resource issues. His lack of commitment may have severe repercussions for the company.
If the GM HR really found any serious reason to apply the Love contract, then he should have treated Pritam as a mature and responsible guy and spoken to him straight about the issue. He should have communicated that, the company is not against the relationship but, as per the policy (which Pritam must be aware of and would appreciate its importance as a HR guy) and for the betterment of the company, he has to sign the contract. If Pritam was considered for senior manager HR for the coveted Detroit office, he must be mature enough to understand and appreciate the above point. Similarly, Jagruti should be communicated about the issue and the reasons to sign the contract. They should be made understand that the policy is not personally against them. But as per the professional code of conduct and for the larger benefit of the company, they have to sign it just as any other couple in the company signs. This contract is not discouraging them to have personal relationship, but rather intends to prevent the professional problems the company might face in future. By this approach, the contract can be signed and the employee’s good will can be retained.
I don’t see any major issue with the love contract policy. But the important thing is how it is implemented. How the employees are treated in order to sign the contract. No company can afford to treat their employees badly. How stringent the policy may be the employees should be communicated properly and treated well while implementing it. Coercion can work in short run, Pritam & Jagruti can be forced to sign the contract. But how many Pritams the company will force to sign. This technique will not definitely be taken in right spirit and will increase the level of dissatisfaction among employees. Many good resources may leave the company. The company’s reputation might deteriorate. This in turn might cost the company more than what the company would have thought to gain out of the contract. So the company should find the best way to communicate and implement the contract in order to realize the intended results.

Love Contract: Prevention is better the cure

At the first instance when I went through the case study, I wondered that do such contracts really exist, but when I further pondered upon the case I actually came across some facts that truly justified the manager’s move of making the couple sign the love contract. Not many might know this, but it is a fact that there has been a growing trend in the US companies for having their employees signs such contract that in a long run might not just safeguard the employee’s interest but also help the company as well.

Dating often begins with a lighter mood and the people involved think that in no way their relationship is going to affect them or for that matter to the entire society, little do they know that such relationship often ends up with harassments, retaliation claims and court cases. And in such situations what really help is such contracts and similar tools that typically affirms beforehand that both the party were romantically involved and their relationship would in no way affect the company and their individual performance. The situations become more intense if the couple involved is in a direct reporting relationship. And so it is strictly advised not to date the boss. One such case is that of the CEO of Boeing Co, Mr. Harry C. Stonecipher who was fired in 2005 by the board of directors when they found out that he was involved with his subordinate. Questions were raised on his ability to lead going forward even after having a rich set of experience. Not just him there were many such cases where performance deteriorated as and when one got involved into relationship within the company.

Now coming to the case of Intermediaries Technology Ltd., similar such case occurred when the GM (HR) spotted 2 of its employee involved in a romantic relationship and decided to take precautionary measures by forcing the couple to sign the love contract so that in future the company doesn’t face the issue of the lost love litigation. Now from the employee’s perspective it might seem in the first instance that the employer is invading into their personal lives and signing such contract would bring out their affair in open. Mr. Pritam Singh who was about to be promoted was given the ultimatum that if he didn’t sign the contract his promotion as well as his colleague Ms. Jagruti’s job would be at stake. It was pretty obvious they didn’t want to be open about their relationship but now they were left with no choice but to sign the contract. And that fact that the employer tried his best that Pritam sign the contract without first reading it clearly shows that the GM (HR) was embarrassed of such contracts but earnestly wanted Pritam to sign it without raising any questions or taking any steps with respect to it. Probably these were the reason one might hesitate to sign such contract. But why in the first place would the GM want to do that? This question can be basically answered by keeping into account the reasons mentioned above that why would any firm wants it employees involved in such relationship to sign such contracts. Such relationships often create awkward situations and claims of favoritism, break ups can be even harder – on the employer. So the GM (HR) took the right step by drafting such contract.

As have already been mentioned by many participants “Love Contract” is basically a mutual agreement between the 2 parties involved that the relationship they are into is mutually agreeable and unrelated to the company. It also clearly mentions that incase of break ups through binding arbitrations and not through lawsuits and that both the party are aware of the policy against sexual harassment and they know how to use it. Such precautionary measure ensures that the firm or any individual doesn’t run into trouble in case of relationship disputes. The contract also demands that the couple behave professionally in the office premises there should be no public display of affection.

There has been many surveys conducted and most of it says that majority of the people in their lifetime career have some or the other way involved in such relationship and many a times have ran into trouble. Such contracts would safeguard such employees’ interest and the company as a whole. One solution to the troubled relationship problem and when there is a case that no such contract is signed, what the employer can do is to place the 2 individuals in 2 separate departments so that they stay away from each other for maximum time. There is yet another technique. Companies like BBC ask its employees to inform a nominated officer of any romantic relationship with subordinates, failing which can even lead to the termination of the employment term.

These were some of the steps other than Love contract, but in either case they aim at prohibiting employees in the same work place to get romantically involved and encouraging them to behave more professionally and not let such relations hamper their work life at all. I am sure that every employer would want its employee to follow this so that their work doesn’t get hampered because “Prevention is always better than Cure”.

Office Romance : Why Contract it? and its Worth?

Work-oriented cultures in today’s organizations have no place for office romances and the related topics of sex and privacy. With more and more employees working day in and day out and spending significant time of their day on-the-job, romantic relationships at work is increasingly becoming inevitable. This has resulted into an important issue confronted by most employers today.

The WALMART Case:

In 2002, the U.S. Court of Appeals along with guidance from the Supreme Court held WALMART stores vicariously responsible for sexual harassment committed by one of its supervisors in the Defenbaugh-Williams v. WalMart Stores case. The case aroused when one of their district managers stated during a meeting a certain female would never move up in the hierarchy as she was supposedly in a romantic relationship with a black man in the office. The manager later became the female’s supervisor drafted a series of disciplinary actions on her on grounds of workplace policy which resulted in her termination. The female employee in return sued a case of sexual harassment.

The Result:
Due to cases like this many employers adopt policies addressing romantic relationship in the workplace as a protection from litigation and potential liability. However such policies vary largely in terms of the range. Some are very strict, like comprehensive prohibition of dating among employees, to the more lenient, like policy that actively discourages, but tacitly allows, fraternizing. This indeed protects the interest of the employer when cases like that of WALMART arise.

For Employee’s:
I also believe that employees should be able to judge the consequences while mixing Love and Work. It is OK for employees to be in a romantic relationship in the workplace until and unless it does not affect their productivity at the workplace, de-motivate or annoy other colleagues or have an indirect/direct impact on the work environment.

Is it Worth It?
But before entering into such a relationship, employees should evaluate its worth taking into consideration two important things:
1. Your colleagues around and how they are affected by the same.

There's a risk of alienating from rest of your department or peers when employees enter into a relationship which indirectly affects his/her professional growth and development.

2. Conflict with one’s significant other.
This puts an awkward strain on the workplace dynamics among the employees in the relationship and among peers/colleagues as well.