Why Colleagues Cannot Marry: Exploring Workplace Relationship Policies

Ever wondered why some companies have policies against colleagues marrying? Such rules can seem restrictive, but they often exist to prevent potential conflicts of interest and maintain a professional environment. Let’s explore the reasons behind these policies.

Navigating Potential Conflicts of Interest

One of the primary reasons companies discourage or prohibit marriages between colleagues is the risk of conflicts of interest. For instance, if two people in a romantic relationship are in positions where one can influence the career progression of the other, it can lead to perceived or actual biases. Decisions about promotions, raises, or evaluations could be questioned by others, undermining trust and fairness within the company.

 

Maintaining Professionalism in the Workplace

Professionalism is key in any workplace setting. When colleagues enter into a romantic relationship and especially if they marry, the boundaries between personal and professional lives can blur. Public displays of affection, personal disputes spilling over into work hours, and preferential treatment are just a few potential issues. These behaviours can disrupt the work environment and distract other employees, which can decrease overall productivity.

 

Reducing Legal Liabilities

Workplace relationships, particularly those between unequal ranks, can also lead to legal repercussions. If a relationship ends badly, there could be claims of sexual harassment or unfair dismissal. By setting clear policies against such relationships, companies aim to protect themselves and their employees from legal actions that could arise from soured personal relationships within the office.

 

Preserving Team Dynamics

The dynamics of a team can be significantly affected if a couple’s personal relationship takes center stage. Cliques or factions may form, supporting either one or the other in a dispute, or favouring their interests over others’. This can hinder teamwork and create a divided workplace, which is detrimental to the collaborative spirit needed for most professional projects. Having said that the organisational policy prohibiting marriage between employees has been an HR dilemma considering that there is insufficient evidence to show how such a policy might affect employee attrition (Colby, 1991).

 

Conclusion

In past studies, researchers have examined the use of various managerial approaches such as risk-minimizing approach, reward-maximizing approach, and the considerate approach to address workplace romance (Henry, 1995). While policies that restrict or prevent colleagues from marrying might seem harsh at first glance, they serve to protect the integrity of the workplace and ensure that all employees have a fair and comfortable work environment. Organisations must balance individual rights with the wellbeing of their workforce and the operational needs of the business.

Such rules aren't universal, and many workplaces have nuanced guidelines that allow relationships with certain limitations. It’s always wise to consult your company’s HR policies to understand the specific rules that apply to your workplace before you fall in love with a colleague.

References

Adams, S. (2012) How to have a successful office romance. Retrieved from Forbes.com: http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2012/08/30/how-to-have-a-successful-office-romance-2

Aguinis, H. (2009) Performance Management. Upper Saddle River: NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

Amaral, H. (2006) Workplace romance and fraternization policies. Retrieved from URI: http://www.uri.edu/research/lrc/research/papers/Amaral_Fraternization.pdf

Anderson, C. and Fisher, C. (1991) Male–female relationships in the workplace: perceived motivations in office romance. Sex Roles, 163–180.

Anderson, C. and Hunsaker, P. (1985) Why there's romancing at the office and why it's everybody's problem. Personnel, 57–63.

Appelbaum, S., Marinescu, A., Klenin, J. and Bytautas, J. (2007) Fatal attractions: the (mis)management of workplace romance. International Journal of Business Research, 31–43.

Bercovici, J. (2007) Notes: the workplace romance and sexual favouritism: creating a dialogue between social science and the law of sexual harassment. Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal, 183–214.

Berdahl, J. and Aquino, K. (2009) Sexual behaviour at work: fun or folly. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34–47.

Clarke, L. (2006) Sexual relationships and sexual conduct in the workplace. Legal Studies, 347–368.

Colby, L. (1991) Regulating love. Personnel, 23.

Collins, E. (1983) Managers and lovers. Harvard Business Review, 142–153.

Dillard, J. and Broetzmann, S. (1989) Romantic relationships at work: perceived changes in job-related behaviours as a function of participant's motive, partner's motive and gender. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 93–110.

Dillard, J. and Miller, K. (1988) Intimate relationships in task environments. Handbook of Personal Relationships, 449–465.

Fleming, P. (2007) Sexuality, power and resistance in the workplace. Organization Studies, 239–256.

Foley, S. and Powell, G. (1999) Not all is fair in love and work: co-workers' preferences for and responses to managerial interventions regarding workplace romances. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 1043–1056.

Ford, R. and McLaughlin, F. (1987) Should Cupid come to the workplace? An ASPA survey. Personnel Administrator, 100–110.

Hakim, C. (2011) Honey Money: The Power of Erotic Capital. London: Penguin.

Henry, D. (1995) Wanna date? The office may not be the place. HR Focus, 14.