Dating in the Workplace

1425 Words3 Pages

Introduction

This case deals with dating in the workplace. I believe probably more than any other topic I have heard more issues in my years in the Army that deal with relationships among service members. I do believe it is morally acceptable for an employer to make rules against dating in the workplace. The degree to which rules are designed though should reflect on how much the relationship may affect the workplace. There should be no invisible rules towards the topic. That is an organization must put such a policy in writing and not just accept that it is understood and everyone will see things for the good of the organization. Individual members must be held accountable for their actions at all levels. A supervisor that violates a policy is as guilty as a subordinate and must be treated the same to ensure the integrity of the policy as well as the organizations standard.

Human Nature

It’s 2 a.m. and the last touch has just been put on the project due by the team in 7 hours to the review panel. For the last 3 weeks, the team of 7 has been working until such hours of the morning to ensure they met the deadline set by the company they work and it would appear in this case live for. The company expects results and the employee’s seem to be motivated enough to meet the goals set by the company. This is a regular pattern of this fictitious organization. Personnel from different departments are brought together to work on a project for the company.

With such a degree of team work expected by the organization so to should the human nature of individuals placed in such situations to form bonds and relationships beyond work be expected. The days of 9 to 5 with plenty of time in the evening and on weekends to interact with others socially are not as prevalent in today’s U.S. workforce. The U.S. works longer hours than other countries and takes shorter vacations if any at all compared to other countries.

Strong recent growth in the number of working women, increasing management emphasis on close workplace teamwork, and longer hours being put in by managers and professionals are helping to fuel the dating trend, experts say (Arnett, 1998). When men were the primary workforce and had to make time to look for female companionship in areas not associated with work there were not significant issues for organizations to worry about dating ...

... middle of paper ...

... go sour.

Conclusion

An organization has a responsibility to itself before its employees. The employees have a duty to meet the expectations of the job they choose. The company has a duty to allow employees to be human and act as such when organization’s goals and practices are not in jeopardy. When members of the organization are expected to sacrifice a portion of their lives however to the good of the company then the company has a duty to take the possible outcomes of such extensive interaction into account when making fraternization policies. This will provide a balance between the rights and duties of the employer to the employee and vice versa.

REFERENCES

Murray, K. (1990). “Romancing at work, Firms learn to be flexible over issue,” Orange County Register, pg. h.01.

Arnett, E. (1998). “OFFICE ROMANCES BLOOMING; RULES BEING REVISED AS TRENDS SHOW RISE IN WORKPLACE DATING,” Daily News, pg N. 20.

Minarcek, A. (2004). “Survey says interoffice romances increasingly accepted by co- workers, bosses,” Knight Ridder Tribune Business News, pg. 1.

Roeper, R. (2005). “Nothing is as inevitable, or tricky, as workplace dating,” Chicago Sun- Times, pg. 11.

Open Document