That’s a good point and it appears then that the pragmatism fits the consequences that are out of the company’s control. I am fine with severe consequences for creepy ass people in power who coerce the vulnerable.
This doesn’t appear to be the case here but it’s the reason those rules are in place. They knew the rules and I guarantee you the both of them were involved in the firing of other people who broke similar rules.
Exactly what? You didn’t answer my question (not that you are obligated to do so)
As a general rule, no. But @hajario pretty much nailed it by providing us a list of valid reasons why a company might have a legitimate interest, particularly when it’s a supervisor and their subordinate. Even if there’s no favoritism, accusations of harassment, or relationship drama spilling over into the workplace, how is it going to look to other employees when Todd gets a promotion or assigned special projects when dating the boss?
Sorry, my ‘Yes exactly’ was meant as a reply to Filmore. For some reason it didn’t show as that.
I think the difference in handling these affairs goes back to different laws in European states. Laws there don’t foresee such dire consequences like resigning from one’s job (in case of sexual harassment the situation would be different).
This is not a legal issue in the US (excepting sexual harassment as you noted). It’s company policy designed to prevent bad outcomes which admittedly is to prevent civil lawsuits. At the root though it’s entirely pragmatic and humane. No one’s rights are being violated by not being allowed to bang one of your employees in secret if you work for a corporation (mom and pop shops excepted).
This is a known “feature” in Discourse where a reply to the immediately
preceding post does not have the “post.in-reply-to” symbol.
(It could be fixed…)
Thanks for that information, I thought I had it wrong.
It looks as if it works now with this reply, but let’s wait and see after I sent it.
No, it didn’t work…
I think @filmore nailed it right. Companies react in the context of the laws in their countries. The laws reflect the culture and attitude of their societies. That is what explains the different approaches.
This was meant as a reply to @hajario.
What is the European approach to a boss having a relationship with one of their employees? How is it more pragmatic? Are the potential pitfalls different there other than, I assume, the company not being as liable if something horrible happens to the subordinate?
If the subordinate is the victim of a crime, the case goes to court. Otherwise, the matter is resolved within the company. The approach is not uniform: each country in Europe has its own culture and jurisdiction. As far as I know, the states in the US also have their own jurisdiction, but I suspect (although I don’t know for sure) that US jurisdiction of the states is more uniform than that of the various European countries. The approach in Europe is more pragmatic, as legal proceedings are regulated differently. I believe people in the US are more willing to take legal action which is expensive in many European states.
Reply to @hajario
I couldn’t see you meme. Facebook and me don’t have a relationship.
But, I’ve seen memes of kiss cams on jumbotrons.
Sometimes it’s sister/brother duo that have to wave and mouth it’s my sibling. Or other variations.
It don’t pay to look cute, nice and be a couple at a game or concert, well unless you just want to.
If you’re hiding something, don’t go there.
Wasn’t there a guy really into dressing up in some garb for every game of a specific team (to get on the jumboton) and they found out he was wanted in a couple states?
Can’t remember who/what/where.
Yeah, that guy.
ETA: Although in his case the criminality was after the attention-whoring. He slowly got wackier and wackier until he finally got wacky enough to start criming.
His life really is an interesting sort of tragedy. How many million others have trod more or less the same pitiful path, just not with any TV cameos to their credit?
@LSLGuy , there might be a more recent character, too.
I wanna think he was in a Moose outfit, completely covered face.
Define “crime.” If the subordinate feels they can’t refuse the boss’s advances, has a crime been committed, or does that depend entirely on the boss’s state of mind?
Literally!
It depends on the court’s assessment whether criminal conduct has occurred.