Employees Sign Workplace 'Love Contracts'
In this litigious age, it's no longer just the office gossips who are calling out coworker couples—now it's the company lawyers.
ABC News is reporting that some employers are asking dating coworkers to sign "love contracts," which define the nature of their relationship as consensual and restate the company's harassment policies.
"Think of it in terms of a prenup," said Good Morning America workplace contributor Tory Johnson. "In this particular case, you're saying to the employer, 'We'll prevent you from being held responsible for employment issues in the event of a failed personal relationship.' The employer should not have that burden."
While these contracts may be proliferating, they are not new. The National Law Journal reported in March 2005 that the then five-year-old idea had come from a San Francisco law firm, whose client company wanted protection from claims of sexual harassment. It's not unusual for harassment cases to arise from consensual relationships.
For coworkers in serious relationships, you can figure that signing the contract is no big deal. But for office flings that get found out, those could create some very awkward moments in the conference room with the corporate lawyers.
Tags: careers | relationships
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (3) | Print
Reader Comments
Just sign it. You don't get a choice.
Given that most citizens working at corporations have already signed some kind of statement "agreeing" to be fired at any time for ANY reason or NO reason, and given that we have a current Supreme Court with five like-minded guys (Thomas, Scalia, Kennedy, Roberts and Alito) who are likely to uphold such objectionable and over-reaching nonsense on corporations' behalf, god luck.
When the Dilbert-inspired lawyers at work come at you with a few more ways to sign away your legal protections, what are you gonna do? Balk? Yeah, right.
THINK about this stuff before you elect another president to appoint your future Supreme Court Justices. They are the real "deciders" and you (we) mere citizens are already way behind in the score on this. If you don't believe me, just "Google" Lilly Ledbetter and Goodyear Tire and check out the "tone" of what your Supreme Court has done for you lately.
What about the companies Daniel?
If I had my way, there would be no dating among employees, period. In the military, you get court-martialed from fraternizaiton (dating the help) and I think that to be a good policy. The company is who loses when two people at the same company date. Further, the company ends up exposed to frivilous lawsuits claiming sexual harrassment or hostile work environment when the inevitable breakup happens. As a minimum, the entire company; or at least of portion of it, gets embroiled in taking sides. there are over 6 BILLION people in the world...go date one who doesn't work in the next cube.
As for the Supreme Court...they are doing just fine INTERPRETING the laws rather than MAKING laws. Constitution 101 tells us that the Legislature makes the laws, the Executive Branch signs them into law and the Courts interpret the laws. The liberal justices and judges are the ones in direct violation of our constitution when they make law. If they want to do that, run a campaign, get elected and then write the laws. Otherwise, interpret per the Constitution.
Add your thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.advertisement
