D. Office Romances

Does management have the right to actively enforce a nonfraternization rule aimed at curbing interoffice romances? This varies depending on the facts. One supervisor who was fired commenced a lawsuit against a former employer. The supervisor had allegedly given his live-in lover a promotion that placed her above several employees with more seniority, even though the company had an unwritten, traditional rule forbidding social relationships between management and lower-echelon employees. When questioned by the home office, the supervisor admitted that he and the co-worker were lovers; citing the nonfraternization rule, the company abruptly terminated him.

The supervisor took the company to court and argued that his employment contract brought with it the company's implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, which the company violated when he was fired. He also stated that the nonfraternization rule was unfair, unreasonable, and selectively enforced.

The company responded that its nonfraternization rule became reasonable and necessary after the company discovered that attachments between supervisory employees and their subordinates led to accusations of favoritism, which had a negative impact on morale. The company also argued that since the employee had no written contract guaranteeing job security, he could be fired at any time for any or no reason.

The court found that the company was legitimately concerned with appearances of favoritism and employee dissension caused by romantic relationships. Given his actions, the terminated supervisor did not make a strong case that the company failed to act in good faith toward him.

Counsel Comments:Other courts have similarly upheld the dismissal of employees romantically involved with co-workers. A Wisconsin court ruled that there were no constitutional or statutory rights barring such a dismissal. In another case, termination because of marriage to the employee of a competitor was found not to violate public policy and the worker's lawsuit for unfair discharge was rejected. Other employees have been fired for violating company fraternization rules by having extramarital affairs or taking a girlfriend to an out-of-state convention. However, since the law is unsettled in this area and each case is decided on its own set of facts and circumstances, never assume that a company's actions are legal in this area. Consult an employment lawyer for advice.

Tip:Although it may be legal to forbid employees from fraternizing, all employees must be treated similarly to avoid violations. For example, if an employer reprimands a male employee for dating a co-worker but fires a female employee for a similar infraction, the employer may be committing illegal sex discrimination.

For off-the-job illegal conduct, a company typically has the right to fire a worker if the illegal conduct harms the employer's reputation or has a negative impact on job performance. The law is not so clear regarding attempts to regulate legal off-the-job behavior. Some cases have given employers the right to bar employees from cohabiting with persons who work for a competitor. In one such case, a court upheld a company's written policy that stated: "The Company will not continue the employment of any person who lives in the immediate household of a person employed by a competitor." But in another case in a different state, an employer's rule prohibiting workers from dating employees of a competitor was found to be illegal.