Howard Levitt’s take: Workplace relationships are not out of the question, but they are a bad career move.
But it’s not a good career move
We all know of couples who met at the office, but these days the corporate setting has turned toxic for romance.
So what gives?
In two of the most recent instances, Steve Easterbrook, CEO of McDonald’s Corp. and Mark Wiseman, global head of active equities for Blackrock Inc., were both forced to leave their jobs after failing to disclose consensual relationships.
Wiseman, whose departure was announced Thursday, joined Black-Rock — the world’s largest asset manager with US$7 trillion in assets under management — in 2016, after serving as Canada’s biggest pension guru in his role as the chief executive officer of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board.
Both Easterbrook and Wiseman appeared to accept their fates with equanimity, with Wiseman noting that, “I regret my mistake and I accept responsibility.”
Adding a twist to Wiseman’s case is that his wife, Marcia Moffatt, is the head of Blackrock’s Canadian division.
In both cases, the executives were forced to part ways with their companies after violating a specific corporate policy requiring executives to disclose consensual relationships.
But why do companies have this policy for senior executives in the first place?
Many corporations have long had rules prohibiting superior-insubordinate relationships. Such relationships create a significant potential for sexual harassment complaints and, more ominously, in the view of some courts, no superior/subordinate relationship can ever be consensual. Even if it ostensibly is, it may retroactively be viewed otherwise by the subordinate party when the relationship ends.
As well, no one should be in a position to evaluate or confer benefits — bonuses, better assignments, etc. — on someone with whom they are romantically involved. Companies could also reasonably expect their employees to act objectively and dispassionately in the interest of a business without letting the tugs of love or lust intercede.
It is not only the involved parties who are affected. If other employees believe that they have little chance of being recognized or rewarded because one of their peers is involved with their common boss, morale is inherently impacted.
But the policies at BlackRock and Mcdonald’s were not merely to disclose superior/subordinate relationships but any at all. There are good reasons for that too, especially regarding senior executives.
Neither Wiseman nor Moffatt apparently reported to the other, but they had to interact and their employers obviously had an interest in knowing that they were involved so that, for example, recommendations supporting the other might not be entirely objective.
Similarly, their positions on issues which advantage the other’s department might also be viewed askance if they were known to be involved. It is also important for an employer to be informed of consensual relationships in order to determine what responsibilities to assign or to otherwise ensure that neither one of them are in a position to assist the other.
Then there is the issue of why the failure to disclose the relationship is cause for discharge. Cause impacts different levels of employees differently.
Easterbrook as CEO and even Wiseman in his senior position at Blackrock must serve as role models for corporate compliance. They are the ones supposed to be enforcing the rules, not breaching them. As well, senior, fiduciary employees must act with integrity and that includes honest disclosure. Failure to do so, even unrelated to their jobs, is often cause for discharge.
This does not mean that it is impossible to have a relationship in a corporate environment, although it is usually not the best idea. I know of many couples who are involved at senior levels and it has invariably impacted the ability of one or both of them to progress.
But if you are going to get involved with a colleague, disclosure is the first rule forward. I would add that you should only date laterally but then, what happens if one of the partners is promoted?
In my experience, they usually will not be. Employers do not wish to promote someone to be in a superior position to their partner since that leads to potential harassment allegations. As well, they often question the judgment of executives who become entangled in office affairs and that, by itself, reduces their promotional potential.
So much as it may seem natural to date and even ultimately marry the co-worker you met at the office cooler, companies have good reasons to prohibit this and those relationships are going the way of the dodo.