LOVE and LAPTOPS:
Information for Employers in Dealing with Office Romances
By Jeff Burgess, Program Coordinator
Technical Assistance for Employers
Bureau of Labor and Industries
It is that time of year; St. Valentine’s Day is upon us. Love is in the air. Many of us spend about half of
our waking lives at work, at least from Monday through Friday. It should come as no surprise, then, to
find that office flirtations bloom into romances from time to time. Should employers even care about
this phenomenon? After all, we have a right to privacy in our lives and we don’t check all of those
protections at the door…or do we? Employers should care, particularly if the romantic relationship is
between a supervisor and a subordinate. Technically, it is not unlawful for a supervisor to embark upon
a romance with a subordinate. It is just a spectacularly bad idea! Even if that romance lasts forever,
there can be costly implications for the organization, the supervisor, and even the subordinate. Other
subordinates of the supervisor may feel as though they have less access to the supervisor than the object
of the supervisor’s affections. There may be allegations of preferential treatment giving rise to the
perception of discrimination. The romance could also contribute to a hostile work environment and a
claim of sex- or gender-based harassment. If the romance does not end happily ever after, as most do
not, there are other likely outcomes that can adversely affect the organization and the people involved.
Productivity may suffer and former lovers may have a difficult time dealing with each other
professionally. If affections are no longer mutual, continuing unwelcome romantic overtures could lead
to harassment claims if they are sufficiently severe or pervasive.
A word about employee privacy is in order. Employers have many occasions to appropriately intrude on
the private affairs of employees. From drug testing to searches to surveillance and monitoring of emails
and internet browsing, if an employer has a clear policy (ideally in writing) and a legitimate business
reason for the intrusion, and if the intrusion is no greater than necessary, it will usually be considered
lawful. Sometimes employers can even regulate off-duty conduct within the bounds of the law, if the
reasons for doing so are compelling and if the intrusion is reasonable. Clear policies diminish
employees’ otherwise reasonable expectations of privacy, both at the workplace and at home. Some
employers choose to have strict anti-fraternization policies to try and regulate relationships between
employees. While these policies, if carefully drafted, can be an effective means of preventing unwise
supervisor/subordinate relationships, and disciplining employees who violate their terms. But they often
go too far. Overbroad policies can lead to liability for the employer. Section 7 of the National Labor
Relations Act, applicable to all employers even in non-union environments, prohibits employers from
restricting “protected concerted activity for mutual aid and benefit”. This activity may be as simple as
meeting to complain about management or working conditions. These types of “fraternization” are
protected by the act. Employers should also keep in mind that family relationship and marital status are
protected categories under the civil rights laws. Employers need not place employees in either
supervisory or subordinate positions over or under the employees’ family members, but otherwise they
are prohibited from making employment decisions on the basis of family or marital relationships. Some
courts have even held that policies prohibiting adulterous relationships are unlawful because to commit
adultery requires that one be married, and marital status is protected in many states, including Oregon.