| Romance at Workplace : Debate (Part - 2)Recently, | | | | over the phone and people around me can request |
| we had one very interesting debate on "workplace | | | | me to talk in a softer voice - that is a comment |
| Romance". What if one of your male employees likes | | | | covered by their freedom of speech, but they cannot |
| to spend his "Free time" with one of his female | | | | touch me or snatch away the phone etc. That will be |
| Colleague. We tried to find following things:1. Is it wrong | | | | a violation of my freedom.Manager can raise objection |
| or right?2. If the management have any right to | | | | only if the person's work performance drops - and |
| intervene?3. Should there be any policy to have a | | | | that drop in performance is a valid grounds for action. |
| check on such "interactions"?4. It is his or her personal | | | | The company's "code of conduct" policies must be |
| life and no one should interfere.5. If this is a right of an | | | | inline with the country's laws - else the company |
| individual and the organization let them continue?I am | | | | cannot take action based on arbitrary "code of |
| sure you will find this debate...an interesting one.The list | | | | conduct" which is in violation with the country's laws. I |
| of participants: Veena Dhamankar, Arun Kottolli, Vivek | | | | recall a legal case in 1986-87, where McMillan |
| Raghuvanshi, Gopika Rani, Madhukar Kaushik, Usha | | | | publications fired a woman for wearing Jeans to work |
| Gowri, Meera, Deepak Miglani, Puja Jhunjhunwala, S. | | | | - citing their "code of conduct" regarding dress rules, |
| Madhavan, Rajendran Mani, Jyotsna Cheruvu, Saumitra | | | | the lady went to court and Bombay high court ruled in |
| Yadav and Sanjeev Sharma (Himachali)Veena | | | | the employee's favor citing that in absence of a work |
| Dhamankar: I recently had an experience. One of my | | | | uniform, employees have freedom of _expression.If a |
| office (female) colleagues is closely involved with one | | | | person's activities are not obscene or illegal, people can |
| male colleague. They go for lunch together; they sit in | | | | do it in public spaces. If other persons in the place are |
| bus together and wherever they go they are together. | | | | disturbed then the other employees will have to learn |
| Because of that lot many discussions, chit chatting etc | | | | to adapt - or their performance will drop. Other |
| is going in the company. Ours is a male dominated | | | | employees can raise objection (this is covered under |
| organization and only few female employees are | | | | their freedom of speech) but the management cannot |
| working.One day my President called me and asked | | | | take action if such an action will be in violation of the |
| me to talk to that girl and prompt them that such things | | | | law - irrespective of the "company policy" or "code of |
| are not good at working place. So I called her and | | | | conduct".Please note that the law of the country takes |
| talked to her very politely that I've received a | | | | precedence over the company policy. No HR policy or |
| feedback like this and.... etc. You will not believe what | | | | company policy can be above the law. Period.As long |
| answer she gave:"I sit with that person in bus because | | | | as person's activities do not affect his/her work |
| I don't find myself comfortable with others. I like that | | | | performance - then company has no right. The legal |
| person and it is my personal matter what others have | | | | standing here is the employee's performance - and not |
| to do with this. | | | | his personal life.If a person's act of talking to other |
| And I'll not stop all this because people are | | | | employee (or any other actions) is causing a |
| discussing".Madhukar Kaushik: These are behavioral | | | | disturbance to others, even then company cannot take |
| issues and counseling by HR in such matters might | | | | action as long as the person's actions are legal. Note |
| boomerang if pursued further. If at all, another | | | | that the person's legal rights take precedence over |
| counseling is being thought by your management as | | | | everything else. To explain this, take an example of a |
| "worth a try". A very senior person in the organization, | | | | male employee raising an objection to another female |
| who has acceptability and respect among the | | | | employee wearing a skirt/pants - citing that her way |
| employees at large, should do it.My advice to you is | | | | of dressing was disturbing him and affecting his |
| that you should report the attitude and response of the | | | | performance. Here company cannot take action |
| lady to your President. This reporting should be done | | | | against the lady - as she has not done anything illegal. |
| very truthfully, almost verbatim (without adding your | | | | But the company can take action against the |
| perceptions in it). Let the President decide further | | | | employee who raised the objection - because he was |
| course of action.Meera: Guess if the so-called close | | | | violating the fundamental rights of the female |
| involvement is not affecting the productivity of both | | | | employee.In the current example, the lady & the |
| parties and they are not being indecent in their | | | | gentleman in question have not done anything illegal - |
| behavior and interaction, I am sure the organization | | | | so the persons raising objection are at legal risk - as |
| should not have any objection.The behavior needs to | | | | their objection violates the fundamental rights of the |
| be professional in the professional environment and | | | | other employees (lady & gentleman in question).To |
| what they do in their private lives should not concern | | | | explain this, consider the celebration of "Ganesh" |
| the organization -- unless it something that affects the | | | | festival in the company premises. If such celebrations |
| organization and others in it in the long run ... like drinking | | | | do not affect the company's performance or its |
| habits, drug addiction, etc.Usha Gowri: Workplace | | | | employees performance, then such festival is allowed. |
| affairs all over the world are a huge problem-esp. if | | | | Other employees who find this religious function as |
| one is Senior and teh other stands to gain by this | | | | offending cannot raise objection because freedom of |
| intimacy | | | | religion is a fundamental right in India. Thus raising |
| My take-does it affect work? --Not necessarily how | | | | objection becomes illegal.All that I am trying to tell here |
| others are affected by it. | | | | is that the company's actions and HR policies must be |
| Are they performing at work? -I mean the work they | | | | inline with the country's laws. Company cannot cite |
| are expected to do and as long as what they are | | | | their policy or code of conduct if these policies are in |
| being paid for is being done well.... | | | | violation of the country's laws. So I am telling all HR |
| If they are, then, I think it's nobody's business if there is | | | | professionals to keep in mind about the law while |
| chemistry, they are having a sexual relationship or if | | | | developing/enforcing policies.Arun Kottolli: I agree with |
| they are whatever. | | | | Saumitra, the lady & gentleman in question have not |
| As long as moral codes of physical intimacy is not | | | | done anything illegal - and their acts are within their |
| happening in the premises of the organization-we | | | | fundamental rights in India.If these two persons had a |
| cannot penalize people for falling in love or being | | | | boss-subordinate relationship at work, then there is a |
| attracted to anybody and as Vive says there is no | | | | risk of sexual harassment and a possibility of |
| sexual harassment (both for men and women) then | | | | misconduct. Under such circumstances, HR has to |
| leave it alone. As they say when and if the relationship | | | | intervene to see that no inappropriate sexual |
| breaks get ready to replace-do a succesion planning!!S. | | | | exploitation is taking place. The company will be at |
| Madhavan: If it affects the work and distract the | | | | legal risk if there was a potential of sexual harassment |
| working atmosphere, u should worry about it. If they | | | | - as both company and the manager will be held |
| move as friends I do not thing the organization should | | | | liable.Sanjeev Sharma: Arun, Have you been to India |
| bother about it. If their behavior is decent, u can advise | | | | anytime during last 3-4 years? Have you visited any of |
| your chief you cannot offend them just because | | | | the Call Center/Contact Center or BPO? If yes, then |
| somebody does not like this.Deepak Miglani: I want to | | | | you would not have said all these...giving all these logical |
| ask that is the sexual harassment world relate only | | | | reasons. Talk practical. No company has any policy, |
| with woman? | | | | which is against the Law of the Land.Because |
| There are lot of sections in our law which, discriminate | | | | companies didn't had any policy...no discipline...and now |
| men and violates the fundamental right of ours i.e. Right | | | | you will see people romancing in the organization, |
| to equality.Rajendran Mani: Almost all one of us facing | | | | taking drugs in the organization...having physical |
| this issue, Sanjeev's view on this subject is | | | | relations. There is dirt all over in those organizations. |
| correct.Jyotsna Cheruvu: What Sanjeev says is true | | | | You talk about GECIS (Now Genpact); WNS; |
| to the extent that one needs to follow the rules of the | | | | IBM-Daksh; Infosys-Progeon; Wipro Spectramind...any |
| game as long as you're playing. But the question I | | | | of the top BPO. And, now probably it is too late to |
| would like to put in is, in a male dominant office, where | | | | control that. There also it started with a simple thing...a |
| in the president interferes and directs the HR, why is it | | | | guy talking to girl.Violation of Rights and DisciplineHave |
| that the girl is called first (or it sound like she is only | | | | a look at this...1) In FMCG companies and production |
| called)? Let it be for both separately and check the | | | | companies all employees undergo thorough |
| opinions of both of them equal. Probably the counseling | | | | body-checks.2) A cashier in a company or bank |
| should go on seniority basis. Ladies first may not be | | | | undergoes a thorough check to the extent that |
| the right way here.And it is necessary that the girl and | | | | security person counts the money in his wallet...every |
| the boy made known that anything disturbing the | | | | time he enters or leaves the premises.3) In |
| environment needs serious consideration from | | | | Call-Centers/BPO's you are not suppose to carry any |
| HR.Karunakaran.J: Sanjeev, You are 100 % right, | | | | computer related accessory into the organization...CD's, |
| employee should follow the company policy when they | | | | Floppies, Pen-Drive nothing. In some companies you |
| are in the office premises this is punching | | | | are not even suppose to carry mobile or hand phones. |
| point.Saumitra Yadav: First of all i must pay my | | | | You should keep your mobiles or hand phones on |
| respect to the lady for her upright stand on her basic | | | | vibration/silent mode.4) In some companies you cannot |
| & fundamental right to live the way she wants to. | | | | even access Internet.Does any of these is violation of |
| Please understand one thing it is no crime when two | | | | "Employee Rights" or "Human Rights"?NO. |
| people from opposite sex are staying together in the | | | | Organizations are formed with certain vision, mission |
| office premises unless they are not showing any | | | | and purpose and none of the purpose is to "Let the |
| indecent behavior, which is publically not permitted, & | | | | people romance in the organization". Nobody is |
| not hampering the job, which they have been assigned. | | | | interfering with the freedom...you can interact with |
| Suppose they are in love, so what let them may be, it | | | | anybody...anytime, provided it is related to your |
| is the case of two consenting adults finding emotional | | | | work...provided it is related to company. I cannot let my |
| solace in each other. They are responsible for there | | | | company premises to become "Love-Garden"...for that |
| behavior & they perfectly understand the outcome of | | | | you have other places to go. It is just for the person to |
| their relationship.From company point of view you must | | | | distinguish between personal and professional |
| see are they in senior & junior position, is the senior | | | | life.Sanjeev Sharma: Ok. I agree that as of know these |
| providing extra benefits to the junior which he or she | | | | two people are just moving around together and have |
| does not deserve, are there relationship is hampering | | | | not done anything obscene. If it is my company, I |
| the career of other co-worker. As a HR person your | | | | should wait till the time they do any such activity and |
| concern should be limited to the above-mentioned two | | | | take any action if required, only after that. I should not |
| things, that's all. We must understand that in today's | | | | take any preventive measures. I should wait till the |
| competitive world every body is stressed to limit & in | | | | family members of either or both the persons enter |
| constant search of true friend who can share his or | | | | into my office and accuse me for harbouring and |
| her stress & these relationship are the outcome of | | | | encouraging such activities.Yes, they are preforming |
| these situations so we must handle it with maturity & | | | | well...there is no problem in their performance. I have |
| understanding.Marguerite: Arun, Your message I felt is | | | | one more couple...they are very dedicated to work...high |
| very correct. Am surprised how people claim that | | | | performers but only during the break they get into |
| interfering into someone s personal issue is their | | | | "physical mode". I should not do anything, their |
| birthright. I do not understand how a management can | | | | work-performance is very good...and why should I |
| become a judge about people having affairs (be it | | | | interfere in their personal life...their personal-right?I have |
| extra marital or whatever). As far as there is no | | | | one more person...very good |
| disturbance in the output and they do not get involved | | | | person...hardworking...punctual...but take drugs. It is Ok. |
| publicly into anything that is obscene, it is not the | | | | He is a performer and why should I worry about |
| headache or the duty of the management to counsel | | | | that?Conclusive remarks given by Arun Kottolli: |
| them. The management must be busy with things that | | | | Basically, I think there is a cultural issue here. I come |
| are important about attaining its objectives for the | | | | from a cultural background, which encourages strong |
| year. In a company where there are thousands of | | | | individualism, and the company policies are designed |
| employees working can all such affairs be taken for | | | | with that in mind. But in India, it is a collectivism that is |
| an issue?I think reacting to this extend about such | | | | more prevalent and important - therefore policies are |
| issues is not going to be of any use. We need more | | | | designed with the collective in mind. The BPO/Call |
| focus on improving the bottom lines of the originations | | | | center examples highlight the collective mindset and |
| that we work for. That is the principle purpose why all | | | | the policies being implemented are in that direction.In the |
| of us (even HR) are recruited for in a | | | | current example, I think what Sanjeev is talking about, |
| company.Madhukar Kaushik: Saumitra, With due | | | | primarily comes from the background that collective |
| regards to yours and others' similar opinions, it is quite | | | | benefits must rule over Individual rights. And I think that |
| easy for each one of us to advise Veena, but, it is a | | | | Individual rights must be honored.Girl talking to a guy or |
| difficult situation for her - she simply can not sermonize | | | | vice versa, As in the case here - where there is no |
| her President, upholding whatever is going on.While | | | | physical contact or a drop in their work related |
| advocating the validity of such openly practiced | | | | performance, is not illegal as per the law and therefore |
| relationship, let us not forget the context in which we | | | | company cannot have a policy banning it.If two people |
| live. I have seen even many husbands and wife pairs | | | | exchange confidential information, or indulged in a |
| working in same office, same department, but even | | | | physical act at public place - that is illegal. You can |
| they don't do any exhibition of their relationship. Wise | | | | have a policy to prevent such activities.However their |
| are those who know where their LAKSHMAN | | | | is a thin line if the romance is between the boss and |
| REKHA gets drawn.Indian Society will need many | | | | the subordinate, in such cases, the HR policies can be |
| years still to become Americanized (I am not talking of | | | | drafted such that they are separated into different |
| Metro Cities)Arun Kottolli: Stringiest policies will make | | | | departments - such that they do not report into each |
| companies fail; these policies will make talented people | | | | other. This is primarily done to prevent any potential |
| not work for such companies. Look at HP, Google, | | | | sexual harassment cases and unethical practices of |
| Nokia, Southwest Airlines, etc. Look at their policies and | | | | favoritism etc. |
| see how these policies are implemented - and you will | | | | I would love to have your comments and feedback |
| learn the best HR practices in the world.I lived in US for | | | | on this issue...not only from India but also across the |
| several years, and I know my freedoms. I can talk | | | | globe. |