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