Workplace Romance Can Be Sexual Harassment

Abstract

Sensitivity training for workplace romance (WPR) and sexual harassment (SHM) across workplaces should be mandated because this knowledge may protect employees and employers by preventing workplace romanticism–sexism.

Workplace romance (WPR) can be defined as a romantic relationship which develops between two consenting adults while working for the same employer. It is unclear whether the definition should include a romantic relationship mutually conceived by two consenting adults prior to joining their common employer, but which was not disclosed (conflict of interest) to their common employer when they accepted their jobs. A recent survey by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) showed that, in spite of almost one fourth of employees reporting WPR, only 42% of these workplaces have written or verbal WPR policies compared with 25% of workplaces in 2005; 81% of organizations do not offer WPR training to their employees (Dong, Alonso, Esen, & Scanlan, 2013). Ironically, workplace gossip most commonly exposes WPR (Dong et al., 2013).

Jagsi et al. (2016) conducted an investigative study that showed reduction in self-reports of sexual harassment (SHM) from 52% in 1995 (Carr et al., 2000) to 30% between 2006 and 2009. This reduction over the decade may be secondary to public awareness created by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2009); employers should be encouraged to educate and sensitize their employees at regular intervals about what constitutes SHM remarks, behavior, advances, bribery, threats, or coercions if overtly or covertly sexual in nature (Jagsi et al., 2016; Till, 1980). However, the high prevalence of SHM reported by medical students (Fnais et al., 2014) and the persistence of SHM reported by one third of female medical faculty (Jagsi et al., 2016) suggest the need to mandate, rather than just encourage, sensitivity training to further reduce SHM. According to assimilated online data through 2014, only half of U.S. states have specific requirements for sensitivity training to educate employees about SHM (Employment Knowledge Online Blog, 2014). Although sensitivity training to prevent SHM is not mandatory yet, WPR should be addressed as a separate topic or at least included within SHM education.

WPR cannot be ignored because relationships that are romantic or sexual in nature are innately complicated and can deteriorate for all involved (e.g., employers, potential accusers and victims, and potential accused perpetrators). As WPR and SHM can have blurred boundaries, the establishment of clear policies for WPR can prevent real or perceived favoritism, SHM, less productivity, and unprofessional conduct with or without the inclusion of nascent “love contracts” (i.e., WPR couples sign affirmations of their romantic relationships; Dong et al., 2013).

Based on SHM (Fnais et al., 2014; Jagsi et al., 2016) and WPR (Dong et al., 2013) study findings, it is clear that explicit policies and sensitivity training for WPR and SHM should be mandated across all workplaces because this knowledge may protect employees and employers by preventing workplace romanticism–sexism. It is imperative that occupational health professionals provide annual sensitivity training on WPR and SHM for all employees and review their organizations’ policies on SHM (e.g., Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, 1996) and WPR (e.g., SHRM, 2014). If policies are out of date or do not exist, they should be updated or established immediately.