This is fun, sort of...

My wife and I have suspected one of our employees is cheating on her husband. The employee was all dressed up to go out after work with her girlfriends yesterday. She was complaining about all sorts of things about her husband yesterday too; all things that we recognize would typically serve as justification for an affair. There's been many other clues along the way, this is just the stuff yesterday. And we know her husband and her kids. So, just based on the complaints about her husband, we suggested she check out MB to see what she could do to help her husband express himself (one of the primary complaints about her H).

Well, today at lunch time, my wife checked her computer history to see if she ever made it to MB. It turns out she was spending a bit of time on a site called marriedsecrets.com. My wife was a bit angry and indicated that she felt deceived, and that the employee is taking advantage of company time for non-company activities, and acts like we're so ignorant that we don't have a clue. I said "yeah, if you feel all that, imagine if it were your spouse who did all those things to you."

OK, so she was supposed to visit MB and seemed to get to the wrong site. Enter me. One of the hats I wear in our company is administering the network. I let my wife know that I can point any of the staff computers to MB when they are trying to access sites such as MS. And that is where our fun today will be. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

So, were thinking the employee is going to get very uncomfortable, but she'll probably not bring it up to us that her computer is taking her to the wrong web site. Any other predictions on response?

You know, I checked the other web site, and it DOES give marriage advise in different articles. Maybe she just got mixed up.

Actually, the site in question is a dating site that caters to married persons. The other clue that it wasn't an accident is the fact that she shot a photo from her office and uploaded it today...

The real question we're wrestling with is what to do with the info. How do we respond to this as an employer?

Some topic of the MB radio show today got us thinking about what moral obligations exist for employers. I'm not really sure.

Oh, 4sunshinydays...can we clone you as a couple? Can we?

Don't you just rock?

Why not call the MB radio show and ask?

Because you're breaking new ground.

Well, for me.

Thank you for being here!!!

LA

This is totally awesome. I hope she comes to you and says, "Hey, I can't get to my Married-Wannabe-Sluts Website! Can you fix that for me?"

Awesome.

Good on ya.

And you do raise a very good question about the role of the employer in a marriage. My own WH's workplace is extremely hostile to families - spouses are NEVER allowed at awards banquets and such - but is very rewarding and supportive of those who fawn over their attractive coworkers and suck up to their married bosses and go with EACH OTHER to said banquets.

It's sickening. It's a huge slap in the face to the employees' families and causes enormous disruption at home, but the company pretends this isn't their problem.

Of course, most employees do not talk about how their home lives are falling apart because of the way they behave at work. I know my WH sure doesn't.

I would love to see a survey or something of just how many people are having serious marital problems because of their company-supported marriage-ruining behavior on the job.

If it ever dawned on anyone how such disruption affects the company's bottom line through distraction and lost time on the job, that maybe they'd rethink their destructive anti-marriage culture.
Mulan

Well, I just laid out the rule that visiting dating sites on our time will result in termination. Just matter-of-factly.

At first the activity was denied. Then came the admission of poor judgement.

OK, so that is how I handled it. I've seen many BS's express frustration with the lack of intervention from WS's employers. But not too many offered any real solutions when I posed the question. I have to say that it feels a little like it isn't our business as employer to intervene. It feels like an employer should try to stay out of personal matters as much as possible. Marriage is very much a personal matter. And, I had to question my own bias, being a recent BS. At any rate, I based the decision solely on preventing wasted company time.

I'd still be curious as to what people would consider fair or expected from an employer.

I'm with Mulan. Affairs cause lots of wasted time at work, hours in court, after divorce hours staying home with children because their is no support when they are sick, etc.

My sis is a partner in a law firm in Seattle. They went through a partner running off with the receptionist who was 30 years younger one time. Now all of their office ladies are in their 60's. No more problems.

4SSD,

I've been thinking about your strategy...and I haven't come up with anything I can articulate...

I've mulled this over for a couple of years, even...

Goes something like this...

What you will do to your family, you will do to the company...we take all of ourselves everywhere we go--that's reality. Standards of conduct at work may differ from at home...there really isn't a personal and professional life...it's all personal...so healthy boundaries at work are essential...aren't they?

When I came to where I work now, six years ago, I was astonished that the owner didn't allow gossip...period. No way, no how. Funny part of this rule, which was greatly beneficial, was that then, there was no communication...followed an absolute...has a downside...

I was impressed, though, that an employer would have such rules...why not against infidelity? Why not for promoting marriage?

I realized in this environment, which has so many other leadership rules...that there were single people and married people...majority married. My boss would speak out when people were living together...as the HR person, she'd say, "Stop playing house and get married." Funnily enough, they would. We didn't have anyone divorced until two years ago...and then there were three in quick succession...

Work is not about earning or being terminated...much of our ENs, professionally and personally, are partially met there...we are all people working for and with people...when you boil it all down...so how we conduct our business, make our rules, all voluntary and inherent choice, matters.

Your dating site rule works well for single as well as married...you are essentially saying, "Stay present. You're here. Now."

I believe we can build marriages at work and build workers at home...it isn't personal and then professional...teaching us to believe we can split ourselves into two lives, two selves...why, that would be...fantasy, wouldn't it?

LA

***What you will do to your family, you will do to the company...we take all of ourselves everywhere we go--that's reality.***

Ya know, I used to believe this - and now I struggle with it. It seems logical that this would be so but I hate to admit that maybe it's not the case.

Or maybe it's just that behavior that is abusive and unacceptable in a personal relationship/marriage really is okay in a work environment?

For example: It's okay for a Boss to withhold information, dole it out on an as-needed basis, ignore employees unless he needs something, and generally behave in a very controlling manner. This is what my WH does, and also makes a point of lavishly rewarding those employees who please him. (Of course, it helps if you're young, female and fawn over him.)

This kind of behavior is devastating in a marriage, but will work fine on the job.

And not to start a political argument, but even though Bill Clinton was a right b*stard to his wife and family I do not know of anything destructive/abusive/illegal/etc. that he did while in office - Monica aside. And hey, Richard Nixon was Mr. Family Man at home, never known to cheat or be a player, but he at the same time he was a crook and a tyrant while in office.

What's the connection?

Great topic!
Mulan

4shinydays,

Most employers/employees have two relationships....business and personal. I think as a marriage advocate you can address both. "Ms. X, as your employer I need to inform you that visiting dating sites on company time will not be tolerated. Taking off my company hat....and speaking off the record as a caring person....is dating while married something you really want to do? The risk you're taking is bigger than than your job security and I'm worried about you. Before you really get over your head, check that site out I recommended....I know it would really be helpful."

I have thought a lot about this as well. Everyone says EXPOSE TO THE WORKPLACE! I just don't get it, unless the waywards work together.
I imagine if I were having an affair and my H told my boss. He would probably be like- "oooookaaaay....." I mean, not because he agrees with my actions- but really, what is he supposed to do? It really is none of their business. BTW- I have never been a WP <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />Just a scenario.

I believe exposure should be made to persons who have the ability to influence the end of the affair- not just to merely embarrass the WP- and that is really the only thing you can accomplish by exposing at work when the WP'S don't work together..JMO

liz,

I've been here a long time. I've seen workplace exposure work very well. Some bosses will say "ooooooookay"...but I know plenty of bosses who didn't. I've also seen it fall flat and even occasionally really backfire. Each person has to look at their situation and decide if will benefit the marriage.

As you suspect....it works best when both affair partners are working at the same company, especially if one is in a subordinate role to the other and therefore exposing the company to harrassment charges. Even if they don't work together....some workplaces....like churches, religious schools, small family run businesses, or even large companies that have strict codes of conduct, or strict rules about using the computer/company phones for personal business will often take action. Exposure certainly does cause embarassment (but if someone is acting in such a way that they need to be embarassed if others find out...whose fault is that?). It definitely has a purpose however (embarassment is not the purpose...it's the consequence)....the purpose is to put pressure on the affair by destroying the secrecy that feeds it and an environment that enables it.

As a marriage advocate....I think affairs are everyone's business. Infidelity and divorce are undermining the sanctity of the family, and the security of children in this country.....with long term effects. It's easier to look the other way. It's easier to say nothing. That's why it's so easy to have an affair. I want to make it harder and more uncomfortable to leave spouses and children. I want to raise the consciousness level of people around me about this epidemic so that people don't become desentized or say "ooooooooookay".

Remember that famous case where that girl in New York got murdered in front of all those people and no one went to her assistance or called the cops? That's what's happened with infidelity.....and I'd like to see that change.

4sunshinydays


An employer has the right/duty/obligation to limit worktime activities. While an employee is on the clock and being paid, the employer has the right to direct what activities are and are not appropriate. I think many companies have rules restricting what internet sites can be visited, personal emails, and even personal phone calls during working hours.

After hours, it's a different story.. Employee's free time should be just that -- free time.

That said, as a small business owner, I think you have the right/opportunity to determine your hiring/employment practices provided you don't break any laws. I saw on T.V. about at least one company that wouldn't hire (would terminate) anyone who smoked cigarettes at any time, on or off duty. (Had to do with health insurance costs vs. morality)

Now, I'm not a smoking advocate, I don't smoke and I don't like smoking but I always wondered how they checked. Do they do home inspections? Do they require employees to submit to medical tests? Do they take their word for it and hope they don't catch their employee lighting up in front of Walmart? It seems to me that the honor system is the only way to go -- allowing employees to self select out of the business if they don't like the rules.

I think the same thing works with regards to infidelity. If you're going to make employment based on the employees not having affairs (off company time) then I think you should let them know that up front, at hiring. And, I also think it would be ethical for you to allow any employees who wish to leave after the implementation of such a policy a reasonable period to find another job with a good recommendation (assuming they've earned it). I don't think it would be fair to assume any employee who left is saying they're having an affair or want to have an affair. I, personally, would probably flee a corporate environment which wanted what I considered to be unreasonable intrusion into my private life or the private lives of others whether or not that particular intrusion affected me.

It's not that I advocate affairs, any more than I advocate smoking.

I just am very leery of businesses that try to enforce 'morality' because it seems to be a slippery slope leading downward. I'd wonder what's next? Do we put 'honesty filter key loggers' on home computers to ensure employees aren't visiting naughty sites off business hours? Do we fire any homosexuals? What about non-Christians? Can they be trusted? What do we do with people of the opposite sex who are co-habiting? What about unwed mothers? Do we treat them differently than unwed fathers? How much are we, as a business, impacted by not being able to accept government contracts (most government contracts have funny rules about hiring practices which might rule these things out.) How much do these rules 1.) eat up company time enforcing them, 2.) contribute to employee moral and turn over, 3) affect our hiring pool for qualified applicants?

Again, I think that as long as a business is upfront about such practices and allows employees the choice to go elsewhere before they're in a terminating position (ie. the first they hear of it is when you call them in to fire them), then it's ethical (fair). And, I also think that certian types of jobs require such off duty measures -- such as certain sensitive government positions and parts of the military service. Men and women who enter those jobs know up front what they're getting into and, as long as they feel adequately compensated by the job, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

It might, however, limit the growth opportunities of your business depending on what you do and where you are.

Mys

Some companies have policies about dating among employees. My H's affair partner was a coworker and his company had this policy, but on of my H's bosses knew about the affair. When I found out about the A and confronted his boss about not telling me(we were also friends) the company fired the OP and not my H. (I think it should have been the other way around - I think the comapny opened themselves up to a law suit there, but they eventually let my H go after he found another job). I don't think legally that you can do anything when it is someone outside the workplace that your employee is having an A with. Monitoring the computer is great. How great that you called her on it. SInce you know the H, I wonder if you could tell her that this puts you in an awkward position and suggest that she seeks counseling because you are concerned that her behavior is self-destructive.