Skip to content

Client Update: Valentine’s Day @ the Workplace

Yellow diamonds in the light
And we’re standing side by side
As your shadow crosses mine
What it takes to come alive
It’s the way I’m feeling I just can’t deny
But I’ve gotta let it go – Rihanna

Office romances are tempting. Sometimes emotions interfere with common sense when it comes to love at the workplace. While a specific workplace romance policy may be difficult to enforce, Valentine’s Day is a reminder to review your Code of Conduct, Harassment and Social Media policies to ensure that a workplace romance does not interfere with business objectives.

CODE OF CONDUCT

At a minimum, your Code of Conduct should:

  • State that romantic relationships must not affect the work environment or productivity;
  • Require disclosure of superior | subordinate relationships to human resources; and
  • Make employees aware of the company harassment policy.

HARASSMENT

Not all relationships have happy endings. Relationships can be complicated when the relationship crosses from romance to harassment. How do you best respond to a harassment complaint? Ensure your harassment policy is clear, communicated and enforced. The fundamentals of a harassment policy include:

  • A clear definition of harassment;
  • A complaint process;
  • A fair and confidential investigation process; and
  • A fair and final outcome mechanism.

SOCIAL MEDIA AND INTERNET ETIQUETTE

Welcome to the World Wide Web of potential sexual harassment claims. Now is as good a time as any to review your social media policy and ensure that something as seemingly innocuous as ‘omg, u look gr8’ does not land you before a human rights tribunal or in a courtroom. Do your social media or Internet policies dovetail with other applicable policies (e.g., harassment, technology and confidentiality policies)? Employers should emphasize that all company policies apply when employees use social media.

Love may not conquer all, but it may conquer a few. Employees must be aware of the rules, procedures and consequences of their romance. While this won’t solve all potential issues of workplace romances, it will assist in setting boundaries to protect all parties involved.

The foregoing is intended for general information only. If you have any questions, or for a detailed list and background of our Labour & Employment practice group, please visit stewmac.arrdev.ca.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Prince Edward Island adopts new Municipal Government Act

December 22, 2016

Perlene Morrison Prince Edward Island’s municipal legislation is being modernized with the implementation of the Municipal Government Act (the “MGA”). The legislation has now received royal assent and will be proclaimed in force at a future date.…

Read More

Land Use Planning in Prince Edward Island: The Year in Review

December 20, 2016

Jonathan Coady and Chera-Lee Gomez It’s that time of year – the moment when we look back at the year that was and chart our course for the year ahead. For many councillors, administrators and planning professionals…

Read More

The Latest in Labour Law: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter – Onsite OHS liability: Who is (and who is not) the true constructor?

December 15, 2016

Peter McLellan, QC and Michelle Black In a recent decision, R v McCarthy’s Roofing Limited, Judge Anne Derrick provided some much-needed clarity around what it means to be a “constructor” on a job site. This is critical as…

Read More

Federal Government’s Cannabis Report: What does it mean for employers?

December 15, 2016

Rick Dunlop On December 13, 2016, the Government of Canada released A Framework for the Legalization and Regulation of Cannabis in Canada: The Final Report of the Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation (“Report”). The Report’s…

Read More

Canadian employers facing marijuana challenges in the workplace

November 25, 2016

Brian Johnston, QC Canadian employers are already coping with approximately 75,000 Canadians authorized to use medical marijuana. Health Canada expects that this number will increase to about 450,000 by 2024. Employers know that medical marijuana…

Read More

You’ve got mail – Ontario Court of Appeal sends a constitutional message to municipalities about community mailboxes

October 28, 2016

Jonathan Coady With its decision in Canada Post Corporation v. City of Hamilton,1 the Ontario Court of Appeal has confirmed that the placement of community mailboxes by Canada Post is a matter beyond the reach of municipalities…

Read More

A window on interpreting insurance contracts: Top 10 points from Ledcor Construction

September 23, 2016

Jennifer Taylor Introduction Thanks to some dirty windows, insurance lawyers have a new go-to Supreme Court case on issues of policy interpretation: Ledcor Construction Ltd v Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co, 2016 SCC 37. The insurers in Ledcor Construction had…

Read More

Charter-ing a Different Course? Two decisions on TWU’s proposed law school

August 11, 2016

Jennifer Taylor Introduction Appeal courts in Ontario1 and Nova Scotia2 have now issued decisions about Trinity Western University’s proposed law school (“TWU”) in British Columbia, and at first glance they couldn’t be more different. The Court of Appeal for…

Read More

Restart the Clock!: Confirmation and resetting limitation periods in Tuck v. Supreme Holdings, 2016 NLCA 40

August 11, 2016

Joe Thorne1 and Giles Ayers2 Limitation periods serve a critical function in the civil justice system. They promote the timely resolution of litigation on the basis of reliable evidence, and permit litigants to assess their legal exposure…

Read More

Client Update: SCC issues major decision affecting federal employers: Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

July 15, 2016

On July 14, 2016 the Supreme Court of Canada issued a significant decision affecting federally regulated employers across Canada. In Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited the Court held that the purpose of the unjust dismissal…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top