Lying About Office Romance Leads to Termination

Brian Bell

Toronto Employment Lawyer Brian Bell: Since we probably spend at least half of our time with our office colleagues, it shouldn't come as a shock when we hear of an office romance. Just a word of warning to the romantics: be careful. Depending on the circumstances, an office romance can cost you your job.

This example involving a manager named Bryan Reichard, and his subordinate Ms. Thompson, is worth a look.

The company was Kuntz Electroplating Inc., and they were astute enough to recognize that office romances happen.  In an attempt to manage such situations, they developed a non-fraternization policy for staff to follow.

While the company did not forbid office romances outright, they did require an employee to advise upper management if they entered into a romance with another worker. The company wished to be made aware of such relationships for operational and Human Rights reasons, such as possible sexual harassment claims, or accusations of favouritism.

In the Reichard case, the company confronted him with the rumour that he was involved in a romantic relationship with a subordinate. Reichard denied the claim, and continued to deny it on several other occasions. He was married, which likely had something to do with his denials. When he was confronted a final time by his superiors, he finally came clean and said that yes, he was involved with a co-worker. When management suspended him and told him not to come back to the office until further notice, he returned to the office twice, in direct violation of their orders.

The employer ultimately terminated Reichard, and the Court supported the employer’s position.  The Court felt that Reichard's deliberate and continuous lying to the employer amounted to Willful Misconduct, calling into question "the trust, integrity and honesty required of him." Said the court: 

While the married Reichard certainly put himself between a rock and a hard place because of the affair, he compounded his problems significantly by deliberately and continuously lying to Kuntz and then deliberately and willfully disobeying orders from his superior.

This outcome gives both the employee and employer things to consider.  The employer should have a policy about office romances and what conduct is considered acceptable. The employees should be aware of what the policy says, and be prepared to follow that policy.

The Reichard case makes it clear: don't lie about an office romance if you are required to disclose it. The romance itself might not get you fired, but lying about it could.