Consensual Relationship Agreement in Workplace - Assignment Example

Consensual Relationship Agreement in Workplace Introduction Scholars define consensual relationship policy as a written agreement that protects workers who are involved in workstation relationships. The contract is authorized by both management and workers, and provides that the workers will not permit the affairs affect or interfere with the workplace atmosphere. The CRA contract verifies and authenticates that the affair is voluntary and consensual. Similarly, the employers should append a copy of sexual harassment policy of the company to the contract to prove that the worker was informed of the policy and had the chance to report any unethical conduct by co-worker. According to evidence, about 75% of the companies do have the CRA policy about workstation romance. Experts agree that the policy is exceptionally crucial because workplace affairs are inevitable. Discussion This discussion contributes to the controversy on the issue of CRA policy within the work environment. It aims to define CRA and argue for its benefits in the workplace. In addition, it will provide counter argument against CRA use and ethical issues involved in its use, as well as other options apart from CRA that will redress workstation relationships. Benefits of CRA in workplace Workstation affairs are inevitable. Experts agree that when clusters of individuals work together for a week, month or several years, there is bound to develop some form of attraction. Similarly, concerning attraction, it is not a person’s position that put them together, but physical attraction and mutual interests. Employees cannot help who they get attracted to and why. In most cases, it is instant, while, in other cases, it may take some time. The more managers reject office relationships, the more it occurs. Therefore, offices and companies should have CRA policy to guide and direct office relationships at all time, (Pierce, Karl & Brey, 2012). CRA permits for inter office affairs, in which the concerned parties should conform to standard rules of the contract. It is crucial in that it permits voluntary affairs as long as no party is harassed or forced. Allowing office romance reduces workers stress of keeping the affair secret rather they will make the affair professional. The CRA policy keeps office romance under track, prevents favoritism and ensures that the behavior does not infringe or offend other workers in the workplace. The contract does alleviate crude behavior and sexual harassment, instead; it permits individuals who are attracted to each other to develop an affair without guilt, secrets, stress and fear, (Tyler, 2008). The policy is an authentication of their affair being deliberate and consensual, warranting that the relationship statutes do not influence the dynamic of workstation ethical infrastructure. The parties in relationship agree to adhere by the managers’ antidiscrimination, workstation conduct policies and anti- harassment policies. Several employers and workers find that consensual relationship agreement can be advantageous and detrimental in the workstation, influencing personal affairs, workstation infrastructure and profitability. Counter argument Some scholars argue against consensual relationship agreement and state that workstation relationships can create various issues that cause poor work performance. Some argue that workers involved in the affairs can be blamed for poor judgments – the ability to make fair, actual, and the better decisions centered on the condition at hand. Similarly, braches of morals refer to infringing the ethical standards or codes of behavior in an organization, which involves but not restricted to, counterfeiting information, interest conflict, sexual harassment, and braking organizational codes of conduct. Productivity lots are a crucial argument against workstation affairs. When workers spend more time concentrating on their romance affairs leaving little time for workplace activities, and thus, minimizing the productivity of workers, (Tyler, 2008). Workers romance lead to poor workers morale, for instance, when sexual affair is visible, other workers tend to lose concentration and interest in work leading to poor performance and productivity. Similarly, fundamental arguments against workplace romance are risks of sexual misconduct and harassment, which is unethical sexual advancement to an individual. Some scholars suggest how workstation romance influences the overall team performance and endangers the future of the organization. Permitting CRA policy in workplace leads to poor judgment. When workers (managers and employers) are involved in workplace affairs, they tend to favor the people in romance with them leading to poor judgment. Similarly, poor judgment in the work environment conflicts creates an adverse chain reaction resulting from management’s inability to differentiate between right, fair and best interest of the decision-making process of the organization, (Pierce, Karl & Brey, 2012). Workstation romance is the critical cause of favoritism. Tyler imagines how favoritism influences teamwork and the functioning of the company. Ethical principles Various workstation environments have various, distinct diversities of cultures and contexts. It is extremely relevant to have moral policies and ethical principles. Some scholars argue that CRA policy permits workplace romance and sexual harassments that undermine the mission of a company. They hold that workplace environment should be free from any harassment and discrimination based on their ethnicity, colour, sexual orientation, age, culture and background. Some companies are contemplating on whether the organizations should include CRA in their policies of conduct. While some companies agree that consensual relationship agreements should be integrated into policies of conduct because they will safeguard workers in the long run, others argue against it because contributes to poor performance and judgment. Experts agree that various ethical principles are involved in CRA use, but it depends on how people address that the contract itself. Additionally, the self-serving notion (the principle of hedonism might-equals-right standard and the principle of organizational right) contributes to the CRA’s use, if the organizational interest principle is applicable. By signing, the CRA policy managers will respond in the organizational best interest and safeguard it from potential risk. Workers who terminate affairs can seek compensation cause for sexual harassment claim, however, if the company had in store a signed copy of CRA that shows the company was aware of the affair between the workers and that they confirm was voluntary no compensation can be claimed. When the CRA is amid the employee and managers, the employee is the recipient of the special favor. When the subordinate has declared claims for sexual harassment sake, which might be anchored on the idea that they may not gain the same favors because they are not broken the affair with the boss, the privacy and agreement of the policy is compromised. Similarly, some of the courts in this case may ignore these arguments because the CRA limitations of employees, (Hellriegel & Slocum, 2012). Some scholars argue that CRA infringes privacy of workers, creates unnecessary paperwork, put human resource and managers in a problematic state and they do not safeguard the company against the challenging romantic affairs. Adverse consensual affairs will not admit to sign contract document that safeguards the company against potential claims or adverse effects of the CRA between two workers. In addition, workers may claim that CRA policies and demands infringe their private. In fact, it is their private life and a matter between the two parties involved, and no person should interfere with their tier bedroom matter. However, if workers bring their private matters to job and in the presence of other workers, it becomes an open affair and the company issue too. Other options to address workplace romance besides CRA’s People will debate for and against workstation relationships, but the main concern arises whether or not consensual relationship agreement addresses workplace romance or brings additional problems than advantages, (Tyler, 2008). The most effective practice to address workstation relationships is to implement a workers code of conduct that is intolerant of workstation romance. In addition, the workers code of conduct must stipulate that, if for whatever interest, a worker initiates an intimate relationship with any associate in the workplace the two must not be operating in the same department. Similarly, the code should prohibit workstation intimacy when it is direct under power level, for instance, between a subordinate and manager. The department of human resource should give at least ten working days for intimate relationship cases for parties engaged, to resign or shift to a different department where he will have restricted direct connection with the other person. In addition, the code of conduct should demand that if time elapses and changes between the two parties are not evident, the two individuals would be fired from their responsibilities, (Hellriegel & Slocum, 2012). Employees conduct code is none tolerance to workstation relationships and provides a rational link to address the best interest of people involved and the organization. Conclusion Workstation intimate relationships have increased in the modern workplaces forcing companies to develop code of conduct with no forbearance, or to create documents that control romance in work environments. CRA is a text that workers consent to litigation when workplace relations are present. CRA seeks to counteract potential sexual abuse claims. However, various arguments for and against CRA complicate the benefits of CRA in a workplace. Ethical principles will support CRA significance and limitations leaving the decision on whether or not to accept CRA policy to regulate workstation romance, to managers and human resource sector. Therefore, consensual relationship agreement acceptance and enforcement is a personal decision based on ethical principles employed by the organization. References Hellriegel, D., & Slocum, J. W. (2011). Organizational behavior: 2011 custom edition. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Leaning. Pierce, C. A., Karl, K. A., & Brey, E. T. (March 01, 2012). Role of workplace romance policies and procedures on job pursuit intentions. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 27, 3, 237- 263. Tyler, K. (2008, February). Sign in the Name of Love. HR Magazine, 53(2), p40-43. EBSCOhost. Read More