Wal-Mart trying to ban office romance

[5vz-fe]

Originally Posted by http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1612110.html Walmart fails to ban office romance Wal-Mart has lost a court appeal to try to legally ban its employees in Germany from having office romances. The regional industrial tribunal in Dusseldorf upheld an earlier verdict by the local Wuppertal industrial tribunal that the company's "ethics rules" were in breach of German law. Wal-mart tried to introduce a 28-page ethical code that forbids "lustful glances and ambiguous jokes" as well as "sexually meaningful communication of any type". And it said: "You may not go out with or have a relationship with someone who could influence your employment situation or whose employment situation you could influence." Wal-Mart also required its 10,500 German employees to report violations of the code, including alcohol and drug use, to a telephone hotline - a move also banned by the courts. According to the tribunal, rules that govern personal relationships, though common in the US, are incompatible with German labour laws and agreement with the regional labour council would be necessary to implement them. Wal-Mart management defended the disputed passages, saying they were only trying to protect their employees from sexual harassment. Wal-Mart still has one more chance to appeal the verdict at the Federal Labour Court in Erfurt.

Nice Try....

[crayzayjay]

Germans... :roll:

[nthfinity]

Originally Posted by crayzayjay Germans... :roll:

Wal*Mart :roll:

[crayzayjay]

I figured it was regional heads in Germany

I'd glanced over the following statement the first time:

rules that govern personal relationships, though common in the US

very surprising!

[graywolf624]

Not particularly. It has to do with the belief that these types of relationships lead to illegal activity in the business environment. Through promotions that favor the other person, major issues with stability and positive relations within the work environment, and other conflicts of interest/disruptions in the work environment.
We also have laws with regards to employing family. You can't employ a family member in any way different then youd employ anyone else. Ironically thats the chapter in my international leadership book I'm studying this moment for my test this evening. Particularly it focuses on American and even British belief in the best keep the family out of business versus the chinese where its almost always family based.

[jakaracman]

Stupid rules, that's all I can say. If it's my (privately owned) company, I'll employ anyone who I want.
And forbiddig ofiice romance? Taht's somethnig only a complete idiot could think of ... Besides, research has shown that office romance increases productivity ...
Ah well, ridicolous american laws ...

[RC45]

Originally Posted by jakaracman Stupid rules, that's all I can say. If it's my (privately owned) company, I'll employ anyone who I want. And forbiddig ofiice romance? Taht's somethnig only a complete idiot could think of ... Besides, research has shown that office romance increases productivity ... Ah well, ridicolous american laws ...

This is the difference betwen a system (not solely American) that does not encourage or condone corruption, and one where birbary and nepotism and corruption are rife - namely ex-communist states... .

If a lady is sleeping with the boss, and gets a promotion, even though YOU are better qualified and capable, but she was just his bed mate - would YOU be satisfied to continue working in that office?

I know I would not - and what if you werer working and the bosses son, an illiterate drop out comes along and gets promoted to shift supervisor in 3 weeks - yet yyou have the training, experience and tenure that would allow you to compete for the position - would you be satisified?

Sometimes I wonder if corruption is an excepted form of life out side of the USA, UK and South Africa.

These 3 countries share some very common ethics - that seem to be discounted and ignored in many other so called civilized parts of the world.

There is a reason why offcicers adn enlisted men/women may not fraternize in the military .

Think people, think

[BADMIHAI]

Originally Posted by RC45 Sometimes I wonder if corruption is an excepted form of life out side of the USA, UK and South Africa.

You must be fucking joking.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by BADMIHAI Originally Posted by RC45 Sometimes I wonder if corruption is an excepted form of life out side of the USA, UK and South Africa. You must be fucking joking.

No I am nte.

Bribary, corruption, nepotism, sexual harrasment and intimidation as well as enforced religious education appear to be quite acceptable in many many many many many other cultures and countries -- but are understood and accepted to be quite unacceptale in the UK, US and South Africa.

I can't speak for Australia and New Zealand, but would like to believe that similar ethical standards are promoted there.

Anyone who thinks that bribary, corruption, nepotism, sexual harrasment and intimidation and enforced religious education are acceptable is themselves inherently corrupt

[graywolf624]

Stupid rules, that's all I can say. If it's my (privately owned) company, I'll employ anyone who I want. And forbiddig ofiice romance? Taht's somethnig only a complete idiot could think of ... Besides, research has shown that office romance increases productivity ... Ah well, ridicolous american laws ...

This isnt a govt law in respect to govt doesnt say no office romance. The govt has given the company the right to say that. And research shows it increases productivity till they break up.. Then it drastically harms productivity. But the corruption issue is the bigger one regardless.

[sentra_dude]

Well the only thing I have to say on this is, if you are going to ban office romance because it might bias people in their work, you might as well ban any sort of office relationships, romantic or otherwise. Who's to say people would only do something for their significant other...why wouldn't they do something for just a friend

Who you date is none of the companies' business.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by sentra_dude Well the only thing I have to say on this is, if you are going to ban office romance because it might bias people in their work, you might as well ban any sort of office relationships, romantic or otherwise. Who's to say people would only do something for their significant other...why wouldn't they do something for just a friend Who you date is none of the companies' business.

You're 21 - you have a naive viewpoint.

Let's chat after you have pissed away 15 years in a career path and worked and worked and been shafted because you didn't sleep with the shift supervisor or play hockey with the manager...

Ethics is an important part of a socially mature and civilized society.

[jakaracman]

Originally Posted by RC45 Originally Posted by jakaracman Stupid rules, that's all I can say. If it's my (privately owned) company, I'll employ anyone who I want. And forbiddig ofiice romance? Taht's somethnig only a complete idiot could think of ... Besides, research has shown that office romance increases productivity ... Ah well, ridicolous american laws ... If a lady is sleeping with the boss, and gets a promotion, even though YOU are better qualified and capable, but she was just his bed mate - would YOU be satisfied to continue working in that office?There is a reason why offcicers adn enlisted men/women may not fraternize in the military .

Obvously you did not read what I wrote. I was not talking about promoting someone because of sex (only a stupid boss would do that), taht should be banned. But why ban having sex or dating? Are you saying everybody is a criminal before he/she does anything wrong (and having sex by itself is nothig wrong unless you are a bacward redneck puritan)? Not very american, RC ...
Let's ban sick leave because some people misuse it.
And: sorry but what you in the US consider sexual harassement is just hilarious. What you coinsider cutting someone off in traffic is hilarious. What you cionsider a safe speed is hilarious ... What you consider safe overtaking is hilarious ...
What do you cionsider nepotism? If I own my own company, I can employ my kid if I want - and that is not nepotism ...
And why do you drag stuff into debate. There was no talking abou religion, bribery, corrupition an so on here.

And by the was, South Africa has worse corruption rating tham most ex communist countries that were accepted in EU ... And difference between US and some of these countries is just 1 point (out of 10) ... Considering that US is 2 points worse tha No1 on the table

[graywolf624]

not nepotism ...

Actually unless you treat him as you would any other employee, with the same buracratic controls, it is nepotism. People have been sued here for that.

sorry but what you in the US consider sexual harassement is just hilarious. What you coinsider cutting someone off in traffic is hilarious. What you cionsider a safe speed is hilarious

I don't know where that came from, but some of it is highly inaccurate. You do realize that our speed limits are in line with europe. In fact the eu guys want to make mandatory speed limits of 62 mph in europe.. In which case I drive on roads every day higher then that (70 mph). I don't know where the cut off thing came from.. And sexual harrasment, while out of control, is a little more then hitting on someone. Mr. Clinton for instance, was investigated for allegedly exposing himself at work to an employee who later sued him resulting in the monica lewinsky thing comming out.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by jakaracman Are you saying everybody is a criminal before he/she does anything wrong (and having sex by itself is nothig wrong unless you are a bacward redneck puritan)? Not very american, RC ...

Are you educated?

This is about as basic at is gets. It has nothing to do with being puritan.

It has to do with the fact that if someone has a personal relationship with another person at work, they are predisposed to treat them better than any one else.

So any relationship with a senior or junior could lead to "special treatment"... thus favouring the person over another.

If the 2 people involved are NOT in the ame department or in a senior junior capacity where undue preforential treatment could unfailry advantage the other then things may be ok.

However, again, if people bring anger, hostility or problems to work is VERY counter productive.

If you cannot understand or comprehend this, then youare not as intelligent as you first thought.

Originally Posted by jakaracman Let's ban sick leave because some people misuse it.

Exaclty how could I abuse "sick leabe" to the point of having an advantage over a co-worker at work? :roll: :roll:
However, If I was boning the boss, they may let me take 4 days sick leave a week, and never let it acrue... meaning I could have 150 sick days a year, and not get fired... yet the co-worker down the hall was never allowed to sick leave.

You really do not see the problem?

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Originally Posted by jakaracman And: sorry but what you in the US consider sexual harassement is just hilarious. What you coinsider cutting someone off in traffic is hilarious. What you cionsider a safe speed is hilarious ... What you consider safe overtaking is hilarious ...

??? wow - just simply - wow.

Originally Posted by jakaracman What do you cionsider nepotism? If I own my own company, I can employ my kid if I want - and that is not nepotism ...

That's actually the point - I have worked for "private companies" where the son got to ride the short track to the top... laziest, most unskilled jackass in the company - that's why I left, there is no point in stickign around while that shit goes on.

So in a publicly traded company, where outside share holders are the owners, that shit is not allowed - then there is the simple discriminaiton thing"You are not my son so I won't promote you".

Again - you don't see the problem in this kind of behaviour?

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Originally Posted by jakaracman And why do you drag stuff into debate. There was no talking abou religion, bribery, corrupition an so on here.

Why did I drag those things in?

Because cultures that promote blatant nepotism, sexual inequality and harrasment also promote and condone bribary and corruption - ti is part of the facbric of the society and is not looked down upon - but rather accpeted and anticipated.

Mexico is a prime example - I have dealt with Mexican business partners - ethics is not very high on their agenda - and these are frontline legitiamte, mainstream companies.

Originally Posted by jakaracman And by the was, South Africa has worse corruption rating tham most ex communist countries that were accepted in EU

Look who is doing the rting :roll:

Oh - and look whom out of the 2 of us actually condones, supports and likes corruption ... it's not I - that leaves you... :roll:

Originally Posted by jakaracman ... And difference between US and some of these countries is just 1 point (out of 10) ... Considering that US is 2 points worse tha No1 on the table

Lets consider whom is doing the rating.

And then lets consider which countries have rules that outlaw such behaviour.

:roll: :roll:

I am amazed that a so called educated civilized person cannot fathom the obvious here.

:roll: