As the old saying goes "you don't dip your pen in the company ink." In other words, you shouldn't get into a dating or sexual relationship with a co-worker.
But consider this: according to a recent Workplace Options survey, nearly 85% of 18-29 year olds would have a romantic relationship with a co-worker, compared to just over 35% for 30-46 year olds and about 30% of 47-66 year olds.
While there hasn't been a Court Martial for dating an enlisted, it can end your career.
Some have relationships successfully as long as it is not flaunted or publicised but if this soldier is in anyway connected to you then you should just avoid it.
Even though the judge finds cause (and therefore no notice is required), he goes on to consider what the notice would have been in case he was wrong about there being cause. The employer argued that the notice amount is set out in the contract, which read: The Judge ruled that that term was not applicable, because on its face, it only applied when the employer is not alleging cause.
Here, the employer did allege cause, and therefore the term does not apply.
I am a lieutenant who would like to date a soldier..
I think it was caused by: Will I be endangering my military career if I ask a subordinate out on a date?The upper-level manager ordered the supervisor to stop dating the employee or be fired, using company policy and the complaints as the reason for the order. He sued, saying the company was violating his right to privacy by trying to monitor his relationships. Why: While recognizing the employee’s right to privacy, especially outside the workplace, the court noted the company had a right to set policies and regulate behavior that might affect the efficient operation of business.The employer said: The company noted that it had a policy against such dating for the very same reason that caused problems in this instance: friction among other employees who perceived that the relationship resulted in favoritism for the subordinate. Terminating an employee for violating such policies – especially after warnings about the behavior – was a valid action by the company.It’s a sordid tale, because both the dismissed employee and both women were married, the husband of one of the women worked for the same employer, as did the employee’s daughter, and the activities took place in the workplace, parking lots, and various other compromising situations around a small town.The Judge finds cause, relying on line of cases ruling that managerial employees have an implied obligation in their employment contracts to ensure that the workplace does not become poisoned due to sexual harassment and to protect the employer from potential legal action for such harassment (including Simpson v. He rejects that argument that the relationships were consensual, because the employees were subordinates and therefore ‘vulnerable’.If you pay attention to a few important details, you will be able to have a successful, yet professional, romantic relationship with a subordinate without losing employees' respect.