Do you think an affair can be harmless if it's never discovered?

[Dietxokebreak]

And if its mainly physical, neither party had any intention of leaving their partner and it's conducted at times they would be away from their families anyway?

If the situation is as stated in the OP, then why not just be honest about it?

Because it would hurt the other partner, is the obvious one. Because they have signed up for a monogamous marriage, not one where it's okay as long as it's in a different postcode - if you want that why not find someone likeminded in the first place? This always baffles me. Enough people have affairs, there must be a sizeable proportion of the population that think it's acceptable to have extra-marital sex in this situation or that or if these specific parameters are in place.

Would you be upset if the shoe was on the other foot? You either think it's morally okay or you don't. If you don't, don't do it. If you do, then find someone else who shares that moral code in the first place to marry, (and accept they have the right to do it too) or accept that your own marriage isn't truly compatible, which either means leaving, keeping it in your pants or admitting it and giving your spouse the chance to see the full story.

I don't think it's fair to trick someone into thinking that their marriage and their spouse is something/someone different from what it actually is. That's not what a marriage is!

None of my business MissBoPeep?

As the owner of the company, it certainly was (and is) my business if efficiency suffered, profits were down and there were complaints from clients about unprofessional behaviour.

And yes, in the industry I work in, there are lots of opportunities for affairs which is why like many businesses in our field, we've included 'no relationship' clauses in our employment terms and conditions. It's a disciplinary offence.

Of course it's speculation whether the OP's lover is a colleague, or whether he's experiencing the effects I listed. I never suggested it was anything other than speculation which was why I used the term 'how is the OP to know?'

I'd say it was more a case of 'How are we to know' rather than how is she to know. She could know if he told her that his work was suffering or his colleagues were giving him the cold shoulder if they suspected.
But it's all la-la land because she has never said they even work together.

It's not for me to tell you how to run or could have run a business. But the no-relationship clause does seem a tad draconian in my opinion. What if it were 2 single people? Presumably you forbid that too?

It implies a complete lack of trust and good judgement between employees. If people fiddled expenses, or their work suffered,that would be disciplinary behaviour regardless of whether another employee was involved or not. I don't think it's down to an employer to dictate employees personal behaviour including who they choose to have a relationship with, though it is their role to respond to fraud and poor performance.

Lots of workplaces have a 'no shagging within the line management chain' stipulation (whether single, or whether adulterous), and will move one or both partner if a relationship is disclosed. This is because it is important to remove (and be seen to remove) both the opportunity for misuse of workplace resources and to remove the opportunity of stirring up accusations of unfair treatment.

Scope for sexual favouritism is never a good thing to have clouding the workplace, especially if promotions and pay rises are involved.

If you say so. But in all my time in my working life I've never encountered it. In fact I know of many happy couples who met at work. I thought employment laws sufficed to contain this type of poor behaviour ( favourtism etc etc) if it arose.

Where I am, you can't dictate to people who they can or can't sleep with. You can make it policy that they must disclose relationships that have, or may be seen to have a conflict of interest. So non-disclosure is a disciplinary matter, not the relationship, as such.

I've worked in several firms that have this policy. I'm more surprised there are posters who've never heard of it before as it's been standard practice for years.

Furthermore, I've worked in firms where employees had to disclose a relationship with an employee of a competitor company as well.

It's good practice because it stops senior managers abusing their authority with junior employees, negates allegations of favouritism based on personal relationships and I've often thought, protects employees from themselves to a degree, as well as the company. I've been involved in various disciplinaries in my career where people who would not normally fiddle expenses or defraud their employers, end up doing just that when they are involved in secret affairs. Because they have to hide the expenditure at home either in leave taken or money spent on their affairs, so their firms are used as a laundering vehicle.

Anyway, where's the bloody OP?

I'd be very interested to know which companies have this policy!
Someone in my immediate family is the company's UK ombudsman (for a long established multi-international company) and they occasionally have to deal with favouristism and sexual harassment type issues. Most large international companies ime use employment law and conditions of employment ( ie not abusing expenses etc) to manage these issues, and don't dictate who can have relationships with whom.

Sexual harassment is of course an entirely different issue to a reciprocal sexual relationship and is amply covered by employment law, but there is no specific employment legislation to cover 'favouritism' and even no employment law that specifically covers general workplace bullying. And of course if fraud is uncovered all firms have the option to invoke normal misconduct procedures, as well as reporting matters to the police, so the clause we are discussing doesn't replace all other internal policies or existing employment laws, it augments them.

Although I'm still a little surprised this appears to be new information, I understand you might not have heard of this practice if you haven't worked in a corporate environment in the last 15 years or so- and I wouldn't expect people to have an up-to-date grasp of employment law if they've never managed large teams or don't currently manage staff, but this really is bread-and-butter stuff for those of us who do. Every potential new employee has the right not to apply for a job with this clause in their contract of employment and therefore if you disagree with the restrictions this might place on your personally, you don't have to work there.

'wellwobbly get your brew and a big stick and you can hit me with it while you sip your tea'

no beating I promise.

What I heard in your words was that you knew what it was like from both sides??

That tells me you know exactly what you are talking about, and I was genuinely interested to hear your thoughts. Sorry I haven't been here to reassure you about this, I have great respect for your experiences.

I work in the NHS and there is a policy that relationships have to be disclosed. They don't necessarily mind but do want to know about them. I'm not a psych nurse but I do recall that psych nurses have one of the highest rates of inter-staff relationships of any profession.

Wobbly, I'm not looking for a ruck but that comment comparing sleeping with someone who is married to knowingly allowing a two year old child to be tortured to death is fucking batshit love! And in rather poor taste.

I don't want to bang on about this really as it's a bit off topic in a way- BUT- have checked with DH who works for a large multinational , is a snr manager and says he's never heard of this in his entire international career. In fact 2 colleagues of his married not long ago and the guy was her boss.
Similarly other family members work in FTSE 100 companies- huge organisations - household names- and there's a wedding coming up for a couple who've met at work in one of them.

And?

Many of us have heard about it and have worked to these contracts for years.

What does it matter that neither you nor your husband and family have experience of it?

That doesn't invalidate our experience or the fact that these contracts exist and are commonplace in some firms and organisations. For example, I didn't know the NHS operated this policy, but it makes sense now I think about it. I learnt something today, so that's a good thing isn't it?

The 'and' Leaven is that perhaps it's not as common as you'd like everyone to believe.
I'm not for a moment saying it doesn't exist. I am saying that in my own circle of people who work in some of the largest organisations/ employers in the world, ( private companies not public sector) the policy does not exist. I don't want to name these companies, for obvious reasons, but they are household names with hundreds of thousands of employees worldwide. In my own experience I could easily name several couples who are now married or living together and who met at work. So you aren't wrong- it's just perhaps not as widespread as you'd have people believe.

My first hand experience was in a major UK public sector employer. Yes, people struck up relationships with colleagues. But if in same line management chain, one/both would be moved.

Though OP doesn't say if the absences during which the affair is carried out are down to work or a hobby or something else.

I'm not convinced those having an affair with a colleague consult the terms of their employment contract and disclose it. I personally think those terms aren't worth the paper they are written on.

I asked DH what his work would think about his affair. He reckoned they wouldn't care, given the (married) head of HR was herself having an affair with a (married) very senior partner. Says it all really.

You appear to be misunderstanding what posters are telling you Miss.

We are saying that some firms prohibit relationships full stop, some have rules only about disclosure and of course others have no such rules at all. The size of the organisation or whether they are 'household names' is irrelevant. The determining factor is the nature of the industry or work, obviously.

So the couples you know who met at work probably work for firms who either have no contractual rules about personal relationships because their business/code of ethics doesn't require them to, or it was fine as long as they disclosed them.

I have no need for you to believe these policies are 'widespread and common'. They are of course both, within particular industries and sectors that you might have no experience of. Because they've been around for many years, I was surprised when you said you hadn't even heard of them- and even more surprised when you seemed to think there was an employment law that protected people against sexual favouritism- but like everyone else on here, I have to accept that what's common knowledge in my world, isn't in others.

I'm still here - don't really know what else to say as seems general opinion is that it is very rare that someone can be involved with something outside their marriage and not let it affect it.

I know it sounds pretty hollow but I really don't want to hurt anyone and I think I have naively told myself up to now that because neither of us want anything more from this that it wouldn't have an impact on his family. Obviously I don't know for sure how he behaves at home but I get the impression he compartmentalises pretty well and he tells me he is happy with his wife.

We do work together, it's obviously not something that's known about at work although our company is fairly small and doesn't have any specific rules against relationships or about disclosure. He's more senior than me but is not my manager and there is no favouritism.

Speaking for myself only I've never met anyone who can compartmentalise an affair and it always has a harmful effect on someone, somewhere- or more typically, a lot of people in a lot of places.

What do you get out of it then? Are you saying this isn't harming you at all? I asked this early on in the thread before it got overtaken by an attention seeker and then you abandoned the thread for days.

That's the angle I'm focusing on- what harm if at all it might be doing to you?

I can see it's a salve to your conscience believing it's not having a harmful effect on his life or the people in it, but unless you say differently I don't suppose it would matter too much if it was, or cause you to change course.

So the self-interest angle's probably more relevant. What are you getting out of this, why are you doing it and what (if any) harm is it doing to you, your life and your view of of yourself?

I'm starting to realise there isn't really anything in it for me. I'm living away from home and if I'm honest am fairly lonely here, I guess he is a distraction. I know I should have found myself another distraction but I'm not very confident with meeting guys and always saw him as just a friend at work until it went too far. I know this is not an excuse as I let it happen when I should have stopped it but I never went after him or pursued it.

I don't really understand why he risks it all - he says his wife would leave him if she found out and he doesn't want that to happen but when I say we should stop as it's not worth risking hurting everyone for what we have he says he doesn't want to.

Are you starting to feel perhaps you should be the one to end it and not take him back?x

What do you think you wanted from it in the first place ?

But why does a distraction have to involve meeting men?

Even if it does for you personally, wouldn't you get more out of seeing a bloke who could see you whenever or wherever, with whom you could have regular sex?

He's risking it all because he thinks he's cleverer than he probably is, and possibly because his wife trusts him and has got better things to do with her time than check up on him. Let's face it, she might be one of those people who thinks that if her marriage is okay and her husband's saying he's happy and loves her, nothing untoward could ever happen. Most of us know life's not like that, but I could understand it if some people still believed all those old tropes. That's not to say she might not be noticing some odd behaviour of course, but if posters on here are anything to go by, she might be putting that down to the hoary old chestnuts that he's stressed at work or depressed.

It's obvious what he's getting out of it and why he doesn't want to stop then, but it's good you're questioning what's in it for you.

Yes - he tells me that I shouldn't feel bad because he's the one doing wrong but seems he just doesn't feel bad enough to stop so am starting to feel i'll have to walk away and not let myself be part of it.

I never thought it through and made a concious decision that it was a good idea. I know it is not but think it was probably your classic slippery slope from 'harmless' flirting to being way too involved without really seeing it and then I wanted to believe that it wasn't so bad even though I know it is.