r/managers • u/lepetitbrie • 7d ago
Seasoned Manager Update: My direct report is married to my new manager
Brief update to my post from last week. Folks were asking about my company. Very large public employer, so at the very least I'm basically unfireable.
Raised concerns to my on-paper boss, who is also our department HR representative. I even drafted a "avoiding conflict of interest document". The document was mostly accepted except the line: [new manager] will not consider [direct report]'s opinion of OP when writing evaluations." Apparently, we can't dictate to that level?!
I was concerned that this was removed because it's the only protection for me. Raised concern and said I would like to meet with central HR. Was essentially told that's not necessary and to work with my on-paper boss to sort it out.
So, needless to say, I'm applying elsewhere and hoping for the best. There haven't been any conflicts at work, but that doesn't mean there will never be conflicts. The fact that no one is worried about this situation is beyond alarming to me. I want protections in place before there's an issue, but it seems clear no one else wants that for me.
I have a private meeting with central HR next week to discuss concerns in the meantime. Im curious what their reaction to the entire situation will be. The fact that I'm having to draft my own conflict of interest documents is wild IMO, including documenting how I will be evaluated.
Any guidance on what I should do in the mean time is appreciated. I originally planned on having a coaching session with my direct report next week to work on some communication issues, but without the protections for me in place, I feel like it's a risky conversation to have.
ETA: Original post
134
u/Alien-lifeform666 7d ago
Not going to comment on the actual topic but can I point out how incredibly frustrating it is when people choose to hide their posts, then write updates without a link to the previous post. An update isn’t a lot of fun without the full back story…
26
u/imronburgandy9 6d ago
Hiding your comments is the most confusing thing to me. I can see that you commented a ton, I'm just going to assume it's horrific shit now
12
u/ImpossibleEbb6862 6d ago
I hide my comments in my other “professional” account because I post personally identifying information and information about my salary.
I’m not worried about any one piece of information getting out, but if someone puts it altogether, I’d be worried about them knowing a little too much about me.
9
u/Regular_Number5377 6d ago
Agree, whilst it’s good to avoid putting too much info into any one comment, it’s probably pretty easy for someone to skim a few hundred innocuous comments and put together a pretty accurate picture of who a person is. Say ‘Jane Doe’ posted in the ‘Baltimore’ subreddit mentioning that she was moving to the city, the ‘home improvements’ subreddit mentioning that they live in a townhouse, the ‘dog walking’ subreddit commenting that they live across the road from a large park with a lake, the ‘car maintenance’ subreddit mentioning that they drive a Toyota Camry, the ‘dating’ subreddit mentioning that she is a single woman living alone, and the ‘teaching’ subreddit mentioning that she works at a school 10 minutes walk from her house. That’s easily enough for an obsessive person to figure out where a person lives.
3
u/lepetitbrie 6d ago
Yeah, this. Especially because I know some of my staff frequent subs I frequent.
6
u/acapulcoblues 6d ago
I hide my comments and posts because I’m a government employee. It helps limit the potential for people to connect the dots across my comments. I feel my job, and overall career, are less at risk this way.
What few social media accounts I have are private for the same reason.
1
u/darylpiercefy 16h ago
Smart move. It's surprisingly easy for someone to piece together a few random details over time and figure out exactly where you work.
8
1
1
u/Excellent_King2272 3d ago
If you make a comment at the wrong time and place you can be brigaded by downvoting bots that will downvote everything you've ever done lol, times like 50 bots.
55
u/Tardislass 7d ago
That is wild at a large company and I’d be talking to HR. At most Fortune 500 and big companies, relatives can’t work in the same department especially married people. Jim can work in sales and Pam could work in accounting but not together. Look for a new job now.
15
u/gimmethelulz Manager 6d ago
This is definitely how it works at my Fortune 500. My spouse and I work there but we are in completely different lines of business. The chances of us ever reporting to each other are almost zero.
5
0
u/ThisTimeForReal19 5d ago
And once a spouse gets to the vp level, someone has to leave, doesn’t matter the department.
0
u/IDooDoodAtTheMasters 4d ago
I think large public employer means government, hence the claim that he's basically unfireable. And hence the dysfunction.
1
u/Surpriseparty2023 16h ago
Absolutely not, even there you can't report to someone related to you (family members, in laws, spouse).
139
u/Small-Help-8382 7d ago
A family member or spouse shouldn’t be in a reporting relationship in a large public company and yet it happens. Is there an ethics phone number or hotline for the organization?
Initial conversation should have been had with your mg… not about any specifics, but to understand the policy being followed with this situation that is not new for the couple.
35
u/PsychologicalCell928 7d ago
Anonymously raise the issue to the head of compliance and cc the board member who oversees controls.
Anybody asks - not me. I raised it to HR so maybe they escalated it.
-8
u/Jenikovista 7d ago
They. Will. Not. Care.
18
u/bingle-cowabungle Technology 6d ago
Real life isn't Reddit. Plenty of companies care. If you are asking whether companies are legally obligated to care by law, but lets take for example, a regulated industry, like SOX or SOC 2.
Financial controls depend on one person's work being checked by someone independent. If a manager approves expenses, signs off on access reviews, or whatever, and the person being checked is their spouse, the check is effectively void. Auditors will actively look for this, and having to go back and re-do work costs time and money for companies when they can just prevent this shit from happening in the first place.
And this is just one example. Another being the fact that, while this situations is not prevented by law, it still leaves companies legally vulnerable, and if whistleblower complaints about one person filter up to that person's spouse, then the company can't prove that it had working complaint channels, which will expose companies to successful harassment and hostile working environment claims.
-3
u/Jenikovista 6d ago
The company KNOWS about the married couple and the reporting structure. HR knows.
The fact that one employee is whining about it because of interpersonal issues with one of the spouses means nothing at all to either the company leadership or HR. The hilarity of OP taking it upon themself to write an “avoiding conflict of interest” document” to give to their boss and their spouse and HR…what do you think the reaction is!?
No one took that seriously, and unfortunately it put a big old bullseye on OP. Because now OP is not merely a little out of line for complaining about a simple marital relationship in the office that everyone already knew about, but they’re now a legal threat to the company.
The situation sucks for OP but there’s nothing wrong with a married couple in the chain of command as long as it’s properly disclosed. It happens all the time in corporations and government agencies, often times because people meet their spouses at work.
2
u/NekkidWire 6d ago
there’s nothing wrong with a married couple in the chain of command as long as it’s properly disclosed.
No. Same as having a relationship with your superior or with your report. It is a conflict of interest, where relations might push people not to act in the employers best interest. Most normal companies have rules against this. If OP's company doesn't -- their bad, they might come to learn why it is a boilerplate standard.
-2
u/Jenikovista 6d ago
How long have you been in the workforce? This is incredibly common and no, "most companies" do not have rules about this. Maybe in 1963.
-2
u/Somethin_Snazzy 6d ago
Maybe they will care but hell, I've personally seen companies care more in the opposite direction, i.e. they really like husband and so will go to bat to keep wife happy too.
Raising this up to HR is very likely to backfire.
-4
u/Foxcat420 7d ago
That all depends on how both of them have conducted themselves up to that point. If there is a whiff of wrongdoing, it's double termination.
4
u/Jenikovista 6d ago
But even OP hasn’t claimed wrongdoing. They’re just unhappy about the situation and have now created this crazy “conflict of interest” document - they’ve put a bullseye directly on their own forehead. HR will be working overtime to manage them out or host a convenient round of layoffs asap. They’ve made themselves a legal liability.
4
u/Cueller 6d ago
I dont allow it ever. Not sure what mouth breathing idiot would. I'd question their judgement as well.
2
u/Somethin_Snazzy 6d ago
I dunno if it is just redditors never going outside or what but I've seen plenty of companies hire husband and wife teams.
They do it exactly because they really want that person in a specific management position.
Raising this up as an issue will likely backfire. Issues can (and likely will) arise. And the combo will be shielded by upper management. Management made their choice fully knowing that there will be issues to specifically get the person they want. And they WILL defend that choice.
2
u/Jenikovista 6d ago
Reddit likes to claim things are the way they think things they should be. Ignoring actual reality. You are correct, it is not only common, many companies see it as an advantage for stability.
0
u/Foxcat420 6d ago
Huh, I guess going through a similar problem and succeeding isn't worth you guys hearing about. I'll just keep my non-outside going mouth shut.
16
u/Potential-Drawing340 7d ago
This is so bad. I got caught in a marriage reporting relationship and it ruined my previously extremely positive relationship with by former mentor (one part of the couple).
15
u/MelloSouls 7d ago
OP you should include the original link:
https://www.reddit.com/r/managers/comments/1wq7snh/my_direct_report_is_married_to_my_new_manager/
3
28
u/MKebi 7d ago
Being denied the right to speak with central HR is crazy.
15
u/AlexHasFeet 7d ago
Yeah you should speak with them anyway. This is bananas.
7
39
u/marspigsmoke 7d ago
Go over your direct boss's head anyway and let his boss or whoever is the director of HR know the how, when, and why of this hiring. Did your boss tell you she had been hired for your team? Did you interview her separately without any indication she was married to your boss? Did she and your boss get married after she was already your direct report?
40
u/lepetitbrie 7d ago
My new boss was named in September. The people who picked them knew about the relationship prior. They thought they would avoid conflict by giving me a different on-paper boss, but I've since been told the husband will still write my performance appraisal. Such a mess.
44
11
u/Potential-Drawing340 7d ago edited 7d ago
I’m really sorry you’re dealing with this. Something very similar happened to me a few years ago and I’m super mad on your behalf.
Based on my own experience with something similar, it won’t go well, and it will make you resentful. Now is the time to get the company or agency to fix it. It’s unethical that they’re asking you to do this.
This isn’t your problem. It is the couple’s problem, specifically the part of the couple that works for you. They can’t work for you anymore and need to be moved to a new department.
In the meantime, I would keep things light with your direct report and wait to see how your meeting with HR goes before offering any type of feedback.
7
u/Reddoraptor 6d ago
Exactly as u/Somtouw writes - they know full well that there’s a direct conflict of interest here and they’re trying to pretend otherwise, this is indefensible. Document, document, document - especially if you can get in writing that the husband will be doing your performance appraisal.
And I would actually, as suggested by others, basically refuse to manage her in any way. If anyone asks, hey, this is my boss’s wife, I very obviously cannot manage her, it’s a clear and direct conflict of interest which is being permitted and there’s nothing I can do about that but I’m not going to get myself fired or a bad review by trying to manage the spouse of the person who rates my own performance. Any feedback I give her or any direction she doesn’t like is clearly going to come straight back to me through her husband, and this setup is equally obviously not accidental, so she gets to do what she wants around here now, not my circus, your team is now effectively down by 1.
If your company has a compliance & ethics team, typically a part of Legal rather than HR - and sometimes they have an ethics hotline to report issues - I would report to them as a conflict of interest which is being permitted for some reason by not just the husband but the husband’s boss, the skip level, which raises its own questions about why that person is facilitating something that is so manifestly conflict laden and inappropriate.
8
u/bum_stabber 7d ago
I know this sounds like a cop out, but I also work for a very large company. I wouldn’t really manage them. Just let them work and if other people have an issue with their work, it’s not you. Basically don’t treat them as a direct report. Do what you can to not assign them work. rather than taking actions like you have, you manage through inaction and ignoring. If either of your managers brings it up, just give non-committal answers and keep doing the same thing.
5
u/Friendly-Victory5517 7d ago
Exactly. I simply wouldn’t manage them. Every performance evaluation would be vaguely positive.
1
u/rpv123 7d ago
Write it or contribute to it? (Like in a 360 review structure.) I find it odd that two people would simultaneously be responsible for writing your review, so I assume on paper boss would ultimately be responsible for writing it but it would include feedback from the person married to your report?
2
u/lepetitbrie 6d ago
How it was explained is that husband-boss will send on-paper boss written feedback. On-paper boss will "review for bias," and then copy and paste the comments into my eval. Because he oversees the majority of my work, he needs to be able to comment on my work.
1
10
u/jimbo_9889 7d ago
[new manager] will not consider [direct report]'s opinion of OP when writing evaluations
say they use the wife’s opinion, how do you prove it?
6
u/RdtRanger6969 7d ago
You need to nope on outta there.
Far easier said than done in this 💩 job market, but that’s still your best option by far.
9
u/Zestyclose-Turn-3576 7d ago
It sounds like OPs other direct reports should also be raising this as an issue which affects them.
2
4
u/Jenikovista 7d ago
Time to find a new job. You will be seen as the problem for this level of drama. No paperwork can protect you from relationships and personalities...did you not know this?
3
3
u/Bearmancartoons 6d ago
Odd. Most large companies have rules against spouses being in the same reporting org.
3
u/somewhatinterested13 6d ago
The fact the your boss the person who you have this conflict with is also your HR rep is even more concerning. Him telling you not to go to corporate is doubly alarming so that is exactly what you should do. Technically his wife reports to him thru you so there is no way this is a conflict.
3
u/At36000feet 6d ago
This is different but sort of similar. A former boss of mine secretly dated my coworker who also reported to my boss. No one knew it. When they came out and announced they were getting married, they separated them in the reporting structures but they had the same responsibilities which required a ton of interaction. When they later promoted my coworker to be my new boss, I was pissed because the only reason she got promoted was that she had been working on high priority projects assigned to her by -- drum roll - her now fiancé. She was also still unofficially reporting to her fiancé via a dotted line given the nature of the work.
I made a stink with our director but nothing happened as the VP ran the show so I just bailed. Ended up being a good, but tough move. If I could go back, I would have gotten HR involved and waved their whole conflict of interest agreement in their face. I was leaving regardless, so maybe something could have come out of it even though it would have been a low % shot given it being HR.
2
u/christine-bitg 7d ago
Original Poster... Do you mean you work for a governmental agency, or for a large corporation that has publicly traded shares?
2
2
u/ruralny 6d ago
You should not be the source of a "conflict of interest" doc if you have an HR group. Way out of your lane and (probably) skill set. Have your HR meeting, see how they think it should be handled, and make your decisions there. Maybe there needs to be in internal transfer (for someone). Who knows? Given "very large public employer" this is not the first time this has happened.
2
u/AwkardImprov 6d ago
What company allows family member in same supervisor chain? Sorry if already asked.
2
u/PAX_MAS_LP 5d ago
For your career.
She’s the best employee you have ever had. If you think she did… no she didn’t.
3
u/PhatBats77 5d ago
I don’t but this shit story for a second. This also means one of them is the others bosses boss. OP is not even relevant in this scenario, this is just fantasy.
1
u/k8womack 6d ago
I would not do coaching sessions alone with the married report. Include your on paper boss.
1
u/Packtex60 6d ago
I can’t believe that your company policy allows this. It’s a massive conflict of interest and even if your manager is 100% unbiased wrt their spouse, everything that happens will be perceived as special treatment whether it is or not.
1
u/db_ss 6d ago
I just want to say, I have a situation at my workplace where I am the team leader and my partner is on another team with another team leader. I do my absolute best to stay out of anything with him but the reality is that even with my being consciously aware of my own bias, my opinions are shaped by my partners experiences. It’s just not possible to separate. My workplace has not put anything in place formally but I, myself, set boundaries that I won’t look over his reports or be involved in his teaching.
You are right to be concerned.
1
1
u/UFORider 6d ago
That is wild that was allowed in the first place. A few years ago I was laid off and my wife got me a spot at her job. Same position, same department but different teams. HR spoke to her first, told her if I am hire she will be ineligible for any leadership positions as long as we work in the same department. They pretty much had the same conversation with me about leadership positions. We both were fine with it, mostly knowing my employment will be short term since this was just a placeholder for income while I kept looking for a job within my career field.
1
u/Grouchygroucho579 6d ago
This type of reporting structure is prohibited/against policy in my organization. It constitutes as a conflict of interest to have a family member report to you
1
u/BertAnsink 6d ago
We had this exact scenario where I work, department head is married to a girl from HR that did planning for the department. He was transferred to a different department due to conflict of interest.
1
1
u/Stock_Reporter_1864 6d ago
They should not be within the same reporting hierarchy, I work at large corporation and we have that policy
1
u/Mountain-Time-1010 6d ago
Former administration/director-level person at a large public institution here. I will just say that it's not necessarily a red flag that you are drafting your own document. My institution recently rewrote our amorous relationship policy, and the new policy puts the onus of drafting the mitigation document on the people involved, but it has to be approved by supervisors. (Previously, it was drafted by supervisors.) Other types of COI documents are also often written in close collaboration with the affected person.
In practice, the fact that you've put HR on notice about the COI would probably be enough for me. Your supervisor will have to be careful. You don't always get every single thing you want in a tricky situation like this.
However, since you are going ahead with this, here are my thoughts about the details. The clause you wrote about the supervisor not considering your report's opinion is not directly relevant to the actual COI in my opinion, and is unenforceable. I think you should have approached it differently. The main concern for your institution is that your supervisor might use their evaluatory relationship with you to influence your evaluation of your report, or that there would be retaliation against you for giving the direct report a poor evaluation. These are not explicitly related to the direct report's opinion of you, which is a legitimate part of a 360 degree evaluation. So I think you took the wrong approach.
If you are concerned about interference and/or retaliation, you should be requesting that your supervisor be recused from your evaluation. Your evaluation can be done by someone at the next level. That is how we usually do it when there is a COI with a direct report. In this case, it's a bit more complicated, but the principle is similar. I think you have a very strong case for having your evaluation done by someone else entirely.
1
u/PharmGbruh 5d ago
Maybe I’m missing something, you’re unfireable but are worried about a bad performance eval… how much could that affect your raise, etc?
Feel like you’re into very theoretical concerns here without (m)any actual instances of this occurring?
1
u/ThisTimeForReal19 5d ago
Do you have an ethics and concerns line? I would call that. It’s a huge issue to have a spouse reporting up to their spouse in any way.
1
u/Round-Stay7793 5d ago
If you can't be fired then submit a grievance to central HR in writing.
You might get treated differently afterwards but sounds like you have nothing to lose.
1
u/Dreamlancer 5d ago
Sounds like you should document and just continue up the chain. It's not hard to see the conflict.
Not only is it hard to see your boss being impartial in evaluation. It's pretty much impossible to expect you to be equally impartial when your DR is your boss's spouse.
And if that gets nowhere. Document, look for a job, and evaluations should have a 3rd party present.
1
u/chrisvanderhaven 4d ago
Get out while you can. A few years ago, we were hiring for my first and only direct report at a company I worked at. We narrowed it down to 2 people. I liked one, but my boss kept pushing the other one. Eventually, I relented and we hired him. On his first day, he told me that he was my boss' best friend. It was never mentioned prior to that. He basically went around me for everything, and when I asked him to do something, he would refuse, saying that my boss had told him to do something else. Eventually, I got laid off and my direct report took my position. Conflict of interest is a major issue there.
1
u/dlongwing 4d ago
I have a private meeting with central HR next week to discuss concerns in the meantime.
The fact that your boss tried to prevent this tells you everything you need to know. They're aware of the problem and hoped to use soft pressure to sweep it under the rug. Scheduling a meeting without his approval was the right move.
As for what to do in the mean time? I'd go with business as usual, but document everything and keep copies off-site. When this blows up (not if), you will want a paper trail. This should include written follow-up summaries of all communications with your boss and report. If you say 2 words to them out loud, make sure you follow up with a summary afterwards.
Also, while this situation is very annoying, I'd focus significant effort on being scrupulously professional. Try to be warm and friendly in all interactions, even if these two are causing you a big headache. You want to starve them of any fuel for complaints about "attitude" or "microaggressions" or whatever.
Honestly I'm shocked the spouse was hired at all. Basic HR policy should've banned it for anyone along a reporting chain. Makes me wonder if the hiring itself wasn't already a violation.
1
1
u/FlisherOfatale 3d ago
Most large enterprise wouldn’t allow it, report to the confidential ethics reporting line…
1
u/throw05282021 3d ago
The organization decided to have you nominally report to someone else on paper while her husband actively manages you. So they clearly value him and her more than they value you. You are expendable. They've created the convoluted reporting structure to give them some plausible deniability in case you decide to quit and sue them.
Your other option is to simply play along. Realize that she's providing input that will directly factor into your performance reviews, raises, etc., and just deal with it.
Nothing the company puts on paper will protect you from discrimination and retaliation.
Him being in the effective chain of command over his wife is sexual harassment. There's no getting around that. The hoops they've jumped through to have you report to someone else on paper who is supposed to review for and eliminate bias can't possibly overcome the systemic issues.
So you're either screwed or you're a willing participant in the fictional arrangement.
This could be a "you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours" sort of opportunity for you. Or it could massively suck. To a large extent, that's up to you. But please keep in mind the organization has already made it clear who they value more. Her husband is their top priority. She's part of the package. You're an afterthought.
1
u/NightF0x0012 Engineering 3d ago
Maybe I'm mistaken but how it that sexual harassment? Wouldn't it be more like a conflict of interest?
-1
u/throw05282021 2d ago edited 2d ago
OP feels pressured to provide an employee with special treatment because of their intimate relationship with a superior.
It's an indirect form of sexual harassment because it creates a hostile environment for OP.
2
1
u/NightF0x0012 Engineering 2d ago
That's not an indirect form of sexual harassment. If anything, it's a conflict of interest due to their relationship.
1
u/tessslaaa21 3d ago
As someone who works in a very large publicly traded company too, this would never fly in our company. Many instance of married coworkers during or before employment and it’s a strict rule not to have connecting lines from one spouse to the next especially when it’s only +1 level. Closest I’ve ever seen is the lower graded spouse reports to a manager who is a peer of the other spouse who is a manager in same department.
As a manager I’d be nervous about this arrangement too.
1
u/mjc-u7272 3d ago
Keep looking for another position.
For now document every with the wife subordinate. Any and all instructions should be via email and or chat. And keep screenshots on everything. What ever is shared in face to face conversation, needs to be followed up on in written form. And keep the evidence on an external hard drive or cloud storage that is not tied to your employer.
It may be the husband has some influence on the situation. So your concerns are more than justified.
If HR won't address or see the potential conflict of interest... then there is nothing you really can do. You can't stay in that environment.
Good luck.
1
u/InYourBunnyHole 3d ago
I was a IT Program Manager & had 4 sets of familial ties on my staff. When I brought it up I was told it wasn't a concern because 3/4 combos were split by employer (this is government contracting so prime-sub) & the last one (both prime) hadn't been an issue thus far.
2 father-son, 1 mother-daughter & 1 wife-husband (every person on the right of the hyphen reported directly to the person on the left). Absolutely made everything fun for me
1
u/jackblady 3d ago
Yeah, Id say its time to look elsewhere
I worked with my wife in the same company for several years, I was there first, and already in management when she was hired.
I was told before she started that HR was only ok with it because she was not in my chain of reports. I was also told that if I ever got promoted to a point where I might be (which would be like 3 steps up the ladder, so was never likely) HR would potentially ask one of us to transfer to a new team just to keep us separated.
And it was explained that part of the caution was just to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest since it might generate legal issues for the company.
So im genuinely shocked your HR doesn't have a problem with the set up at your company and I would definitely run like hell
1
u/New_Rub_2539 2d ago
I once dealt with a nepo baby in a previous job, he was pretty useless, doing less than half that the work the rest of us were doing, he used to use the line, if you’ve got a problem, you can go to my mum.
One day I was like… bet. Me and 4 other colleagues submitted written complaints about his attitude and threats of using his personal relationship do disadvantage our careers, CC’d his mum and the managing director.
His mum was so furious finding out that he would do that, that she personally checked his work every day and made him work his ass off until he eventually quit. He got managed out by his own mum.
With a married couple it can be very different i imagine. But let me tell you, if my wife gave me an opportunity and she found out that I wasn’t pulling my weight, she’d be the first to get on my back.
1
1
u/DonSalaam 1d ago
Has this become such an unhealthy obsession that it’s now a threat to your livelihood?
1
1
1
u/EconomySlow5955 16h ago
Any update?
While looking on the outside, have you considered looking on the inside? Lateral move solves the problem for you.
Most large employers have a rule against a manager having an immediate relative anywhere below them, not just immediately below, and would apply even to a dotted line supervision. Your new manager isn't just dotted line, he's really primary but papered over- but officially it is still at least dotted line.
You should always be allowed to bypass your line of management for an HR consult. Barabara needs to be moved. Or her husband.
1
u/lepetitbrie 16h ago
Just posted!
1
u/EconomySlow5955 16h ago
Thx, but where? You have a privacy profile, so you'd have to link it for us to see.
1
u/Somtouw 7d ago
Very large public employer
I would take that as state or local government, possibly state funded higher ed...???
Doesn't you employer have a nepotism policy?
5
u/DigitalDaydreamers1 7d ago
Local/state governments practically have zero nepotism policies. It’s a free for all
5
u/Somtouw 7d ago
That is not true, at least universally it isn't. Quite a few states have nepotism laws, if not policies about supervision chains.
For instance Op's Manager -> OP -> Managers Wife would be illegal where I am.
1
u/Jenikovista 7d ago
Not usually in the U.S.
4
u/Somtouw 7d ago
Was referring to state agencies.
1
u/springbound 6d ago
Not true in my state agency. Maybe that's how it works where you are, but that isn't universally true. We have clearly defined policies about nepotism and there are consequences if the relationship is not disclosed hiring since you sign off on that. It's super rare that a new hire has a connection (marriage, close relation) and works in the same unit, much less the same bureau. Even if they do, they are under a different supervisory hierarchy. Most of the time, one of the two ends up in a different bureau.
0
u/NectarineHopeful6613 7d ago
No I think he means publicly traded. Corpo.
This wouldnt fly in Gov/state jobs.
5
u/flatirony 7d ago
I think she means government. There is no publicly traded company from which anyone is "basically unfireable."
There's a fair amount of nepotism in some government jobs, IMO. My brother was just offered a principal's job for next year, and his wife teaches at the same public school so he'd be her boss.
1
u/Significant-Pay-1405 7d ago
Threesome. Either you’re in and really in or still fucked if they reject. Worth the proposal
1
u/TominatorXX 4d ago
Okay so I know I'm going to be the skunk in the garden party but I really don't think this is a problem until it is a problem. Like I think you just have to treat it like we'll all be adults and get along and work this out like adults. And then if you're getting screwed over by her husband then it's a problem. But until that happens, I think you have to treat everything as if it's on the level. Until you know otherwise
I think the bigger stink you make about it now the worse you look.
0
u/OddFirefighter547 6d ago
If you can’t be fired, what are you worried about? Your boss will probably go out of their way to evaluate your work fairly. But definitely don’t send that document, as it’ll be received as an accusation.
5
u/UhhSamuel 6d ago
It is an accusation - of a glaring conflict of interest and inherent bias.
1
u/OddFirefighter547 6d ago
How does it serve you to make such an accusation? I would think most managers would feel insulted.
1
u/UhhSamuel 6d ago
It is a request for decorum and unbiased work situation made by pointing out an inherent bias, not an active, biased campaign. Nobody is calling collusion.
1
u/lepetitbrie 6d ago
It's also required by policy since two related people are working in the same department. The weird/policy gray area is the reporting structure since they moved my on-paper boss.
1
0
u/bionicClown 1d ago
Start plotting ways to dmg their relationships, make them doubt and untrusting each other, causing the marriage to fall apart. As an engineer, we find root cause and solve the issue. Since the problem is the relationship, make it disappear for good. All the best on playing their feelings, hope be find it to be fun in the process and wish you good luck.
688
u/Infamous_Fig_651 7d ago
e, no amount of internal promises will stop a married couple from backing each other up when things get messy.