UU employees must report relationships with colleagues, but that is not mandatory

Earlier this year, the Dean of the Faculty of Science, Isabella Arends, proposed a new guideline based on the Faculty Board's opinion that transparency about relationships in the workplace could prevent resentment within teams.

In recent years, the faculty has devoted considerable attention to social safety, which it claims has revealed that many employees need their colleagues to be open when they are dating members of the same team or department.

The faculty council appreciated Arends' plan, but also raised questions about its implications in practice. For example, the dean wanted to make it mandatory for employees to report romantic relationships, but the council was a bit hesitant about that, wondering if people would be sanctioned if they failed to report such a relationship.

People were also uncomfortable with the dean's plan because it clearly specified which relationships would be considered undesirable. For example, the faculty board did not want partners to work in managerial roles within the same department or be part of the same team.

The university's Executive Board also had reservations about Arends' proposal. In addition to being cautious about making such rules mandatory, the university administration was not keen on applying a different set of rules to romantic, family and close friendships between colleagues in different faculties. Instead, the Executive Board would prefer a single rule to apply to the entire university. 

At the same time, the Executive Board acknowledged the value of raising awareness about the negative implications close relationships may have in the workplace. In an email response, a spokesperson for the university administration acknowledges that the existing guidelines on desirable and undesirable behaviours do not contain any specific provisions on romantic relationships in the workplace.

In consultation with the Faculty of Science, the university has decided that the faculty will conduct a trial. From this academic year onwards, managers at the Faculty of Science will be asked to discuss the guidelines with their team members. The basic principle remains that relationships must be reported timely, even if the employee believes that there is no problem.

However, the new document no longer mentions any obligations, nor does it label any specific relationships as undesirable. Student assistants are regarded as employees and are asked to act in accordance with the document. New employees must also be made aware of the importance that the faculty attaches to openness about romantic and intimate relationships. To this end, the faculty aims to launch an awareness campaign targeted at all employees.

UU hopes that the guidelines will eventually serve as an 'elaboration' of the university's Code of Conduct. 'The main purpose is to make colleagues aware of the potential risks that mixing private and work relationships can entail,' a UU spokesperson writes in an email.

She also said that the text should help employees feel comfortable discussing relationships with their managers. 'We believe that strict guidelines, with rules, prohibitions and possible sanctions, do not help that conversation. (...) In addition, it is less in line with the principle of working on the basis of trust.'

Shortly before the summer, the faculty council of the Faculty of Science gave a positive recommendation on the guidelines, appreciating their less binding nature. Nevertheless, the council members are curious to see how the new approach will work out in practice. An evaluation will follow next year, based on which the council will reopen the discussion.