Most of us know someone who has met a romantic partner in the office. Surveys consistently show that around a third of employees have had a workplace relationship at some point in their career (Global Payroll Association, 2025). In the modern world, workplace relationships are no longer just a matter of gossip or HR awkwardness: they have become a board-level governance issue.

Recent high-profile examples from the UK demonstrate that undisclosed or unmanaged relationships, particularly where there is a disparity in power or seniority between the individuals, can destabilise organisations, end careers and expose companies to legal, reputational and regulatory risks.

For HR leaders, the question is not whether relationships will happen at work, but how to manage them in a way that respects employee rights while safeguarding organisational integrity.

High profile cases leading to change

Two prominent cases from the last few years have shown just how disruptive workplace relationships can be, and both have prompted significant policy changes in the organisations involved.

At BP, CEO Bernard Looney resigned in 2023 after failing to fully disclose past personal relationships with colleagues (BBC News, 2023). The oil giant responded decisively by introducing sweeping new requirements. From that point forward, all employees – including senior managers – were required to declare any intimate relationships, even those that had taken place within the previous three years. Failure to disclose such information could lead to disciplinary action. For one of the UK’s most recognisable multinationals, the reputational damage was significant and the governance implications were stark.

Meanwhile Laurent Freixe, Nestlé’s CEO, was dismissed after less than a year when an internal investigation confirmed he had an undisclosed romantic relationship with a direct subordinate in violation of company policy (CNBC, 2025). The probe began after staff raised concerns via an internal company hotline; Freixe initially denied the relationship when questioned by the Nestle board. He received no exit package.

These examples illustrate a broader lesson. When workplace relationships are left unmanaged, the consequences are rarely confined to the individuals directly involved. They spill over into organisational culture, governance credibility and public trust.

The risks of workplace relationships

Unmanaged relationships at work create significant legal vulnerabilities, particularly around claims of sexual harassment, discrimination and conflicts of interest. When a relationship involves a power imbalance, the risks intensify, especially if the relationship ends badly. Allegations of harassment or coercion can easily emerge, even if the relationship began consensually.

There are also other serious risks. Employees may perceive favouritism if promotions, assignments, or bonuses appear to be influenced by personal ties rather than merit. Confidentiality can be compromised when sensitive information or business data is shared inappropriately between partners. Disruption within teams is another common outcome; tensions between individuals can ripple outward, undermining morale and productivity.

Finally, the reputational fallout can be severe. Recent CEO departures in the UK have shown how damaging these situations can be for brand image and governance credibility (Adzuna survey, 2024).

For HR and business leaders, these are not “private matters” that can be ignored. They are workplace realities with tangible legal and commercial implications.

The problem with policy gaps

Despite the clear risks, many organisations still lack formal policies on workplace relationships. Even when such policies exist, they may not be effectively communicated to staff and surveys repeatedly show that a significant proportion of employees do not know whether their employer has a policy at all: one study found that more than a third of employees were unsure of their workplace’s stance, and another found that around half of workers did not know if a policy existed (Human and Legal Resources, 2024). That uncertainty is a problem in itself.

The absence of clear guidance leaves employers legally exposed and creates confusion among employees. Without defined boundaries, it becomes difficult to address conflicts of interest or inappropriate conduct consistently. For example, where decisions appear to have been influenced by a personal relationship, employees may bring discrimination claims. Similarly, when managers handle situations differently, the inconsistency can feel arbitrary and unfair. Staff also suffer from the lack of clarity: employees deserve to know what is expected of them and ambiguity undermines trust.

In short, the absence of a clear policy does not represent neutrality. Instead, it creates a governance blind spot that can quickly become a liability.

Deciding on the right stance

What, then, should HR leaders do? Banning relationships outright is rarely workable and in some circumstances could even be considered discriminatory. Yet ignoring them entirely is equally untenable. The most effective approach is to adopt a risk-based policy that recognises both the rights of employees and the responsibilities of the organisation.

A strong policy should require disclosure of relationships, particularly those involving direct reporting lines or access to sensitive information. It should also set out how conflicts will be managed, whether that means recusing someone from decision-making, adjusting reporting structures or introducing additional oversight. The consequences for non-disclosure must be clearly defined, with disciplinary action a possible outcome for serious breaches.

Communication is equally important and policies should not simply sit on a shelf. Employees need training and clear explanations of why disclosure matters, how the process works and what protections are in place to ensure confidentiality. The emphasis should always be on transparency, fairness and proportionality, rather than moral judgement about the personal lives of staff.

How HR should respond when concerns arise

Even with strong policies, situations will inevitably arise that require active management. HR’s role is to respond promptly but fairly. The first step is usually a discreet assessment to establish the nature of the relationship and its potential workplace implications. Once the facts are understood, conflicts of interest should be identified and mitigated. This might involve restructuring reporting lines, introducing new layers of oversight or requiring individuals to recuse themselves from certain decisions.

Every action taken should be documented, with reasoning explained to demonstrate consistency and fairness. HR should also be careful to avoid moral overreach. Relationships are not inherently problematic; they only become an issue when they create risks for the organisation or undermine fairness. Ultimately, HR intervention should be proportionate and grounded in legitimate business concerns. Heavy-handed or judgmental approaches risk alienating staff and fuelling distrust.

The reputational dimension

One of the most important lessons from the BP and Nestlé cases is that reputational risk is often just as significant as legal exposure. In both situations, the perception was not merely that relationships had occurred, but that they were hidden or mishandled.

In today’s media landscape, undisclosed relationships involving senior staff are highly likely to come to light. Once they do, the narrative is rarely favourable. Questions quickly follow about governance, integrity and organisational culture. A transparent and well-communicated policy therefore provides more than just a compliance safeguard. It also serves as a reputational shield, showing staff, regulators, and the public that the organisation takes integrity seriously.

Moving forward: what HR leaders can do

For HR leaders looking ahead, several practical steps stand out. The first is to audit existing policies and ask whether they are clear, fair, and properly communicated to staff. The second is to review disclosure mechanisms and ensure that employees feel confident they can disclose relationships safely and confidentially. Training for managers is also critical, since line managers are often the first to notice or become aware of workplace relationships and need to know how to handle disclosures appropriately.

HR leaders and senior managers should seek legal advice as soon as a potential conflict of interest or policy breach is suspected – especially where a relationship involves a reporting line, has not been disclosed or is the subject of a complaint. Legal input is also essential when drafting or updating workplace relationship policies, handling whistleblower reports or managing disciplinary outcomes. Early legal guidance helps organisations navigate complex issues with confidence.

Finally, leaders must strike a balance between rights and responsibilities. Employees’ private lives deserve respect, but organisations are entitled to set transparent expectations around fairness, disclosure and integrity.

Conclusion

Workplace relationships are an unavoidable part of working life, but when they are unmanaged or undisclosed, the risks are profound. The consequences extend beyond the individuals involved to affect legal standing, organisational culture reputational credibility, and even corporate governance.

For HR leaders, the task is not to police romance but to manage risk. That means implementing clear, well-communicated policies, handling concerns proportionately and embedding relationship management into wider governance structures.

The message is clear: transparency and proportionate action are not optional. They are essential for organisations that want to protect both their people and their integrity.