Dwight Schrute (Rainn Wilson) is hosting Saturday Night Live this weekend. I’m looking forward to watching it. I’ll post early next week if there’s anything on the show that relates to the blog.

LITIGATION VALUE: $75,000

Nothing says “I love you” quite like a detailed legal contract acknowledging that you were neither coerced nor were promises made to entice you into entering into a relationship with your boss, and if the woman of your dreams becomes a nightmare, that you won’t sue your employer. Yes, love contracts actually do exist. I should know, I’ve written several of them.

Are they effective, you ask? They can be, but not for the reasons you might think, and Dunder Mifflin’s attempt at “protection” is probably not going to prevent Michael (or Jan for that matter) from suing them after the inevitable explosion and disintegration of their relationship. Courts generally don’t take much stock in agreements that waive your right to sue for wrongs that haven’t even happened yet. The love contract would, however, have some limited value as evidence that the relationship was voluntary, consensual, was not considered by either party to be “harassment.” Unless, of course, Michael says that he was coerced into signing it when Jan ambushed him in the driveway of the CFO’s house. And it probably does not bode well that they signed the documents at a company function where cocktails were served.

read more…

LITIGATION VALUE: $30,000 (But it could have been much higher)

“Business is always personal” is probably not the best motto for a manager. It could lead them to act impulsively. Like, say, moving an employee’s desk from the front of the office to an “annex” inhabited by the employee’s chatty, fashion-crazed, quasi (ex?) girlfriend as a punishment for suggesting that the company could someday go out of business. But … would it be illegal? Maybe. Or at least it would be if Ryan’s speech could be considered a protected activity under Sarbanes-Oxley, the anti-discrimination laws, or some type of state whistleblower statute. Because Ryan’s speech (well, the part of it we could hear) probably did not implicate any of these statutes, Dunder Mifflin will likely dodge a bullet.

On the other hand, if Ryan had complained of discrimination and Michael had reacted the same way, then the Company would be looking at significant exposure. In a discrimination case, a manager’s actions do not necessarily have to be related to the workplace to land a company in hot water. Rather, an employer’s action need only be “materially adverse” to start the ball rolling. Telling an employee’s business school classmates that he has never made a sale and publicly berating him could do it. And I’m pretty sure that most guys would find being saddled with Kelly to meet this standard!

read more…

LITIGATION VALUE: $ 0.00

First off, let’s hear it for the HR Hero in last night’s episode. As he put it, “Toby, yeah!” I’m not sure what is going to happen with that story line, but it can’t be good that Hollywood thinks it’s funny for the HR manager to land an attractive model. Or could it?

So Michael ruins the wedding, who would have guessed it? With Michael’s egregious behavior, you might hope that Phyllis could make a claim against Dunder Mifflin. After all, if she can be fired for boorish conduct at an office party, why can’t she sue the company when Michael ruins her party? But she can’t. Being a jerk is not illegal. As much as I wish that it were, it just is not.

read more…

LITIGATION VALUE: $800,000+

If an executive learns that a regional manager has sponsored a bachelor party in the warehouse, hired a stripper, offered to “deflower” the bride, taken an employee to a sex store, received a lap dance, and allowed a pervert dressed up like Benjamin Franklin to make a lewd statement to the receptionist, she should fire him. As soon as possible. Anything else and the company is looking at significant liability. Of course, at Dunder Mifflin, Jan is likely caught in a Catch-22. As soon as she fires Michael, she could be facing a charge for her own conduct in having an affair with her subordinate. Ah, what a tangled web we weave….

As this week’s episode colorfully illustrates, it is not enough to have an anti-harassment policy. Dunder Mifflin has one (as Michael mentioned- twice) and look what happened. Rather, employers must demonstrate that they take the policy seriously and that they are committed to stopping sexual harassment in the workplace. If they can’t, a court is likely to find the policy ineffective. And when it does, the company can say goodbye to its affirmative defense and say hello to punitive damages.