The man gene is on the move again.

About a day after David Paterson was sworn in as New York’s new governor, replacing Eliot Spitzer, Paterson (with wife at side) admitted that he had had “affairs” with other women, including a woman who is on the payroll for the State of New York. (The dreaded man gene!) As if that weren’t enough, Paterson’s wife admitted that she had had affairs as well. (Is there a female gene?) Click here for more on this.

They were trying to address rumors that the governor’s office might be in for another rough ride in light of these marital indiscretions. Although one might conclude that the new governor got out in front of this soon enough to avoid a Spitzer-like demise (and, let’s be clear, Paterson’s sex was apparently provided without charge, unlike Spitzer’s), the involvement of the state employee makes this matter a bit dicey–maybe.

When Paterson’s was asked about the state employee, he said that he didn’t supervise her while the affair was going on. He then said something quite puzzling: “We will try to accommodate that employee’s wishes.” I didn’t hear his press conference, so I don’t know the exact context in which this statement was made. But, as a general rule, it’s not the kind of statement you want your CEO making. What if she wishes to be compensated for having to put up with the gaggle of reporters who will now pursue her? What if she says that Paterson was sexually harassing her–that she felt she had to have sex with him? That is the crux of some sexual harassment allegations.

Maybe New York has had enough. Maybe the media, the politicians, and interested citizens won’t push the matter and let the state try to get back to normal. Maybe.

If there’s any employment law point to be made at this time, it’s that a person in authority should never have an affair with someone lower than he is on the totem pole. I don’t know what Governor Paterson’s position was with the state when he had this affair, but it appears that his position in state government was higher than the female employee’s. It matters to some extent that he wasn’t her direct supervisor, but it won’t matter much if she should claim that she was being sexually harassed.

Have a man-to-man talk with your man gene. Plead with him to give you a break. Reason with him that he’s already caused enough harm. Threaten extreme surgery if he doesn’t cut you some slack. Take a cold shower. Go into rehab. Seek counseling (which Paterson says he’s done). Then muster all the discipline within you and act appropriately.

I’ll say it again. If you’re a big wig, you should never have sex with a subordinate employee. Period. You can’t afford it. Your employer can’t afford it. And given the mess Spitzer is in, you can’t afford to hire a prostitute either.

1. 

   Mike Maslanka says:

   March 18, 2008 at 5:46 pm

   John,
   There is always a place for good judgment in these matters, but I stress the word judgment. A selection of one course of action over another. And sometimes the better course is to place love over conventional prudence. Really, the best place to find out what someone is truly made of—their character—is at work: how do they treat people, do they demonstrate integrity, how do they hold up under pressure. You get know them as they are, and not as they want you to think they are. A date is nothing more than a staged performance.
   As for the Spitzer matter, the saddest part for me was this: he had no friends. Not a person who came out and said, “He did wrong but one wrong does not nuke the all the good he has done.” We will no doubt see and read all the details of his relationship with the young woman. I think we will find the truth of the observation of Fernando Possa:” to pretend is to know oneself.”
   Later,
   Mike
2. 

   John Phillips says:

   March 18, 2008 at 7:47 pm

   Mike, as always, your words have made me think, and as always, I appreciate that. With respect to Spitzer, his situation is sad on many levels. The apparent lack of friends is certainly one of them. He does have himself to blame for some of that, but he did do a lot of good things in his career. The more I’ve thought about this, the more I’m inclined to believe that if he had chosen to fight, he would have been successful. It would have been bloody, not to mention harmful to state government for a time and I’m assuming harmful to his family. As President Clinton demonstrated, impeaching someone is hard to do. While Clinton is a more gifted politician than Spitzer, I think Spitzer might very well have prevailed once the hypocritical gnashing of teeth submitted. I imagine he knew that but decided that it would be a Pyrrhic victory. Maybe there’s still more to come. Maybe Spitzer was trying to prevent more from coming. But I’m guessing.

   With respect to Patterson and your comments about how you can best get to know someone, I don’t disagree. That’s why so many romances blossom in the workplace. I still believe that when it comes to the person at or near the top, he/she shouldn’t have sexual relationships with subordinates. It happens. It always will. Sometimes, everyone lives happily ever after. But in today’s world, this kind of conduct puts the employer at the kind of risk a person at or near the top is supposed to prevent, not cause.

   I’ve never heard you quote Fernando Possa before, although I assume you meant Fernando Pessoa, who also said: “Could it think, the heart would stop beating.” Yes. I Googled him and his quotes, and I know you didn’t have to.

   Take care, and thanks for weighing in.