#but once again. and maybe this is bc I never worked for a large corporation.but I have never heard of the. w/e they called that. in my life

[halfbaked00q]

Very true, Tanner truly has the see-no-evil hear-no-evil down pat.

Although. This had me googling what fraternization policies are like in the UK cuz at first I was like, what if it's like, technically as a gov't worker here is the general handbook, which has the anti-fraternization policy. but as an employee of the Service, here is where you can find our forms to declare relationships and where to file them.

Except apparently:

UK employers are adopting American workplace relationship policies

In the USA, it is common for employees to be required to enter into a “consensual relationship agreement” or “love contract” by their employer and some employers in the UK are now seeking to regulate personal relationships in the workplace. This might involve giving an undertaking not to have a personal relationship with any fellow employee or might seek to restrict those with whom an employee may have a relationship. It may also govern conduct between those in personal relationships. However, employers in the UK will find it very difficult to enforce a similar policy as the Human Rights Act 1998 provides a right to respect for private and family life (Article 8). An outright ban on romantic involvement in the workplace is unlikely to be proportionate other than in very limited circumstances where this can be justified due to the nature of the work, such as for certain roles in the police or military. (source)

First off lmao what the HELL is a consensual relationship agreement or, god forbid, a love contract. I have. never heard of this in my life.

Secondly, the Article 8 of the Humans Rights Act 1998 seems to be recurring legal citation, so I guess this isn't just something That One source made up.

In short, relationships at work in the UK are not unlawful. Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives people the right to a private life. This means employees have the right to have consensual relationships with people they meet at work or anywhere else. This right must be respected by employers. However, situations may not always be so straightforward. If your employees’ contract or company handbook restricts or regulates affairs and personal relationships at work, you may be within your right to enforce this in a way that is compatible with the Human Rights Act. This is usually done by putting procedures in place for employees to be upfront about romantic relationships so that the business can take any steps to mitigate the risk. Trying to ban relationships at work completely, however, could leave you in violation of the Human Rights Act. Employees have the underlying right to privacy, which includes the right to personal relationships, despite what your employee handbook says. (source)

^ but that still doesn't sound like an outright ban, more like a requirement for disclosure.

Similarly with this specific policy from some random .co.uk (local?) gov website:

Part of this responsibility is for employees to avoid conflict between personal interest and public interest and to conduct themselves in a manner which both maintains and strengthens the public’s trust and confidence in the integrity of the council. Where an employee is in a situation where the potential exists for a conflict between their public and private interest to arise, they must declare this matter to their manager. Failure to do may result in disciplinary action being taken. (source)

This other local UK gov't policy also seems to be guidelines for disclosure & avoiding conflicts of interest at work, but again no outright ban.

Also interesting to maybe only me but the specific term (I assume from some legal statute, given how it's repeated in the two local gov't policies?) used is "close personal relationship," and it is not so much defined as a few examples of which are provided, which does include "Employees or applicants who are married, dating, in a civil partnership or co-habiting arrangement" (although the Sandwell one doesn't seem to include "dating" in that...).

I guess I didn't realize there WAS in fact a definitive answer out there about this lmao, but well, so all of the fics that had the declaration of relationship forms was, in fact, legally correct, it seems lmao

Edit: oh yeah guess who actually thought to google uk gov't *close personal relationships* specifically, having now found that term lol. Anyway it led me to this: Declaration and management of outside interests in the Civil Service, which apparently (I assume?) applies to all UK civil servants? It doesn't specifically have a Close Personal Relationships policy but does have a section about declaring personal relationships where there might be a relevant outside interest, and there's some interesting definitions in it. And I also found this article also seems to say that BP implemented a policy requiring such an speculating if other firms would be moving towards requirement relationship declarations too - though this article is dated 2024 and I suppose depending on when you have your fic set, the idea of a mandatory relationship declaration regardless of potential conflicts of interest or not may or may not be relevant (I guess also depending on how strict you have your MI6-- for example, I could see an argument made that for MI6 any serious relationship or even semi-serious relationship maybe should be declared since there is an inherent conflict of interest aspect to consider).

can I be honest. it's actually kind of hilarious to me when authors imagine MI6 with some kind of anti-fraternization policy. Like. Oh nooo, you order me to kill people for a living and live a life of pretty high secrecy. Yeah let me find a relationship NOT in the Service. Like. be so forreal now.