In Canada, Astronomer CEO Andy Byron could be fired for cause without a penny in severance for so brazenly displaying his affair

A couple of days later, Anne called to inform me that our pictures were prominently featured in a Toronto Star restaurant review. No one asked our permission to take the photo and publish it in the newspaper.

More perspicacious than I, Anne stated, “What if we had been having an affair and were ‘outed’ by that photo?”

Imagination being a foreshadowing of life, this bit of history came to mind with the recent scandal that arose during a Coldplay concert in Boston.

It was there that the much-married chief executive of tech company Astronomer, Andy Byron, clearly believing in the precept of “anonymity in a crowd,” was discovered out on a tryst with his recently-hired corporate HR head, the also-married Kristin Cabot.

During the concert, Chris Martin, Coldplay’s lead singer, had cameras zoom in on various couples and displayed them on the Jumbotron. When the camera landed on the couple and they saw themselves openly embracing in front of tens of thousands, they quickly ducked and hid their faces, with which Martin exclaimed, “Either they are having an affair or they are very shy.”

Social media sleuths quickly learned that Byron was married to Megan Byron, and they had two kids.

The fallout: Andy Byron quickly removed his LinkedIn account, and Megan removed the “Byron” from her Facebook page.

Suddenly, the previously little-known Astronomer had more media attention than it could ever wish for, only not of the right kind.

Byron was suspended “pending investigation” and quickly resigned. The company rushed out a press release stating: “Astronomer is committed to the values and culture that have guided us since our founding. Our leaders are expected to set the standard in both conduct and accountability, and recently, that standard was not met.”

The wording suggested Byron did not resign but was fired, or else resigned when the alternative was his firing.

Would Byron’s behaviour be cause for his dismissal in Canada? Courts here have suggested that any relationship between a superior and subordinate is inherently coercive. Consensual or not, such relationships are demotivating for other employees, as they infer that the subordinate will be favoured over their peers, and that in making decisions regarding promotions, raises, assignments or job opportunities, the superior will be inclined to reward his/her lover over others.

Furthermore, to the extent companies have policies either prohibiting interoffice relationships or requiring their disclosure, the CEO and head of HR are the executives most responsible for adherence to that policy and are its two greatest role models. It would be difficult for a company to enforce a policy that its own CEO and HR head were not complying with, and their non-adherence would be fatal to any dismissal lawsuit based on the policy’s breach.

There is also the issue of the reputational impact of their conduct, which is cause for discharge, too. When an employee conducts themself in a manner that deleteriously affects their employer’s reputation, it can be cause for dismissal.

A CEO and head of HR having an apparent public affair could have a negative impact on a company’s client relations, causing some customers to choose not to do business with it. That is why Astronomer was so quick to send out a press release letting the world (and its customers) know that it remained “committed to its standards in conduct and accountability,” and publicly throwing Byron overboard for not meeting those standards.

In Canada, Byron could be fired for cause without a penny in severance for so brazenly displaying his affair, based on the impact that would have on his company’s public reputation as well as the breach of its fraternization policy, if it had one. But even without such a policy, it is generally accepted in this country that sexual affairs between superiors and subordinates are unacceptable.

This would be exacerbated here by the fact that the other party to the affair was head of the very department (HR) responsible for enforcing the company’s policies. Given Cabot’s role, the affair would be cause for her dismissal as well, which would normally not be the case for the subordinate in the relationship.

This titillating tale, playing out literally before our eyes, carries many lessons as to the importance of discretion and consequences of its absence. More importantly, it has much to tell about how sexual harassment laws have evolved from coercive relationships to any relationship between a superior and more junior employee, and how brand-damaging behaviour in any context can be cause for discharge.