The syntax is off on this question, but I think I understand it. The qualities that I'd want in a lover are not the same qualities that I'd want in an employee. The two are separate issues. And of course, I would not have an employee who was also my lover.
Laura,
39
Lowell, MA USA
No. Proximity is proximity.
Jill,
61
Saylorsburg, PA USA
Yes. The reverse is also true. The criteria by which such relationships are chosen are completely different, in my mind.
Felicia,
38
Lowell, MA USA
yes... I might not have someone as an employee because they didn't have the right qualifications or skills, but that would be irrelevant in bed ;)
Alice,
23
Wincehster UK
Sure. I am not necessarily looking for the same qualities.
Janet,
46
E. Brunswick, NJ USA
If I were a manager, my employees would be programmers. I wouldn't limit myself to programmers for lovers, though. My husband was an accountant. If you mean would I have a lover who lied on his resume or had bad references or just seemed like someone who couldn't cooperate with others, then, no I probably wouldn't.
Cathie,
54
Novi, MI USA
It would depend on the reasons I wouldn't have the man as an employee. If they involved integrity or antisocial behavior, then I certainly wouldn't have him as a lover. If, however, it was his technical skills that disqualified him as an employee, that would not affect my judgment of him as a potential lover.
Jane,
63
West Linn, OR USA
Absolutely. In fact I think it's better that way.
Alias Irrelevante
Well, yes.
I don't know if I'd have my husband as an employee, because then I'd become
his evil boss and he might not like me very much. However, it's not at
all that he's unhirable. He
really tries to do his absolute best at work, and that's a great quality
for an employee.
Karen,
23
Ames, IA USA