Tossing out some thoughts, wearing both my rescue and former corporate manager hats.
First from my perspective based on dog welfare, with the usual caveat that YMMV:
As an FYI, the rescue I work with generally is not in favor of bringing dogs to work, and rarely approves an adoption where this is mooted as the only dog care solution. The decision was made because we have too often seen it all go pear-shaped. To protect our dogs, we prefer that other, more dog-appropriate, solutions are in place when one wishes to adopt.
The few exceptions have been made where the work environment is wholly suited to the individual dog’s particular needs. Off the top of my head, the few times bring-my-dog-to-work exceptions have been granted were largely when the prospective owner had absolute total control over the work environment, or worked in appropriate non-office settings, mostly jobs with some kind of outdoor component.
In all cases where a dogs-at-work option is proposed there has to be an assessment of the work conditions as well as the usual home assessment, as well as an assessment of what the dog’s typical day would look like, including ability of the owner to balance interaction with and supervision of his dog with his work responsibilities, to make sure the environment is appropriate for the animal.
We generally do not like to see dogs in offices, especially in ‘cubicle farms’.
This is because many of the dogs we work with not the kind who are content to sit quietly for 8-10 hours per day, they usually need more interaction and stimulation either physical or mental than can be given while simultaneously creating a spreadsheet. And many are temperamentally unsuited to an office setting, among strangers or lots of coming-and-going.
I bring this all up to emphasize that it actually is not fair to many dogs to put them in an office setting, there is too much stress. I worry about QOL in such cases.
An employee may have permission to bring his dog to work, but that can be rescinded at any moment, should another employee object. What then is Plan B for the dog?
Your office is not your space alone, an employee cannot always control what goes on.
A significant problem we see is that an employee is often unable to provide sufficient supervision - of course, work needs to be done - and sometimes not in a position to advocate for his dog in the office due to power structures or office politics.
An example: A shy dog was turned over to the rescue a few years ago. The owner had taken him to the office, was not able to appropriately supervise him, and disaster struck.
The owner’s manager was a purported dog lover, and insisted on playing ‘raggers’ with this dog, because ‘every dog likes to play raggers’. Well, this dog did not like hands waving in his face, he was terrified of the manager. He tried to escape under the desk, but the manager insisted ‘all dogs love me’. The owner felt he could not contradict his manager because he did not want to cause friction with someone who held more power than he did.
You guessed it. One day the manager started up the game, the terrified dog could not get away, and snapped.
Game over. Literally and figuratively.
The dog fortunately passed the subsequent Veterinaramt ordered Wesenstest with flying colors, and so was not ordered euthanized - but obviously no longer allowed in the office. The employee had to give the dog up.
This is only one anecdote, but we have seen too many instances where having dogs at work doesn’t work, and the dog ultimately pays for it.
I understand that some dogs can cope, even fully enjoy being the office dog. But a thorough assessment of the individual dog and individual office needs to be made, all issues of liability thoroughly understood, and there must be a Plan B ready to put into immediate action at any moment.
To me the question should not be whether an office benefits by having a dog around, but rather whether the dog benefits by being in the office. And in my experience with the dogs I advocate for and typical offices, more often the answer is ‘no’.
——
Now donning my ex corporate manager hat:
A company has a duty to provide a safe working environment for all employees, and policies must be fair and equitably put into place.
As another poster said it best: Any benefit of the dog being in the office only applies to those who like dogs - or more accurately, only applies to those who like that particular dog. To those who are uncomfortable with dogs in the office, you have created a new stressor, which is unfair to those employees.
How does a manager balance the two?
Bringing dogs to work, in the corporate environment I once inhabited, would have been a nightmare from that standpoint.
First, there are liability issues. Now my management experience is in the US, and I am aware of the legal and cultural differences in Switzerland. But nonetheless a company would be foolish not to have the legal staff thoroughly look over corporate and individual liability wrt dogs in the office. And I mean thoroughly. (Remember that dog ownership is a causal Haftung in Switzerland.) What liability is born by the dog owner, the company, or even Manager X who approved the dog coming into the office, should something go wrong?
Not all employees will be on board with a dog in the office. Whether from allergies, hygiene issues, fear or dislike of dogs, or cultural reasons, it does not matter why. If any office mate is uncomfortable around dogs then the dog does not belong in the workplace. Punkt.
A company needs to understand whether bringing a dog into the office puts other employees at a disadvantage or even discomfort, especially when concerns are medical or religious/cultural, which could open a pretty big can o’ legal worms.
Do not underestimate this point. Many people in Switzerland are very much not dog fans. Unless every single employee in the office agrees to each individual dog proposed, the idea is dead in the water. One no is a veto - there can be no other way given what is at stake.
What if two employees want to bring in their dogs and one dog is a delight and so allowed, the other a nightmare and thus denied? There have to be quantifiable standards to ensure that you are not accused of playing favorites.
The NHB test was mentioned as a possible way to test behavior, but be aware that it does not really address the stressors a dog could encounter or test behaviors in an office environment. Thus, perhaps of limited use in such a case.
How would multiple dogs in the office be managed? What if the dogs individually are fine, but in a group do not get along? Does every dog get banned, or only some? Again, with an eye to fairness, your have to think of all possible troublesome situations and have a policy in place.
A manager also has to consider productivity. Here perception is important. You will have employees claiming that Bob spends too much time playing with his dog, time off that others do not get. (Think about complaints that smokers get to take more breaks - you likely already see this kind of thing where group X is perceived by group Y to have an unfair advantage.) There have to be plans in place to address this should it come up - which chances are it will.
OTOH, what happens when an employee claims his performance problems are due to the distraction of a dog in the office? How do you deal with such claims?
And finally, what is the cost to the company of allowing dogs at work? Extra cleaning, organizing work spaces, moving people around, compliance or paperwork, etc.? You need to research all possible costs, and be ready to answer questions. And, of course - how would you justify any additional cost that might arise, what benefits can be proved to offset costs?
—-
I’m about as big a dog lover as one can possibly be. Heck, I left corporate life so I could properly care for my dog when she unexpectedly appeared in my life.
Years later, there was only one period I brought the dogs to the office: When I worked by myself at home.
And most of the time they got bored as I stared at my computer, got frustrated that my deadline was more important than fetch, and trotted off to bark at squirrels. Fortunately they had that option.
OP, I’m just tossing some ideas out - if you seriously want to propose this, you should think very carefully about all possible objections, and prepare yourself. Try to put yourself in the shoes of someone who does not like dogs.
And then ask yourself: Is this really, truly, fair and beneficial to everyone, human and canine? Are you doing this primarily for dog owners, or for dogs? (Hint: the answer should not be the former.)
All the best.
ETA:
Now putting on my Captain Obvious hat:
The above applies to bringing a pet dog into the office.
It does not apply to a duly accredited working service dog, such as a guide dog or similar, who is there to assist the owner with a disability. That is a very different matter, and disability accommodation needs to be made.
), the technology centers, the specific business units or R&D.
Linear Mode
