The Financial Post reports in its Monday, Sept. 8, edition that Nestle has made a bold statement by firing its chief executive officer for cause, without any severance or notice, highlighting a shift in corporate governance. The Post's guest columnist Howard Levitt writes that if a major corporation can take such decisive action against its top executive, how safe is a middle manager? Dismissal for cause means the employer believes the misconduct is so severe that no compensation is owed, regardless of tenure. While the bar for proving cause is high, boards are becoming more willing to act due to the potential fallout from inaction, such as loss of investor confidence and reputational damage. Office romances can lead to serious issues like favouritism and harassment allegations, and the most common corporate downfall is often hubris -- especially the mistaken belief that a relationship with a subordinate is "consensual." Courts recognize the coercive nature of these dynamics, which led to the dismissal of figures like McDonald's Steve Easterbrook and Nestle's recent action. Whether the conduct is truly coercive or not is almost irrelevant -- the appearance of coercion or favouritism is enough to poison the well.