Coldplay Kiss Cam Chaos: Did The Byron–Cabot Affair Justify Their Dismissals?

The question of whether you can be legally dismissed for having a workplace affair has never been so relevant as it is now. As you and everyone else would know, earlier this month US data company Astronomer’s CEO Andy Byron and its CPO Kristin Cabot had their intrigue exposed to the world when their ‘kiss cam’ moment at a Coldplay concert went viral.

Byron and Cabot have since stepped down from their roles, and Astronomer – a previously little known tech firm based in Ohio – has become known worldwide. Living up to the maxim that ‘any publicity is good publicity,’ the company, last week published a video on all major social media platforms that audaciously poked fun at the incident.

The video featured Gwyneth Paltrow, ex-wife of Coldplay frontman Chris Martin, as Astronomer’s temporary spokesperson. She proceeds to answer the most asked questions about the company, including “OMG! What the actual f…” and “how is your social media team doing?”

 

 

Were they forced to resign?

While the Coldplay kiss cam affair has generated more internet memes than any incident in recent history – memes that Astronomer is now gladly adding to with their recent video – there is of course a more serious side to the incident.

The way the company handled Byron and Cabot’s very public indiscretions raises questions about whether they voluntarily resigned or were pushed out by the company. Shortly after the kiss cam incident went viral, Astronomer posted a statement on social media that its board had “initiated a formal investigation.” The next day, Astronomer announced that Byron had resigned.

 

 

“Our leaders are expected to set the standard in both conduct and accountability, and recently, that standard was not met,” Astronomer said in a statement posted to X.

About five days after Byron’s exit, Cabot followed suit. While we can only speculate on whether the duo were pressured to resign by Astronomer’s board, it’s important to note that in the United States, a forced resignation would likely not have been illegal.

After all, this is a country where workers can generally be dismissed without notice or reason (beyond an illegal reason like the worker’s race or sex, for instance).

 

Australia’s laws are far different

Compared to the US, Australia’s Fair Work laws are far more rigorous, providing workers with many protections from unfair dismissal. But do they go so far to protect from dismissal those who engage in extramarital affairs?

In this article we answer this question by looking at how our Fair Work laws regard romantic relationships with colleagues and out of hours conduct. We also share a few other stories of corporate affairs, including a high flying London banker who was fired for linking up with a young colleague and later sued his employer for sex-based discrimination.

 

Can you be dismissed for conduct outside work?

You may think that what you do in your personal life has nothing to do with your job, especially when it comes to romantic relationships. And while this is generally true, under the law there are times when actions in your personal life can potentially lead to disciplinary action or dismissal. This is especially relevant if your private life, such as an extramarital affair, spills over into the workplace or public eye.

Australian employment law, in particular the Fair Work Act 2009, generally protects your right to a private life. Employers usually can’t interfere with your personal activities. However, if there is a clear “relevant connection” between your out-of-work conduct and your job, your employer might have grounds to act.

 

Establishing the relevant connection

So, what makes your personal conduct relevant to your employment? Generally, the Fair Work Commission will see if there is a strong link in three ways:

1. Serious damage to the employment relationship

If your behaviour is likely to seriously harm the trust between you and your employer, or cause significant disruption among your colleagues, it could be grounds for disciplinary action or dismissal.

Let’s use the Byron and Cabot affair as an example. Both worked in leadership positions at the same company. While their affair was revealed outside of work hours at a Coldplay concert, the very public manner of its revelation drew negative attention not only to them personally, but also Astronomer.

You can imagine the distress staff at the company experienced, not to mention their loss of trust and confidence in Byron and Cabot. Their unethical and reckless behaviour, to any reasonable person, would make their positions at the company no longer tenable.

Under Australian law, the duo could likely be fairly dismissed for their actions due to the damage they caused to the employment relationship.

2. Harm to your employer’s interests

If your conduct genuinely harms your employer’s business, reputation or brand, it can become an employment issue. This could involve bringing the company into disrepute, causing them to lose clients or damaging how the public views your workplace.

If we use Byron and Cabot as an example again, their behaviour clearly damaged the reputation of Astronomer – particularly given their leadership positions. Almost the whole world now knows about the company, not for its data solutions, but for its association with the duo’s unethical behaviour. If the duo were kept in their roles, serious questions would be asked of Astronomer.

3. Incompatibility with your job duties

If your out-of-work actions mean you can no longer fulfil the essential requirements of your role or if you’ve fundamentally breached your duties, your employer might have grounds for dismissal.

This again applies to the affair of Byron and Cabot. Key requirements of their leadership positions would include trustworthiness and acting with integrity. Their affair, of course, destroyed any semblance of those qualities.

You can read more about how Australian employment law regards workplace romantic relationships and out of hours conduct in our detailed articles.

 

Other corporate affairs you may have missed

Given the worldwide public fallout of the Byron-Cabot affair, you could be forgiven for not knowing about some of the other illicit corporate liaisons that have made the news recently. Let’s look at two stories where an illicit affair ended badly and led to a dismissal:

 

London banker dismissed for affair with junior, sues for discrimination

This story made news headlines around the same time as the Byron-Cabot affair, in July 2025. Stanislav Stepchuk, aged in his thirties, was a director at US investment bank Merrill Lynch. In 2023, the married Mr. Stepchuk began an affair with a colleague in her twenties.

After being fired by Merrill Lynch, he sued the bank for sex and age discrimination, harassment and unfair dismissal. Mr. Stepchuk claimed he was unfairly targeted while his junior colleague’s behaviour went unchecked.

 

‘Half the bank sleeps around’: Explosive details emerged at tribunal

At Mr. Stepchuck’s hearing at a UK employment tribunal, details of his very first coffee meeting with the woman, known as Colleague A, were shared. Mr. Stepchuk allegedly told Colleague A “us guys like younger girls” and that he and his wife started out as “friends with benefits.” He also said that “half of the bank (Merrill Lynch) sleeps around.” Mr. Stepchuk denied ever making this remark.

The duo began messaging on LinkedIn. Mr. Stepchuk suggested they start texting on WhatsApp and four days later he sent her an unsolicited “intimate photograph” of himself. Merrill Lynch’s legal team described Mr. Stepchuk’s texts as “sexually aggressive.”

The tribunal heard how Colleague A said over WhatsApp that she was a virgin. Mr. Stepchuk interpreted this as “throwing more coal to the fire” due to what he perceived as her flirtatious behaviour. Stepchuk maintained that Colleague A was actively pursuing him. He said she would give him “looks” around the office and was “continually teasing” him.

 

Wife’s pregnancy ended affair, wanted to ‘murder’ unborn child

When Mr. Stepchuk ended the relationship when he discovered his wife was pregnant. His legal team claimed Colleague A then became “increasingly resentful” and started taunting and threatening him. Upon telling her about his wife’s pregnancy, Colleague A allegedly made “increasingly sinister and unhinged remarks.”

Mr. Stepchuk claimed that after they had met up in August 2023, Colleague A demanded to see his bank account and suggested that “she would not mind being a ‘murderer’ of his unborn child.” Mr. Stepchuk’s team claimed she sent messages like “any lie is suicide” and “you need to stay alive to take care of your family.”

Hours after this alleged meeting, Mr. Stepchuk contacted Merrill Lynch HR, raising “concerns regarding Colleague A’s disturbing conduct.”

 

Mr. Stepchuk was dismissed, while Colleague A got off scott free

Unbenknownst to Mr. Stepchuk, Colleague A had already lodged a formal complaint to HR. She claimed she had been sexually harassed and was threatened when she spoke of going to HR. The company investigated the complaint and found that the relationship was consensual. However, it still decided to dismiss Mr. Stepchuk for serious misconduct.

His argued to the tribunal that Merrill Lynch’s approach to handling the affair was “tainted by discriminatory and gendered assumptions.” Mr. Stepchuk claimed that he had been discriminated against as he was perceived as “the aggressor in a sexual dynamic” and her as an “innocent” victim. As of writing, the tribunal case is still ongoing.

 

Canberra lawyer dismissed for ending affair with boss

This story was detailed in a recent ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal case: Council of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory v R [2025]. The unnamed applicant in this case worked for a Canberra-based law. In a wrongful termination claim lodged on her behalf by the Council of the ACT Law Society, the applicant argued that her boss, known simply as R in proceedings, unfairly dismissed her after their seven-month affair concluded.

She claimed that she suffered from a “psychological impairment” during the affair that made her vulnerable; specifically because of a power imbalance between her and her boss. The ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal had to decide if R had committed professional misconduct for having a sexual relationship with the applicant while she suffered from a psychological impairment and was vulnerable. It also had to work out if she had been wrongfully terminated after their affair ended.

 

Met up for sex weekly

The ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal heard that both individuals were married with children and had been close with each other’s families for over a decade. The applicant began working at the firm in 2016 and within a couple of years its staff consisted only of herself, R and his wife. The applicant and R’s wife were described as “best friends” who often commuted to work together.

Towards the end of 2020, the applicant claimed that she and R began meeting up for sex every week. The relationship, however, soon soured due to disagreements about the applicant’s mood changes. R was also contending with his failing marriage, which led to a “tense” atmosphere at the firm.

 

Applicant got ‘abusive’ and jealous after split

Around the time the affair ended in the middle of 2021, R called the applicant into a meeting to discuss her behaviour at the firm. R accused her of being “threatening, harassing, abusive, obsessive.” He told the Tribunal that they had weekly conflicts; a claim the applicant agreed with.

R subsequently sent the applicant a letter informing her that she could be dismissed due to “lashing out” as well as bullying and harassment. In response to the letter, the applicant admitted that her behaviour had been “sh*t” and that it was triggered by her jealousy over R and his wife’s relationship. She wrote that it was “ really hard to face such a perfect couple” and that she was taking out her frustrations on the couple.

 

‘Not a tribunal of morals’: Applicant’s arguments shutdown

The ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal accepted that the end of the affair was the “root cause” of the applicant’s inappropriate behaviour. However, it made the point of declaring that it was “not a tribunal of morals.” The Tribunal said that it was not responsible for assessing the behaviour of R and whether it was socially acceptable or not. Rather, its chief concern was to determine if “two charges of less than acceptable professional conduct occurred…and nothing more.”

On this score, the Tribunal was ultimately unconvinced by the applicant’s arguments. It found that she had not been suffering from a psychological impairment while the affair took place. This was based on the fact that there was no evidence to support the claim. Also, because the applicant herself had admitted that she did not feel vulnerable. The Tribunal therefore reasoned that there was not a power imbalance between the duo, and the applicant’s claim was dismissed.

 

Read More: Forced resignation & constructive dismissal inquiries

 

Have you been unfairly dismissed?

Lost your job unfairly or forced out of the workplace? A Whole New Approach is here to help you fight back. As Australia’s leading employee advocacy service, we specialise in unfair dismissal, workplace bullying, harassment, discrimination, and more.

We have supported thousands of workers across the country and can help you get your job back or maximise the chance of winning financial compensation. With only 21 days to lodge a claim, there’s no time to waste. Call 1800 333 666 for a free, confidential consultation and get the support you deserve.