With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". accepting secondary employment in his off-duty time d gency decision, has the burden of proving that the policy is unreasonable. See Edwards, 936 S.W.2d at 468; Lairson, 742 S.W.2d at 101. Kaup argues that Global Securities had no right to control his leisure activities and that the policy prohibiting him from obtaining unapproved side employment, outside of his regular work hours, is an unconscionable attempt to control his off-duty time. He contends that this infringement on his personal time is unreasonable. Employers are permitted to limit their employees’ outside employment to avoid conflicts of interest. See Evans v. Reliant Energy, Inc., No. 01-01-00855-CV, 2002 WL 31838088, at *3-4 (Tex.App.Houston [1st Dist.] Dec. 19, 2002, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (<HOLDING>). Further, the Global Securities policy does

A: holding employer could be hable for sexual harassment of employees by nonemployees including employers customers
B: recognizing public policy limits on employer discretion in discharging employees
C: holding that employer could enforce its business ethics policy that prohibited employees from working for companys customers because multiple employments could create conflict of interest for employees
D: holding that probation department employees are not county employees
C.