©FatCamera via Canva.com
Should Retailers Tone Down Political Discussions at Work?
In recent years, an increasingly polarized electorate has been escalating political tensions in the workplace that only promise to intensify in the coming months leading up to the presidential election.
A survey of U.S. workers from late 2022 from the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) found that 24% of workers said they have personally experienced differential treatment (positive and negative) because of their political views or affiliation, up from only 12% in 2019. It also found that 45% of workers have “personally experienced political disagreements in the workplace,” and 26% engage in political discussions with coworkers.
A just-released survey of 1,000 U.S. workers from ResumeHelp found that 51% believe workplace political discussions hurt the work environment. Of those surveyed, 51% never or rarely discuss politics at work, while 45% have regretted having political discussions at work.
Corporate moves in recent years to take progressive stands on political issues, whether reproductive rights, racial justice, gun control, or climate change, have created friction with right-leaning internal staff.
At the same time, left-leaning workers may be increasingly clashing with their bosses. Researchers from Boston College, Cornell University, and the University of Chicago found executive teams across major U.S. firms to be overwhelmingly Republican (68%) and becoming more partisan.
ResumeHelp’s survey found that 23% of workers decided not to apply to a company’s job listing because of the company’s political stance, while a quarter of respondents have left or wanted to leave their job because of their boss’s political beliefs.
“It seems like companies are becoming more politically polarized one way or the other,” Abhinav Gupta, a professor of management at the University of Washington’s Foster School of Business, told the Washington Post. “When CEOs come out and speak about a political issue or controversial social issue, that essentially speeds up this process of homogenization. It makes employees whose political views are different from that of the CEO feel more uncomfortable, more unwelcome in the company.”
Banning political discussions is believed to likely create a worse impact on morale and be challenging to enforce. Some guidance, however, may reduce the discord caused by differing political views that may impact productivity or work quality. Kara Govro, principal legal analyst at Mineral, an HR and compliance firm, recently told SHRM, “Given how divisive things are now, even if a company has laid the groundwork to ensure its culture is civil and respectful, it may prove helpful to communicate some ground rules.”
Discussion Questions
What advice would you have around reducing conflicts among coworkers in offices or on selling floors resulting from political disagreements?
Is formally setting up guidelines on how employees express themselves politically in the workplace worth the effort?
Poll
Loading …BrainTrust
Christopher P. Ramey
President, Affluent Insights & The Home Trust International
Gwen Morrison
Partner, Candezent & Retail Cities Consultant
Everyone has political views. And everyone is entitled to hold political views and to express them. However, the workplace is usually not the right place to actively engage in party politics. Discussion should not be banned, but it should be treated sensitively and with great discretion. Where politics reveals itself – for example, someone has a car bumper sticker supporting a candidate – what is key is to treat people with respect. We should all thank our lucky stars that the United States is a free society where we can hold different views. That’s a great strength.
There are taboo topics that trigger employees and therefore have to be managed. Sex is an easy example. Unless you want a one-dimensional firm, you have to add politics to the list.
The standards of acceptable behavior continue to be eroded by individuals who are encouraged by peers to be louder and more offensive. I fear that civility and being respectful are lost concepts.
The issue is leaders at companies want to be surrounded by loyal employees who think like them; including politics. And, from personal experience, too many are intolerant of views that are dissimilar from their own regardless of how far to the left or right they may be.
“Politics doesn’t belong in the workplace” Easier said than done…right?? Particularly when a good workplace usually equates to (at least a certain amount of) personal interaction between employees. This has always involved some amount of tradeoffs, and companies have traditionally avoided – or really, minimized – the issue by not hiring “troublemakers”. I can’t say that idea doesn’t continue to have merit, tho it’s probably harder to accomplish these days.
But as far as the (hopefully rare) issue of employees bringing their politics onto the selling floor: absolutely not! Those who can’t keep their traps shut really need to be shown the exit.
If you’ve made it to corporate America, then you probably know not to show up at work with your political candidate’s name across your chest. More ground rules are not necessarily the issue. Most people already know politics is a slippery slope in the office.
However, with so much recent social and political upheaval, it’s increasingly harder for companies to remain silent. It’s nearly to the point where companies are damned if you do speak up and damned if you say nothing at all.
The speed at which news travels today via social media and mobile devices has eroded that safe space of “leave it at home.” Most often when news breaks, you’re in the office and that’s hard to ignore.
Consumers now choose companies and brands based on values alignment. This is the new reality. While personal discussion of politics should be discouraged in the workplace (to keep a peaceful work environment) at the corporate level, silence is as good as agreeing with whatever is going on, good or bad. This is where Legal, PR and Communications Teams earn their keep.
I agree that political discussions these days are more polarizing than in previous eras, and I attribute that to social media, extreme politics on both sides, and the fact that schools today preach and indoctrinate instead of encouraging healthy debate. In today’s America, instead of “your views” and “my views,” we have just right and wrong.
However, I am opposed to censorship and banning speech because it is hard to define boundaries, and even a conversation about cars these days can turn into something political.
The best approach is to train employees to avoid polarizing topics, but in any case, everyone must exercise good manners and respect. In other words, let’s teach what used to be taught in middle school. – Db
Sadly, “even a conversation about cars these days can turn into something political.”
For 17 years (in the 70s and 80s), I worked in corporate America. I can say I do not ever remember an antagonistic political discussion. Certainly, there were discussions about world affairs or the economy at lunch or the bar after work, but nothing like what one experiences today.
The extremes today require guidelines. If political discussions are disruptive, someone should be terminated. Companies should be no differnet from athletic teams. When you are in the game, everyone is your teammate.
There’s a big difference between politics, policies and personalities. Behind the scenes, private conversations about any of those things are fair game. Public conversations outside of any work context are fair game. But it’s not right to say that it’s OK to conflate free speech with the license to disrupt work or customer facing relationships. Free speech carries with it the premise that the other guy has the same exact right, and there are proper forums for potentially disagreeable subjects. The selling floor and the office are not on that list.
We live in very difficult times. I can’t remember it being so badly polarized, including the Vietnam era, which was pretty polarized.
people are going to talk politics. They just are. The best we can do is discourage overt discussions in the workplace. This is easier said than done. Politics has bled into LinkedIn, which I find very disturbing and if I’m honest, I judge all the time based on political stance.
so the best advice seems to be “take it outside” but be aware that positions are hardening, not softening.
In today’s world, open discussion of political matters can veer too easily into argument. Teams who are expected to work together need to leave their private political leanings at the door. It’s easier said than done when many corporations are taking well-intentioned positions — and actions — on DEI and other social issues. People on opposite sides of issues can raise the “free speech” banner too easily when it affects workplace behavior.
In building an effective team, it’s critical to focus on shared business goals and the path to achieving those goals. While it can be tempting to make a political comment (beyond sustainability which may be pertinent to those goals), its important not to make assumptions. Dissension is best kept to team sports in the working world.
Politics, religion, and sexual orientation, all have a place in the lives of most people. However, that place should not be the workplace. All have a place one’s home. Religion has a place in places of worship, politics has a place in the local pub, as long the discussions are civilized, sexual orientation discussions have a place in organizations and gatherings specifically created for those discussion. None of the them have a place in the workplace. It’s a bad idea with few, if any, positive outcomes. Understanding by everyone is essential.
2024 is a year of divisive viewpoints with politics, elections and wars making global headlines. It’s inevitable that political topics will surface during the workday. Yet conflict can erode productivity, morale and a sense of security, which makes politics an issue for employers to address.
Guidelines for group harmony can keep the workplace safe and productive:
This is more about how we treat each other than about disparate political views. Attempts to regulate by way of the company handbook will fall flat. An appropriate guideline would be to simply live by the golden rule, both with customers and colleagues. Accomplish that and all of these issues go away.
This is an almost intractable problem. It used to be that we could agree on facts but have differing opinions. Today we can’t even agree on facts, or worse, feel perfectly comfortable making up our own or “learning things” from social media and an increasingly partisan news media. You aren’t going to keep people from talking politics and, if you try, you might find yourself in court like Home Depot did over “Black Lives Matters” clothing and buttons. So the best you can really do is institute a Code of Respect that covers all manner of conversations — political, sexual, personal, bullying, etc. As part of that code you can insist that whenever an employee is feeling uncomfortable in even a casual conversation that conversation has to stop. Now, this is admittedly unenforceable, but it may give some grounds for banning some kinds of conversations and limited followup disciplinary actions. Worst case consistently violation of the Code could be used to block promotion or raises. The grounds would be “disruption” not politics. No solution is perfect when human beings are involved. People still tell off-color jokes, for example, just not as loudly or publicly as they used to.
Political views have become polarizing and to some, even hateful. I’d suggest that this subject be incorporated into broader sensitivity guidelines and training built around building a positive culture. There is much room for employees to better understand their role in making others around them feel comfortable. In this context, employers would less likely be called out for constraining free speech.
Retailers also have responsibility as corporate citizens. When retailers articulate their values in annual reports and other communications, they have to support or distance their company from policies that don’t align. One of the comments below points out that staying silent is essentially agreeing with the political environment. Issues such as immigration and access to healthcare require the voices of corporate America.
Passion and personal beliefs around issues will always exist in the retail workplace around diverse teams. But once passion becomes political parties, people take sides, and it wreaks havoc in workplace dynamics and productivity. Hours of energy are burned, momentum depleted.
The other big risk at retail is open political stances where customers feel dragged in, forced to take sides. Dividing your customer base comes with inherent risks in lost sales, marketshare, and brand reputation.
Sure, have passion about where your product is sourced, the resources to make it, who is making it, how it’s made. Market this well and tell your story of differentiation. But leave your customers out of the politics.