honoluluadvertiser.com

Sponsored by:

Comment, blog & share photos

Log in | Become a member
The Honolulu Advertiser
Posted on: Monday, June 18, 2007

For workers, speech isn't always free

By Anita Bruzzese

With the start-up of the presidential campaigns, it's natural that many of us will begin to discuss the issues facing this country, and some of those discussions will probably take place at work. After all, we spend much of our day on the job, and it seems inevitable that politics will find a place at the water cooler.

That may not be such a hot idea. Why? Because your employer may be uncomfortable with you expressing your political or personal views at work — so much so that you may find yourself disciplined or even fired for doing it.

While you may think that sounds unfair — especially since free speech is guaranteed by the First Amendment — employers actually have wide latitude when it comes to what employees can and cannot say, even if it has little to do with the workplace, says Bruce Barry, a professor of sociology at Vanderbilt University.

"Nobody would argue that employers have to allow anything and everything to be said," Barry says. "But employers have become too hair-trigger — there's too much apprehension about what employees say."

As an example, Barry cites cases where an employer fired a worker for having a political bumper sticker on his car, while another company let a worker go for complaining about co-workers on a MySpace page.

While such actions are not rampant in the American workplace, Barry contends that "it's sufficiently common enough to create a chill ... because some of these (speech) issues are not really threatening to an employer."

Further, while the explosion of technology that has led to e-mail, blogging and social networking sites has created an outlet for employees to "blow off steam" after work, it has also prompted employers to sound an "alarm bell," questioning the workers' stability or judgment, he says.

As employees face company policies that determine what is and isn't acceptable online and elsewhere, Barry says it points to how complex the intersection between work and free speech has become. It has become easier than ever before, he says, for employers to know what an employee privately believes or says when not at work.

Further, under the U.S. legal system, employers — even those in the public sector — have the right to discipline or terminate an employee they have determined affects them in an adverse way. As employers compete in a global marketplace, they have become more concerned with controlling their brand image and corporate reputation. Employees who are seen running afoul of that — such as posting something on their Facebook — may face tough consequences.

"The law lets employers do that," Barry says. "But I think we also need to point out that while it's true that work is for work, it's naive to avoid seeing that work is where life happens. We have to think about the big picture — about how important it is for democracy to have open debate."

At the same time, more employees are using self-censorship because they fear repercussions either from current employers, or future ones. Barry cites the case of a job candidate not receiving a call-back from a prospective employer because of the sermon he gave on his church's podcast. A less-stable job environment means workers are much less willing to challenge the restrictions placed on them by their companies, he says.

Barry argues that it's critical for all of us to consider the important role that free speech and debate play in a civil society, and that includes online debates and discussions. It's not all about funny videos and vacation photos, he says, but the forum that the Internet provides for people to share ideas and opinions about important issues. He says that when people can't talk freely — including at work — it undermines the quality of the debate.

So what would Barry like to see happen? On his list would be changing some state and federal laws that don't protect employees' rights to free speech, the chances of which he admits are "remote." But on a smaller scale, he says employers can simply give more careful consideration to what free speech means for this country and its future.

"This matters not just because of what is said in the workplaces, but really how it affects how people contribute to the broader discussions in our society," he says.

If you'd like to contribute to the discussion about your workplace experience or get more career information, check out my blog at: www.anitabruzzese.com.