Workers commenting on Kirk’s death learn the limits of free speech in and out of their jobs

By Cathy Bussewitz and Wyatte Grantham-Philips Associated Press NEW YORK In the days following the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk numerous workers have been fired for their comments on his death among them MSNBC political analyst Matthew Dowd Several conservative activists have sought to identify social media users whose posts about Kirk they viewed as offensive or celebratory targeting everyone from journalists to teachers Right-wing influencer Laura Loomer noted she would try to ruin the professional aspirations of anyone who celebrated Kirk s death Related Articles Letters In the current environment how can nation increase kindness Letters Overly broad bill is bad for campus free speech Letters AB would stifle speech in classrooms Stanford pupil paper noncitizen students sue Trump personnel over speech-related visa policies Sheriff removal hearing will be open to the general San Mateo County says It s far from the first time workers have lost their jobs over things they say publicly including in social media posts But the speed at which the firings have been happening raises questions about worker rights versus employer rights In the U S laws can vary across states but overall there s very little legal protection for employees who are punished for speech made both in and out of private workplaces Preponderance people think they have a right to free speech but that doesn t necessarily apply in the workplace commented Vanessa Matsis-McCready associate general counsel and vice president of HR Services for Engage PEO Preponderance employees in the private sector do not have any protections for that type of speech at work Add to that the prevalence of social media which has made it increasingly common to track employees conduct outside of work and to dox people or publish information about them online with the intent of harming or harassing them Employers have a lot of leeway Protections for workers vary from one state to the next For example in New York if an employee is participating in a weekend political protest but not associating themselves with the organization that employs them their employer cannot fire them for that activity when they return to work But if that same employee is at a company event on a weekend and talks about their political viewpoints in a way that makes others feel unsafe or the target of discrimination or harassment then they could face consequences at work Matsis-McCready declared Largest part of the U S defaults to at-will employment law which essentially means employers can choose to hire and fire as they see fit including over employees speech The First Amendment does not apply in private workplaces to protect employees speech mentioned Andrew Kragie an attorney who specializes in employment and labor law at Maynard Nexsen It authentically does protect employers right to make decisions about employees based on employees speech Kragie announced there are pockets of protection around the U S under various state laws such as statutes that forbid punishing workers for their political views But the interpretation of how that gets enforced changes he notes making the waters murky Steven T Collis a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin and faculty director of the school s Bech-Loughlin First Amendment Center also points to particular state laws that say employers can t fire their workers for legal off duty conduct But there s often an exception for conduct seen as disruptive to an employer s business or reputation which could be grounds to fire someone over community comments or social media posts In this scenario if somebody feels like one of their employees has done something that suggests they are glorifying or celebrating a murder an employer might still be able to fire them even with one of those laws on the books Collis revealed For masses employees which can range from school teachers and postal workers to elected agents the process is a bit different That s because the First Amendment plays a unique role when the establishment is the employer Collis explains The Supreme Court has ruled that if an employee is acting in a private maximum but speaking on a matter of residents concern they could be protected Still he noted that ruling body employers can discipline a worker if they determine such conduct will interfere with the ruling body s ability to do its job Particular in the society sector have already worked to restrict speech in the aftermath of Kirk s death For instance leaders at the Pentagon unveiled a zero tolerance plan for any posts or comments from troops that make light of or celebrate the killing of Kirk The guidelines broadcasted by the Pentagon s top spokesman Sean Parnell on social media Thursday came hours after numerous conservative military influencers and activists began forwarding posts they considered problematic to Parnell and his boss defense Secretary Pete Hegseth It is unacceptable for military personnel and Department of War civilians to celebrate or mock the assassination of a fellow American Parnell wrote Thursday A surge of political debate The ubiquity of social media is making it easier than ever to share opinions about politics and major news events as they re unfolding But posting on social media leaves a record and in times of escalating political polarization those declarations can be seen as damaging to the reputation of an individual or their employer People don t realize when they re on social media it is the town square revealed Amy Dufrane CEO of the Human Reserve Certification Institute They re not having a private conversation with the neighbor over the fence They re really broadcasting their views Political debates are certainly not limited to social media and are increasingly making their way into the workplace as well The gamification of the way we communicate in the workplace Slack and Teams chat and all these things they re very similar to how you might interact on Instagram or other social media so I do think that makes it feel a little less formal and somebody might be more inclined to take to take a step and say Oh I can t believe this happened Matsis-McCready commented Employers are not ready In the tense divided circumstances of the U S multiple human pool professionals have expressed that they re unprepared to address politically charged discussions in the workplace according to the Human Stock Certification Institute But those conversations are going to happen so employers need to set policies about what is acceptable or unacceptable workplace conduct Dufrane disclosed HR has got to really drill down and make sure that they re super clear on their policies and practices and communicating to their employees on what are their responsibilities as an employee of the organization Dufrane announced Multiple employers are reviewing their policies on political speech and providing training about what appropriate conduct looks like both inside and outside the organization she reported And the brutal nature of Kirk s killing may have led particular of them to react more strongly in the days that followed his death Because of the violent nature of what several political discussion is now about I think there is a real concern from employers that they want to keep the workplace safe and that they re being extra vigilant about anything that could be viewed as a threat which is their duty Matsis-McCreedy mentioned Employees can also be seen as ambassadors of a company s brand and their political speech can dilute that brand and hurt its reputation depending on what is being mentioned and how it is being received That is leading more companies to act on what employees are saying online she mentioned Selected of the individuals that had posted and their posts went viral all of a sudden the phone lines of their employers were just nonstop calls complaining Matsis-McCready reported Still experts like Collis don t anticipate a essential change in how employers monitor their workers speech noting that online activity has come under the spotlight for at least the last years Employers are already and have been for a very long time vetting employees based on what they re posting on social media he commented Associated Press Staff Writer Konstantin Toropin in Washington contributed to this document