What I can think of offhand: let's say an employee goes to a pro-life political rally, and the employer is pro-choice. Or an employee making anti-semitic remarks on social media and his employer catches wind of it.

For the pro life / pro choice “example” I don’t think that would be grounds for consequence from an employer… have never heard of it resulting in punishment from an employer.

The anti-Semitic example is actually what the Kyrie situation is. Are you suggesting anti-semitism is a political stance? Interesting

In the Kyrie situation, it makes sense that he is facing consequences. It’s actions / words that don’t align with the company/teams identity/values. It’s borderline hate speech. Pretty cut and dry.

These aren’t “political behaviours”

This post was edited by SharpNips on Nov 10 2022 11:40am

My point is that employees shouldn't be fired for saying things their employers don't like. Doesn't matter if people think it's hate speech.

Btw, words not aligning with company values shouldn't be a fire-able offense. It's like I said, people should have the freedom to express their beliefs.

It does matter if people think it’s hate speech. It’s a business, with the objective of generating revenue. If the hate speech puts the revenue generating ability in jeopardy, the employer should have the right to deal with the problem.

This is very simple.

Well, I think people should have the freedom of speech. It's not the employee's fault that customers associate the words of an employee with his company. They really shouldn't be doing that.

Isn’t freedom of speech protection from the government?

It’s not the employees fault if the words that come out of his mouth damage the company he works for? Whose fault is it then?

Again, this all comes back to voluntarily signing a contract. You agree to give up certain freedoms for compensation

You shouldn't have to give up your freedoms just so you can feed yourself.

It’s voluntary

If you don’t like the terms of a contract, you have 3 options
1. Sign and deal with it
2. Negotiate
3. Find another job that allows you to be a moron without consequences

They're pressured to give up freedoms indirectly by the pressure the public would put on the company if nothing was done about the behavior. It's basically democratized and self-policing situation. If the majority of the public wouldn't enact backlash against the company's inaction, the company would let the employee do whatever they want. Blame the populace, not the company for behaving rationally.

I'll excuse you have no idea what "freedom of speech" is since you are pretending to be Canadian.