Freedom of speech does not equal freedom from the consequences of that speech. Elizabeth Lawrence lays it out pretty well in this article.
Many who lost their job for mocking Kirk’s homicide claim their “First Amendment rights” were violated, but they fundamentally misunderstand the amendment’s purpose. The right to freedom of speech prevents the government from censoring Americans – it does not prohibit employers from enforcing standards of conduct.
The government cannot arrest or fine Americans for offensive speech, but private companies can take action when employee behavior reflects poorly on their brand – even when it happens off the clock. An employer is not obligated to keep someone on the payroll who publicly mocks a murder victim.
Most employment in the United States is “at-will,” meaning an employer can fire workers at any time for almost any reason. Many companies also have internal policies that ban so-called “hate speech” or forbid employees from posting about certain topics on social media.
And that is the distinction that makes all of the difference.
What’s happening now is employers are realizing that their employees’ behavior online can affect their bottom line. So they are finally stepping up. This power was on display during the wuflu with masking and shot mandates. Regardless, they are doing what the government can’t. But this turn about has to definitely be pinching the feet of the folks who cheered at that time as well.
I’m thinking this is just a little bit of karma….
Midwest Chick's Place 
Leave a Reply to lnac Cancel reply