Issue of Employees Participating in Demonstrations and Protests

Written on .

The January 6, 2021 protest in Washington, D.C. raises questions about participation of employees in protests that may turn into riots.  Unlike governmental employers, private businesses have no "free speech" obligations to their employees participating in such protests.  However, other legal issues can arise as to subsequent actions against those protesting.  

First, some states and localities have laws that provide protection for lawful off-duty conduct.  In some cases employees may have protections against terminations or discipline not for "just cause" such as those covered by a collective bargaining agreement.  Some employers would discipline or terminate protestors who engage in criminal conduct or display hate symbols.  A hate symbol might include carrying a noose, for example.  But the situation gets much more cloudy if the protestor merely marches next to someone carrying a noose.  

Sometimes the protests are not off the job, but on the job.  A particular application of this concept may occur when someone wears a face mask or other attire bearing Black Lives Matter or some similar messaging.  A recent federal district court ruling addresses policies of Amazon and Whole Foods Market that prohibit workers from wearing face masks or other attire bearing Black Lives Matter messaging.  Firth v. Whole Foods Mkt., Inc., D. Mass., No. 1:20-cv-11358, 2/5/21.  The decision dismissed race discrimination allegations of 28 lead plaintiffs in a proposed class action under Title VII, because being disciplined for wearing such clothing does not describe a violation of job discrimination law because Title VII "does not protect free speech in a private workplace."  Further, the plaintiffs did not allege that either Amazon or Whole Foods would have treated their BLM-mask wearing more favorably if they had been of a different race.  In contrast, in a case involving a public employer, a federal court in Pennsylvania ruled that a ban on employees wearing COVID-19 face masks with political messages, including support for the Black Lives Matter movement, are likely unconstitutional.  Transit Union Local 85 v. Port Auth. Of Allegheny Cty., W.D. Pa., No. 2:20-cv-01471, 1/19/21.  The public employer port authority prohibited its employees from wearing uniform adornments like buttons and stickers with "political or social-type protest" messages.  The fact pattern revealed that when several employees started wearing the "Black Lives Matter" slogan, an employee complained, asking management how it would feel if he wore a "White Lives Matter" mask in response.  The Port Authority said it feared allowing employees to wear BLM masks would cause disruption, likely from employees wearing "competing" masks.  

This is part of our March 2021 Newsletter.

Click here to download the newsletter PDF

Get Email Updates

Receive newsletters and alerts directly in your email inbox. Sign up below.

Recent Content

Women signing papers at a table indoors

Trump Regulation Requiring EEOC to Conciliate Rescinded

The current administration has moved rapidly to eliminate the Trump administrators, even during the terms of their employment, and to eli...
Port-au-Prince, Haiti - Outdoors, houses on the hillside

TDPP Extended for Six Countries

More than 400,000 citizens of six foreign countries who live and work in the U.S. under Temporary Protected Status (TPS) are able to stay...
a group of people protesting outdoors, with jackets in the cold

Issues Related to Safety and Work-related Issues, Pertaining to Walk-outs, Sit-ins, Protests, Etc

The current situation is an appropriate time to remind employers of their obligations under federal laws dealing with not only safety pro...
Covid Vaccine Clinic, Parking Sign, Outdoors

Biden Issues Executive Order Attempting to Require Covid Vaccination & Testing

In what many consider President Biden's most bold move regarding COVID-19, he issued an Executive Order on September 9, 2021 in an effort...
candles burning on a rack indoors in the dark

Dealing With Religious Objections to a COVID-19 Vaccine Requirement

In our discussions of rules mandating COVID-19 vaccines, we’ve mentioned the two possible exemptions to a vaccine requirement: disability...
yellow rubber gloves on hands reach high

Protected Concerted Activity in the Era of COVID-19: What Employers Need to Know

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is one of the federal agencies that many employers do not have on their radar. The NLRB is most...

Wimberly, Lawson, Steckel, Schneider & Stine

3400 Peachtree Road, Ste 400 / Lenox Towers / Atlanta, GA 30326 /404.365.0900

Where Experience Counts


Thank you for visiting the firm's website. Please note that this website is intended for general information purposes only and does not constitute an offer of representation or create an attorney-client relationship with the firm. The firm welcomes receipt of electronic mail but the act of sending electronic mail alone does not create an attorney-client relationship. You may reproduce materials available at this site for your own personal use and for non-commercial distribution. All copies must include the firm's copyright notice.

© 2020 Wimberly, Lawson, Steckel, Schneider & Stine P.C. | Site By JSM