Fired for political social media posts - employees/directors beware!

Social media has become a primary platform for political expression, allowing individuals to share their views on policies, elections, and social movements. However, many employees and organizations’ board of directors mistakenly believe their right to free speech protects them from workplace consequences.

The legal reality is that employees and directors can be disciplined, terminated, or removed for making political posts -especially when those posts cause reputational harm to their employer or organization, violate workplace policies, or create a conflict with an employer’s values.

When can employees and directors face termination or removal for their political social media activity? What are the unique risks across different employment sectors? What are the key legal precedents in Canada?

While Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees freedom of expression, it only applies to government actions, not private employment relationships. This means that while employees and directors are free to express political opinions, private employers are equally free to discipline or terminate employees and discipline or remove directors if their posts harm the organization or violate workplace policies.

Employers have legitimate concerns about maintaining workplace harmony, protecting their brand reputation and avoiding liability for employee or director conduct. If someone’s social media activity disrupts workplace operations, damages an employer’s public image, or creates a hostile work environment, termination or removal may be justified.

When can an employer terminate for political social media posts?

The decision to discipline or terminate an employee or remove a director for social media activity typically depends on the following factors:

Nature of the post: Posts containing hate speech, discriminatory language, or inflammatory content are more likely to result in disciplinary action. Political comments that attack specific groups or promote extremist views may be viewed as violating workplace policies, even if posted outside of work hours.

Association with employer: Even if an employee or director does not explicitly identify their employer in a post, they may still be linked to their workplace. If the employee’s or director’s account or social media presence can be easily connected to their job, the employer may need to take action to protect its reputation.

Reputational harm: If a social media post causes customer loss, donor withdrawal, or public backlash, an employer may have grounds for termination of an employee or removal of a director. Organizations must protect their brand, and political comments that alienate stakeholders can have real financial consequences.

Public-facing roles: Employees in high-profile or leadership positions (such as executives, municipal workers, or non-profit employees), as well as directors, are often held to a higher standard of public conduct. Political posts made by these individuals can reflect directly on their organization.

Workplace social media policies: Many organizations have social media policies outlining acceptable online behaviour. If an employee or director violates these policies -particularly if they have signed an agreement acknowledging them - disciplinary action may be justified.

Social media misconduct legal precedents

Several Canadian cases support an employer’s right to discipline or terminate employees or to remove Directors for their social media misconduct, even when posts are made outside of working hours:

• EV Logistics v. Retail Wholesale Union, Local 580 (2008): An arbitrator upheld the termination of an employee who posted racist content and expressed admiration for Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime on his blog. The case highlights that political ideologies, particularly extreme views, can justify dismissal.
• Wasaya Airways LP v. Air Line Pilots Assn, International (2010): A pilot was dismissed for making racist remarks about First Nations people on social media. The case emphasized that the use of hate speech or the use of speech causing reputational harm to an employer can justify termination.
• Pridgen v. University of Calgary, 2012 ABCA 139 – University students challenged disciplinary actions taken over social media posts. The court ruled that online speech has real-world consequences, reinforcing that social media is not a “safe zone” for harmful speech.
• Groves v. Cargojet Holdings Ltd. (2011) – This case distinguished private vs. public social media comments, ruling that if a post is publicly accessible and causes reputational harm, the employer may take disciplinary action.

Unique risks for different sectors

Government employees: Public sector workers - including federal, provincial, and municipal employees and councillors - are often required to maintain political neutrality. Making statements against elected officials or government policies can be seen as undermining public trust and may lead to disciplinary action.

Not-for-profit employees: Many non-profit organizations rely on donor funding and partnerships. If an employee makes statements contradicting the organization’s values or alienating donors, it could impact funding and the organization’s reputation.

Private/public corporation employees: Companies have the right to enforce social media policies that protect their brand image. Political statements that spark controversy or alienate clients may justify disciplinary action, particularly in public-facing roles.

Directors on a board: Directors usually hold a public-facing role and represent the organization for whom they are a director. For this reason, they are typically held to the same standard as employees who also have public facing roles. Political neutrality is important. Political comments or derogatory posts about elected government officials or government representatives, whether federal, provincial, municipal, or with respect to a government office from another country, are divisive in nature. The result can be reputational and financial damage by loss of government and private funding.

Best practices for managing social media activity

If you are concerned about the impact of social media activity at your workplace, consider the following:

• Review your workplace’s social media policy to understand what social media posts are not permitted.
• Review your Board of Directors’ Code of Conduct to see if political social media posts violate the Code.
• Monitor social media for inflammatory, discriminatory, or controversial statements that could impact your organization and lead to reputational and financial damage.
• Consistently enforce social media policies by disciplining employees/directors and terminating or removing them when necessary.  

While employees and directors on a board have the right to express political views, employers have the right to protect their workplace culture and reputation. Canadian case law shows that courts have consistently upheld terminations of employees related to damaging or inflammatory social media activity.

Employers should ensure their social media policies are clear, reasonable, and consistently enforced, while employees and directors on a board must understand that online speech carries professional consequences.