Well, fans of these groups are more likely to vote than the skater boys and pop tarters out there.
I find it hard to believe they can tell you not to go (even though the memo is filled with words like “recommended”, “should”, and “not advisable.” (Okay, two words on that last one.)) At least in the military, you’re allowed to be political - just not on base, and not in uniform.
One thing that isn’t clear to me from the OP. Do you believe the above and think this one instance doesn’t apply? Or do you think the whole idea is wrong?
Regardless of whatever you may think of journalism, papers and their staffers have to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest not only because of the goals they have, i.e. trying to give their audience the facts, but in order to maintain their credibility as a news source. One employee might not make a difference, but if a whole bunch of staffers went to the show and the news of that got out, it would probably harm the paper. I want to hear the answer to Loach’s question, although I think Jplacer only has a problem with this particular decision that conflicts with what he wants to do.
I don’t know for sure since I am not an attorney, but I think that on your own time, you should be allowed to do what you please. You owe the boss a day’s work for a day’s pay and that’s it. I work for the gubmint. Under the Hatch Act (which doesn’t apply to you) I can attend any function and donate to anyone I please on my own time and as long as I do it as a private citizen (do NOT use a government title or position as a soap box). In an “at will” or so called “right to work” state, I understand they can fire you on a whim, with no recourse. So, while my knee jerk reaction is to “tell him to piss off”, that would probably be a bad idea. Now if this guy tries to tell you how to vote, then you got him.
All I see online indicates that SC is an employment at will state. Seems to me that, technically, you’re screwed. They can tell you what to do, and fire you if you don’t. Of course, the flipside to at-will employment is that, if you dislike this policy (or just don’t feel like coming in to work), you can happily quit and they’re equally screwed.
Just to clarify, as I read the OP Jplacer’s employer is not telling him that he must not attend the concert or that he will be fired if he does so; the employer is saying that he should not attend the concert, because (I infer) they consider that for him to do so reflects badly on his professionalism and therefore on the professionalism of the organisation as a whole. Presumably, if they think he lacks professionalism, this could adversely affect the progress of his career, but it doesn’t necessarily mean disciplining or dismissing him.
But, since it appears that he works in an “at will” state, the employer would be free to dismiss him.
Even if he didn’t work in such a state, I suspect the employer would still be free to impose a requirement of this kind. If adherence to professionals standards of integrity and honesty is a reasonable requirement for an employer to impose - and in relation to at least some jobs it is clearly a reasonable requirement - it is nonsense to suggest that the employee must behave with integrity, honesty and independence 9-to-5, but in his own time can indulge in every kind of dishonesty and deceit. If Jplacer were to be convicted of an offense of dishonesty committed at a weekend, in his own time, he could certainly be fired from any job for which an honest character was a reasonable requirement.
Here we’re not talking about honesty but about political independence, but the principle is the same. The only basis for opposing this is to argue
(a) that it is not reasonable to require political independence of a journalist (so that all forms of political activism should be permitted, outside work) or
(b) that attendance at the concert is not inconsistent with the political independence to be expected of a journalist.
Given that the concert is part political fundraising effort and part political rally, the second argument is a tough one to sustain.
I agree with UDS. My immediate thoughts would be outrage at the company for trying to barge in on your private life, and that surely they wouldn’t fire you for something like that, but it is easy for me to say that when it isn’t my job.
Even if they can’t fire you, they can pass you up for promotions or privately think less of you as a worker. Is going to the concert really worth it?
If you’re not too bothered about the concert, but already have the ticket, I would go see your boss and explain you’d bought the ticket before his email. Perhaps they will refund you. Else, give it away to a friend.
Of course, if you really want to go then I doubt they would find out. Can you give a friend’s name and address for it, or would that be classed as fraud or something?