A Political (Not Really) Musing of the Politically Agnostic HR Practitioner 04.30.2022

Note: This was originally written and shared on Facebook in 2022. I believe it remains pertinent, even now during the Senatorial Elections.

A few days ago, I joined a TwitterSpace discussion on the topic: Should HR Campaign for a Political Candidate?

I've had an active Twitter account (@joyalosbanos) since 2014, where I post a mix of content, from rants (which I've since stopped), HR/OD topics, to cat pictures, all within the character limit of 140. The imposed limit requires you to be concise and direct, even with TwitLonger.

For those unfamiliar with social media, Twitter Space is a new feature that allows you to discuss any topic, similar to Discord, and it's not recorded (unless you know how to record it).

Let me summarize the discussion points here (please note that I remain politically neutral - two participants were on opposite sides, while Sonnie Santos and I were somewhere in the middle).

It's not only acceptable for HR professionals to advocate for their political beliefs and actively campaign for their chosen candidates or policies, but it can also be seen as a vital part of fostering an inclusive workplace culture where diverse perspectives are acknowledged and respected.

In today’s increasingly polarized political climate, the ability for individuals within HR to express their views can contribute to a richer dialogue about the values and principles that shape a company's identity. Even if I have taken the opposite approach, choosing to remain neutral or advocate for a different set of beliefs, this divergence still represents a significant stance in itself. It highlights the importance of open discourse and the necessity for organizations to create environments where various viewpoints can coexist.

By embracing these discussions, HR can help to facilitate a more engaged workforce that feels empowered to express their own opinions, ultimately leading to a more dynamic and innovative organizational culture. Additionally, it is crucial for HR to navigate these conversations with sensitivity and awareness, ensuring that all employees feel safe and valued, regardless of their political affiliations. This balance can foster mutual respect and understanding, which is essential for maintaining a cohesive workplace.

Since 1986, I've held a cautious view on discussing politics within the family, shaped by a significant incident involving my late cousin and grandmother. My cousin, intoxicated, confronted my grandmother about her political beliefs, despite her fragile health following a stroke. The tension escalated, turning a family member into a source of discord rather than support. This event led to my estrangement from that side of the family for nearly a year, highlighting how political discussions can fracture familial bonds. The experience taught me the importance of valuing peace over asserting political views, leading me to keep my opinions private to avoid potential conflicts.

In the same vein, it's regrettable to terminate friendships developed over years by branding someone as ignorant or uneducated for siding with the opposite view. Isn't it a pity to let friendships fade away because of this? Frankly, will they remember who we are once they win? Likely not.

As an HR practitioner, you need to remain objective despite differing opinions. HR should maintain a balanced approach. We handle employee disputes, from minor issues to serious administrative hearings.

If you force employees to accept your political choice, it doesn't reflect well on you and may change how they perceive you. Diversity includes not only education, upbringing, sexual orientation, and values but also the political affiliations of employees in the organization.

HR can assess candidates' qualifications similarly to recruiting employees, as one participant mentioned. While true, I pointed out that we are also susceptible to recruitment biases when evaluating people.

This is a temporary exercise of our right to vote and choose our leaders for the next six years. Whoever wins will lead us, whether we like them or not.