Should I pretend to support my boss's spouse's candidacy?

A reader, let's call him Chuck, from the Southwest United States finds himself at odds with many of his colleagues when it comes to political views. The reader considers himself less conservative than most others with whom he works, but he writes that he never flaunts his views nor criticizes those of others unless he finds something they say specifically offensive. Chuck has found that keeping politics out of the workplace has been relatively easy -- up until recently.

This past fall, Chuck's boss's spouse was campaigning for a local position. While his boss always espoused that he had no party affiliation but was an independent, his spouse ran on a conservative ticket with a conservative platform. For much of the year leading up to the November election, Chuck's boss spent time working on his spouse's campaign. But up until a few weeks before the election, his boss had kept his campaigning out of the office.

A few weeks before the election, Chuck's boss arranged an assortment of his spouse's campaign collateral material in his office and sent out an email to others in the company inviting them to come and get a button, bumper sticker, magnet, or yard sign supporting his spouse for office if they wanted one.

Chuck, who writes that he has never shied away from being blunt. "My desire for gainful employment softened my resolve," he writes. He "reluctantly" took home a bumper magnet so it would seem as if he supported his boss's spouse. "It never made it past the waste basket at home." Chuck isn't sure that his boss didn't check his vehicle to see if the bumper sticker he took was in use.

The boss's spouse lost her election to the more liberal opponent.

"Was I wrong to insinuate that I would support a candidate based on personal/professional connections rather than on my own political biases and platform affinities?" asks Chuck. "The courageous choice would have been to point out the inappropriate nature of the request at the time it was delivered, but I failed to do this. Instead, I offered a feigned agreement of support and collected the bumper sticker for corroboration."

Now, Chuck asks: "What role does ethics play in calling out a superior's unethical behavior?"

I'm not a labor lawyer, so I won't speak to the legality of Chuck's boss sending that email to his colleagues. But ethically, Chuck is right that it was inappropriate for the boss to do so.

Chuck's concern about keeping his boss happy so he can remain gainfully employed is fair, but Chuck didn't have to respond to his boss's email. He knows that by taking a magnetic bumper sticker, he might have been sending a signal to his boss that he intended to support the boss's spouse.

If Chuck didn't feel comfortable bluntly confronting his boss by telling him how inappropriate his email and campaign paraphernalia was, the right thing would have been for Chuck to simply ignore the email and not show up to collect any campaign material.

And the right thing would have been for Chuck's boss's boss or someone from the human resources department to tell Chuck's boss that he was wrong to send the email and he should never use company email for such purposes again. 

Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice, is a lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues. 

Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net. 

Follow him on Twitter: @jseglin 

(c) 2015 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.

Should I agree with my uncle's politics to make him stop talking?

When he was eight years old, my oldest grandson, Evan, asked if each of us gathered around the table for Thanksgiving could say something we were thankful for or to sing a song. We were in the middle of eating at the time, so the request came kind of randomly, yet we obliged. One by one, we expressed thanks or sang a short tune.

In the U.S., Thanksgiving tends to kick off a season of family gatherings. While it is always an issue, given the particularly contentious presidential election that just ended, I have received more than the usual number of questions about the right way to talk with family about politics when thrust around the same dinner table. The questions come with even more vigor from those who know they are about to break bread with some loved ones whose views run quite counter to their own.

A reader from Massachusetts wrote that he and his partner were specifically asked ahead of time not to talk about politics at a dinner to which they were invited. The host mentioned she knew that family at the dinner had strong, yet opposing, political viewpoints. She preferred such potentially difficult conversations not be brought up over dinner. "What should we do if politics do arise?" the reader asks.

I ascribe to the notion that the host gets to set the rules. If it's tradition or a request that no politics (or some other topic that might prove heated or, in some cases inappropriate) be discussed at the dinner table, the right thing to do is to honor the host or the tradition.

But a tougher question facing many is what to do if there are no established rules. What if someone around the table states a political position with which you disagree? Should you sit quietly? Verbally support that person's view to avoid unpleasantries? Nod in agreement? Flee the premises?

There's no ethical upside to pretending to hold a position that you don't simply to appease another guest. If the discussion is indeed a discussion, then it's perfectly appropriate to offer a different viewpoint if you have one. Fleeing is generally a poor option, particularly if you're enjoying your meal.

But offering a different viewpoint is different from trying to convert your dinner guest to thinking like you do. If you go into a discussion believing that your goal is to convert those to think like you do, it's unlikely you'll succeed. A good discussion involves as much listening as it does talking. And it's important to gauge others at the table to make sure any discussion doesn't make them uncomfortable or simply bore them.

At family gatherings, we know the people and we know the traditions. The right thing is to honor the same traditions we've always honored, not to pretend to hold views we don't simply to keep the peace, and respect those with whom we're talking.

It's also good to remember that politics isn't the only thing families and friends talk about. We talk about our kids, our work, our hobbies -- any number of things that don't require taking a particular side.

When all else fails, suggesting that each person at the table take turns expressing their thanks for something or breaking into song might not be a bad option. 

Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice, is a lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues. 

Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net. 

Follow him on Twitter: @jseglin 

(c) 2015 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.