Picture this: a team meeting derails because two colleagues snipe at each other. The root cause: they’re on opposite sides of every issue that hits the headlines. It doesn’t matter that you’ve banned talking politics during the workday—each knows what the other believes.
That scenario has become increasingly common. Ninety-one percent of employees report witnessing or experiencing political clashes at work. Three out of four say political discussions have grown more intense. More than half admit they actively avoid coworkers with differing views, https://www.resume-now.com/job-resources/careers/post-us-elections-report.
A 2024 survey of 2,300 U.S. workers that one-third of employees have experienced a conflict that began as a political disagreement—and four out of five of these were actively looking for a new job. Those caught in political altercations were 5.6 times more likely to report productivity lose than employees facing other types of conflict, https://blog.perceptyx.com/political-conflict-at-work-drives-employees-to-quit-perceptyx-study-finds.
It doesn’t stop at arguments. Seventy of U.S. workers reported they had personally experienced and/or witnessed threats being made due to differences in political opinions. 69% say they’ve witnessed or experienced violence in the workplace because of political differences, https://www.shrm.org/content/dam/en/shrm/topics-tools/topics/civility/shrm-q4-civility-index-abstract.pdf.
Why this matters
Hostility reshapes workplace dynamics. Research shows that polarization feeds demonization—seeing the “other side” not as misguided colleagues but as enemies to be discredited, ridiculed, or punished, https://hub.jhu.edu/2024/10/27/snf-agora-poll-september-2024/. Nearly two-thirds of Democrats and more than half of Republicans now agree that members of the opposing party as “downright evil,” https://publicagenda.org/news/pa-snf-pr/.
Once you believe those holding opposing views are “enemies,” contempt feels justified. In the workplace, that can show up as colleagues cutting each other off in meetings, whisper networks spreading rumors, and employees leaving because the environment feels unsafe.
The cost of inaction
Employers ignore this at their peril. The consequences:
- Culture rot. Gossip and partisanship corrode trust faster than any missed deadline.
- Talent flight. Surveys show one in five employees and 40% of workers aged 18 to 34 would leave a job due to political differences at work, https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/news/political-differences-workplace#:~:text=The%20matter%20of%20politically%20aligned,lives%20remain%20positive%20and%20enjoyable.
- Productivity loss. When conversations turn into verbal combat, energy gets diverted from collaboration to conflict management.
- Legal risk. Employers who tolerate violent or demeaning political speech face the same liabilities as harassment or hostile-work-environment claims.
What leaders can do
- Draw the line clearly. Debate ideas? Fine. Celebrate violence or slurs? Not fine. Think of it like a bar: lively debate welcome, chair-throwing not allowed.
- Step in, don’t punt. “Work it out yourselves” is abdication. If you’d intervene in a fight over printer paper, you need to intervene in feuds over politics.
- Train for respectful disagreement. Arm employees with neutral phrases: “I see that differently” instead of “Only an idiot would think that.”
- Model it. Leaders set tone. Eye-rolling, interruptions, or partisan asides teach staff that contempt is acceptable. If you wouldn’t want it in a deposition, don’t say it.
What employees can do
- Pause before snapping. Don’t let today’s zinger torch tomorrow’s bridge. Silence—and a lap around the block—usually beats a verbal grenade.
- Get curious instead of caustic. “What makes you see it that way?” keeps dialogue alive. “So you just swallow headlines?” shuts it down.
- Set boundaries. “This isn’t productive. Let’s get back to the work that pays our salaries.” Simple, professional, effective.
- Skip the gossip circuit. Venting sideways doesn’t fix conflict; it ferments it. Whisper networks rot culture from the inside out.
Bottom line
Political polarization is no longer just a cable-news storyline. It’s a workplace risk. Surveys show that employees feel strained, less collaborative, and even mistreated because of partisan divides. Employers who look away aren’t staying neutral—they’re licensing incivility, division, and attrition. The solution requires leaders who model respect, and train employees to disagree without contempt—and employees willing to pause, set boundaries, and resist the gossip circuit.
In the end, workplaces don’t collapse from deadlines missed—they collapse when colleagues stop seeing each other as human.
© 2025, Lynne Curry, PhD, SPHR, SHRM-SCP
Subscribing to the blog is easy
If you’d like to get 1 to 2 posts a week delivered to your inbox (and NO spam), just add your email address below. (I’ll never sell it.) I’m glad you’ve joined this vibrant blog. Thank you!
I still think the best policy is simply not to engage in highly charged discussions at work- politics, abortion, religion and the like. I work in an incredibly diverse company- diverse in pretty much every aspect- gender, sexual orientation, religion, politics. And in three plus years working here have never seen any two employees get into an argument over any of those issues. And it’s not that management puts a thumb on us and shuts us down, it’s that everyone appears to agree that there are just certain things you don’t need to discuss at work.
Dee your coworkers seem to have a very “grownup: approach to such discussions, and bravo to all.
Dee, you speak for many. Interestingly, a lot of folks who didn’t speak up have called me recently and said they’ve been considering speaking up–wondering if they owe to the future to counter some of the polarized thinking now present. A good argument can be made both ways.
This is such a timely post! In an organization I belong to, days after the Charlie Kirk murder, one of our members spent time in their role as meeting emcee talking about how there was much to admire in Kirk’s free speech stances and ability to talk in impromptu situations. Days after that, one of the group’s members messaged me saying they wouldn’t be renewing because the political content of presentations and discussions made them feel no longer safe. We, too, have a don’t talk politics or religion official position, but it seems to be being abrogated more often lately. Good suggestions for brining things to people’s attention and toning down the discussion without trying out-and-out to prohibit it, because it will continue, and at the same time trying to deal with potentially harmful aspects of such discussions.
Excellent comment–and a challenging anecdote. Thank you so much for sharing!