Post-Election Incivility Puts Retention and Culture at Risk

By Nathan Brooks

More than 25% of employees said they were likely to leave their jobs following the 2024 election because of workplace incivility, according to SHRM research. The available summary did not state the research sample size.

The same research found that 56% identified differing political viewpoints as the top driver of incivility they experienced or witnessed. Those findings put post-election politics directly on HR’s retention and workplace-conduct agenda.

HR and other leaders often face a recurring challenge after an election: acknowledge politically charged moments while preventing tension from spreading through the workplace itself. The midterms are over, but conflict rarely ends with the final vote. A shift in political control of Congress can renew the conversation.

The risks include good employees leaving, deteriorating company culture and harassment. Leaders need a response that acknowledges the moment without choosing a political side. That response touches manager communication, employee conduct and HR’s handling of conflict, while also shaping whether employees believe political disagreement remains separate from incivility and harassment.

What does silence communicate?

David Grossman, CEO of the Grossman Group and a workplace communication expert, said: “Silence is a decision, and employees read it as one.”

His point separates taking a political position from demonstrating leadership. Leaders do not need to weigh in on who won or lost an election. They do need to recognize that employees bring different emotions and concerns into work.

Grossman said: “The opportunity here is to reinforce respect, acknowledge uncertainty and remind employees that they are part of the same team.” That approach acknowledges the election without turning employer communications into political commentary.

For HR, employees will likely discuss the result; the choice is whether the organization responds in a way that makes difficult conversations safer and separates political disagreement from incivility toward colleagues.

When should HR react?

The first tool is to address difficult or contentious conversations when they arise. Acknowledging what is happening, without taking a side, can make employees more comfortable and may prevent a larger dispute from taking hold.

HR or direct managers can communicate four practical points:

• Employees may express their feelings without anyone diminishing those feelings.
• Employees can take time and space when they need it.
• Different backgrounds and experiences help make a community diverse and caring.
• Everyone should treat themselves and one another with extra gentleness.

These messages give leaders something specific to say without asking them to debate the election, while establishing a workplace norm that emotional reactions can vary but respectful treatment remains necessary.

When should leaders speak first?

The second tool is to communicate proactively when results are sensitive or contentious. Employees will likely talk about those results whether or not the employer has set boundaries around the subject. A timely message can get ahead of bigger issues.

A communication formula from 15Five offers a practical test for readiness:

• Can employers acknowledge that an election can be a deeply personal issue connected to personal lives, families and faith traditions?
• Will leaders stress kindness and respect around the wide spectrum of beliefs on political issues?
• Can leaders explain how miscommunication can easily occur on forums such as Slack and email?
• Do employees have other communication outlets, including conversations with the leadership team or HR department?

Leaders must decide whether they can acknowledge personal reactions without partisan commentary, explain how written messages can miscommunicate, and provide a route for questions beyond Slack and email.

What should employers carry forward?

HR and managers must choose who will speak, what standards they will reinforce and where employees can take concerns, because a leader can deliver the same message from HR or directly to a team. Employees should know that leadership and HR remain available when a conversation becomes difficult.

That structure keeps the response focused on workplace conduct. It does not require employers to ignore differences or endorse the winner or loser. It requires a visible line between differing views and behavior that undermines respect.

As post-election conversations continue, employers will need to show that political differences do not cancel the standards of respect and teamwork.