So your worker joined the convoy protests. Can you fire them?

Hours after he uttered the words “freedom convoy,” Kid Carson was out of a job.

Last Wednesday, the popular Vancouver radio host spent the morning spouting conspiracy theories about Canada’s pandemic response, warning listeners that the federal government was microchipping children with “a digital ID that will control every aspect of their lives” and that the sole purpose of the blockade in Ottawa was to prevent this from happening.

By day’s end, the producers of Stingray’s Z95.3 radio were assuring listeners they’d “parted ways” with the DJ and his controversial views.

The station found itself grappling with a workplace quandary that has bedevilled employers across Canada in recent weeks.

Since early February, when demonstrators converged on Canadian cities with trucks and tractors to lament the Canadian government’s public health response to COVID-19, the politics of this protest have become an increasingly tricky topic to navigate in the workplace, forcing employers to balance their staff’s freedom of expression with corporate reputational harm and uncomfortable co-workers.

On Tuesday, when hackers leaked data from the crowdfunding site GiveSendGo, exposing the identities of 36,000 individuals who contributed funds to the convoy, companies across the country suddenly found their brands entangled with a protest that as of Monday the federal government had declared illegal.

Posts on social media spotlighted a range of businesses, from major banks to sole-proprietors, whose employees appeared to have donated to the convoy.

Customers at David’s Tea ignited a boycott of the company after a screenshot circulating social media appeared to show a $200 donation made by Emily Segal, an Ottawa therapist and the wife of David’s Tea founder, David Segal, even though she had already departed the company.

A senior staffer with Ontario’s solicitor general quickly left her position in the government this week after it was revealed she had made a $100 donation.

Janet Candido, founder of human resources firm Candido Consulting Group, said she has heard from several clients in recent weeks concerned about the damage to their company if employees are discovered to be part of the protest.

“More than ever, people are very worked up about these protests and they’re saying, ‘Fine, I’m not buying tea from David’s Tea’ anymore if it seems like someone with the company donated,” Candido said.

“So now my clients are wondering, ‘Are my workplace policies strong enough to address this if an employee is tied up with the protest?’ ”

Provincial labor laws ensure that employees retain a strong degree of autonomy when advocating for their beliefs outside work. Lawyers and HR experts surveyed by the Star routinely said that an individual’s conduct in their personal life cannot justify punitive measures, including termination, unless their conduct de ella somehow breaches predetermined company policy or severely harms their employer’s reputation with the public.

But when employees associate their company with their personal beliefs, employers may have grounds to take action, said Richard Johnson, partner at Kent Employment Law.

That includes using a work email address to donate funds to the trucker convoy.

“If the employee is using work resources like the email system, that’s an abuse of work time and that’s a disciplinary offense,” said Johnson.

Ideally, employers should have established policies on using work resources well before these issues transpire, said Johnson. Those policies should make clear to employees how to use their work emails, when to display their company affiliation and under what circumstances they are seen to be representing the company.

“This is an incredibly thorny situation we’re in now, so employers should really put a policy in place on a going-forward basis that outlines the confines of workplace behavior and properly conveys to workers when they’ve crossed a line,” he said.

Most donations to the trucker convoy were made before the federal government invoked the Emergencies Act, declaring the protest illegal and mandating Canada’s largest banks to freeze accounts deemed to “further” protest activity in Ottawa.

Nita Chhinzer, an associate professor of leadership and organizational management at the University of Guelph, said the illegal nature of the Ottawa blockade may strengthen an employer’s claim that a participating employee is causing reputational damage to the company — but workers that supported the protest last week were supporting it at a time when the blockade was still technically legal, leaving employers little ground to take action.

If the employee is advocating for their beliefs on their own time, detached from the organization they work for, employers should not interfere in most cases, said Chhinzer.

“We still have to let employees be free and use their freedom of speech. It’s only at the point where their actions are harmful to others or harmful to the company that we should step in and take action,” she said.