What to do when an international conflict comes knocking at your door?

24.10.2025

The peace talks in the Middle East have come to a successful (and hopefully enduring) peace agreement to end the clash between Israel and Hamas. The Gaza ceasefire and the release of hostages conclude the first phase of the globally endorsed and although some minor details still must be addressed, the overall fulfilment of the commitments of the parties gives hope on the de-escalation of the conflict at all levels.

However, the echoes of the protests have not ceased in the western world, where civilians have raised their voices in all areas of society by taking over the streets, publicly raging against institutions which don’t share their views, and even trying to halt production in factories and manufacturing plants.

Many employees have demonstrated their support for the Palestinian cause in their workspaces with uneven degrees of violence. For instance, the Spanish majority unions called for a rare peaceful general strike in support of the Palestinian people on October 15th that simply entailed a voluntary 2-hour break in their ordinary working day although other minor unions and civil rights associations have pushed for rather more intense disturbances. But, how are employers supposed to react to potential disruptions in their workplaces when related to scuffles over political views? Are displays of political support a protected trait in potential claims of discrimination for publicly advocating for certain political issues?

Employees can surely take positions on their political views and can freely and openly share them within their working space although employers still have room for banning certain conversations which may be considered unwise for its potentially impact on the business, clients or new markets. A correct and fair balance between employees right of free speech and right to dissent will help companies protect all political sensibilities, support advocating for non-biased movements for the benefit of the community and enhance neutrality at a corporate level.

Amidst the outburst of overwhelming polarisation in society over sensible political clashes companies should work simultaneously with (i) a well-laid out corporate communication plan; (ii) neutrality in all facets (including C-level and white-collar managers); (iii) clear focus on business-driven decisions; and (iv) a clear risk control panel in charge of coordinating all the previous three elements.

Many companies lose focus and fail to align communication, business and neutrality, thus nurturing potential claims for lack of protection to all sensibilities and political views. It is crucial to stay fact-based and avoid opinion-based decisions, and no better way to act when the right time comes than under policies and step-plans set out in advance.

Nevertheless, HR is not the only area where risks must be controlled. ESG and the corporate governance function must also be alert and be extra meticulous with governmental interference and claims of securing tactical advantage for a certain party in the conflict. Just today the papers published that the Spanish National High Court (Audiencia Nacional) is opening an investigation against the board of a local steel producer for selling to the Israeli defence industry to secure production of military vehicles.

A new step in compliance has just arrived: the risk of taking political correctness to the next level.