is a reminder to vote too political?

by Alison Green on September 10, 2024

A reader writes:

I currently work in a management role in a government agency. For anyone who cares to do a quick Google/LinkedIn search, it is clear from my previous jobs for campaigns/issue groups/certain politicians that I’m a Democrat, but I maintain pretty strict boundaries about discussing politics at work. We are a service agency, and I would never want to do anything that would alienate who we serve or make people in the workplace uncomfortable.

Every week, I have an all-hands with my team, and as part of that, I bring up office policy reminders as they come up (time sheets, upcoming reviews, vacation submission deadlines, donut arrivals, just the important stuff). Whenever we have an election, I remind them of our office policy on time off around voting (our meetings also happen to be on Tuesdays).

I was discussing this with another manager, who was taken aback and said it could come off as “too political.” His argument was that they know I’m a Democrat and Democrats are known as the “pro-voting” party, and my team is more likely to vote left. (I don’t know the ideological makeup of my team, but if sweeping generalizations are true, he’s probably right.)

I was a little dismissive at first because I need to know for planning purposes if my team is going to be unavailable, but on reflection, he might be a little bit right? We live in a swing state going into a very contentious election. I always preface the reminder with “if you are planning to vote” rather than pushing them to vote. I have heard from my team that it has served as a reminder that got them to vote, especially for non-presidential elections. And between you and me, I am that annoying person who reminds everyone in my personal life to vote, and I do believe it’s important! But then we’re sliding into “everything is political” territory because as someone who cares deeply about labor rights, a lot of my reminders are about making sure my direct reports are aware of everything they’re entitled to from their employer.

So yay or nay on this being too political? Is there a normal way to find out if these reminders make anyone feel pressured or uncomfortable? Should I do something less direct, like an email reminder in October? Or am I seriously overthinking this?

It doesn’t even sound like you’re reminding people to vote. You’re letting them know of the office policy on time off if they are voting. That’s work-relevant information, just like reminding people of your inclement weather policy when a snowstorm is expected or that the bloodmobile will be on-site next week.

If that’s all you’re doing — just “the company gives up to four hours paid time off for voting on Tuesday; use code 032 on your timesheet” or whatever — your coworker is being very weird. You’re sharing info, not urging anyone to do anything.

Is the subtext of the reminder that the company supports people in voting? Sure, because your company does (assuming the policy makes voting during the work day easier, not harder).

Is sharing info that makes it easier/more likely for people to vote an inherently partisan message? Only if you don’t believe in democracy, I suppose. And it’s sure true that one party is currently engaging in a lot more vote-squelching activities than the other. On the other hand, it’s also true that both parties engage in intensive turn-out-the-vote activities (for their own voters — but both do it).

The more interesting question, I suppose, is whether reminding people to vote — not just reminding them of the company’s policy — is too political for work. I’d love to say, “Of course not! Implying that one side wouldn’t want all voices heard in an election is itself a partisan stance; it’s insulting to that party and counter to foundational principles of our democracy.” That should be the answer. But we’re in such a raw nerve of a cultural moment that that encouragement could indeed read as partisan from either side, depending on which political views are assumed to dominate on your team or in your company, or could just feel like an unwelcome injection of political talk into a space where people might be trying hard to tune it out. It’s incredibly messed up that that’s the case! And on the principle of it, I still think it’s fine — good, in fact — to remind people to vote. Please do. But ugh that we even have to ask the question.

You may also like:
{ 405 comments }

{ 405 comments… read them below }

  1. Retail Dalliance*

    “His argument was that they know I’m a Democrat and Democrats are known as the “pro-voting” party, and my team is more likely to vote left.”

    Yikes to the idea that there’s an “anti-voting” party. I feel like your colleague said a lot here in this statement.

      1. Also-ADHD*

        I mean, I think I’d ask him innocently if he was suggesting that the GOP is against voting (unless he was liberal guilting, assuming he seemed to be not a Democrat) or if he felt the company policy was partisan, just to see why he said next.

    3. Yeah...*

      I was going to focus on something similar.

      YMMV, my experience has been people who don’t want others to be reminded to vote seem to prefer people who don’t agree with them not vote at all.

    5. Beth*

      Also, why does he think that LW’s team knowing they’re a democrat matters? Voting records are private info that your manager can’t access–so the team can’t be rewarded for voting with LW, and doesn’t need to fear repercussions for voting differently. If the team is more likely to vote left, it’s because they genuinely hold those opinions, not because their manager who reminded them they get time off for voting happens to be voting left.

      Discouraging voting reminders specifically to a group that you assume leans left sounds a lot like wanting to suppress votes for one side. Not very democratic.

      1. Silver Robin*

        my guess is that coworker assumes LW would be less assiduous in those reminders if they thought their team would be voting for the other party. Therefore, LWs reminders are a subtle way of turning out the Democratic vote, under the guise of workplace policy reminders.

        1. sparkle emoji*

          I’m sure you’re right, but twisting oneself in pretzels like this must be exhausting. Coworker needs a hobby.

        2. Great Frogs of Literature*

          I think that if one split time between two teams, let’s say engineers and data analysts, and for whatever reason it was known that engineers tended to be right-leaning and data analysts tended to be left-leaning, and one held an equivalent role on both teams but only did the voting reminders for one group or another… THAT could be argued to be a partisan move in the workplace.

          But simply being embedded in a team that’s presumed to have sentiments on way or another and issuing reminders about voting info to that group… calling that a partisan GOTV move at work is a stretch for me. (I know that there are people who think like that. I think they’re wrong.)

      2. Lisa*

        It also sounds like the guy’s argument included that LW’s team is “more likely to vote left” whether or not LW encouraged them to vote. That person sounds like they were sure exposing their own biases.

        Our COO regularly encourages us to vote, while never telling us how to vote. Heck, my church does the same thing. It’s really messed up for someone to interpret the encouragement to vote as an endorsement of one party. It is indeed a sign of where we are in the US, but man, it’s exhausting.

      3. What_the_What*

        Actually, voting records are NOT as private as you’d think! I can google my friends and neighbors and know their party affiliation. I was SHOCKED to find my own with a simple google search of my name and state. I tried to upload a pic but I guess you can’t do that here. It doesn’t say who I voted for, per se, but it does say my “known political affiliation” so….

        1. Jaunty Banana Hat I*

          It’s worth remembering that if that “known political affiliation” info is based on who votes in which primary, some people vote strategically on their opposite political affiliation in an effort to pick the least worst candidate for their actual side to go against. Like if the primary is unopposed for the Democrat, but the Republican primary has two candidates, the person who intends to vote for the Democrat in November might decide to vote in the Republican primary in the hope of the “less bad” candidate winning. Pretty sure that happened at least to a small extent in GA around Raffensburger (state secretary).

          1. Turtlewings*

            Lol, I know my dad has done exactly that, so it definitely happens! And is a valid strategy, imo. As long as you’re only voting in one primary, you get to use that vote however you like.

          2. i am a human*

            I’m registered to a party that I disagree with a lot of the time because my voting district rarely has a primary in the other party. It also helps in my small town for people to think (were they to google) that I’m voting the same as them.

          3. Kate*

            I used to do a similar thing. If the Rep candidate was too far right the state would vote for the Dem. So I voted for the craziest mf I could find.

            Then the tea party happened. Now I stay in my own party and have nothing on my ballot come primary time.

        2. Won't Stanton*

          The “affiliation” is what party you registered with to vote in a primary. (Or a caucus, in states that caucus. If you go to a caucus, that is very definitely a matter of public record because you are talking face to face with your neighbors.) Sometimes people register to vote in the primary of the party they support. It is also perfectly legal to register for the opposite party’s primary, in order to vote for the “least bad” primary candidates on the other side.

          Being registered “Republican” doesn’t mean a person plans to vote for Trump. It may mean they wanted to vote in a Republican Senate primary last month. Being registered “Unaffiliated” doesn’t mean they haven’t made up their mind, or even that they haven’t voted a straight party ticket in every general election since 2008.

          1. Constance Lloyd*

            And Ohio doesn’t even have you register with a party, you simply request your primary ballot of choice, and then your online results show that as your party.

            2. Just Another Cog in the Machine*

              Same with Michigan, and I usually vote in the Republican primary (especially for local elections) because there’s a good change that’s the person who’s winning the general. (Also, most of the Democratic races don’t have multiple people running. When they do, I vote in that primary.)

          2. BattleCat*

            So when you register to vote, are you registering your name with the actual Republican or Democratic party; or are you putting your name down on some neutral county/state/national register as a Republican or Democrat voter? And if you don’t have to vote for the party you’re registered with, what’s the point of being one or the other?

            2. STLBlues*

              Short answer: some states require it when you register to vote, some states don’t. Some states require you to be registered to the party to vote in the primary, some states don’t.

              Like all things American election-based, the answer is “it depends on your locality”

            3. Great Frogs of Literature*

              To expand on what Blues said, you’re registering with your locality* (generally state), and you do it because in a lot of states, it’s the only way to vote in the primary election (which picks which candidate will be on the ballot in the real election) — and you can ONLY vote in the primary for that particular candidate.

              So, example, if the parties in play are Republican, Democrat, and Green, there will be three candidates on the ballot per race** (assuming all parties manage to produce a candidate for that race; a lot of them only have Republican and Democrat, even if there are other parties): the Republican one will have been chosen by people registered as Republican, the Democrat by people registered as Democrat, and the Green by people registered as Green.

              Yes, it is a weird system. (And even in the places where you may have the ability to choose which primary you vote in per election, you’re still picking one of those primaries to vote in.)

              *Caucuses are weird and different and I’m not sure if those are administered by the state or the party.

              **Ignoring races that do complicated things like “pick 12 of 18,” which I think are usually local elections and often not split into parties in the same way.

            4. Lenora Rose*

              If you *had to* vote for the party you’re registered with, what would be the point of voting? Just look at the registrations in advance and declare a winner.

              Thankfully, that’s not how it works in the US. Your registration doesn’t constrain you at all, and that’s a good thing for so many reasons.

              As noted, folks sometimes want to vote in primaries for the other party. There are also places people are pressured by relatives to register a certain way, or choose to since the affiliation is potential public knowledge and they don’t want to rock the family. In addition, people plain change their minds. Moreover, with multiple different races on one ballot, they might want to vote one way for the president and another for a judge, and yet another for the dogcatcher.

            5. So Middle of the Road that there's a line on my forehead*

              I don’t align neatly with either major political party, but registering as Unaffiliated would mean I couldn’t vote in any primary for anything other than school board. So I registered with the party that seems to have the most impact on a local level for primary elections, and I vote my conscience, regardless of party.

          3. COHikerGirl*

            In Colorado, unaffiliated means you get both the Republican and Democrat primary ballots and you get to pick which one you fill out and return (everything is mail-in, it’s so wonderful and convenient and accessible for everyone! You can also go in person if you want to. Literally all of the options!). At one point, my husband was unaffiliated and had filled out a D and an R ballot (different elections of course!). He’s solidly single party in November but primaries bounces for exactly what you said in the first paragraph!

        3. The Gollux, Not a Mere Device*

          Fortunately, enrolling in a party is optional. Whether it’s a good idea depends on which state you live in. In New York (for example), you can only vote in a primary if you’re registered as a member of that party. In Massachusetts, if you don’t choose a specific party, you can walk up on primary day and tell them which ballot you want, and it doesn’t have to be the same one every time.

          When I was volunteering to help newly-naturalized citizens register to vote, if anyone asked about that part of the form, we told them that it was fine to leave it blank, and they could enroll in a party later if they wanted. (Most of the volunteers leaned left, but we all thought that encouraging people to vote was a good thing, and we never wore anything partisan while doing the voter registration work.)

          1. ReallyBadPerson*

            Up until very recently in my state, you couldn’t vote in a primary unless you enrolled in a party.

            1. dawbs*

              I was interested in being a poll worker/volunteer, but I can’t in my state because I don’t (and won’t) register with a party.

              1. Waiting on the bus*

                You need to register with a party to be a poll worker??? That seems kinda sketchy on first glance.

                I suppose it’s to make sure they have representatives of both parties present to avoid accusations of cheating? Is counting the votes open to the public in the US?

                No one asks about political affiliation over here. The count is public, so in theory people can just wander in and watch us count the votes if they suspect foul play.

                1. Texan In Exile*

                  It depends on the state. In some states, they want a balance of parties working the polls.

                  In Wisconsin, where I volunteer at the polls, you just apply and go through the training. And yes, we have official pollwatchers (who I think are by party) but also citizens can stick around, although we aren’t counting the ballots at the end as much as doing all the validations, which is to count the physical number of ballots and make sure that tallies with the automated reader and with the voter numbers we gave out. Also, we have to go through and find any write-ins – those do have to be counted by hand because all the reader can tell us is that there is a write-in, but not for whom.

                  (We also have to count all the signatures in the ballot books and validate that against the totals, etc, etc. There are a lot of checks and balances, which is why I get so bothered when people accuse us of cheating. Do they know how many people would have to be part of the conspiracy to cheat?)

                2. Kate*

                  In the state where I live *and* work the polls, you can register “unaffiliated”, pick your primary every time, and provide “balance” as an election judge – they can assign me to almost any precinct where they need to balance it out. I’m like the Onegative of election workers.

            2. Philosophia*

              It’s still the case where I live, and besides declining to enroll with a party that keeps endorsing an antisemite, I’m not going to subject myself to spam. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t, though: during the last decade, a local party operative took it upon himself to look up voting records and repeatedly harass people who DIDN’T vote in primaries.

            1. Reluctant Mezzo*

              In Oregon we have *all* the parties, and then there’s ‘non-affiliated’. Since people are registered to vote when they get their driver’s license or Official ID if they don’t drive (you also get on the local jury list), the non-affiliated make up a large number. We also exclusively mail-in, but you can vote down at the county clerk’s office if you lose your ballot (which I did one year. Of *course* I found it as soon as I got home).

        4. Texan In Exile*

          That information can also be based on political candidates and causes to which a person has donated or petitions a person has signed. (All public info)

          But it still doesn’t tell you how someone votes. Or it might tell you how someone voted in the past, but people can change. I talk to almost everyone I meet about voting and there are a lot of women who used to vote one way who are, for the first time in their life, going to vote the other way because they are so so angry and so concerned about a certain issue.

          Indeed, I am in the middle of writing post-its to leave in the ladies’ rooms for the next six weeks – post-its that tell women that their vote is private and they can vote for the candidate who supports them and the issue they are so angry about – and that their husband will never know.

            1. Lenora Rose*

              You think women won’t vote because of a post-it? Unless it’s telling them which party to vote FOR, which I would, ah, let’s say STRONGLY discourage, it’s just a reminder.

              1. ShanShan*

                It’s possible this person hasn’t spent much time in public women’s restrooms and is unaware of the strog culture of posting messages and flyers there that we don’t want men to see.

                The only thing that’s unusual about this measure is that it’s a Post-It rather than a full poster.

                1. Texan In Exile*

                  Yeah there’s a reason the human trafficking hotline is pasted to the inside stall doors of almost every ladies’ room.

            2. Texan In Exile*

              I am pretty involved in election and campaign volunteering and I can assure you that there are women who don’t want their husbands to know how they vote and who don’t know if the husbands can find out.

              (Unfortunately, if they vote absentee, the husband can insist on seeing the ballot.)

              (Fortunately, the party the women don’t want to vote for anymore happens to discourage absentee ballots.)

              1. Reluctant Mezzo*

                And since women run so many errands, one of them could be to the county clerk’s office, where they can *re-vote*.

        6. hellohello*

          Whether you voted and if you voted in a party-specific primary are public records. Who or what you voted for is entirely secret.

      4. Susannah*

        Actually if you’re registered in a party, that’s generally public.
        HOW you vote is private.
        But LW doesn’t have to hide his or her political party, as long as no one feels pressured to agree.

        I don’t even know what to say to someone who thinks encouraging democracy is “political.”

      5. Turquoisecow*

        Is he concerned the OP’s employees are going to vote democrat just because OP is a democrat, and they feel they have to in order to win favor with the boss? That’s a ridiculous stance but it was the only thing I could think of.

        1. Texan In Exile*

          Also just nuts because it’s illegal to take a photo of your ballot. So how would you even prove it?

        2. Llama Lamma Workplace Drama*

          no, my thought was that he is a Republican and doesn’t want people to vote who he thinks are Democrats.

        3. Irish Teacher.*

          I’m looking from abroad so may be missing something but my interpretation is that he is a Republican supporter and, rightly or wrongly, believes a majority of people (or just a majority in that area/state) support the Democrats so more people voting = advantage to the Democrats and therefore encouraging people to vote = giving an advantage to the Democrats and that’s unfair.

          If I’m right it’s bizarre logic and works on the assumption that politics is a “game” where each side tries to “win” rather than essentially choosing somebody for a job and trying to implement the will of the majority.

      6. Ellie*

        Yes, and he should remember that not everyone votes the way they’re expected to, either. I am firmly on the left, but an awful lot of people who know me assume I sit on the right (I have no idea why… I’m actually quite vocal about a lot of leftist issues). So him assuming the team is mostly Democrat – unless they’re wearing badges and t-shirts – he should consider why he made that assumption.

        Anyway, it seems that supporting people’s ability to vote is a company policy. OP is just relaying that policy so that everyone is properly aware of it. I think that’s admirable.

        1. Reluctant Mezzo*

          Because I am a veteran, I get spam emails from the party a certain party thinks I should be. Um nope. I’ve told them that a few times and they ignore me. Hello spam folder!

    7. Observer*

      Yikes to the idea that there’s an “anti-voting” party. I feel like your colleague said a lot here in this statement.

      Agreed.

      1. 14 Degrees*

        The party you consider to be the pro-voting party have sued to keep the person I want to vote for off the ballot… because it could hurt them politically for people to have that choice.

        1. Befuzzled*

          Sounds almost like the person you want to vote for is a criminal and a traitor who led a violent insurrection to overthrow a free and fair election…

      1. amoeba*

        Hah, yes.

        Reminds me – in Germany, they made ChatGPT fill out the online “voting recommendation” tool we have. Turns out ChatGPT votes Green (the most liberal, and obviously also climate-friendly, party over here).

    10. H3llifIknow*

      So I think we all know where HE clearly leans and he’s trying to dissuade you. If you were saying, “Hey be sure to vote BLUE on Tuesday” well that’s problematic, but like Alison said, if you’re reminding people, “Hey you get X hours off to vote, don’t waste it!” that’s perfect. New people may think voting time comes out of pocket, or they have to do it at 7am or 7pm. Facts are facts and your coworker is a jerk.

    11. Quill*

      On the one hand we functionally have an anti-voting party.

      On the other hand I don’t think we can take it for granted that this guy’s ridiculous complaint won’t be taken seriously at the moment.

    12. amoeba*

      Yeah, that people actually *say* that part out loud is pretty scary.

      As Alison says, “unless you don’t believe in Democracy”… well, I guess we’re on to something there.

    13. Fishsticks*

      Yeah, little bit of the “quiet part out loud” there.

      Considering how many businesses offer absolutely nothing to employees as far as paid time off to vote, I think any company that does needs to make it very very clear.

    14. Reluctant Mezzo*

      Since Abbott is sending SWAT teams to people who want to encourage others to register to vote, and DeSantis is sending police to investigate people who signed petitions for a particular measure on the ballot, I’m sensing a trend here.

  2. FormerFed*

    If you’re in a US federal government agency, it’s not just about you being personally worried about making others uncomfortable in the workplace. You’re required to comply with the Hatch Act as a federal employee.

    (Reminding people about time codes to vote does not violate the Hatch Act)

    1. Festively Dressed Earl*

      This. The key to avoiding Hatch Act violations is the word “partisan”, and voting is not by definition a partisan activity. OP isn’t attempting to persuade or coerce their coworkers into voting for a particular candidate, punishing people for not voting, making hiring decisions based on whether an individual votes, etc. The other manager is off base.

        1. CountyWorker*

          I’m a county worker, and they’ve set it up so we can choose to work as election officials during elections. Except elections are run by the city, so I’m supposed to get paid by the city (at just over minimum wage), calculate eight hours of that, and send a personal check to the county covering the eight hours they paid me for. Which is obnoxious every time I get a paycheck and then *again* during tax season.

          I asked if I could just use my designated “volunteer hours” to work the elections, but they won’t let me because volunteering as an election official was deemed “too political”.

          Which is technically correct.

          1. Texan In Exile*

            Ha! I volunteer registering voters with a non-partisan group, but I only go to events and neighborhoods where I will likely be registering like-minded people.

            And I volunteer as a pollworker in a like-minded neighborhood.

            I don’t talk about candidates or parties in either environment, but I pick my locations strategically.

          2. Festively Dressed Earl*

            Wrapping my head around that required another cup of coffee at 4 PM. If I can’t sleep tonight, I’m blaming your county.

      2. North American Couch Wizard Society Member*

        As a fellow government employee, though, I’ve found that there’s a LOT of confusion about the Hatch Act and that many fellow employees seem to interpret it as “you can’t do anything political or even mention politics at work” rather than “you can’t use your governmental position when engaging in partisan activities”. Which is probably a testament to how much attention people are paying to those online trainings about the Hatch Act, but whatever.

        (I brought one of our many identical travel mugs to work last week just like I do every day only to realize that my spouse had absent-mindedly stuck a “HARRIS-WALZ” sticker on it and I had to shamefacedly squirrel it away in my desk before anyone saw it.)

    2. Roscoe da Cat*

      My agency always sends out a reminder about time around voting and also volunteering for poll workers (which is permitted under the Hatch Act)

      1. Anonymel*

        The commander of the AF Base I work at sends out a reminder! That colleague is so off base he can’t be seen without binoculars.

        1. JanetM*

          “That colleague is so off base he can’t be seen without binoculars.”

          This is a lovely phrase. May I add it to my quote file? Default attribution would be “Anonymel, on Ask A Manager, September 10, 2024,” but I can change that if you would prefer.

          1. What_the_What*

            I too have an AAM list of “I am going to work this into a conversation one of these days”! This goes in mine, as well.

    3. Madame Desmortes*

      US-state policies applying to public employees usually work similarly — non-partisan voting-related stuff like time-off policies for voting is fine, partisan politicking on work time is not.

      I will say, I do not envy political-science instructors at public universities in the US right now.

    4. JSPA*

      It has been okay since… forever? for c(3) nonprofits / churches / other groups legally held to nonpartisan, apolitical guidelines to encourage “voting.” The height of the legal wall between Non profits and “incidental” partisan political acts has shifted up and down a bit over the decades, but “souls to the polls” and the various “rides to the polls” groups and issues activism “please vote” mailings (even those that highlight candidates’ stances on the relevant issues!) are broadly legal.

      All major parties and most minor parties are on the record as encouraging voting. The coworker is doing some weird anxiety dance. Feel free to ignore it.

    5. Lizzianna*

      Fed here. It wouldn’t even occur to me that anything OP mentioned would be a violation of the Hatch Act. I make sure that my team understands time off allowances for voting and because our work sometimes requires us to leave unexpectedly with short notice in the fall, our leadership team shares info on absentee and early voting options.

      Generally, my agency encourages non-partisan civic engagement, including voting. We do skew a little more to the right than your average agency, although I tend to lean more to the left, and I’ve never heard anyone complain about voting encouragement.

    6. AJ*

      I can’t speak to the USA, but we have similar in the UK. I’m a Civil Servant, and we have to remain politically neutral, especially in the run up to an election. There’s a lot of very stringent rules about what we can and can’t do during the Pre-Election Period, or “PEP” (formerly known as “Purdah”). But encouraging people to vote, as long as we’re not encouraging people what to vote for, is completely fine. I remember getting a similar email, through work, just before the latest GE about how to volunteer at a polling station.

  3. EM*

    Agree with the above. I’m a fed and I could not encourage people to vote without running the risk of someone finding it too political. A great way to handle it is just what you’re doing–a reminder about the policies around taking time off to vote.

    1. Not Tom, Just Petty*

      This.
      I read the headline and thought, if you tell any staff member “remember to vote tomorrow,” you are overstepping. Done. Full Stop.
      If your statement is factual, you are not doing that.
      By your colleague’s logic, informing people that they are eligible for FMLA after one year encourages absenteeism. Oh look, a woman on your team announced she was pregnant. Clearly she chose to become pregnant because during a staff meeting you read the HR updates to the group announcing parents now get X+2 weeks paid leave instead of X weeks.
      I hope you don’t explain to your staff that they get a 15 minute break during 4 hours of work. Good god, ANARCHY!
      Now, your colleague would disagree with this, because he doesn’t care about employees and their rights. He only wants to make sure you aren’t coercing people to the left.
      But it would be fun to ask him.

      1. Your Former Password Resetter*

        I’m curious why it would be overstepping to encourage people to vote?

        From what I understand you can’t be partisan or coerce people to vote a certain way, but if you encourage everyone to vote that seems like it shouldn’t apply?
        Or is it an optics thing, where it’s not against the rules but can be easily misinterpreted?

        1. Presea*

          imho, “remember to vote tomorrow” comes with an assumption that the person is, in fact, voting tomorrow. This message coming from a manager comes with the implication that they’re telling you to do it the way they’d tell you to remember to turn in your timesheets, eg that they may consider it mandatory. And with a manager who’s political affiliations are well-known, someone could read into it as crossing into campaigning for voting for a particular candidate as the coworker did in this letter. Granted, all of this would be reading a lot into the situation and the manager could have been totally benign in their intentions, but it’s certainly not good optics and not something a manager should want to do.

          But this would primarily apply to a “remember to vote tomorrow” directed at an individual. A more general “reminder that the election is tomorrow, so some people may be out of the office to vote” or whatever would presumably be fine. Especially because being out that day wouldn’t necessarily disclose whether the person voted or not – someone could be out for a doctors appointment right then, or could have voted early/absentee, etc. so at that point it really is just useful information.

          1. Not Tom, Just Petty*

            “[Hey,] reminder that the election is tomorrow, so some people may be out of the office to vote” or “please drop an email if you need to be in late, take time at lunch or leave early,” is not the same as,
            “Hey, voting day tomorrow. Don’t forget to vote/Be sure to vote tomorrow.”
            I would feel uncomfortable about it. I would thank my boss for the heads up. I would not say that I was planning to vote or not planning to vote. I would hope for the conversation to end quickly.

        2. Zelda*

          I suppose if one encouraged *particular individuals* to vote, it could leave one open to a charge of selecting whom to encourage based on guesses or knowledge of how those individuals are likely to vote. But encouraging *the entire staff equally* to vote shouldn’t be. (“Shouldn’t.” Sigh.)

        3. sparkle emoji*

          Yeah, I’ve never encountered it in the workplace but I frequently had Professors at my (public) university say something like “remember to vote tomorrow” or let us know we got a freebie absence if we missed class to vote.

          1. Properlike*

            I was a university professor and encouraged it. I would even bring in my sample (non-primary) general ballot to give students a view of what a ballot looks like and how it’s not just federal.

            I reminded them that voting is a constitutional right that not many of us have always had in this country. And they it’s so easily taken away if you don’t use it. That the expectations of US citizens is that they will exercise their right to vote and the responsibilities that come with it (jury duty) even though it can be inconvenient.

            No, extra credit for voting would be illegal and shut out people who are unable to vote for whatever reason.

            I never brought up party. I told them their vote is private, as it should be. I told them it’s so fundamental to our system of democracy that I didn’t care how they voted, as long as they did it. I gave out non-partisan resources for more information.

            It’s one thing I miss about teaching.

      2. Susannah*

        How on earth is it overstepping – unless you believe voting itself is a subversive or revolutionary act?
        Do NOT let this colleague bully anyone into not voting.
        Encouraging someone to vote is no different than encouraging them to walk X steps/day, get a flu shot, contribute to the company’s Unit way find – which many do. And are REALLY aggressive about it. I can’t tell you how many “reminders” I got about giving to United Way. Or donating blood. And that’s to participating in democracy – it’s my money and actually; blood!

        1. penny dreadful analyzer*

          I’d be pretty annoyed about my employer “encouraging” me to get in X steps per day, too.

          1. ShanShan*

            A flu shot is probably a better comparison, since getting the flu affects others but getting your steps in only affects you.

            1. penny dreadful analyzer*

              I don’t think management should be telling their subordinates what non-work-related stuff they should do. Providing information or resources about it, sure, and instructions about what to do where it does specifically interact with work life, definitely yes, but it’s not your boss’ job to tell you to vote, exercise, go to the doctor, change your air filters every quarter, or any other non-work-related thing they want to tell themselves is totally fine because it’s pro-social.

              1. ShanShan*

                I mean, in theory, sure, but if we’re talking about the US, we’re in a country where we’ve decided to irrevocably marry healthcare to workplaces, so it’s a little late to start worrying about that now.

    2. sdog*

      I’m curious about this. I was a fed for a long time, and reminding people to vote has never felt political in the offices where I’ve worked. Does it feel that way because you sense that you are different politically than your colleagues?

      1. EM*

        I work at a very controversial agency, which is part of it. I feel like I have to avoid even the appearance of implying I have a political opinion at work, including encouraging voter registration etc. even though I’m very active on my own time. I never know when someone might be waiting to pounce on my statements, or who might see them as coercive unfortunately. I do make sure to answer the public’s questions and offer information about how to find information on voter registration and their eligibility when asked. At other agencies, it might be less fraught, which would be wonderful! The current climate has made me even morr careful than is legally required though.

  4. mango chiffon*

    In DC it is required for companies to notify staff of their right to time off for voting before an election. Understandably not all places in the US follow this, but it is not political to say that there is a policy in place around this.

    1. Orv*

      This is true in California, too. We have postings about it (along side the usual equal opportunity and minimum wage posters).

  5. I want my voting sticker*

    Speaking as someone with friends and family all over the political spectrum, I don’t beleive that one party over another is considered the ‘pro-vote’ party. Registed voters are pretty evenly split.
    Regardless, I have heard everywhere from church leaders to musicians at concerts say ‘I don’t care who you vote for – just go and vote the way your heart tells you to’ or similar phrasing. I think that’s totally okay.

    1. HA2*

      “Pro-vote” party in the sense that the Democratic party is trying to make it easier for people to vote and wants to expand the voting population, whereas the Republican party is trying to put up more barriers to voting and restrict the franchise. Both parties obviously want people to vote for them, but yeah Democratic party stance is pro-voting-rights right now and Republican party stance is anti-voting-rights.

      1. I want my voting sticker*

        Can we not ffs?
        I don’t discuss politics with my closest friends, so I am not interested in your political views (nor anyone else’s).

          1. I want my voting sticker*

            I didn’t start this one – I am not the OP.
            And there is not an anti-voting party. To say otherwise is unhelpful, especially in this political climate.
            Point is, telling people to vote is okay as long as you are injecting your opinions on how to vote.

            2. Worldwalker*

              There is not?

              I see a party which attempts to put up barriers to voting — for example, reducing the number of polling places in areas they consider favorable to their opponents — and one which does not. And a lot more — I’m not going to go into the details, they’re all over the news if you want to read about them. But I would certainly consider that “anti-voting.” The opposing party does not do this.

              2. Llama Lamma Workplace Drama*

                and only 1 party made it illegal to hand out bottles of water to people waiting in the voting line when it was 100 degrees outside!

            3. Dahlia*

              You commented your opinion on a public forum. You don’t get to demand people don’t reply to your opinion. That’s starting a conversation.

            4. MK*

              You commented on this post, and one can easily tell by the title that it is about politics, even partly. As far as I know this site doesn’t have a general “no politics in the comments” rule, and it’s inappropriate to demand that people don’t discuss politics here because you don’t want to hear their views.

              1. CommanderBanana*

                Right? Voting sticker is more than welcome to skip the comment section of this question altogether, but commenting and then demanding that everyone else stop commenting is….well, quite precious.

            5. Hastily Blessed Fritos*

              There absolutely is a party that for years has been attempting to make it more difficult to vote, and one that has been attempting to make it easier. Describing the former as “anti-voting” may be hyperbole, but “pro-barriers to voting” is absolutely true. (This, obviously, refers to the policies and stated goals of elected officials of the two parties, and is not meant to represent everyone who votes for them.)

            6. CommanderBanana*

              Point is, telling people to vote is okay as long as you are injecting your opinions on how to vote.

              Freudian slip?

            7. Befuzzled*

              “there is not an anti-voting party. To say otherwise is unhelpful, especially in this political climate.”
              ————
              There’s a party that wants to make it harder to vote and disenfranchise side swaths of the country- what term would you use?

              Also- if you don’t want a political discussion don’t hop into the comments and start one.

        2. Kevin Sours*

          Sorry if people stating the truth in bland language offends you but this refusal to discuss the elephant in the room out of a misguided sense of politesse is a large part of the problem.

          1. I want my voting sticker*

            Truth is never offensive.
            And I have every right to decide who I want to have a conversation with – it isn’t you. Or any other internet strangers.

            1. Spreadsheets and Books*

              Then why exactly are you commenting on a public site that is rife with internet strangers?

            3. Worldwalker*

              In that case, I would strongly suggest not participating in a comment thread, because the whole point is having conversations with “Internet strangers.”

            4. Learn ALL the things*

              Then don’t post to Internet forums where strangers can reply to you. That’s kind of how this works.

            6. Apex Mountain*

              I think voting sticker is just saying they don’t want to discuss specific politics which is the whole point of the question, not that they don’t want to hear from anyone ever – not sure what the issue is with thaty

              1. Turquoisecow*

                Then they shouldn’t have brought up specific policies. The parties are absolutely NOT both equally encouraging or discouraging voters and they had to have known that was going to be a controversial statement, but they threw it out there and then said “oh I don’t want to talk about it?” Then they shouldn’t have brought it up.

                1. Apex Mountain*

                  I don’t see what’s so controversial about not wanting to talk politics at work.

                  I agree that the R’s are trying to make it harder for some to vote but that’s really not the point of the letter or the comment (imo).

              2. MigraineMonth*

                The problem isn’t that they don’t want to discuss politics. It’s that they’re posting political opinions (because “neither party discourages voting” is a political opinion) and getting angry at everyone replying.

                If they don’t want to talk to strangers on the Internet about politics, they could very easily not do so.

            7. Irish Teacher.*

              It’s fine not to respond to people if you don’t want to have a discussion here, but it’s not really reasonable to reply to a discussion, then complain when people reply to you because you don’t want to have a conversation with us, while continuing a conversation with us. If you don’t want a conversation, then just…don’t reply.

              You posted your view on the topic. Other people have a right to post theirs. If you aren’t interested, you don’t have to read them, but it isn’t reasonable to expect people only to post what you are interested in.

            9. C*

              Normally when I don’t want to have a conversation with internet strangers I don’t leave a comment at all. Or if it’s too late for that I just close the tab and do something else.

              1. Irish Teacher.*

                Yup, my general response when people are giving response to my comment that bother me, generally because they have misinterpreted what I was saying is that I clarify once, then I stop reading. And I don’t SAY, “I will stop reading any responses now,” because that just sounds like I’m doing a “and I get the last word ’cause I’m ending the conversation here.”

                Other people have as much right as I do to express their views and if I don’t want to engage any more, I just…don’t.

            10. What_the_What*

              So you just like to drop your little opinion bombs and then tell anyone who responds to them to stop talking to you if they don’t agree with it.

              Got it. I know 14 year old who does something similar.

            11. Good Enough For Government Work*

              This is a very strange remark to make in a busy replies section. If you didn’t want to talk politics, why reply to a post about politics?

            12. Befuzzled*

              “ Truth is never offensive.”
              Yet you seem to be offended by the truth

              “And I have every right to decide who I want to have a conversation with – it isn’t you. Or any other internet strangers.”
              Sure – but by posting on the Internet comment thread, you started the conversation with all of us. You don’t get to demand that we stop posting on this public forum. If you don’t want to engage in the conversation anymore, you can leave.

        3. jasmine*

          ++

          I’m not even a republican, feel very strong about the political views I do have, but I wish I didn’t see politics so often on AAM. its not what I’m here for

          it’s Alison’s site so she can do whatever she wants, but trying to start a political conversation/debate with a random commentator is just not necessary

          1. Arrietty*

            It’s not possible to discuss the issues that are important to people without discussing politics, because by definition if something matters to people and there are differing views, it’s a political issue.

            1. jasmine*

              “everything is political” in response to “hey I don’t want to see politics everywhere”… do those of you who think this way not get burned out by simply existing on the internet?

              you can just not bring up an issue

              1. Irish Teacher.*

                No, we don’t get burned out. Why would we? Accepting that life is political isn’t…something that causes most people to burn out. I realise it can if somebody is a member of a group that is being harmed by the way things are political, but in that case, it’s the reality that is burning them out, not acknowledging it.

                You can not bring up an issue, but not bringing it up is also political as it means you either think it doesn’t need discussing or that it is better not to discuss it which…are also political stances. If I think that say gender relations don’t need to be discussed, that implies I am satisfied with the status quo which is…a political stance.

                And I Want a Voting Sticker did bring up an issue, then objected when other people responded to them on that issue. It wasn’t those who replied to them who started it.

              2. metadata minion*

                I mean…sometimes, yeah? I also get burned out by existing in a world that thinks my identity is a political statement.

          2. blah*

            There’s a magical thing you can do called ignore those comments and move on. It’s what the rest of us do.

            1. Apex Mountain*

              There’s also the option to discuss it which is what Jasmine’s doing – you are equally free to skip that comment

          3. Jeanine*

            It’s not something that happens often, but THIS year with all that has been going on since the pandemic started, the election is the most important election we have had to date, and some commentary is to be expected. Once it’s over I’m sure it will die down.

        4. Seashell*

          You said you didn’t believe that one party over another is considered the ‘pro-vote’ party. Someone else had different beliefs and expressed those. Do you think it’s fine for you to given an opinion, but not fine for anyone else to disagree?

          I don’t think the fact that registered voters are split has anything to do with the behavior or policy positions of the major political parties regarding voting.

        5. hellohello*

          “There is no anti-voting party” is, in fact, a pretty political statement to make, and one many people would pretty strongly disagree with. I’d recommend that if you don’t want to talk politics in a comment section, don’t leave a comment with a political statement in it.

        7. sparkle emoji*

          HA2 explained something from the letter you misunderstood. They didn’t share their political stance. Calm down.

        8. Specks*

          Well, that’s ironic, since your post had everything to do with a political statement and nothing to do with the letter at hand or advice for OP. And when someone pointed out you’re wrong, you suddenly aren’t interested in hearing anyone’s political views. Hypocrisy at its best.

        9. STLBlues*

          You’re literally the one saying that there’s no such thing as a pro-vote party….

          Why wade into something, controversially, and then claim you absolutely NEVER want to talk about controversial topic? That’s pure drama llama behavior, Sticker.

      2. Richard L*

        That is a common mistake. Both parties are pro-voting-rights. The issue is who is eligible to vote based on existing laws. As a conservative, I see no issue with the OP reminding people to vote.

        1. Educator*

          This is intellectually disingenuous. One party is actively MAKING laws to try to make it harder for historically marginalized groups to vote. Come on.

          1. Worldwalker*

            One party is pro-voting-rights. The other party is pro-voting-for-us-rights. The former believes that, if everyone has a voice, people will pick them. The latter believes the same — that people will vote for the other guy. So they’re going to considerable lengths to ensure that people who are likely to vote for their opponents do hot have the opportunity.

        3. Learn ALL the things*

          The difference is that one party is pro voting rights for everyone, while the other party is pro voting rights for people they think are more likely to vote for their party.

          One party is more likely to recommend closing polling places in poor and/or non-white neighborhoods. One party is more likely to restrict the voting rights of people with criminal convictions. One party is more likely to promote policies that restrict early voting or voting by mail.

          These are real and true things that are happening, and it’s disingenuous to say that both parties are equally pro-voting.

          1. Worldwalker*

            Exactly. (similar to what I said above, with nesting fail)

            It’s a difference between favoring voting, and favoring only people voting for their party.

        4. Trout 'Waver*

          :looks at Republican gerrymandering of my state:
          :looks at Republicans bragging about gerrymandering to the maximum extent possible:
          :Looks at political affiliation of supreme court judges that upheld the gerrymanders:

          Nah. It’s not a both sides thing.

          1. Goldenrod*

            Also Donald Trump tried to break the postal system because he (misguidedly and weirdly) thought that would disqualify absentee ballots which he (also weirdly) felt would benefit him.

          2. migrating coconuts*

            Amen. Look at dems following covid rules and voting by mail. Look at trump’s post office general removing machinery and other shenanigans so that sorting and delivering is extremely delayed so votes don’t arrive in time. Look at which side is removing voting places and ballot drop off places in minority and working class neighborhoods. Look at which side is removing early voting or extended voting (and guess who has less ability to get time off at their jobs to vote on just one specific day) Look at which side is passing laws restricting voting just a few weeks before election day. To say both sides are pro-voting is disingenuous at best. Regardless, if you don’t want people to prove you wrong, don’t comment with false statements.

            1. Reluctant Mezzo*

              Don’t forget the thousands of ballots that ‘got lost’ in Virginia and were only discovered a few months ago.

          3. Member of the pro-voting political party*

            Both sides do gerrymander, though. I don’t know if one side or the other does it more, but they both do it a lot.
            I don’t recall hearing any Democrats bragging about it.

            1. Trout 'Waver*

              If you don’t know which side does it more, you are loudly proclaiming your own ignorance.

              Some Democrat state parties do it. Some very notable Democrat state parties don’t.
              Every single republican state majority does it, with the backing of the republican majority on the supreme court.

              Every single anti-gerrymandering lawsuit is brought by Democrats or left-learning independents and opposed by Republicans.

              Calling this a both sides thing is intellectually dishonest.

        5. Turquoisecow*

          Then why did the Republican Party vote against an expansion of the voting rights act which would have ensured that eligible voters are able to vote more easily?

        6. Anonymel*

          If by reducing the number of polling locations in places that have little access to public or other means of transportation, destroying or removing mail in ballot boxes, suing states to try and stop them from counting mail in ballots, creating an intimidating atmosphere around voting locations, and making the locations themselves as uncomfortable (see: no water for voters waiting for hours in the sun), etc… as “being pro voting rights”… sure. I’m sure they’re pro “someone” voting, but it sure isn’t “everyone” voting.

    2. madhatter360*

      This reminds me of a scene from the West Wing. A group of girl scouts is making posters for get out the vote and suggest the slogan “It doesn’t matter who you vote for, make sure you vote.” The campaign manager for one of the candidates says it does matter quite a bit who you vote for, and suggests “No matter who you vote for, make sure you vote”

    3. Educator*

      “The way your heart tells you?” Gross. How about the way your brain tells you after actually examining policies?

      1. I want my voting sticker*

        Okay then the OP can phrase in whatever way they feel is approriate. I am just giving examples of what I have heard. The person saying it was very clear – vote your conscience.

      2. Worldwalker*

        Yeah. We’re not voting for the Homecoming Royalty, we’re voting for the leader of the United States.

        Think, don’t feel.

        1. Ally McBeal*

          As listed on the ever-so-charming posters/flags for one of the candidates… “f your feelings.” (If only the flyers of those flags took their own advice!)

      3. jasmine*

        this is just nitpicking… both of these things mean the same thing “vote however you feel is best”

        although I suppose one of them is more condescending

      5. Apex Mountain*

        My heart and brain feel the same when it comes to politics, so not sure what you’re getting at here, other than to make a lame attempt at an insult

      6. Boof*

        oooo I was trying to not get into it but yeah – I’m team “vote if you really thought about it/researched the candidates and options” not “just get in there and do whatever whim strikes you as long as you do it!” noooo please try to make it an educated vote not a random or utterly uninformed vote
        (That being said for a lot of the ballot it’s weirdly hard to look up all the options ahead of time, you’d think you’d get test ballots and more educational references IDK – there’s usually so much more than just the major national cadidates)

      7. Carmina*

        Heh, it’s not my preferred wording, but “gross” is a bit overstating it. There’s quite a lot of research thoroughly showing that voting, like most human activities, is way more feelings-based than intellectual, for better and for worse.

        I agree that it’s important to be informed so that your vote accomplishes what you wish it to, instead of being manipulated by propaganda, but those wishes themselves are usually feelings-based.

      8. ShanShan*

        It’s an extremely common turn of phrase meaning “the way you think is right.”

        Obviously, you know that, and it’s odd that you are pretending otherwise.

      9. Educator*

        Well, lots of replies to this one! My point was that it is important to make an informed choice when voting. It is one time that we all really should do our research and think about our options rationally.

        There is way, way too much misinformation happening in this election cycle, and the most powerful kind of misinformation is designed to make uninformed people afraid. To use an example from one of my local elections, one candidate saying they feel like crime is worse now than a few years ago and so we need to be tougher on criminals. For my city, that is demonstrably false per police statistics. Don’t follow your feelings, follow the facts. I stand by my statement that it is gross to tell people to vote based on emotion–it’s infantilizing. We should expect more of our fellow citizens.

        There are a lot of ways to get better informed before the election! I recommend the League of Woman Voters. They are a national organization that shares what is on the ballot and multiple perspectives on key issues. See if you have a local chapter and check out their resources.

    4. T.N.H*

      I profoundly disagree with this framing. Lots of people don’t vote for any number of important reasons. This reminds me of “I don’t care what you believe in as long as you’re not an atheist.” Of course everyone should have the opportunity to vote, but “I don’t care as long as you vote” is overreach.

      1. ShanShan*

        That comparison is quite the stretch.

        People being atheists doesn’t affect whether or not I get healthcare next year.

      2. metadata minion*

        I’m curious what reasons you’re thinking of. Certainly plenty of people *can’t* vote, both for reasons I think are sensible and because of barriers I want to see removed, but what important reasons do people have for voluntarily never voting?

      4. amoeba*

        Well I mean, this is where we disagree, I guess – I absolutely consider voting a civic duty (even if you don’t vote for any of the candidates – feel free to hand in an empty ballot then!) that’s fundamental for living in a democracy-

      5. Lenora Rose*

        Not being able to (whether not legally allowed or by imposition of obstacles) is a legit reason not to vote, though in the latter case, the law should be wielded as much as possible to remove obstacles which prevent valid voters from exercising their right, and be examined closely in places where it bars legitimate citizens from voting.

        Not voting because you want to protest something – simply put, it doesn’t register as a protest action as long as many people who could vote don’t out of mere indifference, and so many want to vote but can’t. Nobody can tell why a voter didn’t vote.

        Also, write-in options exist if you want to protest vote, or you could, if you’re in a system with multiple races on one ballot, vote downballot.

        1. ShanShan*

          Or vote for a third party and try to boost them over 5% threshold to get funding. That’s way more useful than just not voting.

    5. Reluctant Mezzo*

      When one governor sends a SWAT team to people trying to get others registered to vote, *that* message is pretty loud and clear.

  6. Bird Lady*

    Admittedly, I do not work for a government agency (private, employee owned company!), but our HR department is really great about communicating our rights as employees for voting, but also how to code time if we volunteer as an election worker. It encouraged me to sign up to work the election!

  7. MK*

    While I don’t think reminding people to vote is political per se, it does feel like a bit of an overstep; they are adults who know perfectly well that an election is taking place. And I say this as a competence voting supporter.

    1. Goldenrod*

      But not everyone at this workplace may know that they are entitled to time off in order to vote; and that their employer supports their constitutional right to vote.

      So I do think it’s important, as a manager, to tell people that!

      If Republicans truly *are* a party that wants fewer people to vote…well, that doesn’t sound much like democracy, as Alison pointed out.

      1. ferrina*

        I regularly reminded my team that “Election day is [DATE]; we want to make sure that everyone who wants to vote and is voting in person gets a chance, so please [feel free to use your flex time/if you’re a manager, arrange coverage to make sure that your team is able to step out of the office as needed/etc].” I usually do add something like “we want to make sure everyone who wants to vote, can vote”

        Voting lines can get extremely long in certain jurisdictions, so it can be worth a reminder to managers that team members may need time to vote (especially if they have team members in an array of locations). Also the hours of polling stations can vary and some polling stations have limited hours, so folks may need to leave during regular work hours if they want to vote. Work coverage is extremely important (and shout out to my colleagues who vote by mail and provide coverage to those who can’t/don’t).

    2. Catagorical*

      Perhaps, but if they regularly get reminders on how to code various activities in their timesheets, this is just another regular item of information. It’s the other manager’s reaction that is out of line.

    3. Caramel & Cheddar*

      I wouldn’t actually assume people know that an election is taking place, or at least know what day it’s happening. I’ve worked places that have served as polling stations in the past and the number of coworkers for whom the presence of the polling station itself served as a reminder was non-zero. A lot of people who are vaguely that an election is happening at some point in the future somehow still manage to not know when it’s actually taking place. Even with reminders on TV, on billboards, in newspapers, or stuff showing up in their mail. I don’t know how they manage it, personally, but they’re out there!

      There’s an argument to be made that these folks wouldn’t vote even with a reminder, of course.

      1. The Gollux, Not a Mere Device*

        I’m doing some explicitly partisan get-out-the-vote work, and the cards we’re sending out including “you can vote early on these days, and Election Day is November 5.”

        Not everyone knows the rules for early voting–those vary from place to place, and year to year–or what day is Election Day. (It’s not always the first Tuesday in November–it’s the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, so can be any of November 2-8.)

        LW isn’t telling people who to vote for, they’re telling people how to exercise their constitutional right to vote. Similarly, it’s entirely possible that our reminder cards will be read by someone who opposes the candidate I’m supporting, and thinks “right, I must remember to vote against her.”

      2. Banana Pyjamas*

        It’s me, I’m out here. I’m also a serious voter who spends hours researching candidates beforehand.

        My main struggles with time blindness are the day of the week, and the date. So while I know the election is the first Tuesday in November, realistically I have no concept of WHEN that is coming. While I keep track of weekdays much better now, I still constantly check dates, as in multiple times per day.

        My last two jobs Election Day was a paid holiday, so it was a non-issue. Honestly, all non-emergency businesses SHOULD be closed on Election Day.

        1. Astor*

          I was going to suggest checking to see if your electronic calendar lets you put it in every 4 years (because I’m not in the US but absolutely do weird reminders that way), but: it turns out it’s not even the first Tuesday in November. Wikipedia tells me it’s actually “the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November i.e. the Tuesday that occurs within November 2 to November 8.”

          I’m in Canada and Victoria Day messes up my calendar the same way because it “on the Monday between the 18th and the 24th (inclusive) and, so, is always the penultimate Monday of May.”

          But in case it’s worth noting, both gmail and outlook let you set reoccurring events to things like “the fourth Thursday of November”.

    4. Beth*

      People usually do know a presidential or federal congressional election is taking place–those are big news items. But they may not know that a local school board election, mayoral election, state congressional election, etc is happening.

      Case in point: I thought I was a pretty aware voter. Then I moved to California, where I automatically get mailed a ballot for every election without needing to request it. There are more elections than I thought! I now think I probably missed some local ones in the past. I don’t want to talk politics at work, but I appreciate more civically-aware people sharing nonpartisan info e.g. election dates and voting-related PTO policies.

      1. sparkle emoji*

        Exactly! I try to vote in every election, but the little ones for local office are hard to keep track of. Much easier to forget an off year local election or a run off election than a presidential one.

      2. Menace to Sobriety*

        I’m in the midwest and SAME. Of course I know when a Presidential election is occuring, despite my best efforts not to sometimes *sigh*. But we’re constantly having elections for congrss, state house/senate, local school board, legalizing pot, some new levy, or whatever and I never know. I’ll come home and ask “why is the parking lot of (our polling place/church) so busy on a weekday” and my husband or son will look at me like I’m an idiot and say, “today is election day for Issue XY” and then I have to say “oh shit” and run out and vote before it closes.

      3. metadata minion*

        Exactly! I don’t know about other states, but in Massachusetts local elections are done by city, and are sprinkled festively across the calendar making it extremely difficult to keep track of whose election is when. (And are you in a town instead of a city? That’s an actual political designation here and you get old school direct-democracy town meetings!)

    5. Observer*

      they are adults who know perfectly well that an election is taking place.

      Given the amount of misinformation out there, it’s perfectly possible that there are facts that people are not aware of. *Certainly* there is a good chance that even competent adults are not fully aware of what the employer’s policy is.

      People are not such delicate flowers that just reminding them about voting and what the employer policies around time to vote are, is going to have some great effect. To be honest, if a coworker got all offended over that I would be looking at them kind of oddly.

      1. I Have RBF*

        In fact, a certain party sent postcards to registered voters with the voting day wrong, or other important errors, IIRC.

        (Some of these are paywalled:
        https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/election/article220334185.html
        https://www.myheraldreview.com/news/gop-postcard-results-in-voter-confusion/article_31930a70-7f64-11e5-bf22-33ab4834b405.html
        https://gothamist.com/news/psa-that-shady-postcard-you-got-about-the-primary-election-is-misleading)

        IMO, reminding an eligible voter to vote is not political, it’s just a courtesy.

    6. Office Plant Queen*

      As someone who experiences a fair bit of time blindness, I do appreciate the day-of reminders! Sometimes a Tuesday doesn’t feel like a Tuesday and instead I think it’s Wednesday or Friday or something. It’s kinda like how I’ll never forget that my sister’s birthday is on X date, but I absolutely will forget that the date TODAY is X, so I try to have an active reminder in case I spend all day unaware of what the date is

      1. MK*

        Ok, but that’s you. Maybe a lot of people wouldn’t mind the reminders, but I still think it’s a bit off to do it in the workplace.

        1. Bast*

          Particularly when I worked in a larger office, there were plenty of email reminders that would go around that if they did not pertain to me, I’d just hit delete.

          “Reminder that the ABC Conference is taking place at noon today in the large conference room!”
          “Reminder for all participating in the food drive that all food items are due by tomorrow.”
          “Reminder that Sarah’s baby shower is tomorrow after work at X Restaurant.”

          If by chance, I did forget — great, I remember now. If I didn’t forget, or the event didn’t pertain to me — fine, it takes 5 seconds to hit delete. Every election I see the “Remember to Vote” everywhere until it blurs into the background. I’d treat this email like any other and hit delete.

        2. Arrietty*

          Do you feel the same way about reminders to request time off by X date if you’re planning to take time off for Christmas? What about reminders to submit expenses claims? Where do you draw the line?

          1. MK*

            I am not about what OP is doing, but about reminding people to vote, which was addressed in the last paragraph of AAM’s answer.

            Reminding people of the company’s voting leave policy is similar to the things you mention, and as I said above, it’s perfectly fine.

            Reminding people to vote, for me, is not the same; it’s more like reminding people to file their tax return statements.

            1. C*

              …why is it too much to remind people to file their taxes? It seems that every year my email and local news is filled with reminders, so what’s one more?

        3. Roland*

          “ok but that’s you” is a weird response in this context. The top thread comment was saying “everyone knows” and Office Plant Queen was saying that actually not everyone knows and remembers. So yeah, it’s her, and probably others, and it is directly relevant to the thread

          1. Irish Teacher.*

            Yeah, especially since if there IS even one person who needs the reminder, it’s a good thing to do it.

      2. Nobby Nobbs*

        I forgot to wish my best friend a happy birthday this year because I was so focused on preparing for her birthday party the following weekend. Time blindness is wild!

    7. Jiminy Cricket*

      I’m volunteering with a nonpartisan get-out-the-vote organization, and I have to tell you that many people are only vaguely aware that there is a U.S. election this year. A huge percentage do not know the date (November 5!) and the vast majority do not know their polling location or how to register. Really.

    8. Specks*

      They might know there’s an election taking place, they might even know that technically they’re able to take time off to vote. What communicating those policies does is say “you’re entitled to this time off and we will not subtly punish you for it”. And that’s, frankly, a great message to send about any benefit any worker is entitled to… you can’t “remind” people enough.

    9. MigraineMonth*

      I’m a competent adult who frequently forgets the dates of local or primary elections, and ends up looking up the candidates last-minute and getting there a half-hour before the polling location closes.

      The US presidential and senate elections get a lot of attention, but state senate and alderperson elections can have a huge impact on day-to-day life.

    10. ShanShan*

      Speaking as someone who has done phone canvassing— no. A huge percentage of adults either lose track of the election or haven’t made a plan in advance about how and when they’re going to get to their polling place.

  8. Caramel & Cheddar*

    I’ve worked at a few places that sent out reminders about voting, with varying degrees of emphasis on the act itself and not just company policy around voting, but the reminder was always an official one for the whole organization on behalf of the team that maintained our relationships with varying levels of government. I think I’d definitely find it weird if my boss sent a reminder about voting (detailing anything other than company policy), but less so from the folks who actually work with the government.

    That said, these were all non-profits reliant on government funding. You were never encouraged who to vote for, but the concept of voting in general wasn’t verboten.

  9. Falling Diphthong*

    I don’t see what you’re actually doing as any different from letting people know the policies around snow delays and time off for Yom Kippur.

    1. Antilles*

      That’s exactly how it reads to me too. You’re just letting them know what the policies are according to the handbook; whether they choose to do so or not is fully up to them.

    2. learnedthehardway*

      Exactly – informing people of organization policies is not in any way political. It is simply keeping people informed of things that they might want to know that are beneficial to them.

      Same as informing people of how to access their benefits – it’s important that employees know what is provided and how to avail themselves of the benefit.

    3. I Count the Llamas*

      Yes, this. I live in a conservative state and work in an industry that tends to lean republican. Yet before every major election, HR emails the entire staff saying when polls are open and what the law/company policy is around needing time off to vote.

      This is not a partisan issue, it’s just telling people what they need to know as it could affect when someone needs to be out of the office for a bit.

  10. bamcheeks*

    I probably wouldn’t think of it in the moment, but I’d be tempted to treat “the Democrat party is the pro-voting party” as a political comment. I don’t know whether your colleague intended it as a pro-Democrat or pro-Republican (by the sound of it, pro-Republican? But in an unhinged way?), but you could absolutely treat it as a pro-Democrat comment.

    1. Retail Dalliance*

      lol @ “in an unhinged way” hahaha. If he meant it as pro-R, it’s a very “said the quiet part out loud” type of statement (as someone indicated under my own comment).

    2. Worldwalker*

      And the fact that you ape TFG and say “the Democrat party” instead of “the Democratic party” tells me a lot.

      1. bamcheeks*

        I’m not American, so that’s just a phone keyboard/ autocorrect error that I didn’t catch. I’ve no idea what its greater significance is!

        1. Double A*

          It’s just a weird grammatically incorrect thing that a lot of conservatives do because they think it annoys Democrats. “Democrat” is a noun and “Democratic” is an adjective, so “Democrat Party” is grammatically incorrect and has this weird edge of contempt to it?

          It’s honestly so petty but I guess it’s some kind of in-group signal about one’s enjoyment of owning the libs (i.e. annoying Democrats).

          2. bamcheeks*

            Oh wow, thank you for the explanation! I would never have guessed that, not least because “Labour party” is totally normal in the UK, so noun+party doesn’t sound remotely weird to me!

            1. STAT!*

              Also not from the USA bamcheeks, & I was not aware of the whole Democrat/ Democratic thingo until yesterday either. But then why do talking heads shorthand-refer to them as “the Democrats” instead of “the Democratics”? (Or do they, and I am just a lazy listener?)

              1. YetAnotherAnalyst*

                “The Democrats”, as in “the people in/the leadership of the Democratic Party” is correct, because it’s a noun.
                It’s tricky, because “Republican” can be either a noun or an adjective, so “the Republicans” and “the Republican Party” are both grammatically correct. But “Democrat” is only a noun, and the adjectival form is “Democratic”, hence “the Democratic Party”.

              2. I Have RBF*

                Because Democrat is a noun, describing someone who belongs to Democratic Party. Democratic is an adjective that modifies party, but is not in and of itself a noun. I’m not sure why Republican is both a noun and an adjective, but technically the Republican Party is the “Grand Old Party”, and IDK where “Republican” comes from.

                1. STAT!*

                  Thanks YAA & RBF, makes sense. And also further thanks, I didn’t know the Republicans were technically the Grand Old Party, I thought that was just a nickname.

                2. Kit*

                  Other way ’round – Republican is the official name of the party, after a coinage from Jefferson (republicanism was a serious interest of the founders, thanks to both English politics and ideas that date back to the era of the Roman Republic). GOP (which does stand for Grand Old Party) is a nickname, not an official designator, although it does date back to the 1870s so it’s quite entrenched as a label.

    3. MicroManagered*

      Find me a Democrat that wants other Democrats to discourage other Democrats from voting because it’s too political and I’ll eat my shoe…

      1. bamcheeks*

        Well, I could picture someone being a Democrat but just very conscientious about not having any party political messages in the workplace— I think that’s pretty common, in fact! But then it feels like if you’re that strict about not having politics in the workplace, calling the Democratic party the pro-voting party is CONSIDERABLY more partisan than reminding people of the policy around time off to vote!

        1. CountyWorker*

          I do get-out-the-vote efforts for Democratic candidates in my free time, but at work I discourage partisan conversations. I’m just one of those annoying, stick-in-the-mud people who tries to avoid breaking federal law.

          Well, that one, at least.

  11. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

    Huh, I’m a volunteer registrar in my state and I’ve always registered folks at work — I hope this hasn’t become a problem! I am not a government employee, and I’ve done it every year since I started volunteering, including two presidential years. Generally people just say thanks or ask where their polling place is or whatever. Maybe I should check with leadership this year?

    (A few people have been combative, but only during public tabling. My “favorite” was the guy who yelled at me that he knew I’d throw out forms from people in his party. Leaving aside that I volunteer through a county and it’s nonpartisan — there’s no party registration here! Unless you choose to be Prince Pissy Pants and write it on the form to make a point. At which time there’s a decent chance it will be rejected for extraneous info!)

    1. Antilles*

      I think your example depends primarily on the type of workplace and the office culture. Government organizations and some companies might have a hard-and-fast rule against that, while others wouldn’t blink twice about it.
      That said, if you’ve done this for a long time at your current workplace without issues, I wouldn’t even bother to ask leadership. If they actually thought it was an issue, they would have proactively said something at some point in the past 8+ years; clearly they either actively support it or are willing to ignore it.

      1. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

        Thanks! We definitely don’t have a policy against it, and it’s a pain in the butt to register in this state so most folks like the convenience and don’t consider it controversial. I do have a new senior leader who I’ll probably ask before sending the all-staff email, but most folks have seen the forms on my desk and all I’ve gotten are a few thank-yous.

        1. Strive to Excel*

          Some companies have a “no selling/soliciting” policy in their handbook, probably to prevent the problem of people selling MLMs/school fundraising/etc and being a nuisance about it. Barring specific guidance on politics, you could always check that section of the handbook, or volunteering.

          But in lieu of that checking with your senior before sending the email is a good bet.

  12. mordreder*

    I tend to think that a lot of things that people claim aren’t political issues are, in fact, political issues, but this one’s a bit much even for me, especially if it’s just “as a reminder, if you vote, here’s the company policy on time off for that”

  13. Insert Pun Here*

    Your state may also have laws around allowing employees time to vote, and it may be worth reminding folks of that, too, if it applies. (Hard to argue that literal state law is partisan in this case.)

  14. Chick-n-Boots*

    FWIW, I work for local government and am part of my department’s IDEA committee. Our August informational/educational share-out included a number of landmark commemorations related to the civil rights movement, including the 1963 March on Washington (where Dr. King gave his “I have a dream” speech). We also reminded everyone that it was an election year and included information on how to register to vote, how to find out who their elected representatives are (local, state & federal) and where to find good, nonpartisan information on who is on the ballot and their positions & voting records. Our framing was that voting is a fundamental civil right and having robust participation in our democracy is a critical step to ensuring an inclusive and equitable future for everyone.

  15. tabloidtainted*

    “Pro-voting” is a funny thing to call out as a political statement. Both parties are “pro” people voting for them and “anti” people voting for anyone else or any other party. Can a universal truth be political?

    1. TPS Reporter*

      I mean, it’s literally a political topic because politicians by (most) definitions are voted in to elected office. but my god just saying- hey there’s an election and you can have time off to vote is not a political statement! I can’t wait for this election cycle to be over, it’s so exhausting.

    2. Worldwalker*

      One party appears to think that if every eligible voter has the chance to vote, they will win.
      The other party appears to think that they can only win if some voters are discouraged or prevented from voting.
      That’s telling.

    3. Busy Middle Manager*

      True and I can’t believe I had to scroll so far to find this.

      I personally find “remember to vote” offensive, and I said that’s my personal opinion so not everyone need agree. I do not understand the logic of forcing people to cast ballots when, if they need to be reminded it’s election day, don’t follow politics or know who the candidates are.

      That’s bad enough IMO at the national level, but when you go further down the ballot, gets worse. I don’t even remember what political party the county executive is of the area I grew up in, for example. That’s how much it matters. Both sides are pro-education and pre-environmentalism there. But to decide who to vote for you need to dig deeper (for example, if one is concerned about land preservation alone, but another thinks environmentalism simply means leaving a farm here and there while approving high density housing?). You can’t guess these things based on vibes or party, which is why it doesn’t make sense to push people not following the issues to vote

      A rhetorical question, if you’re a democrat, and you’re “reminder to vote” only garnered action from republicans, would you still approve of the message?

      1. Pescadero*

        “A rhetorical question, if you’re a democrat, and you’re “reminder to vote” only garnered action from republicans, would you still approve of the message?”

        Yes… but then, I’m a proponent of legally required, mandatory, voting.

        It’s a duty you shouldn’t be able to get out of.

      2. Abogado Avocado*

        In the United States, the right to freedom of speech also means that you have the right NOT to speak. With regard to voting, that means you are free not to vote. In this country — and unlike other democracies (such as Australia, where you pay a fine if you don’t vote) — you can refuse to vote without fear of punishment by the government.

        Thus, freedom in the U.S. means that you don’t have to participate in an activity that can maintain our freedoms. Regrettably, not voting can lead to the “tyranny of the minority,” such that the minority who vote end up choosing who leads. Which is what we have in Texas, where 37 percent of the voting-age population re-elected our governor in 2022. By contrast, 66 percent of the voting age population voted in the 2020 presidential election.

        All of which is to say, Busy Middle Manager, I would prefer people vote — even if that means voting for Coke over Dr Pepper when I prefer Dr Pepper — rather than staying at home. But I also live in a constitutional democracy that allows people to forego voting, Which means that, after advocating that people get out and vote, I respect a considered decision to stand mute.

        1. Ariaflame*

          Correction, in Australia you get fined if you don’t turn up to vote or submit in any other way a ballot. You are not required to make a legal vote. You can in fact draw things on it more like a teenage boy would and submit it and it won’t be counted as a vote, but you will be counted as having voted and not fined, we also have preferential voting, not first past the post, which allows the possibility of smaller parties or independents to be elected.

      3. sparkle emoji*

        Serious Q– do you find the reminders offensive because you feel they’re patronizing or are you reading a political intent into the reminder? That’s a new perspective I haven’t heard before.

        1. Busy Middle Manager*

          If I had to pick one of your two choices, I would say patronizing.

          But I don’t think my thought fits into one word. I think the issue is, the more down the line on the ballot, the more you’re voting for specific things that aren’t obvious just by looking at the party. If someone doesn’t even know what those specifics are, it’s more like gambling than voting, and I don’t see a point in getting people to vote unless you’re getting them to vote for “your” candidate.

          To continue by local county executive example, both sides were “pro education” “pro justice reform” and pro-environmentalism and claim they will lower taxes and fix the housing “crisis.” But they either mean different things by that or are just paying lip service to these items because they are popular

          the elections are more nuanced than presidential elections, if you don’t look specifically what you are voting for, you’re throwing arrows at the dart board, not voting because you don’t know what you’re voting for

          1. hellohello*

            Listen, I understand where you’re coming from and I really hope you don’t take this as condescending or in bad faith, I genuinely mean it: thinking that people shouldn’t vote if they aren’t well-enough-informed is a really fast track towards thinking only people who have the right education, or who have a stake in their communities by being property owners, or who are “intelligent enough” are worthy of a vote. Similar arguments have been used frequently and violently to prevent people of color, poor people, homeless people, immigrants, and more from voting. Part of the point of a democracy is that politicians (and proponents of ballot measures, etc.) have to care about *everyone* they represent, and need to work to earn everyone’s vote. That’s already undermined by the amount of money, gerrymandering, voter-ID requirement shenanigans, polling place closures, etc. that make voting hard for people. I feel really strongly that it’s in our best interest as a society to not fall into the trap of thinking “some people don’t deserve a vote because they’re too stupid/lazy for it.”

        1. Busy Middle Manager*

          If you can explain how asking the most obvious follow up question to this letter is “being weird,” I will gladly venmo you $100! I mean, when you see celebs saying “get out there and vote like your like depends on it,” it’s usually obvious they mean for a specific candidate. It’s not “weird” to ask people to check themselves for biases. Not liking any given candidate is not weird

          1. DJ*

            Not voting because you don’t like any candidate is weird. It’s not a popularity contest. One of them will be president, and one is better than the other. Vote for that one.

          2. JB*

            Can you explain how this is the most obvious follow-up question to this letter?

            Per the letter, OP isn’t reminding or even encouraging anyone to vote, she’s informing her direct reports about what the company’s voting day/time off policies are. She also stated directly that she has no idea who her direct reports intend to vote for.

            I’m not sure what that has to do with celebrities, or why you would assume that celebrities (who, presumably, are aware that their statements are seen/read/heard by thousands of people) would assume that their “remember to vote” messages would magically only reach the ears of people who are voting the same way that they are.

      5. Irish Teacher.*

        I don’t think reminding people to vote is forcing people to cast ballots.

        I, personally, and I know there is debate about this, agree with you as far as disagreeing with compulsory voting. In Ireland, we already have politicians using things like their mother’s surname if it comes earlier in the alphabet since candidates are listed alphabetically and apparently, there are enough people who just start at the top of the ballot paper and find the first person they like that having a surname starting with A gives you an advantage over somebody with a surname starting with T. And I always remember during the divorce referendum one of my then teachers saying she was tempted to vote “yes” because she thought “no” was going to win and she was conflicted and would prefer to be on the losing side so she didn’t feel responsible for whatever the results were. Even at 15, that struck me as ridiculous logic and I thought it would make more sense not to vote if you were that conflicted.

        However, I do not think that just telling people, “hey, you know you can use time off to vote on such a date” is forcing people who have no interest in politics to vote. All it is doing is ensuring that those who do want to vote have the opportunity to.

        And yes, of course, I would want people to be reminded to vote even if they were voting differently than me (which most are; I vote Green and Soc Dem, both of which have…well, 12 and 5 seats respectively in our Dáil, compared with 35 each for Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin and 32 for Fine Gael). But anybody who only wants people with their political views voting is…being anti-democratic.

        And personally, I am still somewhat annoyed about being denied the chance to vote in 2007. I got a subbing job at short notice, too late to get a postal vote and…the election was held on a Thursday and the annoying part is that the government did it, almost certainly, to reduce the number of younger people voting, as their party was most popular among older voters. They knew that holding it on a Thursday would make it difficult for college students and young people working away from home to get home to vote. The norm in Ireland is for elections to be held on a Friday and there was no reason giving for changing it that one time.

        Making it difficult for people to vote because you think they will vote against you is fundamentally corrupt and undemocratic. Now failing to remind somebody to vote because you think they will vote for a party you dislike isn’t quite on that level, as I guess you (general you, of course; I am not suggesting you personally go around deciding whether or not to remind people to vote based on your assumptions about what party they vote for) have no obligation to remind anybody, but…I’d still be a little uncomfortable with a manager who figured “I won’t remind my employees of the option of taking time off because most of them probably vote X.”

      6. jasmine*

        what OP’s doing sounds different though. people should know they have a right to vote and could do so with ease, without work hindering them. it’s different from encouraging people to vote

      7. I Have RBF*

        A rhetorical question, if you’re a democrat, and you’re “reminder to vote” only garnered action from republicans, would you still approve of the message?

        I am a registered Democrat. A reminder to vote, and laying out the company policies on voting, is always appropriate, even if I know 99% of my coworkers are Republican.

        Why? Because aside from partisan BS, it is my humble opinion that if you are eligible to vote, but don’t, you have very little right to bitch about the outcome.

        As far as felons voting is concerned, I also feel that those who have served their sentences should automatically have their voting rights restored.

        1. Learn ALL the things*

          I’ll go one step farther and say I don’t see any reason why incarcerated people shouldn’t be provided with a mail in ballot for the voting district they lived in prior to their arrest.

          Voting is a fundamental constitutional right and I believe that not even prisoners should be deprived of it.

          2. Grammar Penguin*

            For voting to be treated as a fundamental constitutional right in the US, and not the privilege that it is, would require an amendment to the US Constitution.

            There is no right to vote in the Constitution, only some later amendments restricting states’ ability to deny the vote, first to former slaves, later to women, most recently to any citizen over 18.

            Outside of those restrictions, states are pretty free to limit the franchise as they will, especially since the the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (itself a long-overdue enforcement of the 15th Amendment’s guarantee of voting rights for black folks) was gutted by SCOTUS in 2013 (Shelby County v. Holder).

            I wish it were guaranteed to all under the Constitution. I would support an amendment simply stating that all US citizens are guaranteed the right to vote, period.

      8. Chick-n-Boots*

        I agree – which is why when my office sent out a reminder in August that it was an election year, we included information on how to register to vote (or check to make sure you were registered), see who your elected representatives were (local, state & fed) and nonpartisan sites where you can look at your local ballot and the positions, votes, platforms and public remarks of those individuals so you can be an informed voter come November.

        I think reminding people to vote is pretty benign in and of itself, but agree that what we really need are informed voters so I always want to make sure people get ALL of that information, not just the “don’t forget to vote” reminder.

      9. Chocolate Covered Cotton*

        You also don’t understand that reminding people of Election Day is not in any way “forcing people to cast ballots.”

        You know what offends me? Being reminded every day for a month that Christmas is coming and I should buy a bunch of crap now. But I don’t complain about being forced to participate because that’s not what’s happening. That the whole season offends me is irrelevant to anyone but me and is no reason for others to do anything differently. My sense of offense is MY problem and nobody else’s.

        I suggest your offense to being reminded of an election is the same: your problem and nobody else’s.

        It’s a pattern I’ve noticed over the years, this tendency of some folks to view any suggestion as if it were a command. Reminding you of the calendar, or even suggesting you participate in an election or in a holiday isn’t forcing you to do anything. These folks really seem to view every effort to educate as an effort to coerce. I guess it’s projection.

        I still laugh at how when Michelle Obama reminded kids to eat right, exercise, and stay in school, the conservatives lost their collective shit about how the Democrat Party are going to force kids to be vegan or something. It’s nuts.

        And it never fails. Whenever someone, not even a liberal but just not a conservative, suggests some way people could improve their own lives, or even just reminds other folks of civic events and their options, conservatives act like they’re being FORCED at gunpoint into some gulag.

        Meanwhile their own party is literally talking about prison camps, mass deportations, and imprisoning talk show hosts for making fun of their guy. Because FREEDOM!

      10. Just Another Cog in the Machine*

        “I personally find “remember to vote” offensive, and I said that’s my personal opinion so not everyone need agree. I do not understand the logic of forcing people to cast ballots when, if they need to be reminded it’s election day, don’t follow politics or know who the candidates are.”

        That might (MIGHT) be true about presidential votes, but what about all other votes that don’t occur in November? Sometimes I don’t find out about those until the morning of. (And first I have to find out if it even applies to me, because a lot of time there’s nothing to vote for in my particular precinct/school district/whatever combination).

        I DO look up what’s on the ballot and research it before casting my vote, even when I find out last minute.

    4. Blarg*

      Both parties want people to vote for their candidates. But only one party seeks to limit voting opportunities for people they think are less likely to vote for their candidates.

    5. Office Plant Queen*

      Generally I agree, but there are a lot of very loud Republicans who are against voting rights. As an example, the last time around the Republican candidate for secretary of state (the office the administers elections) in my state was running on a platform of making voting harder in several ways, including getting rid of absentee voting. And was a pretty vocal election denier. That’s not a unique viewpoint and it’s well beyond just wanting people to vote only if it’s for your party. FWIW I don’t think this is a conservative vs liberal thing and know conservatives who are very much in favor of voting access! But I do think the parties are increasingly making it a partisan thing (and party lines don’t necessarily line up with liberal/conservative).

      So I see how being pro-voting can be taken as a political statement in favor of the Democrats, even though it really shouldn’t be

      1. Ariaflame*

        The GOP at the moment is trying to add a rider making it harder to vote to the government funding continuance because the current House is apparently not competent enough to write an actual budget. It won’t get past the Senate though but they are posing by adding another layer of bureaucracy to something even though the thing they pretend it’s to make illegal is already illegal.

  16. WantonSeedStitch*

    I would say that reminding SOME people to vote but not others could be interpreted as too political, if the appearance is that you’re only reminding people whose political opinions are, or could be assumed to be, the same as your own. A general reminder to the whole office of “don’t forget to vote” is reasonable. That said, I don’t think it’s necessary to remind people of their obligations or opportunities (whichever you consider voting to be) outside of work, so I think a reminder about the policy around voting is a good way of handling it. Even if your office doesn’t have a specific policy, you can always say something like “if anyone needs to leave a little early today to go vote, or step out for a bit to do it during the day, just let me know.” I’ve done that with my own team in the past.

  17. Kotow*

    I think what you’re doing of reminding workers of the policies is fine and that’s a weird way for your coworker to interpret it. As far as actually reminding people to vote: I won’t say it’s “wrong,” but it does feel like a bit of an overstep. There was one primary election that I deliberately didn’t vote in because as a Republican who is in a heavily Democrat city, there literally were **no** Republican candidates for many positions and even when there were, it was only one. I had no motivation to vote because it truly wasn’t going to make a difference. Someone did remind me to vote that day, and while I didn’t say anything, it wasn’t something I was thrilled to hear and it took a bit of effort to refrain from expressing my opinion. Rather low stakes in the grand scheme of things, but I think it’s one of those topics that can be a sensitive issue or at a minimum the thing that finally triggers someone to reach a breaking point.

    1. Worldwalker*

      Always vote in your primary. Your voice is much louder there.

      The people who turn out for primaries are frequently on the fringes — the single-issue voters, the hyper-partisan, the utter whack jobs. If you leave the choice of candidate to those people, you get an extremist. They can try to pivot back to the center for the general election, but they remain someone who was the candidate most appealing to the extremes of their party. So in the general election, you are given a choice, not of two people who are both reasonable and acceptable, but two people who appeal most strongly to the fringes of their parties. People wind up choosing the extremist of their own party, because at least that’s less bad than the extremist of the other party.

      Vote in your primary.

      1. Lily Rowan*

        Did you read the whole comment? They literally didn’t have any choices on their primary ballot. That seems fine to skip, IMO.

    2. Anonymouse*

      I used to be Democrat in a very Republican area – often there were NO Democratic candidates on the primary or general.

      I registered as a Republican so I could vote in the primary because often that was where the election actually happened because there was no Democratic challenger.

      That was State-Where-I-Used-To-Live where only registered Republicans could vote in that primary. State-I-Just-Moved-To has open primaries – you have to chose if you want to vote in the Democratic primary or the Republican primary but you don’t have to be registered with the party to vote in their primary.

      1. STAT!*

        Can you vote in both primaries in New State? (I think I like your system. In Australia we just have to put up with whatever useless hack lifer candidate is offered as part of some obscure factional deal. And I say this as an active member of a political party, not an ordinary sideline cynical punter.)

        2. Just Another Cog in the Machine*

          I live in a state with open primaries (you don’t register with a party, you just show up and tell them which ballot you want), and you can only vote in one of them for each election.

  18. HailRobonia*

    If election day was a national holiday and anyone who thinks reminding people to vote is partisan would spontaneously combust out of rage.

    2. Anon for reasons*

      I work in a state agency, and election day in even-numbered years is a paid holiday.

      IMO, it’s telling that one party has made moves to make the day a federal holiday, and a different party likes to put up roadblocks.

    3. Head Sheep Counter*

      It really should be a national holiday. We have plenty of holidays that are more iffy… and less consequential.

  19. a raging ball of distinction*

    I am curious if there are any commenters who think saying “don’t forget to vote!” is too political for the workplace. Can you help us understand why that is?

    1. Gale*

      It’s because OP is a government worker. There is a standard of ethics in public service that requires public servants do not misuse their public positions for their own or other’s gain. This becomes even more important around election time, when anything that could be construed as supporting a particular candidate, campaign, or cause is a major no-no. Since this OP’s party affiliation is apparently common knowledge in their workplace, I can see why they are asking the question. They want to be extra sure this wouldn’t be misconstrued as undue influence or using their public powers to sway voters.

      Which, if they really are simply letting their direct reports know their rights, how to request time off for this, and getting a sense of what staffing will look like that day, that’s clearly an unbiased activity. But again, standard in government is different, so I get it. It’s considered a pretty serious violation.

      1. Anonymel*

        I’ve worked for the DoD for 25 years. “Don’t forget to vote” or “Hey you get 2 hours off to vote, if you choose to do so,” is NOT a “serious violation. You cannot express “Vote Dem” or “Vote Repub” for sure, but it’s no different than “Hey Monday is Labor Day so don’t forget Friday is a family day for our military personnel.”

        That’s a weirdly strictly political black and white take on it, and it’s not accurate.

        1. Gale*

          I think you misunderstood me. All I’m trying to do is provide context for the folks who don’t understand why OP is even asking this question.

          What I meant is that what OP is doing is a NOT serious violation. However, it would be a massive violation if they were promoting a certain candidate, appearing to use their influence to get votes, etc. through their position as a government worker.

      2. sparkle emoji*

        Do we know that LW’s political affiliation is common knowledge based on the letter though? They say that their past roles on LinkedIn align with one party’s platform enough that you can make an inference about their politics, but I wouldn’t think most people care enough to do that. It definitely doesn’t seem as if LW is trying to make it known in their workplace.

        1. Gale*

          I was going based off what OP said about his colleague’s concerns – “His argument was that they know I’m a Democrat”. No clue how valid that actually is, but if this colleague knows it, it’s feasible that others might.

          To be clear I think the colleague is full of it, but I also empathize with why this led OP to reconsider the optics of communicating with their team about voting.

    2. Funko Pops Day*

      As a related question, I’m curious if “remember that tomorrow is election day” is equally political (if “don’t forget to vote!” is). I guess I see it like reminding someone “don’t forget to move your car because of street sweeping tonight” or “remember that Tuesday is trash day this week because of the holiday weekend”?

    3. ReallyBadPerson*

      It is political, in a sense. At least it is in this election cycle. Telling people to go and vote is telling them that you belong to the party that wants as many people to vote as possible, rather the party that wants to limit voting opportunities for certain people. But the co-worker is ridiculous for being upset by this.

    4. 501c problems*

      I work for a 501c3 in a highly politicized issue (think gun rights or abortion rights– something that people can be single-issue voters about and where positions diverge heavily along partisan lines) and with the political climate the way it is, we’re only allowed to make the most milquetoast possible “get out the vote” statements in our “official” voice. Counsel says that “voting is important!” is fine, “remember to vote for the issues you care about!” could be read by a hostile reader as encouraging people to vote for our “side” of the issue, which comes down to saying “vote for the X party.” It’s overly conservative but we’d rather be safe than fighting for our 501c3 status.

    5. sdog*

      I posted above asking something similar too. I’m really having a hard time seeing how it could be as being too political, and I have worked in fed govt for over a decade. There is the Hatch Act that prohibits employees from engaging in some activities (distributing campaign material, such as soliciting donations for a political party, inviting subordinates to political events, etc.), but it’s not a violation of the Hatch Act to remind people to vote. Really, it’s about using an official position to exert undue influence over the political process. Also, I tend to think it protects employees from being discriminated against due to political affiliation (leadership at the higher levels change a fair amount based on the president’s political party at the time).

      It seems, from reading the comments, that the issue is that in a political climate such as this current one, even reminding someone to vote implies that you want them to vote for a certain party (thereby creating the undue influence). Nowadays, the Hatch Act no longer applies to me, but I still work in govt, and I do occasionally ask people if they’ve voted or remind them to do so. Honestly, I don’t think I’ve ever been obnoxious about it, and I don’t feel persuaded to stop.

    6. JB*

      “Don’t forget to vote” is not too political, it’s just rude.

      “Reminder that Election Day is (date) and we offer (x hours off/flexible hours/whatever) to accommodate voting”, which sounds more like what OP is describing, is absolutely fine.

  20. Spreadsheets and Books*

    Out of curiosity, I just checked my company’s intranet and there’s a whole page about how November 5th is election day and how the company supports voting rights/what laws might cover employees working in New York and California. They also provide access to a voting guide with ballot information and local guidelines/timelines, and a list of nonpartisan volunteer avenues outside of the organization people passionate about getting out the vote can consider partnering with.

    Making sure people understand their rights and opportunities shouldn’t be political and I appreciate that my workplace sees it the same way.

    1. Orv*

      In California employers are required to, at a minimum, notify employees that they’re allowed time off if they need it to vote. (In practice so many people vote by mail now that it rarely comes up.)

  22. juliebulie*

    It’s pretty damn sad if people are so sensitive about voting that they can’t bear to hear it mentioned.

    1. Busy Middle Manager*

      It’s not about being “sensitive,” it’s being concerned about how people who don’t follow politics are going to pick candidates (assuming not even knowing it’s election day = you don’t follow politics, which doesn’t seem like a leap). Especially in state and county elections and for judges. I feel like the more local you get, the less political party matters. They’re running on more and more specific issues that impact you on a more immediate basis and you can’t just guess which you’d prefer based on party. So people are basically guessing which candidate would be better.

      1. Blarg*

        Nope. Encouraging folks to vote every time is how they become more informed and more engaged. Gatekeeping voting to “those in the know” and up to your standards is just a step away from not letting them vote at all. Since you know better.

      2. Irish Teacher.*

        Honestly, while I see your point, I don’t think reminding people to vote is going to cause that. The people who do that are generally those who have been raised to believe that voting is their civic duty and they must do it in all elections. Those people will vote regardless of whether there are reminders or not. I’ve known a few people like that and they are generally people who just see voting as “something you do” and would never consider not voting but who don’t feel the need to do any more than go in to the polling station and cast their vote.

        I could see mandatory voting leading to an increase in this problem but not just a reminder “hey, go and vote.” People who aren’t interested and don’t intend to vote won’t anyway. It will only change things with regard to people who did plan to vote but perhaps forgot the date or didn’t realise time off was available.

        I have my doubts anybody is going to say, “well, I’ve no interest in politics and didn’t intend to vote but now that somebody said, ‘please remember to vote,’ I’d better go and do it, even though I have no idea who to vote for.”

      3. Not Your Sweetheart*

        There are ways of learning about the candidates and issues. I let people know about vote411 dot org all the time. It’s non-partisan and candidates answer the same questions regardless of party. I use it nearly every election because who can keep up with all the local offices and candidates? I don’t know how telling people about sites like this would work at work, but it’s useful (and non-partisan) information.

      4. The Gollux, Not a Mere Device*

        A bunch of those people ask friends or relatives who they basically agree with about issues which candidate to vote for. My grandmother regularly asked my father who she should vote for, because she knew that he paid a lot more attention to local politics than she did, and that finding useful information about people who are running for things like school boards or even city council seats.

        Here in 2024, you can start by googling the candidate names, and look at any news articles that turn up, and at their websites and/or social media feeds.

      5. JB*

        My man, I hate to break it to you, but people are in fact allowed to go in there and just guess if they want to.

        If someone is so disinterested in politics that they truly don’t know it’s election day, and then someone reminding them that it is makes them go “oh. Huh, I guess I’ll go vote just for the kicks”, and then they get in there and look at the ballot and start just checking things off at random (or based on which candidate has a name they like more, or whatever other reason) – they are allowed to do that.

        It seems very strange to me if you genuinely think that “remember to vote” will somehow generate a wave of uninformed, incompetant child-adults swamping the polls that wouldn’t have otherwise gone, but even if that were to be true, they are all allowed to vote based on whatever criteria they choose. Elections are not supposed to be some secret club or ARG where only people who meet a minimum level of observational skill or education are let in.

        And, you know, you are allowed to be annoyed with people chirping “remember to vote”. You don’t have to dig in so hard for a ‘real’ reason that you end up backdooring yourself into sounding like a eugenicist-lite.

    2. Dawn*

      Some people really don’t want politics entering their workplaces; I happen to be one of them. As a Person Whose Very Existence Is Currently A Contentious Issue, I don’t care to invite those discussions into a place I have to go and at least outwardly be polite to everybody; and I’m well sick of seeing it everywhere else anyway, and it’s nice to have a refuge, too.

      It’s really not about “sensitivity”.

      1. peter b*

        How is being informed of provided time off to vote an invitation to discuss politics? Especially in the announcement context of the letter, I’m struggling to understand your point of view.

    3. Head Sheep Counter*

      I think the party who yells “snowflakes” at the other… is perhaps projecting… because… oof.

  23. TheBunny*

    At my company, every single company holiday requires a conversation around how pay works around holidays.

    And open enrollment requires a conversation about that process.

    I agree with Alison. As long as the conversation is focused around the policy around time off for voting, people who are making it political are the kinds of people who make EVERYTHING political.

  24. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

    Boy howdy, I’m glad I don’t work with your coworker- I’m planning on positively blanketing my company with info on voter registration deadlines; info on free rides to the polls; and reminders about what day the election is and how to find a sample ballot. On election day, I’m planning on wearing a “Vote!” t-shirt. I wouldn’t ever tell my coworkers how or who to vote for- that’s their business- but I don’t think just reminding people of the election is out of bounds.

    At my last job, the parent company’s owner/CEO sent out a letter warning us about the dangerous policies that the left (ie: rising socialists) favors that might affect our business. It was distasteful and if it hadn’t been a picture sent to our emails, I’d have copied and pasted it here (with the identifying info left out). I actually forwarded it to my home email because I was so shocked that this person thought it was an acceptable message.

    2. Grammar Penguin*

      It seems to me that the kind of engagement you describe, expressly non-partisan encouragement of people to get out and vote, that used to be just basic good citizenship. We participate and encourage others to participate in this civic activity as a celebration of who we are, a free people in a democratic republic. The election itself is a kind of celebration of that fact.

      Whoever you’re voting for, the act of voting is a celebration of democracy that we all appreciate and enjoy. It’s a kind of civic holiday, a celebration of our own freedom and of our ability to come together as one nation to resolve our differences peacefully with civility and respect. Because the fact of America as a democratic republic is itself a reason to celebrate and we celebrate by participating in democracy.

      That was a long time ago, I guess.

      1. penny dreadful analyzer*

        Honestly this take makes me fall even harder on the side of “the OP should provide factual info on the voting-day-related policies in a strictly value-neutral manner.” I don’t need my workplace telling me what to “celebrate.” Anyone outside of work (where I need to behave myself) telling me to “celebrate democracy” by voting in a freaking U.S. Presidential election would find themselves facing 24 years worth of pure, unadulterated rage against the Electoral College.

        I say this as someone who takes voting very seriously and never misses a primary or an election. But if you start lecturing me about how I’m supposed to feel good about it because our electoral system is sooooo great and totally a real democracy, I will be disagreeing with you quite strenuously!

  25. Go Vote*

    As someone who has done the 501c3 and 501c4 tightrope walk reminding people to vote and helping them do so is literally the definition of non-partisan activity.

  26. Jayem Griffin*

    Shout-out to OP for including donut arrivals in their list of “important stuff.” A sign of someone who has their priorities straight.

  27. Votingvixen*

    I am the letter writer, and this is all very helpful! I know to some it might seem obvious, but I thought if someone I work with interpreted this as political, maybe someone on my team would. And maybe on some level, I was using a routine HR reminder to get people to the polls, but the consensus seems to be that even voting reminders aren’t wildly unethical.

    As for this coworker, he is a bit of an odd duck who is very stringent about rules and anything that could even give off the whiff of unethical behavior, not some hardline Republican who doesn’t want people in our blue city voting in our purple state (at least, I don’t think so!).

    1. learnedthehardway*

      Arguably, it would be political to NOT inform people of the time they have available to vote, when other benefits like statutory holidays, maternity leave, etc. etc. ARE announced…..

    2. Goldenrod*

      “And maybe on some level, I was using a routine HR reminder to get people to the polls, but the consensus seems to be that even voting reminders aren’t wildly unethical.”

      I would actually argue that it would be unethical to *not* remind employees of workplace policies around voting. As a manager, I think you have an ethical obligation to do so (as you did!).

    3. Radioactive Cyborg Llama*

      The ethical line is about partisan politics, not politics. The Hatch Act (eg) allows federal workers to express their opinions about political issues. Go Vote is not partisan; Go Vote Democrat or Go Vote Republican is.

    4. Lost academic*

      In acting this way he is the one politicizing voting and I would say his manager needs to sit him down. He also reminds me of my sibling who’s so fanatical about certain kinds of regulations (like safety and taxes) but he isn’t at all an expert or very well informed at times and so he’s just obsessively wrong often enough and he’s created a lot of trouble for himself in his government roles. Don’t mistake intensity for accuracy.

      This isn’t unethical in the least, specifically for government employees.

    5. Observer*

      who is very stringent about rules and anything that could even give off the whiff of unethical behavior

      That may be true. But he’s also someone who makes stuff up, when he doesn’t actually understand the rules. Because there is simply *nothing* in the rules that comes close to what he is suggesting.

      Which suggests to me that if he ever comes to you with some other issue around rules, you should double check whatever it is. Because sometimes being “too cautious” is actually not caution but incorrect behavior.

      1. Votingvixen*

        Your characterization is not too off base. He is an expert in something very specific, but then he is the sort who thinks that applies to all things. I get along with him well enough, but I will be more cautious about taking anything he says at face value!

      2. Analytical Tree Hugger*

        This reminds me of a relatively recent video from Neil deGrasse Tyson where he opens by saying, “One of the great challenges in this world is knowing enough about a subject to think you’re right…but not enough about the subject to know you’re wrong.”

    6. Resentful Oreos*

      Your coworker sounds incredibly tedious to be around. I know government operates under different standards than the private sector, but simply informing people about time-off policies isn’t political at all. It’s the same as informing people about sick leave, parental leave, vacations, and so on.

      Coworker needs to STFU and go away. (He sounds like the type who gets told that a lot.)

  28. Moose*

    I also work in a government agency. Alison’s answer is basically good if you’re in the private sector but doesn’t really apply in all government positions. If there’s any concern you might be violating your agency’s ethical standards around political neutrality you need to have it confirmed by someone above you that you aren’t. Government ethics don’t make for good AAM questions, IMO. Every state is different and every agency is different. “Normal” work advice doesn’t always apply.

    1. Jackalope*

      The thing that makes this more straightforward in my opinion is that the LW is not making a Go Vote! announcement, or anything like that; she’s explaining the employer’s official policies surrounding leave on voting day. That’s a part of her job, just like explaining any other benefits.

    2. Observer*

      Even in government situations, what the LW is describing is not remotely “political” in the sense of the relevant regulations. I don’t work for a government agency, but we are bound by the same types of rules.

      Simply telling everyone “go vote” is not remotely political. And the LW is not even doing that.

      What *could* be political is claiming that only one party or the other values voting etc.

      Refraining from letting people *in general* know *organization policy* around time because of political considerations (ie Party X is more interested in voting) could wind up being a major problem, though.

      The LW is not expressing any opinion here. They are not even telling anyone what to do, much less implying anything about how to vote. I get that the rules can be complex. But making stuff up doesn’t make for better compliance.

  29. Lady Lessa*

    I don’t think that just reminding people about the upcoming election is political, especially if you are careful not to reveal your views. I posted a reminder about when registration closes and Next door kept it up. They are fairly strict about political talk. I also encouraged folks to consider being a poll worker.

  30. You know it's Liz*

    The OP should feel 100% free to reject the premise that it is partisan to participate in a participatory democracy.

  31. Gale*

    I said this in another comment but I think it’s really important here to remember that this OP specified they are a government worker. There is a standard of ethics in public service especially around elections. Public servants are very expressly prohibited from using their public position to do anything that could unduly influence votes or support a particular party or candidate.

    That clearly isn’t what they are doing based on what is written here, but it is definitely why they’re taking a moment to do a gut-check about this. I think they are handling it correctly (“if you vote” rather than “go vote!”), but I would be asking the same question, especially if I’ve already been associated as the office Democrat. Government workers really have to be more careful with this kind of thing and OP is right to consider the optics before they act.

  32. Bookworm*

    We tend not to talk politics in my office, but I always tell people if they’re complaining about whatever gov’t policy: “I don’t care how you vote. If you don’t vote, you have no right to complain.” It’s made some people vote!

    1. Fluff*

      Yup – I said this to my MIL regarding the President / VP election coming this November.

      She likes to not vote so she can have 100 % FTB. It is going to be fun having those conversations. Did ya vote? Nope.

      DENIED for any complaining on any P or VP! For four years! It is going to be glorious.

      * FTB = freedom to b***h)

  33. Buffalo*

    I used to work in government relations for a boss who was very openly aligned with a different party from mine, and if he’d reminded me to vote, I’d have felt like he was pushing me to vote for his guys…but that’s 100% not what the LW is doing, in any way. Reminding your team of the policy around time off to vote is totally in bounds.

  34. YetAnotherAnalyst*

    “Only if you don’t believe in democracy, I suppose.”

    And therein lies the crux of the matter.

  35. Fluff*

    Soooo if the work place gives # of hours off for voting, can us noncitizens get 4 hours off to cause mischief?

    ::runs away quickly::

    (teasing during an intense discussion)

    1. Michelle Smith*

      I would support you getting 4 hours off, but you have to do something equally fun like waiting in a long line at the DMV or at Costco or something.

      (I’m of course just kidding, but your comment gave me a chuckle.)

  36. Seen Too Much*

    If I don’t remember to send a reminder out about what our policy is, I get a lot, and I mean a lot, of emails asking if we still have time off for voting. We have employees in several states, some democrat, some republican and at least 1 swing. I don’t think it’s weird to remind people of a policy.

  37. MicroManagered*

    There is only one correct answer to OP’s coworker: “Hogwash!”

    He really said the quiet part out loud, didn’t he?!

    There’s no universe where reminding your team of the time off policy for voting, on voting day, is “partisan.” We need to stop entertaining this stupidity with politeness.

      1. Writer Claire*

        But if OP had said Malarkey, that might be seen as partisan!

        (Sorry. Couldn’t resist a silly reference to Biden’s use of the word.)

  38. Dawn*

    I mean, I wouldn’t, simply because I feel like it opens the door to discussions that I really do not want to entertain at work. But that’s me.

  39. Lorikeet*

    I’m in Australia, and in my part of the country we have local council elections this Saturday. I will always remind people to vote, because if you don’t, you get a $55 fine as voting is compulsory.

    And that’s money that could be spent on fun things, like Democracy Sausages or cake stall treats.

        1. Democracy sausage eater*

          It depends of the state!

          Sausages tend to be served on white bread in the eastern states. In Western Australua, they use long rolls.

          In reality, the reason for serving the sausages on bread is mainly a cost one. A slice of bread is cheaper than a roll, so for school fundraising purposes the margin is higher if you just use bread.

          Democracy sausages (which can be vegan!) are such a big thing that people run review sites on election day. So by say 11am in the morning you know the best place to vote and the food on sale.

          But in Australia voting is compulsory and on a Saturday.

          So for most workplaces the sort of discussion in the thread just doesn’t arise: it’s a legal obligation on all enrolled citizens.

      2. Jill Swinburne*

        In Australia it’s tradition to have a sausage sizzle (do they call it that outside Australia/NZ?) outside polling stations.

        It can even be seen on Bluey!

    2. Part time lab tech*

      Australian council elections aren’t compulsory but I started to vote for them when they sent out postal vote forms to all households.
      Also, technically you only need to get your name ticked off the electoral roll and pick up the forms. If you don’t fill state and federal in it’s not like they can tell. (donkey voting is still anonymous)

      1. Democracy sausage eater*

        It depends on the state.

        Voting in council elections is compulsory in Queensland, for example.

      2. Freya*

        NSW council elections are technically compulsory, but there’s a bunch of reasons they’ll accept as sufficient excuse if they get on your case about not voting (eg. you were interstate or you were in the ER).

    3. Freya*

      Hello, fellow human participating in this weekend’s election! (Although I have an event I’m going to, so I ordered my postal vote instead of trying to vote in between workshops three hours drive away from my house…)

  41. NobodyHasTimeForThis*

    I got kicked off a Community Events facebook group for sharing information about a last minute COVID vaccine clinic. This was when the vaccine was first rolling out and very hard to find an appointment.

    I did not tell anyone to go, I just did an FYI there will be a clinic tomorrow at the middle school from 4-8 pm.

    Banned for being too political.

  42. Susannah*

    Good lord.
    Reminding people that the company is giving them time off to vote (which, you know, is a way of ENCOURAGING people to vote) is somehow political?
    This, after management in so many places needles employees to contribute to United Way (nothing against them; I prefer to give directly to smaller charities, where I feel more will go to feeding people/teaching kids); bugs them about getting a flu shot (I do it; I prefer to go to my local pharmacy instead of standing in line in the office building like I’m in elementary school again) or push them towards “team-building” and fitness regimes?

    I appreciate Alison wanting the LW to avoid aggravation but … you know, that is indeed how democracies die. It’s when encouraging people to have a voice in their own government and futures is political (because, why? Better to have someone assume power without being elected?).

    Do NOT let this idiot undermine employee’s rights or democracy writ large by convincing you voting – or encouraging voting – is somehow subversive. I promise you, he is not voting the way your team is. That is his right. He’s just hoping he can bully you into discouraging anyone from voting in a way that doesn’t serve him.

    1. Dawn*

      I really don’t think that one person declining to discuss voting in their workplace is going to kill democracy. Or that we can assume anything about the coworker’s politics or intelligence, for that matter.

    2. Jiminy Cricket*

      This is exactly how functioning democracies die. We’re so afraid of even talking about voting in a positive way — how can we learn to have constructive, civil conversations about what we’re voting for?

    3. Head Sheep Counter*

      Yes. The only folk who benefit from sitting it out are the folk who always benefit when democracy fails… and that’s people with enough power to stay in power.

  43. Formerly Ella Vader*

    I live in a different country where people are less likely to volunteer information about how they are going to vote than people in the US are (I’ve also lived in the US). And at my work, I just look up the rule of how many hours off people are entitled to, and share how that applies. Our company owner sometimes expresses that as “remember to vote!” but I make a choice similar to that of the OP.

    Also, having lived somewhere I wasn’t eligible to vote, I try to be sensitive to the fact that not everyone who works for us is eligible. Just like I’d distribute a blood-donor appeal by saying “If you are eligible, please consider …”, I’d say “If you are going to vote, you can X, Y, or Z.” As I tend to be pro-voting myself, I might look for opportunities to correct any misconceptions, like “Whether or not you are on the list beforehand, you can …” But in my general people-managing role I don’t want to speak differently to people who are on working visas or permanent residents than I do to naturalized citizens – even though I might know this info because I write letters for them.

  44. RetailIsDetail*

    I’m for reminders of at work, not that I’ve ever been given any time off to vote by an employer.

    The idea that encouraging folks to vote (not for/against a particular candidate or issue, but just exercising their right to vote!) is a partisan activity is disturbing and disappointing.

    I’ve started reading “How Maine Decides: An Insider’s Guide to How Ballot Measures Are Won And Lost” by Christian Potholm (who was a professor at Bowdoin as well as a political consultant) because I’m from Maine and I’m a Maine politics nerd, and this passage stuck with me:

    “I always thought we had the better or best candidate or the better or best cause and/or the better campaign. We always wanted the maximum number of voters out and about and hearing our messages. We always favored a November vote over a June one. We favored a large turnout over a small one.

    And we always felt we could convert many on the other side. We always felt that getting one of their voters was the same as getting two more of ours out. Today, almost the entire focus goes the other way. It is reduced to getting out your base while keeping down the turnout of your opponents. Subtracting instead of adding and then trying to reduce the opponent’s access further? Madness for democracy. Again, in forty years in Maine politics, with all types of political groups, I can’t ever remember anyone talking about suppressing the opponent’s turnout. That line of thinking today is most antidemocratic and very corrosive to the body politic. I’s a shame, and those currently advocating it should be ashamed.”

  45. Michelle Smith*

    Your coworker is just blatantly wrong. My office isn’t even open on Election Day expressly so people can vote without having to use PTO, and we are an organization that is legally prohibited from taking any political stances whatsoever or we’d lose our tax exemption. Reminding people of that hasn’t been a problem for us in the 25 or so years they’ve been in operation. I would be hard pressed to be convinced that your situation is any different.

  47. How is this a question???*

    Dude, I’m LDS, one of the most conservative leaning churches in the world and they remind people to vote OFTEN. Telling people to vote should never be partisan.

  48. Nonanon*

    I just hate that we’ve hit the point that “remember to vote!” is being taken as a political statement, not a responsibility in a democratic nation.

  50. Apex Mountain*

    I’m not too familiar with public sector work, but I would think being a government agency there are all sorts of rules and regs about this type of thing. Can you ask your boss or someone who might know more for clarification?

    1. Votingvixen*

      LW here! A few people have asked this question so I thought I’d respond. When it comes to political activity/advocacy at the office, the actual written ethical standards are pretty straightforward and no, the voting thing is not a violation of that. Our particular leadership team goes above and beyond to appear nonpartisan for a plethora of reasons (some of it having to do with previous leadership not doing that in an inappropriate way which, again, technically didn’t violate any rules), so the question was crowdsourcing to make sure I’m in line with most everyone’s thinking. I was not worried about a formal ethics violation.

  51. LL*

    I cannot believe we’re at a point where one party is considered the “pro-voting party” and one party is considered the anti-voting party and that anyone could even think it’s partisan to tell people to vote! Telling people to vote is always the way people who want to be non-partisan engage with elections!

    1. Apex Mountain*

      Not sure what you mean – most people seem to think it wouldn’t be a huge deal just to mention the election at least as far as the time off policies etc go. I agree with that – I think as long as you’re not pushing one particular party/candidate it’s fine

  53. Head Sheep Counter*

    The US has a poor voter turnout record.

    https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/07/12/voter-turnout-2018-2022/

    ” About two-thirds (66%) of the voting-eligible population turned out for the 2020 presidential election – the highest rate for any national election since 1900. The 2018 election (49% turnout) had the highest rate for a midterm since 1914. Even the 2022 election’s turnout, with a slightly lower rate of 46%, exceeded that of all midterm elections since 1970.”

    Voting should be a responsibility. One that we take seriously. If reminders improve outcomes… then so be it… because… left to our own devices… we are evidently fine with a simple majority defining our government.

    Don’t like it? Get engaged and change it. Don’t vote? Don’t complain.

    Its understandable that the national elections can feel like one’s vote doesn’t matter. Depending on your location and vote… it sometimes doesn’t matter as much as it could/should. But your vote very much matters the next level down and matters even more the more local you get. We can and do make meaningful differences at the local level.

    … steps of soap box and thanks OP for their reminder.

  54. Sneaky Squirrel*

    If this weren’t a government agency role, then I would role my eyes at this and say that reminding people to vote is similar to reminding people to reminding others that they have to pay their taxes, that they have off for Columbus/Indigenous People day, or that there is a policy for jury duty. It’s not inherently partisan to remind others of a company’s policies or about one’s rights/responsibilities for the country that the company is based in.

    In a government agency, I assume that one would have more restrictions limiting that type of activity for fear of being perceived as partisan. However, I also assume LW would have access to more information about what is/isn’t permissible.

  55. Nancy*

    This isn’t a company, it’s a government agency. Government agencies have very strict rules.

    You should ask HR or the compliance officer to clarify what is allowed, and to check your wording if you are concerned. The other manager may misunderstand the policy or just feel it is easiest to avoid the discussion completely.

  56. Just Saying*

    ..Isn’t the coworker in violation of the Hatch Act himself here, suggesting LW shouldn’t give timesheet reminders to perceived democrats, intending to limit voting access, while he was at work? I would talk to his manager about it, and ask for a general announcement about how to conform to the Hatch Act around election time. (Which IIRC is something standard anyways at agencies. if it’s happened already, maybe they can pull coworker aside.)

    H. A: “Engage in political activity – i.e., activity directed at the success or failure of a political party, candidate for partisan political office, or partisan political group – while the employee is on duty, in any federal room or building, while wearing a uniform or official insignia, or using any federally owned or leased vehicle.”

      1. Just Saying*

        “His argument was that […] my team is more likely to vote left.” Quote trimmed for clarity.

        LW goes on to say: “I don’t know the ideological makeup of my team, but if sweeping generalizations are true, he’s probably right.” That sentence tells me LW didn’t generalize the coworker’s wording- the coworker perceives her team as intrinsically left-leaning, not that he was worried providing information would sway the undecided.

        Advocating to limit certain employees’ access to voting-relevant information based on his perceptions of their political affiliations seems like “activity directed at the success or failure of a political party” to me. (Quote from the Hatch Act, abbreviated H.A., in comment above.)

  57. nnn*

    Aside: “the bloodmobile will be on-site next week” is quite the phrase when you’re unaware that mobile blood donation clinics exist.

    (My first mental image was, like, a food truck for vampires…)

  58. NobodyHasTimeForThis*

    All of this is giving me flashbacks to my first year in this state where I worked a 12 hour shift on Tuesdays about 40 minutes from my polling place and my boss tried to say I could not take time out to vote. He basically said I could take a full day of vacation or not vote. I ended up taking the worlds longest lunch and he never said a word. I was salaried.

    Of course this boss also said that since I had to work on Labor day which was a company holiday but my job function had to work Holidays, that he guessed I just lost that holiday pay and that on Thanksgiving since I normally didn’t work Thursdays I wouldn’t get the holiday pay either. Neither were true.

    He was actually a pretty good boss in some ways, but dreadful when it came to anything policy/HR related because he didn’t care to know and would just make crap up. I am grateful to him now because I was youngish and having him as a boss made me learn how to speak up for myself and not take what he said as gold.

  59. musical chairs*

    National Voter Registration Day in the US is September 17th this year. I plan to use that as relatively neutral pretext to offer resources in my office. I make it super easy to ignore me as well. I’m a volunteer voter registrar in a state that makes is so tricky to get registered in time. But I have only sent these emails out before presidential general elections, which could be construed as…pointed, but I also don’t want to spam people.

  60. Freya*

    As an Australian, every time this comes up I am FASCINATED by the American voting system. It’s so intricate, and takes so long, and there’s so many rules that make no sense to me! AND Y’ALL DON’T GET DEMOCRACY SAUSAGES!!!!

    With our compulsory voting system here, I remind everyone to vote every election, so they avoid the $20 fine ($55 for my state’s local elections). It’s completely uncontroversial.

    1. metadata minion*

      Now *I* want democracy sausages.

      In my precinct we do at least usually get some sort of baked sale from the local Boy and/or Girl Scouts at the polling places for the general election.

      1. Freya*

        The democracy sausages are a nice little fundraiser for the public school that is my usual polling place – there’s usually a cake stall and a coffee cart as well, and if there’s a big line up, they’ll send someone down the line to ask for orders so you can snack and sip a drink in the ten to fifteen minutes or so it takes to get to the front of the queue.

        (the one and only time I’ve had to queue for more than 15 minutes to vote was the time the election was the same day as the Christmas Pageant and my nearest polling place was on the opposite side of the pageant route to where I lived, compounded by my finishing work at about the same time as the pageant finished. A LOT of parents who took their kids to watch the pageant chose to vote while they were out, which meant there was about 10x the number of voters coming through as usual for that polling place)

  61. Student*

    The Hatch Act dictates what federal government employyes can and cannot do regarding elections.

    There is a great deal of officially published guidance on what does and does not violate the Hatch Act.

    Encouraging people to vote is fine. The Hatch Act rules start to matter the moment you seek to influence who or what, specifically, people are voting for.

  62. Lim*

    The crucial thing here is the fact the LW doesn’t work for a company, they work for THE GOVERNMENT.

    I don’t know why the answer keeps repeating the word “the company” four or five times when LW was clear that they don’t work for a company.

    Government employeees have strict rules over voting and what’s allowed to be said about voting at work.

    1. Chocolate Covered Cotton*

      And as SO MANY gov’t employees have commented here, this does not violate any rules and is routinely done in their own agencies.

      This is reminding people of an employment benefit that exists. In many jurisdictions, including whole states like mine, employers are REQUIRED to notify employees of this benefit, including government employers.

      Once again, they are simply telling people that they CAN vote. They are not telling people that they should or must vote and certainly aren’t telling anyone how to vote. Even suggesting people go vote would be fine: that’s just basic civic engagement, the sort of standard assumption in civil society that OF COURSE people who can vote are going to do so and here’s how much PTO you can use.

      It’s not partisan in the slightest. It’s a celebration of the fact that we live in a free democratic republic. It’s a shared experience of patriotic citizenship. It’s no less inappropriate for the workplace than a Fourth of July picnic. Hooray for democracy!=Hooray for America!

      To make voting itself into a partisan issue not to be discussed in polite society is to dismiss that we are, in fact, a free democratic republic and we should celebrate that. It’s anti-democratic and anti-American.

  63. r..*

    The US Hatch Act regulates political activity by federal employees, and in general outlaws partisan political activity while on duty.

    Encouraging people to exercise their right to register for voting and cast a vote is not an outlawed activity of the Hatch Act, as long as the activity is restricted to get people to vote, with no intend to influence how they vote. As a matter of fact the Act goes out of its way to explicitly permit activities intended solely to increase voter turnout.
    This fact should tell LW all they need to know whether it would be appropriate to tell people “to go and vote, no matter whom you intend to vote for”.

    However, if LW’s coworker believed that the majority of LWs reports are Democratic and he therefore engages in political activity to disencourage LWs reports to vote, even if it is convincing LW not to engage in voter turnout outreach, *that* would likely violate the Hatch Act.

  64. Luna (the other one)*

    I work at a non-profit school, and we are not allowed to do any political campaigning or we could lose our non-profit status. We can’t even tell our students who we are voting for, because we are too influential as teachers.

    But we are 100% allowed to remind people to vote, including wearing VOTE t-shirts and I VOTED stickers.

    Because while voting rights have become politicized, voting is not inherently politically biased.

    Just about anything can become politicized, doesn’t mean it is inherently political. You could say you enjoy the fresh air, someone could interpret that to mean you’re anti-pollution, and therefore anti-capitalism, and therefore a communist.

  65. Crencestre*

    Does anyone else recall those public service announcements that filled radio airwaves during election season? Ex-presidents and very prominent members of BOTH parties would say things like “Election Day is coming soon. Go to the polls and vote! Vote as your conscience tells you to, but vote.”

    The idea that there would be one party that would actively try to discourage voting would have stunned people back then. Voting was a citizen’s duty AND a citizen’s privilege – a privilege, we were well aware, that many people all over the world did NOT have. That’s not to say that no politically-motivated deviousness or outright crimes never occurred – of course they did! – but no major party would have wanted to be associated with voter suppression. And suggesting that simply reminding employees of their employer’s time-off-for-voting policy was a political move would have stunned people as well.

Comments are closed.