When the US Supreme Court blocked Biden’s vaccine-or-test mandate for large, private employers last week, it didn’t come as a surprise to many legal experts watching the case. Conservatives who opposed the rule had politicized the topic, and today’s Supreme Court has become disappointingly predictable when deliberating cases charged with partisan politics.
What was surprising about the Supreme Court’s ruling was the lead-up to it: Throughout court proceedings this month, one of the justices didn’t wear masks, even as the Omicron variant raged in DC.
We now know, thanks to reporting from NPR, that Chief Justice John Roberts requested that everyone mask-up—Justice Sonia Sotomayor has diabetes, and is therefore at a higher risk of developing severe illness from a covid-19 infection. But Justice Neil Gorsuch did not acquiesce in spite of these pleas. As a result, Sotomayor—not Gorsuch—has been working remotely, forced to contribute as the odd one out, on unequal footing.
Critics now see Gorsuch’s bare face as a violation of basic decency in the workplace (or anywhere for that matter) made worse by his assigned seat directly next to Sotomayor’s on the bench.
But this isn’t just any workplace. Supreme Court justices are essentially colleagues for life. No doubt, the two will be sitting next to one another for many years to come.
Beyond the court, this conflict raises questions that employers will have to face when—and if—they bring employees back to the office. Regardless of local masking regulations or vaccination guidelines, there will always be workers who are more vulnerable to covid than others. And there will always be employees who feel the rules don’t apply to them.
Company leaders and managers will have to determine who will be accommodated and who will not. Those decisions may well inform who’ll get to stick around and who will be sent home. They could also put employees in the position of making their own decisions about where and how they should work.
Hakan Ozcelik, a professor of management at the Sacramento State College of Business, says the worst thing a company can do is leave employees in limbo to navigate interpersonal debates about masks or vaccination. In fact, his research during the covid pandemic suggests that company mandates around health and safety are interpreted by employees as a cue about how much a company cares about its people, so the policies ought to be well-considered and thorough. He advises that companies do the following:
- Communicate the company’s masks policies clearly, explaining the science behind the rules. Someone who chooses to ignore masking rules ought to understand all the consequences of that choice.
- Make that communication memorable by using multiple forms of media and featuring personal stories and anecdotes that demonstrate the value of wearing a mask.
- Craft a policy that puts science-backed health protocols first, and is fair to everyone, but also logical—it must stand up to employee scrutiny. (If someone works on-site alone for eight hours per day, for example, they probably don’t need to wear a mask, he says.)
- Highlight to all employees that their behavior matters, and ask staff for input into covid protocols as the pandemic situation changes.
- Use this transitional period to build or reinforce a culture of respect within your company. Remind people of the organization’s commitment to basic social expectations, like the assumption that people will show each other compassion.
Heidi Scott, chief learning officer at HR.com, a social networking site for human resources managers, approaches it this way: Remind workers that the company wants to bring people together, that it respects those who have wildly differing opinions on some polarizing topics, and that its mask policy is meant to protect everyone, including employees who object to masks.
At some point, “you have to hope you’ve hired some good-willed people,” she says. Still, even ill-willed people have a right to their views, she points out, and some may leave, “which is not a horrible thing.”
“There’s going to be an organization out there that’s perhaps better suited to who they are, where they want to go, and how they want to work.” —Lila MacLellan
Five things we learned this week
🧹 Activision Blizzard fired more than three dozen employees connected to sexual harassment allegations. In related news, Microsoft just bought the maker of hit mobile games for $70 billion.
💡 Albert Camus would have put the Great Resignation in perspective. The post-war philosopher proposed that we make meaning by asking unanswerable questions like “What’s the meaning of work?”
🤖 Covid-19 barely registered in a list of CEOs’ top concerns for 2022. But company chiefs said they did fret about automation, competition, disruptive business models, and being fired.
📆 Almost all startups make the same hiring mistake. They bulk up too early, which leaves them financially stretched and unstable.
🏃 The elevated pace of job-switching will stick around for a while. But some “Great Reshuffling” predictions are hyperbolic, says LinkedIn’s chief economist Karin Kimbrough.
ICYMI
Feeling anxious about going back to the office, where not every one of your coworkers might share your concerns? We’ve been here before. In this piece from our archive, Quartz spoke to Sian Beilock, president of Barnard College in New York and a cognitive scientist, about how to deal with such fears. Read it again, just in case the reopening rumors are true this time.
You got the Memo!
This week’s Memo was written by Lila MacLellan and edited by Francesca Donner. The Quartz at Work team can be reached at work@qz.com.
Did someone forward you this email? Sign up for future installments here. Get the most out of Quartz by downloading our app and becoming a member.