When Off-Duty Becomes On-Brand: What Leaders Need to Know About Employee Conduct in Public
Emily Rust
Wearing your company uniform while heckling a politician? That’s one way to go viral - for all the wrong reasons.
This week, a Tonkin + Taylor employee allegedly confronted Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters during a public event. The incident didn’t occur during work hours, but it did happen while the employee was dressed in company uniform - visibly representing their employer.
While some view it as an isolated act by a private citizen on a break, others argue the optics damage the company’s reputation - and by extension, its internal and external relationships.
The big question: can an employer take action for conduct that happens off the clock?
The answer here from Stones Expert Julia Shallcrass, Employment Lawyer: Yes - if there's a clear connection to the employment.
When Private Conduct Becomes a Workplace Issue
Under New Zealand employment law, an employer can investigate (and in some cases, discipline) an employee for conduct outside work hours if it negatively affects the employment relationship, the company’s reputation, or the employee’s ability to do their job.
The test isn't whether the act happened at work - it’s whether it has the potential to harm the employment.
As confirmed in Hallwright v Forsyth Barr, where a senior analyst’s off-duty road rage attracted national media attention, the Employment Court stated:
“It is not necessary that the conduct itself be directly linked to the employment, but rather that it has the potential to impact negatively on it.”
In that case, the company was justified in terminating the employee due to the reputational fallout.
Uniforms, Perception, and Accountability
In the Tonkin + Taylor situation, the visible company branding becomes the bridge between personal behaviour and professional accountability. Being in uniform, even off-site and after hours, can create the impression that the employee is speaking or acting on behalf of the organisation.
This places leaders in a tricky position. They must balance:
-
Employees' right to free expression, and
-
An organisation’s right to protect its reputation and culture.
It’s not just about the law - it’s about trust, brand perception, and the expectations leaders set and communicate for representing the company both inside and outside work hours.
Key Takeaways for Leaders
-
Set clear expectations in your Code of Conduct about public behaviour and social media, especially when wearing uniforms or referencing your employer. Remind team members during team or one-on-one meetings, or training sessions.
-
Educate your team on how off-duty conduct can still impact their employment.
-
Be consistent in how incidents are assessed - focus on the impact, not the location or timing.
-
Review your policies on political activity, public behaviour and statements, and brand representation.
Final Word
Leadership isn't just about what happens inside the walls of your organisation. It’s also about the ripple effects of individual behaviour in public view.
As public scrutiny grows and workplace boundaries blur, one thing is clear: uniforms carry more than logos - they carry reputations.