OK, let's use your book club example. Imagine that an AG or other similarly placed official has a taste in literature that is known to be controversial and to evoke discomfort on the part of some employees. Imagine that this official holds daily meetings devoted to the study of this form of literature, in a government office. Imagine that this practice is perceived among employees, whether accurately or not, as a means of giving those who share this taste in literature preferential access and exposure to the boss, and that employees who do not share this taste feel subtly excluded, and suspect - again, accurately or not - that their career prospects would be adversely affected by their failure to share the tastes of the boss.
None of this, of course, would be illegal, unless it could be proven that members of the inner circle were getting preferential treatment or that those outside the circle were being discriminated against. But it would inevitably create dissension in the office and compromise the ability of the agency to function effectively. It is not something that would naturally be the subject of legal action, but it is something that I think would be of concern to the appointing authority and to anyone else concerned with the smooth functioning of that office.
The logical response, of course, would be for the appointing authority to suggest quietly to the official in question that this particular taste would be better indulged outside the office. |
