This is how NOT to respond to employee complaints

JP Morgan is making waves with its decision to bring employees back to the office five days a week starting in March. But what's making even more waves is its reported crackdown on employee communication about this decision on the company intranet.

Let's talk about why that's problematic from both a legal and practical standpoint:

1./ Section 7 Rights under the NLRA

Employees have the right to discuss terms and conditions of their employment, including workplace policies, under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act. By limiting or silencing discussions about the end of remote work, JP Morgan could be treading dangerously close to a violation of these rights. It's a stark reminder to employers: your communication policies need to align with labor law, or you risk serious legal consequences.

2./ The Practical Case for Open Communication

Shutting down conversations on your intranet doesn't silence employees—it just moves their conversations elsewhere. Employees will still talk—on Slack, WhatsApp, or even social media. The difference? You lose control of the narrative and miss the chance to address concerns in a centralized, constructive way.

And let's not overlook the optics. A communication crackdown looks reactionary and out of touch. It breeds distrust, invites bad PR, and undermines morale. Open communication, on the other hand, fosters transparency and gives companies the opportunity to engage with employees in a way that builds trust and improves policy rollouts.

The takeaway for businesses? Be proactive, not reactive. Employees want to talk, and they deserve to talk. The smart play is to create a space where those conversations can happen—and to participate in them constructively. Trying to shut them down will only backfire, legally and practically.