You're not running the Department of War (née Defense), and your employees aren't soldiers. If you think, however, Hegseth's speech yesterday is a model for shaping culture in your workplace, here's a lawyer's caution: his words are an employment-law nightmare.
Imagine a CEO saying any of the following to employees:
Sex discrimination & gender stereotyping: He demanded all standards revert to the "highest male standard only" and mocked "dudes in dresses" and "gender delusions." Translate that to performance reviews or promotion criteria, and you’ve got textbook sex-discrimination and hostile-work-environment claims.
Religious & race discrimination: He invoked prayer at official events and banned beards with no exceptions. That's a double legal risk — not just religious-accommodation violations but also potential race discrimination, since beard bans historically impact Black men with pseudofolliculitis barbae.
Disability & age: Daily PT and deriding "fat generals" would be unlawful if you required employees to meet weight/fitness benchmarks that disproportionately impact those with disabilities or older workers.
Retaliation & chilling complaints: His plan to eliminate anonymous complaints — and his message that dissenters should "resign" — maps directly onto retaliation and whistleblower protections.
Bullying & hazing: He celebrated bringing back bullying and hazing, which he feels have been demonized. Employers who mimic that mindset in civilian workplaces are inviting claims of harassment, constructive discharge, and negligent supervision.
The throughline is simple: culture-setting that ridicules protected groups, undermines complaint processes, or normalizes hazing doesn't just risk morale. It risks liability.
Employers, take note. You can absolutely demand accountability, high standards, and strong leadership. But if you frame those expectations in ways that demean, exclude, or silence, you're not leading, you're litigating.
Imagine a CEO saying any of the following to employees:
Sex discrimination & gender stereotyping: He demanded all standards revert to the "highest male standard only" and mocked "dudes in dresses" and "gender delusions." Translate that to performance reviews or promotion criteria, and you’ve got textbook sex-discrimination and hostile-work-environment claims.
Religious & race discrimination: He invoked prayer at official events and banned beards with no exceptions. That's a double legal risk — not just religious-accommodation violations but also potential race discrimination, since beard bans historically impact Black men with pseudofolliculitis barbae.
Disability & age: Daily PT and deriding "fat generals" would be unlawful if you required employees to meet weight/fitness benchmarks that disproportionately impact those with disabilities or older workers.
Retaliation & chilling complaints: His plan to eliminate anonymous complaints — and his message that dissenters should "resign" — maps directly onto retaliation and whistleblower protections.
Bullying & hazing: He celebrated bringing back bullying and hazing, which he feels have been demonized. Employers who mimic that mindset in civilian workplaces are inviting claims of harassment, constructive discharge, and negligent supervision.
The throughline is simple: culture-setting that ridicules protected groups, undermines complaint processes, or normalizes hazing doesn't just risk morale. It risks liability.
Employers, take note. You can absolutely demand accountability, high standards, and strong leadership. But if you frame those expectations in ways that demean, exclude, or silence, you're not leading, you're litigating.