It’s intriguing because it encompasses employee and employer rights as well as free speech.
A man on his way to work heckled the New Zealand First leader and is now subject to an employment investigation by his employer, Tonkin + Taylor.
Mr Peters has said he would not be upset if the man were sacked.
It so happened that the heckler was wearing a Tonkin + Taylor lanyard. The engineering conglomerate would not want to take political sides.
The heckling — some might call it abuse — included swearing and insults directed at Mr Peters.
However, the heckler was not there in any work capacity.
Mr Peters, no mean verbal jouster himself, gives as good as he gets. He responded pointedly to the man.
Tonkin + Taylor swiftly apologised to Mr Peters and instituted the employment investigation. When approached by the media, the man said he was "apologetic".
Mr Peters was at the end of a media stand-up where he and National’s Chris Bishop were announcing $600 million worth of rail funding.
Mr Peters has also been reported as saying: "If your company actually gets contracts from KiwiRail, or from railways, it’d be rather wise for you to keep counsel."
That sort of comment is worrying. It could be seen as a Donald Trump-like threat.
A Free Speech Union spokesman said Tonkin + Taylor had been urged to respect its employee’s speech rights.
Employers did not own employees’ time when they were commuting. The choice to heckle Winston Peters had nothing to do with the company.
"The company apologising off the bat sets a dangerous precedent, sending a message to employees that expressing political opinions in public is unacceptable. But individuals don’t forfeit their right to express political views just because they have a job."
It was common practice for employees to wear lanyards to help with workplace identification, the spokesman said.
Civis likes to be on the lookout for subtle and not-so-subtle prejudices. How much is our view on employees’ rights, employer obligations and free speech in this instance coloured by what we think of Mr Peters? Did he get what he deserved?
Do the rudeness and expletives also affect our judgement?
New Zealand laws to defend employees against dismissal are strong compared to many places. A sacking for this one incident, whatever the company’s code of conduct says, seems unlikely.
Tonkin + Taylor will want to appear politically neutral and perhaps even curry favour. Hence, its rush to take action.
But in doing so, is the company trampling on the man’s rights?
Civis, while uncertain about what personal prejudices are in play, is sympathetic to free speech arguments. At the same time, the man was foolish and obnoxious.
On such occasions, free speech principles become more difficult but perhaps even more important to uphold.
Mr Trump’s terrible trampling of civil liberties in the United States should make us all the more determined not to follow even a little way down the same path.
★★★
Last week, Civis lamented the "run it straight" craze. Tragically, faster than even Civis had imagined, it took the life this week of a Palmerston North 19-year-old.
The stupidity and futility of "run it straight" and the Australia-based Runit, whatever its "safeguards", are blindingly obvious.
Current rugby and rugby league players should be barred by their employers from being associated with the "sport". This is a case where employers should exert control over their staff outside work hours. The players are bringing themselves and their sport into disrepute.
Meanwhile, former stars should face pressure and public opprobrium from us all. They are sullying their reputations.
