It may be the most contentious presidential election in recent memory. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are controversial in their own ways and plenty of voters don't like them.

Though the home stretch of the election officially launched during the Labor Day weekend, the heated debates over the candidates got off to an early start everywhere, including the workplace. That can create major headaches for human resources leaders if political banter among employees turns ugly, according to the Society of Human Resource Management.

In June, weeks before the Democratic and Republican national conventions, SHRM released the results of a survey that showed 26% of HR professionals perceived a greater political volatility in the workplace this year compared with previous election years. Other national surveys have also shown nearly half of Americans have gotten into fights with friends, relatives or co-workers over Clinton and Trump.

“There has been discussion among employees, which is to be expected. This campaign year is unique in that we have a reality TV star/business mogul and a former first lady and secretary of state running,” Jackie Henderson, vice president of human resources for the $743 million Rivermark Community Credit Union in Beaverton, Ore., observed. “As with anything else discussed in the workplace, it is no surprise that more passionate discussions ensue as a result.”

But in the battleground state of Ohio, Cindy L. Swigert, vice president of human resources for the $331 million Day Air Credit union in Kettering, a suburb of Dayton, hasn't seen any animated discussions among employees over Clinton and Trump.

Both human resources managers said their credit unions don't have any policies regulating political activity in the workplace because other policies ensure everyone's opinions are respected. Even so, the nasty barbs bound to be traded between the two candidates during this contentious campaign may evoke emotional reactions and talk among employees.

In the verbatim comments from the SHRM survey, HR professionals commented that employees are more vocal about their opinions, feel the presidential candidates are more polarizing than in previous years and appear to be more concerned in regard to their choices of candidates than in previous elections.

What's more, 45% of Americans have gotten into a fight over the election with a friend, a family member or a co-worker in August, up from a third in May, according to a Huffington Post/YouGov poll. Thirty-eight percent of Americans have argued with a friend, 30% with a family member, and 16% with a co-worker.

While more than 70% of HR professionals reported no difference in the political volatility in the workplace, and 5% reported less volatility during this year's presidential election, some HR executives noted because the potential of volatility is so tangible, employees are avoiding political talk.

“There is so much potential volatility that employees are not discussing the election at all,” one HR professional commented in the SHRM survey.

“People seem to be less willing to talk about who they support for fear of backlash as the candidates are fairly polarizing figures,” another HR executive wrote.

Because employees may have strong feelings about the controversial candidates, credit union HR managers are trying to keep an eye on things without muffling workplace discussions as long as they stay civil and respectful.

“We try to monitor activity without stifling freedom of thought or speech,” Henderson said. “We have a very respectful workplace, and employees are generally thoughtful about discussing topics in a manner that is appropriate for the workplace so that discussions don't elevate to an unacceptable level.”

Because credit unions are politically active in order to promote the industry's interests, Swigert brought up a challenging dilemma.

“When we talk about PACs and try to encourage our employees to donate to PACs, we're having political conversations,” she said. “So it's difficult then to try to say that that kind of conversation is OK, but now politically-based conversations on the presidential election are not. How would you go about slicing that up so that certain conversations are OK, but other conversations are not? That just seems contradictory.”

While the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee freedom of speech at work and only applies to government action, there is an important exception.

The National Labor Relations Board prohibits organizations to restrict employees from talking about wages, hours and other employment terms and conditions inside or outside of the workplace.

In a recent blog post, labor lawyers William B. deMeza Jr. and Kenneth A. Jenero of Holland & Knight, a Tampa, Fla.-based international law firm, wrote that the National Labor Relations Board has long recognized that all non-supervisory employees have the right to engage in concerted communications about pay, benefits and workplace safety as long as they do it in a lawful and proper manner.

If employees are discussing the presidential candidates within the context of the $15-an-hour minimum wage issue or the Affordable Care Act, for example, that is a protected conversation.

“So how can you have a policy, then that prohibits those types of conversations that are going to be, in my opinion, in direct conflict with the NLRB?” Swigert said.

For Swigert and Henderson, it comes down to having policies that maintain workplace respect for all employees, members, vendors and guests.

“I just really think that as an organization our role is not to try to legislate the conversation,” Swigert said. “I think our role is to insist upon respect and respectful behavior that also supports diversity and inclusion.”

To ensure an respectful work environment, HR managers may want to remind employees about the company's workplace policies against harassment, bullying, threats and wasting time.

For example, workplace harassment is generally defined as behavior that interferes with employees' work performance and creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment.

“Whether certain conduct constitutes harassment is determined in part by the perception of the affected person,” Henderson explained. “Conduct or communication that may be innocently intended can be viewed as offensive by the recipient. Similarly, conduct or communication that might be acceptable in a social setting with one's friend can be unacceptable in the workplace. The best practice is to be sure your conduct while at work or on credit union business is acceptable and appropriate to any audience.”

Even though most states require organizations to give employees either paid or unpaid time off to vote, the SHRM survey found 77% companies do not take any action to encourage employees to vote in political elections.

Only 6% of employers share nonpartisan messages via emails, bulletins and posters encouraging employees to vote, according to the SHRM survey.

Rivermark Community encourages employees to vote over the credit union's intranet and posts information on how to register in common areas.

Day Air CU doesn't do anything specific to encourage employees to vote. However, if an employee is unable to get to the polls before or after work, most managers will be flexible to allow employees to vote. Swigert noted Day Air President/CEO William Burke does place information on candidates who are supportive of credit unions in board packets. That information is also available to all employees.

About 30 states require employers to either provide paid or unpaid time off for employees to vote except when the polls open or close one, two or three hours before or after their work shifts, according to XpertHR in New Providence, N.J. States such as Connecticut, Indiana, Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and the District of Columbia are silent on allowing employees time off from work to vote. In other states such as Delaware, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and South Carolina, employers are not allowed to prevent employees from voting.

Eighty-six percent of employers give their employees paid or unpaid time off to vote, while 14% said they do not allow employees to take time off from work to vote, according to the SHRM survey.