Sure, but it's not qualitatively different from many other situations where employees make incompatible demands, is what I'm saying. One employee can say, I wan

Sure, but it's not qualitatively different from many other situations where employees make incompatible demands, is what I'm saying. One employee can say, I want to be allowed to work from home; another can say, I have trouble interacting with people remotely and want to see them face to face. One employee can say, I want to bring my dog to the office; another can say, I'm allergic to dogs. One employee can say, I want a beer fridge at work; another can say, I'm a recovering alcoholic and free beer is too dangerous. One employee can say, I really want a strong management structure; another can say, I really want a flat structure. One employee can say, I wish to live in New York and work during the daytime; another can say, I wish to live in Tokyo and work during the daytime. It's the employer's job (not the employees') to mediate between those, if possible (such as by having different teams with different offices/policies/etc.), and figure out which employees to make contracts with, if not. Or, more directly, two employees can say, I want this much salary, and the company doesn't have budget for both. If they meet the demand of one employee, they are risking the other employee. But nobody would ever suggest (in good faith) that either of the employees needs to put the business first and not negotiate for a higher salary so that the company can retain the other employee. That's the company's problem to solve. (Since you mentioned a hostile work environment - sure, there is a law in some jurisdictions that you cannot discriminate based on political affiliations. If one employee is trying to put the company in violation of the law, then the company has an easy answer for which employee not to make a contracts with. And, again, such a law binds companies and effectively obligates them not to hire people who will put them in violation of the law; it typically does not bind employees. In the absence of a law giving the company only one choice, it's up to the employer to figure out what benefits them more. Underpaying a hard-working employee is certainly "hostile" in a colloquial sense, but it is not illegal, and many companies manage to retain underpaid employees in practice.)