Sundar Pichai Can Say He Doesn’t Want That, But ...: Here's What Google Employees Sacked Over Israel Protests Claims

In their complaint, the former Google employees claimed that the company's decision to terminate them constituted an infringement upon their rights protected under US labour law

After Google fired 50 employees for protesting the company's governmental collaboration with Israel, the employees took legal action by lodging a complaint with the US labour board, reported The Times Of India. Alleging wrongful termination, these ex-employees assert that the tech giant infringed upon their rights as workers when it decided to end their employment.

In their complaint, the former Google employees claimed that the company's decision to terminate them constituted an infringement upon their rights protected under US labour law, particularly their ability to advocate for improved working conditions.

The former employees asserted that their actions did not involve political discourse but rather centred on discussions regarding working conditions relevant to the development of software intended for sale to governments such as Israel's. They argued that this discourse constituted a protected activity under the National Labor Relations Act.

"That's legally protected activity," one of the software engineers recently fired by Google told ITPro. "Sundar (Pichai) can say he doesn't want that, but the National Labour Relations Act says otherwise. Google is probably the most powerful company in the world, and the work the workers do every day has an incredible impact. To pretend it's objective and you can't talk about the effects of that is absurd," he added.

In a recent blog, Sundar Pichai, Google's CEO, emphasised the importance of employees being more attentive to how they work, collaborate, communicate, and even engage in disagreements.

He mentioned that Google values a culture of vibrant, open dialogue, fostering exceptional product development and transforming innovative ideas into reality. Preserving this culture is crucial. Nonetheless, he underscored that “ultimately we are a workplace, and our policies and expectations are clear: this is a business and not a place to act in a way that disrupts coworkers or makes them feel unsafe, to attempt to use the company as a personal platform, or to fight over disruptive issues or debate politics.”