Google ran secret project to convince its employees that 'unions suck'

Executives at Google, one of the richest company's in the world, ran a secret anti-union campaign dubbed Project Vivian to discourage employee activism and 'convince [workers] that unions suck,' a newly released National Labor Relations Board ruling has revealed. 

Google enlisted IRI Consultants, an aggressively anti-union firm that reportedly monitors and collects info on employees' finances, union tendencies, and even ethnic backgrounds, to muddle union organization efforts, according to the NLRB document released January 7.

The union watchdog group also found that Michael Pfyl, Google's head of employment law, called the secret scheme an opportunity 'to engage employees more positively' - and 'convince them that unions suck.'  

Alphabet, the umbrella company that owns the $3 trillion search behemoth, has 120,000 workers. Only 226 Google employees have signed union cards.

The revelations are the result of an ongoing investigation of a complaint by the Communication Workers of America lodged on behalf of seven Google employees and ex-employees in December 2019 who claimed the company illegally tracked their actions. 

Last December, the CWA accused Google of illegally firing, interrogating and surveilling activist employees. 

Google has denied any wrongdoing. 

One former employee has since settled with the search giant, but five were fired and two were disciplined after engaging in attempts to unionize fellow employees.

In late 2020, the NLRB issued a federal complaint against Google for illegally firing and surveilling the software engineers who the company's attorneys say were dismissed for 'breaching security protocols.'

Administrative Judge Paul Bogas of the NLRB demanded in the January 7 ruling that Google 'immediately' produce 180 internal documents related to the company's 'Project Vivian' campaign.

In the order, Google's director of employment law is quoted as saying Project Vivian's mission was 'to engage employees more positively and convince them that unions suck.'

Google has yet to turn over the documents to an attorney representing the former employees, citing attorney-client privilege.

But Judge Bogas rejected those assertions, saying 'to put it charitably, an overreach.'

The judge said in the ruling he reviewed evidence that a Google attorney sought to find a 'respected voice to publish an OpEd outlining what a unionized tech workplace would look like, and counseling employees of FB (Facebook), MSFT(Microsoft), Amazon, and google (sic) not to do it.'

Google's HR director Kara Silverstein reportedly endorsed the idea but warned it should be done with 'no fingerprints' tracing back to the company and it should not be 'Google specific.'

Project Vivian documents reviewed by the NLRB also revealed that the decision to retain IRI was made by a group of non-attorneys, including Silverstein and Danielle Brown, Google's vice president of employee engagement.

IRI later produced a proposed draft of the op-ed to a Google lawyer, the judge's report revealed.

Project Vivian also included discussion of Google employees' 'opposition to mandatory arbitration which has been a rallying cry for activists within the company who succeeded in seeing the policy ended in February 2019.

A Google spokesperson said the company vehemently disagreed with the judge's order to turn over the documents.