FAQ
Got questions? We have answers.
General Info
Why were you fired?
Google claimed we caused a “physical disruption” and made coworkers “feel threatened.” In reality, we exercised rights that are protected under federal and state law: the right to peacefully protest in opposition to discrimination and unlawful conduct by our employer. Many of those fired had minimal or no involvement in the sit-in itself.
Wait, can Google really just fire people for protesting?
That’s exactly what we’re asking the courts to decide — and so far, the answer is leaning toward no.
Federal civil rights law (through Title VII) and similar state laws protect workers who oppose discrimination. Google claims we were fired for being “disruptive.” We argue we were fired for being inconvenient — for telling the truth about how our colleagues were being treated.
What is your goal?
We’re seeking accountability. Specifically:
- A ruling that Google’s mass termination was unlawful retaliation
- Reinstatement and back pay for those who were wrongfully fired
- A clear legal precedent that tech workers have the right to speak out against discrimination and harassment
Why do you need donations?
Fighting one of the world’s largest and wealthiest corporations in federal court is expensive. Google has virtually unlimited legal resources. We don’t. Your donations go directly toward legal fees, court costs, expert witnesses, and the day-to-day expenses of sustaining a multi-year federal lawsuit. Every dollar helps level a playing field that is deliberately stacked against workers.
What happens to the money you received if the case is dismissed?
If our case is dismissed or we otherwise end up with more donations than we need to cover our legal fees, all excess funds will be donated to the Palestinian Children’s Relief Fund. No one from the Fired 50 will have personal access to the funds, or personally profit in any way from your donations.
I’m not a tech worker. Why should I care?
Because this case isn’t just about Google. It’s about whether any employer in America can fire workers for speaking up against discrimination and human rights abuses. If Google gets away with this, it sends a message to every company in every industry: punish dissent, silence objections, and face no consequences.
The legal precedents set in our case will affect workers everywhere — from warehouse floors to corporate offices. When worker protections are gutted, all workers are more vulnerable, not just those in tech.
Legalese
What are the NLRB and NLRA?
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is the federal agency that enforces the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The NLRA, also known as the Wagner Act, protects private-sector employees’ rights to organize, unionize, and engage in collective bargaining. If your employer utilizes Unfair Labor Practices (ULPs), or behaviors that interfere with your rights as outlined in the NLRA, you can file a charge for the NLRB to investigate. That’s what we did after Google fired us for organizing.
What is the EEOC?
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is the federal agency responsible for enforcing laws against workplace discrimination. If your employer retaliates against you for opposing discrimination — which is exactly what happened to us — you can file a charge with the EEOC, who will investigate your claim. In the vast majority of cases, the EEOC declines to pursue the case and issues the claimant a “right to sue” letter, which allows you to bring your case to federal court under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Title VII doesn’t just protect people from being discriminated against directly. It also protects anyone who opposes discrimination — for example, employees who speak out against their employer’s mistreatment of a particular group. That’s the legal basis of our case.
What is Title VII?
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it illegal for employers to discriminate based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Critically, it also makes it illegal to retaliate against employees who oppose workplace discrimination.
We opposed Google’s treatment of Arab, Muslim, and Palestinian employees — people being harassed, censored, and marginalized for their identities during the ongoing debate around Project Nimbus. When Google fired us for raising those concerns, that was textbook retaliation under Title VII. A federal court has already denied Google’s motion to dismiss our claim.
Why are you pursuing a lawsuit through EEOC / Title VII claims?
Our case has two legal tracks. The first was an unfair labor practices complaint filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in May 2024, arguing that Google violated our right to organize. The second is a federal lawsuit — Anderson v. Google LLC — filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, arguing that Google retaliated against us for opposing discrimination against our Arab, Muslim, and Palestinian coworkers.
The Title VII track is where our case is actually moving forward. In September 2025, a federal judge denied Google’s motion to dismiss our retaliation claims, ruling that we could proceed to the discovery phase of litigation. That’s a significant legal victory — a federal court agreed that what we did may constitute protected activity under civil rights law.
What happened to the NLRB complaint?
We were forced to withdraw. After our investigator with the NLRB had requested more information, our lawyer received a notice that we had less than 24 hours to withdraw our case because the NLRB would be dismissing it. We don’t know why this happened, but we can speculate based on the current political environment towards workers rights.
The National Labor Relations Board is the federal agency that’s supposed to protect workers’ rights to organize, protest, and collectively advocate for better conditions. Under normal circumstances, the NLRB would investigate our complaint, and if it found Google broke the law, it could order reinstatement and back pay.
But the NLRB has been systematically undermined by the current administration. Here’s what’s happened:
- The board lost its quorum. In January 2025, the Trump administration fired Board Member Gwynne Wilcox — whose term wasn’t set to expire until 2028 — leaving the NLRB without enough members to rule on cases. For most of 2025, the board literally could not issue decisions.
- Massive staffing cuts. The agency’s budget was slashed by $14 million. Ninety-nine employees were cut, including case handlers and administrative law judges. The people whose job it is to investigate cases like ours simply aren’t there anymore.
- A 500-case backlog. By October 2025, the NLRB had a pileup of 500 unresolved cases.
This is not a coincidence. The NLRB was deliberately weakened to make it harder for workers like us to hold employers accountable. That’s why pursuing our Title VII claims through the federal courts — which can’t be defunded or stripped of quorum by executive action — is our primary legal strategy.
