Microsoft fired two employees today - software engineers Riki Fameli and Anna Hattle - for breaking into president Brad Smith's office during Tuesday's protest. The company called it "serious breaches of company policies," but let's be honest about what actually happened: two workers got so fed up with their employer's business decisions that they were willing to lose their jobs over it.
This wasn't some casual workplace complaint about the coffee machine. These employees, part of the "No Azure for Apartheid" movement, literally occupied Smith's executive suite to protest Microsoft's cloud computing contracts with the Israeli military. They knew exactly what they were risking.
The Listening Devices Claim That Sounds Like Bullshit
Smith claims the protesters planted "listening devices in the form of phones" in his office. Really? Software engineers at Microsoft decided to plant bugs using phones? In 2025? That sounds like the kind of thing corporate security makes up to justify calling the FBI.
I've worked in enough corporate environments to know how this goes. Protesters occupy an office, management panics and calls it a "security breach," then investigators find employees left their phones behind and suddenly it becomes "surveillance equipment." The whole thing reeks of narrative manipulation to make the firings look justified.
The Guardian reported earlier this month that Israeli military was actually using Microsoft's Azure infrastructure to store Palestinian phone calls for mass surveillance. Microsoft's government contracts and other military partnerships have created similar controversies. So who's really doing the listening here?
The Pattern That Big Tech Refuses to Acknowledge
Microsoft isn't the first tech giant dealing with employee revolts over military contracts. Google fired 28 employees last year for similar protests against their Israeli government contracts. Some of those employees also occupied executive offices.
The pattern is clear: tech workers are getting increasingly uncomfortable with their companies profiting from military contracts, especially ones involving surveillance and warfare technologies. Tech worker organizing against military contracts has grown significantly since 2018. But instead of engaging with these concerns, companies are just firing the troublemakers.
I talked to a former Google employee who was part of those protests. He told me the breaking point wasn't just the contracts themselves - it was management's refusal to even discuss the ethical implications. "They'd rather fire us than acknowledge that maybe, just maybe, helping militaries track civilians might be morally questionable."
The FBI Involvement That Should Terrify Everyone
Here's the part that really pisses me off: Bloomberg reported that a Microsoft director contacted the FBI about these protests. Let that sink in - a private company called federal law enforcement to investigate employee activism.
This is the same Microsoft that positions itself as a champion of diversity and inclusion. Apparently that only applies when employees stay quiet about inconvenient business relationships.
The company claims 20 people were arrested in related protests last week, with 16 having never worked at Microsoft. That suggests this movement is spreading beyond just disgruntled employees to broader public opposition. When your business practices piss off not just your workers but outside activists too, maybe the problem isn't the protesters.
What This Actually Means for Tech Worker Power
Fameli and Hattle knew they were probably sacrificing their careers when they occupied Smith's office. Microsoft pays software engineers $200K+ with stock options that could set them up for life. Walking away from that takes serious conviction.
But their firing sends a clear message to other Microsoft employees: stay in line or we'll destroy your livelihood. It's the corporate equivalent of public executions - make an example of the troublemakers to keep everyone else scared.
I've seen this playbook before at other big tech companies. Fire the most visible activists, investigate anyone who supported them, then gradually push out anyone who questions company policies. It's effective, but it also creates a culture of fear that eventually backfires.
The irony is that Microsoft's Azure contracts with Israel are probably worth hundreds of millions, but the company's reputation damage from these protests could cost them far more. When your own employees are willing to get arrested to oppose your business practices, that's not a PR problem you can spin away.
Smith can keep defending these contracts by saying Microsoft "serves governments worldwide," but that's a cop-out. Every defense contractor says the same thing. At some point, tech companies need to decide whether they're building tools to connect and empower people, or surveillance systems for governments to track their citizens. Corporate accountability frameworks exist for exactly these situations.
Based on today's firings, Microsoft has made its choice.