Published
September 02, 2026
The National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) Division of Advice this week released a memorandum addressing the case Microsoft Corporation in which the agency’s Office of General Counsel held that employee protests do not necessarily enjoy blanket protection when it comes to social causes unrelated to the workplace. More specifically, the July 2026 memo concluded that Microsoft lawfully discharged two employees who organized a protest on company property related to the war in Gaza and the company’s business relationship with Israel.
The case stemmed from employee activism during which organizers promoted a walkout, vigil, speaker series, and fundraiser on Microsoft’s Redmond, Wash., campus. Microsoft informed the organizers that the event could not be held on company property. After the organizers proceeded despite repeated instructions to relocate the event, Microsoft terminated them for violating company policies.
The memo concluded that the protest was not protected by Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) because it was not undertaken for employees’ “mutual aid or protection.” According to the memo, the primary objectives of the protest were to pressure Microsoft to end contracts with the Israeli government and raise awareness about conditions in Gaza. The Division found that any connection between the protest and employees’ working conditions was too attenuated to bring the activity within the NLRA’s protection.
In reaching that conclusion, the memo distinguished the Board’s 2024 decision in Home Depot, where employee expression was found to be a logical outgrowth of workplace concerns about discrimination. In this case, the Division determined that the protest’s indirect connection to a previous petition mentioning employee safety and speech rights was insufficient to establish that improving employees’ terms and conditions of employment was an objective of the protest itself.
For employers, the memo provides helpful guidance. It reinforces the principle that not every employee protest touching on political or social issues is automatically protected concerted activity. Employers retain the ability to enforce reasonable workplace rules, property-use policies, and security directives when employee activity is primarily directed toward broader political objectives rather than workplace conditions.
That is likely good news for employers because it creates greater clarity. The memorandum helps draw a more predictable line between protected workplace advocacy and political activism. While employers must still proceed carefully when evaluating employee protests, the Microsoft memo suggests that the NLRA does not require businesses to accommodate every form of political expression on company property simply because employees are involved.
About the author
Sean P. Redmond
Sean P. Redmond is Vice President, Labor Policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
