Google Fiber workers successfully unionize in Kansas City

In a tally with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) this afternoon, Google Fiber customer service workers — employed by staffing agency BDS Connected Solutions, which is subcontracted by Alphabet — voted nine to one to form a union. They’ll be represented by the Alphabet Workers Union, an arm of the Communications Workers of America (AWU-CWA.)

Workers at the store, which operates out of Kansas City, Missouri, told Engadget back in January that they were feeling left out of important workplace conversations, especially around safety and staffing. Kansas City was the market where Google Fiber first launched, approximately a decade ago. Workers at this store skipped straight to petitioning the NLRB for union recognition because, for reasons unknown, the supermajority of union card-signers were seemingly ignored by Google and BDS alike. At the time Emrys Adair, a worker at this location said, “There’s been no acknowledgement, no pushback. No response at all yet.” Since then neither company responded to Engadget’s requests for comment.

Among the ballots cast, nine were in favor while one was opposed; an additional ballot was challenged, but the number of challenged ballots was not sufficient to change the result of the election. 

“Our campaign faced many efforts to discourage us from exercising our right to a collective voice on the job. Yet it was always clear to all of us that together we can positively shape our working conditions to ensure we all have access to the quality pay, benefits and protections we have earned,” Eris Derickson, one of the retail associate at this location, told press in a statement today. “We all enjoy our work with Google Fiber and look forward to sitting at the negotiating table with BDS Connected Solution to set a new standard for our workplace to improve both worker, customer and company experience.” 

The Alphabet Workers Union sees this not only as a victory for this specific store, but part of a broader campaign to level the playing field between Alphabet’s full-time staff, and its larger and reportedly worse-compensated TVCs (temps, vendors and contractors, in Google parlance.) “Since our founding we have been committed to tackling Alphabet’s segregative, two-tiered employment system. Alphabet wants to maintain its reputation for treating its workers well but doesn’t want to pay for it. Instead, the trillion dollar corporation relies on temporary, contract and vendor workers to provide essential work for the company without the same pay, benefits or rights as full time employees,” Andrew Gainer-Dewar, a Google software engineer with AWU-CWA wrote in a statement today.

What remains next is for these Google Fiber workers to bargain their first contract, itself a herculean effort that companies have tremendous power to draw out or undermine. Thus far, the specific changes these workers hope to win in bargaining have not been disclosed by the AWU-CWA, though keeping those goals close to the chest is by no means unusual. 

Earlier this year, document discovery by the NLRB revealed the existence of an internal Google initiative called “Project Vivian.” As reported by Wired, the program was meant “to dissuade employees from unionizing after worker activism began heating up in late 2018”; and as it was put in the in documents themselves by Michael Pfyl, the company’s director of employment law, Project Vivian was intended “to engage employees more positively and convince them that unions suck.” 

Initially, workers had applied to have Alphabet and BDS considered joint employers in their unionization application. Hoping to avoid legal headaches and in the interest of an expedient vote, however, Alphabet were eventually dropped.

“We have many contracts with both unionized and non-union suppliers, and respect their employees’ right to choose whether or not to join a union,” a Google spokesperson told Engadget. “The decision of these contractors to join the Communications Workers of America is a matter between the workers and their employer, BDS Solutions Group.”

Correction: an earlier version of this story listed Alphabet as a joint employer. While initially filed as such with the NLRB, those terms changed over the past two months and we’ve updated to reflect that.

European Union reaches provisional agreement on antitrust law targeting tech giants

The European Union has reached an agreement to adopt the Digital Markets Act (DMA), a sweeping antitrust law meant to rein in Apple, Google, Meta and other tech giants. Lawmakers reached a “provisional” agreement on the law Thursday, following hours of negotiations, the European Parliament wrote in a statement.

The law could have far-reaching implications, some of which could extend beyond Europe. Most notably, one of the primary provisions of the DMA is that messaging providers would need to make their services interoperable with other services, “EU lawmakers agreed that the largest messaging services (such as Whatsapp, Facebook Messenger or iMessage) will have to open up and interoperate with smaller messaging platforms, if they so request,” the EU Parliament said following the agreement.

It’s unclear for now if this requirement would also apply to interoperability between the large messaging platforms themselves. Parliament wrote that the interoperability provisions for social networks “will be assessed in the future.”

In a statement, an Apple spokesperson said the company was “concerned” about some aspects of the law. “We remain concerned that some provisions of the DMA will create unnecessary privacy and security vulnerabilities for our users while others will prohibit us from charging for intellectual property in which we invest a great deal,” the spokesperson said. “We believe deeply in competition and in creating thriving competitive markets around the world, and we will continue to work with stakeholders throughout Europe in the hopes of mitigating these vulnerabilities.”

Meta didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. The company’s head of WhatsApp, Will Cathcart, wrote on Twitter that he hoped the law was “extremely thoughtful.” “Interoperability can have benefits, but if it’s not done carefully this could cause a tragic weakening of security and privacy in Europe,” he said. 

The DMA also prohibits companies from “combining personal data for targeted advertising” without explicit consent, a move that could limit Meta and others’ ability to serve targeted ads to users. As The New York Times points out, there are still many questions about how European lawmakers will enforce these new rules and the companies in question are likely to raise legal challenges.

Earlier proposals of the law also included provisions that would change how Apple and Google ran their app stores. Under the proposed rules, Apple would have to allow users to install apps from other stores, and both Apple and Google would be required to allow developers to bypass their companies; storefronts and use their own billing. It’s unclear if those provisions were included in the latest agreement. The European Parliament will hold a press conference Friday, when they are expected to share more details.

Updated to include a comment from Will Cathcart.

Ex-TikTok moderators sue over ’emotional distress’ from disturbing videos

Two former TikTok moderators filed a federal lawsuit seeking class-action status today against the platform and parent company Bytedance, reportedNPR. The plaintiffs, Ashley Velez and Reece Young, worked for the social video platform last year as contractors. To fulfill their role as moderators, they witnessed “many acts of extreme and graphic violence”, including murder, bestiality, necrophilia and other disturbing images. The lawsuit accuses TikTok of negligence and violating labor laws in California, the state where the platform’s US operations is based.

Both plaintiffs said they were tasked with viewing hours of disturbing footage, often working 12-hour days. They both paid for counseling out-of-pocket in order to deal with the psychological toll of the job. The lawsuit accuses TikTok of imposing high “productivity standards” on moderators, which forced them to watch large volumes of disturbing content without a break. Both employees were also forced to sign non-disclosure agreements as a condition of their employment.

“We would see death and graphic, graphic pornography. I would see nude underage children every day,” Velez told NPR. “I would see people get shot in the face, and another video of a kid getting beaten made me cry for two hours straight.”

Moderators at Facebook and other platforms have spoken out in the past about the severe psychological toll of their jobs. Employees have alleged they’re given a short period of time, usually only seconds, to determine whether a video violates the platform’s policies. The job has often been called “the worst job in technology,” and workers regularly suffer from depression, PTSD-like symptoms and suicidal ideation. In a 2020 settlement,Facebook paid over $52 million to a group of former moderators who said they developed PTSD from the job.

This is not the first lawsuit of this type for TikTok, which currently has a base of 10,000 content moderators worldwide. Last December another content moderator for TikTok also sued the platform for negligence and violating workplace safety standards. According to NPR, the lawsuit was dropped last month after the plaintiff was fired.

Activision Blizzard faces another lawsuit over sexual harassment

Activision has been served another lawsuit over harassment at the company. As Bloomberg Law and Game Developer report, an anonymous woman still working at Activision Blizzard has sued the game developer in a Los Angeles court for allegedly enabling sexual harassment and discrimination. The company also retaliated against her when she shared her experiences at a December 2021 press conference, according to the complaint.

As with past suits, the woman accused Activision Blizzard of routinely allowing misconduct. The senior administrative assistant in IT was reportedly pressured to join in “cube crawls” where women were harassed and groped, and was told to tolerate unwanted sexual advances and excessive drinking. She was also asked to keep her complaints private, according to the suit, and supposedly faced an increasingly hostile workplace the more she spoke out.

The plaintiff said she applied for positions elsewhere in the company to avoid sexism in IT, and wrote to president Allen Brack (who stepped down in August 2021 as the scandal grew) about the problems. She was offered and took a lower-paying role elsewhere in the company, but noted that her application for an executive assistant job was rejected in December that year, shortly after she’d applied in November.

In the lawsuit, the woman demands damages that include lost earnings and medical expenses. She also asks for functional reforms, including the ouster of CEO Bobby Kotick, a rotating human resources team (to prevent conflicts of interest) and the use of a neutral firm to investigate incidents.

We’ve asked Activision Blizzard for comment. The company has used some measures to address harassment and discrimination complaints, including removing employees, taking disciplinary actions and forming a committee to implement anti-harassment initiatives. It also settled an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission lawsuit and has been more cooperative with investigations. However, it’s still facing a mounting number of legal challenges that include both more lawsuits and an SEC investigation — the debacle is far from over.

Washington DC Attorney General sues Grubhub over hidden fees

Washington DC Attorney General Karl Racine has filed a lawsuit against Grubhub over alleged hidden fees and other “deceptive trade practices.” His office has accused Grubhub of violating the jurisdiction’s Consumer Protection Procedures Act in eight separate ways.

“We’re suing Grubhub for misleading District residents and taking advantage of local restaurants to boost its own profits,” Racine wrote on Twitter. “Grubhub charges hidden fees and uses bait-and-switch tactics, all while pretending to help local businesses during the pandemic. This needs to stop.”

Racine’s office also claims the app charged users higher prices than they’d pay in restaurants and that it misrepresented an offer of “unlimited free delivery” with a Grubhub+ subscription, since customers still need to pay a service fee.

The suit alleges that Grubhub offered deliveries from more than 1,000 eateries in the area without restaurants’ permission. It accused the company of listing phone numbers for restaurants that were actually routed to Grubhub workers and creating websites for restaurants without their consent or clearly disclosing that it operated the sites. Grubhub has ended those practices, as TechCrunch notes.

“In one of Grubhub’s most shameless moves, at the beginning of the pandemic, it ran a discount called ‘Supper for Support,’ ginning up business by claiming to help struggling restaurants, and then stuck restaurants with the bill,” Racine said. “This program cut into struggling restaurants’ profit margins while padding Grubhub’s bottom line.”

The promotion allowed restaurants to offer a $10 discount on orders over $30, but they had to cover the cost. Grubhub later offered them a $250 credit, as the suit notes.

“We are disappointed [the AG’s office has] moved forward with this lawsuit because our practices have always complied with DC law, and in any event, many of the practices at issue have been discontinued,” Grubhub said in a statement. “We will aggressively defend our business in court and look forward to continuing to serve DC restaurants and diners.”

Grubhub says it has worked with Racine and his office over the last year to address concerns. In the wake of the lawsuit, the service is adding disclaimers about service fees for Grubhub+ subscribers and the fact prices may be lower at restaurants than in its app. Grubhub will also make it clearer that users can place orders for free through its app and website as long as they pick up food themselves. These changes will apply to everyone, not only users in DC.

The DC lawsuit is the latest in a number of legal battles over delivery apps’ business practices. Chicago has also sued Grubhub (and DoorDash) over alleged deceptive delivery fees and charging higher prices for menu items than restaurants themselves do. In September, those two services and Uber Eats filed suit against New York City for placing limits on the fees they can charge restaurants.

Apple settles voice over LTE patent dispute with WiLAN

Following years of litigation, Canadian “patent monetization” firm WiLAN has signed a licensing agreement with Apple. With the deal, the two companies have settled all court cases that were ongoing between them in the US, Canada and Germany related to …

US Justice Department says Google misuses attorney-client privilege to hide documents

The US Department of Justice has accused Google of training its employees on how to shield business communications from discovery in cases of legal disputes “by using false requests for legal advice.” As Axios reports, the DOJ has told the judge overseeing its antitrust case against the tech giant that Google instructs employees to add in-house lawyers to written communication, apply attorney-client privilege labels to them and make a request for legal advice even when it’s not needed. The department is now asking the judge to sanction the company “for its extensive and intentional efforts to misuse the attorney-client privilege to hide business documents relevant” to the case.

In the brief (PDF) its lawyers wrote for the judge, the DOJ said Google refers to the practice as “Communicate with Care” and that it first started no later than 2015. New employees are reportedly directed to follow the practice without discussion on whether it should only be used when legal advice is truly needed. In addition, Google allegedly provided the same training to teams handling search-distribution for the department’s (and other authorities’) antitrust cases. 

Google specifically told those teams to follow the practice for any written communication containing revenue-sharing agreements and mobile application distribution agreements, based on the presentation slides the DOJ included in its brief. Those agreements are central to the case. If you’ll recall, the DOJ accused Google of having an unfair monopoly over search and search-related advertising in its 2020 antitrust lawsuit. It also questioned its terms for Android device manufacturers that force them to pre-load Google apps and set Google as the default search engine. 

According to the DOJ, statements such as “adding legal” or “adding [attorney] for legal advice” appear in thousands of Google documents. These emails apparently lacked any specific request for advice and attorneys rarely respond to them. In the brief, the department said the practice “pervades the entire company” and is being used even by Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai.

The DOJ is now asking the court to hold Google’s conduct as sanctionable and to order it to immediately produce “all withheld or redacted emails where no attorney responded to the purported request for legal advice.”

Google spokesperson Julie Tarallo McAlister defended the company in a statement sent to Axios, however, calling the allegations “flatly wrong.” McAlister said:

“Our teams have conscientiously worked for years to respond to inquiries and litigation, and suggestions to the contrary are flatly wrong. Just like other American companies, we educate our employees about legal privilege and when to seek legal advice. And we have produced over four million documents to the DOJ in this case alone — including many that employees had considered potentially privileged.”

Russian court finds Meta guilty of “extremist activity”, but won’t ban WhatsApp

A judge in a Moscow court said on Monday that Instagram and Facebook were guilty of “extremist” activity, solidifying a ban on both platforms that went into effect earlier this month, reportedReuters. But the court also spared WhatsApp — one of Meta’s core products and one of the most popular messaging platforms in Russia — from the ban. Russian authorities decided to open a criminal case against Meta after Facebook’s decision to temporarily allow for calls of violence in Ukraine and select other countries. The outcome of that case was determined today in court.

Many Russia experts believe that the court chose not to include WhatsApp in the ban due to its ubiquitous status in the nation. Roughly 80 percent of Russians over the age of 14 use WhatsApp to communicate, according to a 2021 survey from Deloitte. Ironically, the case against Meta led to WhatsApp losing its status as the most popular messenger in Russia. Telegram, which millions of Russians downloaded in recent weeks due to uncertainty over WhatsApp’s fate, is now the most popular messaging app in Russia, mobile operator Megafon toldReuters today.

Under the judge’s ruling, Meta is effectively banned from opening offices or doing business in Russia, according to Russian state media agency TASS. But Russian citizens won’t be accused of extremism for merely using any of Meta’s platforms or services (that is, if they can access them). Many Russians have downloaded VPNs in recent weeks to access many of the Western-owned tech platforms banned by their government.

“The use of Meta’s products by individuals and legal entities should not be considered as participation in extremist activities,” a spokesman for the prosecutor’s office told TASS.

But even those able to access Facebook or Instagram still face limits on free speech. A new Russian law criminalizes the spread of “fake news” or public statements that are critical of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Thousands of Russians have been arrested, fired from jobs or expelled from school for criticizing Russia’s activities in Ukraine, reported NPR.

Despite WhatsApp being spared, future sparring between Russia and Western tech companies could make it harder for Russians to buy new devices or access services. Samsung, Microsoft, Apple, LG and others have banned device sales in Russia. 

MacRumors recently reported that Russian users can no longer access the App Store or pay for any of Apple’s services, which would include iCloud. Google Play has also paused all billing in Russia, although users can still use free apps. WhatsApp offers encrypted backups, but users will need an iCloud or Google Drive account. 

Brazil reverses its Telegram ban after just two days

A judge on Brazil’s Supreme Court has reversed a ban on Telegram, two days after blocking the messaging app for ignoring orders. Telegram CEO Pavel Durov said the company missed the court’s emails.

“We complied with an earlier court decision in late February and responded with a suggestion to send future takedown requests to a dedicated email address,” Durov wrote on Telegram on Friday. “Unfortunately, our response must have been lost, because the Court used the old general-purpose email address in further attempts to reach us. As a result, we missed its decision in early March that contained a follow-up takedown request. Luckily, we have now found and processed it, delivering another report to the Court today.”

Durov added that Telegram will appoint a representative in Brazil and set up a framework so it can address requests more promptly. According to The New York Times, Telegram complied with the court’s demands by taking down classified information posted on President Jair Bolsonaro’s channel and deleting the accounts of a Bolsonaro supporter who was allegedly spreading misinformation. The court then reversed the ban.

Telegram reacted so swiftly that the ban (which was imposed by a judge who is running multiple investigations into Bolsonaro and his allies for spreading misinformation) was never actually in effect. The court order gave Apple, Google, ISPs and phone providers five days to block the app.

Durov and his team made some other changes to the app in Brazil in the hope of avoiding another ban. Officials are said to be concerned about misinformation in the lead up to the general election in October. As such, Telegram will start promoting verified information and labeling posts containing falsehoods.

It will also monitor the 100 most popular channels in the country. Telegram says those account for 95 percent of views of public posts. The company has typically taken a hands-off approach to content moderation. The far-right Bolsonaro has used it as a means of communication with his 1.2 million followers after the likes of Twitter, Facebook and YouTube took a firmer stance against misinformation.

Brazil has become a key market for Telegram. According to data from Sensor Tower, Brazilians have installed Telegram more than 84 million times. Between January 1st and March 17th (the day before the court issued the ban), Brazilian iOS and Android users downloaded the app an estimated 4.9 million times.