Google DeepMind employees in Britain are pressing the company to remove contract clauses they fear could deter them from warning the public about artificial intelligence risks, even after they leave.
The Washington Post reported on 3 November 2026 that it reviewed an employment contract and interviewed two current workers who say the restrictions could discourage open discussion.
Google says it does not enforce non-disparagement clauses against former employees and has removed post-employment restrictions from contracts for recent hires. Some current staff want their existing agreements amended rather than relying on those assurances.
Workers Say Clauses Could Discourage Public Warnings
The Post found contractual language barring some UK-based employees from criticising Google indefinitely. It did not establish how many workers had signed identical terms or whether a particular AI safety concern had been suppressed.
Dozens of employees joined an internal discussion about the restrictions, according to one worker interviewed by the newspaper. Some criticised the terms, while others posted an emoji reading 1984, a reference to George Orwell's novel.
'If it's not enforceable then the reason is to basically intimidate people,' an anonymous employee told the Post. That was the worker's view of the provision, not evidence that Google deliberately designed it to suppress safety warnings.
Former Engineer's Interview Prompted Contract Checks
The dispute gained momentum after London-based research engineer Sofia Liguori told the BBC on 21 October that she had resigned over Google's increasing military AI work.
'In principle I'm not allowed to criticise Google for the duration of my life,' Liguori said. She spoke publicly despite the restrictions she described.
Her interview prompted current employees to examine their contracts. Some discovered similar terms, the Post reported.
On 30 October, a Google executive told an internal discussion that the company would not enforce the restrictions against former staff, according to the Post. Google subsequently confirmed it had removed post-termination non-disparagement terms from contracts for recent hires.
A spokesperson said Google encourages open discussion about AI safety and responsibility and has internal channels for escalating concerns to senior leaders.
The reporting does not establish that all existing agreements have been changed. Employees pressing for revisions want the restrictions removed from their own contracts, not simply a promise that they will not be enforced later.
UK Whistleblowing Law Does Not Protect Every Disclosure
In Great Britain, employment agreements cannot prevent legally protected whistleblowing disclosures. Government guidance says such protection may cover concerns about suspected criminal offences, breaches of legal obligations or threats to health and safety, where the worker reasonably believes disclosure is in the public interest.
However, public statements to journalists face additional legal conditions. Disagreement with an employer's approach to AI does not, by itself, qualify for whistleblowing protection.
The reporting identifies no court ruling determining the enforceability of these particular DeepMind clauses. The dispute remains focused on whether Google will amend existing contracts so workers have greater certainty about speaking publicly on AI risks.
