Three Amazon software engineers who live in Seattle say the company is investigating them after they spoke publicly in favor of local data center regulation. The workers say the issue is not only about data centers, but also about whether tech employees can participate in civic debates without being treated as company representatives.
The employees, Darius Irani, Liesel Wigand, and Patrick Schloesser, filed a joint complaint on Thursday with Seattle’s Office for Civil Rights, according to the employees and a filing seen by WIRED. They accuse Amazon of illegally attempting to intimidate and retaliate against them for expressing personal views outside work.
What Sparked The Dispute
Earlier this month, five current Amazon employees publicly urged Seattle City Council to regulate data centers. The source article describes the action as an unprecedented act of advocacy by tech workers.
The workers spoke during public comment periods at three city meetings this month. They identified themselves as members of Amazon Employees for Climate Justice, a collective of thousands of current and former Amazon workers that has long pushed the company to better address its role in contributing to climate change.
The employees say they did not claim to speak for Amazon. To their knowledge, Amazon did not make any formal comment about the data center measure at issue.
Amazon does not have a current or proposed data center in Seattle, according to the source. Other companies, however, have put forward plans for new projects, and Seattle has been considering regulations for the industry.
The Internal Investigation Claim
Irani, Wigand, and Schloesser say they were separately called into virtual meetings with an Amazon employee relations staffer last Wednesday. They say they understand the company’s concern to be that they allegedly represented themselves as spokespeople for Amazon without prior approval.
Schloesser rejected that premise. “It’s a totally ridiculous claim,” he says. “It’s patently absurd.”
The employees say they were told an investigation may take one to two weeks. They also say they have not received updates so far, other than being directed to use a speaker registration form that they do not believe applies to personal comments they made.
Schloesser recalls being told the probe could lead to being fired. The workers say they have received numerous messages of support from colleagues and no internal criticism, aside from the meetings with HR.
Two other Amazon workers who spoke at later city council meetings say they have not received notice that they are under investigation.
Why The Complaint Matters
The three workers believe they are being targeted for expressing political beliefs. Their complaint argues that Amazon’s response amounts to intimidation and retaliation tied to their personal views on the environmental and social impacts of data centers.
Abby Lawlor, an attorney at Barnard Iglitzin & Lavitt who is advising the employees, framed the matter as a test of local protections for political belief and association. “Seattle is one of just a few jurisdictions in the country that prohibits private employers from discriminating against their employees based on the political beliefs they hold and the organizations they belong to,” she says.
Lawlor also said the case gives workers a way to push back. “Here, we have legal tools to fight back and ensure that tech workers can be full democratic participants in these important local discussions. We hope the city of Seattle will do its part to ensure that this vital Seattle law is enforced.”
Amazon and the Seattle civil rights office did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Margaret Callahan, an Amazon spokesperson, previously told WIRED that the company respects employees’ right to voice their opinions and that it tries to be a responsible steward in the communities where it operates.
Data Centers Become A Political Flash Point
The workers’ advocacy comes as data centers have become a political flash point. The source describes a tension at the center of the debate: data centers can attract significant investment to communities, but they are also consuming increasing amounts of power and water to meet surging demand for AI.
Amazon has developed technologies aimed at reducing the amount of resources its facilities consume. At the same time, a growing movement across the US is pushing for new ways to hold Amazon and other companies accountable to their environmental goals.
Irani’s public comments suggested Seattle could require data centers to use renewable energy and innovative cooling technologies. He also suggested that data centers contribute to citywide initiatives to address climate change.
“I should be able to speak out about what’s important to me, and what’s important to me is that Seattle should be regulating AI and data centers, and that’s why I’m reporting Amazon for violating city law” by threatening discipline for his speech, Irani tells WIRED.
What Seattle Did Next
After receiving dozens of supportive comments from members of the public, the Seattle City Council unanimously passed a one-year moratorium on new data center construction. The purpose is to allow time to impose new rules on the industry.
The measure was passed as an emergency measure, giving it immediate effect. The city’s mayor has also said she plans to formally sign off on it.
For Schloesser, the episode is about whether people who work in tech can openly take part in public policy discussions. He told the city council last week, “I took the step to be public for the first time because I got sick of feeling afraid to stand up for my values.”
He also said workers in the industry should be included in policy work. “Those of us who work in tech have a role in this moment. We want the council members to include us in the process of developing good, equitable AI and data center policy.”
Schloesser tells WIRED he spoke at that meeting and an earlier one “to show tech is not a monolith, and there are those of us who have reservations” about what the industry is doing. He described the unexpected Zoom call with HR as “horrifying,” saying it left his heart racing and mind frantic shortly before he needed to give an internal presentation.
“I cannot abide by corporations trying to silence employees who are expressing their right to speak politically,” he says. “It’s incredibly dangerous if we allow corporations to do this.”