Google DeepMind’s London unionization effort has entered a difficult phase, with employee representatives and the company giving sharply different accounts of the first formal talks.
The dispute centers on whether Google DeepMind is engaging seriously with employees who want union representation, or whether the company is treating the process as an HR matter rather than a leadership-level negotiation.
The Recognition Push
In May, DeepMind employees asked Google to recognize the Communication Workers Union and Unite the Union as joint representatives. Google denied that request, but agreed to take part in negotiations handled through a third-party arbitrator.
The first meeting took place on Wednesday. It included union officers, DeepMind employees involved in the unionization campaign, the third-party arbitrator, and DeepMind HR representatives.
For those backing unionization, the meeting began on a frustrating note because senior DeepMind leadership figures were not present. John Chadfield, a CWU officer who attended, argued that this absence sent the wrong signal.
“Recognition talks not being attended by senior management at the opening stage is a leading indicator that a company isn’t engaging in good faith. It’s just a time-wasting exercise,” claims John Chadfield, a CWU officer, who attended the meeting. “Negotiations have stalled at an early stage.”
Google DeepMind rejected that characterization. Al Verney, a Google DeepMind spokesperson, said the process had begun with a necessary first step.
“The first step in the process is to define who the unions want to represent and the parties agreed on next steps to do this,” says Al Verney, a Google DeepMind spokesperson. “The appropriate representatives attended this initial meeting.”
What Employees Say Happened
During the meeting, a DeepMind employee read a prepared letter on behalf of colleagues who support unionization. The letter, reviewed by WIRED, described employee concerns about how Google DeepMind has handled the campaign.
“Instead of having meaningful dialogue with its employees about our concerns, Google DeepMind workers have been treated as a problem handed off to HR,” the letter states.
Multiple sources with knowledge of the meeting said the employee reading the statement was interrupted twice by DeepMind HR representatives.
The letter also alleged that Google had limited internal discussion around the unionization effort. It claimed the company had shut down or reconfigured internal chat venues, prevented staff from responding to company-wide communications about the unionization bid, and “reprimanded” employees who tried to work around restrictions.
One DeepMind employee involved in drafting the letter, who asked to remain anonymous because they are not authorized to speak to the media, described the alleged conduct in stark terms.
“The intention was to intimidate,” claims a DeepMind employee involved in drafting the letter, who asked to remain anonymous because they are not authorized to speak to the media. “These are well-established union-busting techniques.”
Verney said Google DeepMind would continue participating in the process and pointed to other ways employees can raise views inside the company.
"We’ll continue to engage constructively in the…process and have open dialogue with employees,” says Verney. “For topics outside of this, we continue to offer employees a variety of other channels and opportunities to discuss their views.”
Why AI Ethics Are Part of the Dispute
The unionization push began in February 2025, after Alphabet removed a pledge from its ethics guidelines not to use AI for purposes like weapons development and surveillance, according to WIRED’s previous reporting.
For some DeepMind employees, those principles were not abstract corporate language. They were part of the reason they joined the company in the first place.
“Those principles were a big part of why I joined DeepMind,” says a second DeepMind employee, who asked to remain anonymous for the same reason. “We basically just got rid of them all.”
The concern fits into a wider pattern of unease among AI workers over how models may be used. In late February, staff at DeepMind and OpenAI signed an open letter in support of Anthropic, after the US Department of Defense sought to designate the lab a supply chain risk over its refusal to allow its technology to be used in autonomous weapons and mass surveillance.
In April, The New York Times reported that Google had entered into a deal allowing the Pentagon to use its AI for “any lawful government purpose.” Roughly 600 US-based Google employees reportedly signed a letter protesting the permissive terms of the deal.
The US Department of Defense later confirmed that it had reached deals with seven leading AI companies, including Google, SpaceX, OpenAI, and Microsoft, to use their models on classified networks.
Google’s Position on Government AI Work
Google has previously defended its government deals. Jenn Crider, a Google spokeswoman, told The New York Times in April that the company saw its role as part of a broader group of technology providers supporting national security.
“We are proud to be part of a broad consortium of leading AI labs and technology and cloud companies providing AI services and infrastructure in support of national security,” Jenn Crider, a Google spokeswoman, told The New York Times in April. “We remain committed to the private and public sector consensus that AI should not be used for domestic mass surveillance or autonomous weaponry without appropriate human oversight.”
That position has not ended employee concern. The London unionization effort shows how debates over AI deployment, workplace voice, and company governance are now colliding inside one of the most closely watched AI labs.
What Comes Next
The immediate question is whether the London talks can move beyond disagreement over process. The company says the parties agreed on next steps to define who the unions want to represent. Union representatives say the absence of senior management suggests a lack of meaningful engagement.
If talks do not progress, Chadfield said employees will ask an arbitration committee to force Google to recognize the unions.
“We’re hoping that Google genuinely comes to the table and we can agree something amicably,” claims Chadfield. “[But] both sides have to come to the table with some concessions. Google is coming with no concessions whatsoever.”
The outcome could matter beyond one office or one meeting. In 2021, Google employees in the US formed the Alphabet Workers Union. Alphabet does not recognize that union for collective bargaining purposes, though it has previously succeeded in negotiating agreements on behalf of Google contractors.
For now, the Google DeepMind unionization talks remain at an early stage. But the first meeting has already made clear that employees, unions, and the company are far apart on what constructive engagement should look like.