USA 
United Kingdom
Two Microsoft employees have been dismissed after staging public protests during the company’s 50th anniversary celebrations, raising fresh questions for HR leaders over employee activism and corporate responses to politically charged workplace incidents.
Software engineers Ibtihal Aboussad and Vaniya Agrawal were both removed from the business following separate interruptions at high-profile events held at Microsoft’s Redmond, Washington campus.
The incidents centred on the company’s ongoing cloud services contract with the Israeli government and were linked to concerns over the war in Gaza.
Aboussad interrupted a keynote presentation by Mustafa Suleyman, Microsoft’s Head of Consumer AI, accusing the company of supplying artificial intelligence technology to the Israeli military and alleging it was complicit in the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians.
Microsoft described her actions as “hostile, unprovoked and highly inappropriate” in an internal disciplinary notice. She was subsequently removed from the venue and dismissed by email for “acts of misconduct,” according to documentation reviewed by Bloomberg.
Agrawal interrupted a Q&A panel featuring Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and former company heads Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer.
Though she had formally planned to resign on April 11, the company expedited her departure and revoked access to her corporate accounts immediately following the event.
Internal activism sparks wider debate
Both employees were affiliated with an internal activist group called No Azure for Apartheid, which campaigns for Microsoft to terminate its contract providing cloud computing services to the Israeli government.
The group’s members have criticised the company’s role in enabling surveillance and military operations in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Friday’s protests were the most visible demonstration of internal dissent at Microsoft, reflecting a broader trend of employee engagement with geopolitical issues. Several tech companies have faced similar challenges, with workers pushing back on contracts linked to defence, war crimes or state surveillance operations.
HR departments across the industry are increasingly being tasked with managing the tension between employee free speech and company policy - particularly when political or ethical beliefs clash with strategic business interests.
The Future of Global Workforces | Trends and Predictions for 2025
Discover What’s Next for the Global Workforce in 2025
The world of work is changing fast - and organizations that stay ahead of the curve will be best positioned to attract, retain, and engage top talent.
In The Future of Global Workforces | Trends and Predictions for 2025, we explore the key shifts shaping how companies operate across borders. From rising employee expectations and evolving regulatory landscapes to game-changing advances in technology, the modern workforce is being redefined.
One standout trend? The continued evolution of remote and hybrid work. What began as a pandemic-era necessity has now become a non-negotiable for many employees - and a strategic opportunity for employers.
As Connie Diaz, Senior Director of HR at G-P, explains: “Remote work gives us the flexibility to better integrate work and life — and gives employers access to talent anywhere in the world.”
Download the report to uncover expert insights, explore emerging trends, and gain practical takeaways for building a future-ready, globally competitive workforce.
Balancing employee rights with company conduct codes
While the right to political expression remains protected in many jurisdictions, employers also have grounds to enforce codes of conduct, particularly when internal protests disrupt events or involve senior executives. Microsoft's decision to act swiftly in both cases suggests a firmer line on workplace protests than some of its peers.
The company has yet to issue a formal public statement on the dismissals, and it remains unclear whether the internal activist group will face further disciplinary measures. The situation adds to a growing HR and legal debate over how companies balance employee activism, reputational risk, and operational integrity amid fast-moving global events.
For senior HR leaders, the case demonstrates the importance of reviewing employee engagement policies, clarifying escalation protocols, and preparing for the possibility of internal protest in an increasingly politicized workplace environment.
