Will Tech Fuel the #Resistance?

Nothing has lit a political fire in the soul of tech like the election of Donald Trump. In an industry premised on openness and data, where immigration fuels innovation, and where 60% of STEM employees in Silicon Valley are foreign born, Trump’s "America First", "closed boarders," "alternative facts," brand of politics is a direct threat to tech, both ideologically and economically. In response, tech has mobilized to defend its principles. Much of this activism, from walk outs to legal challenges, is emanating from inside tech companies and professional groups themselves. 

This kind of workplace activism is unusual. Normally, activism on the job is aimed at changing something inside a company, such as pay or benefits. But what is happening right now in tech is different. Rather than trying to change something internally, tech employees are expecting, and in some cases demanding, that their companies take a stand against a presidential administration. From signing on to amicus briefs, to CEOs making public statements, to turning down government contracts if the ethics involved are suspect, tech employees want their companies to #Resist. 

As I write in The Atlantic in my article, The Tech Industry Joins the Political Fray, “Not only is this form of workplace activism rare, but this kind of rapid political mobilization is also rare. It usually takes place only under certain circumstances, like when people feel that their way of life is under threat. Such was the case after the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979. Prior to the accident, environmental activism in the surrounding area was minimal. But afterward, many of the middle-class residents living nearby, who had no previous history of political protest, came out en masse.

Called “suddenly imposed grievances” or “moral shocks” by researchers, events like Three Mile Island and the 2016 presidential election are galvanizing political forces because they generate intense concern, and people who become the most politicized are those most outraged and directly threatened by the grievance.” For Three Mile Island, the group that showed the greatest opposition were those living closest (within a five-mile radius) to the epicenter of the accident. In the Trump era, tech is uniquely at risk. According to social movement theory, they are the exact group we should expect to get highly politicized.  

And that is exactly what is happening. Tech employees are getting political – many for the first time. There has been an increase in people attending meetings of organizations like the Tech Workers Coalition and new organizations have emerged since the election like Tech Stands Up and Tech Solidarity. There have been walkouts at Google and Comcast in response to Trump's executive order on immigration. Coworker.org, a digital platform that gives workers more voice at their companies through online petitions, has seen a substantial increase in engagement since election day.

In the tech industry, people’s personal identities are often bound up with where they work. Thus, it’s not surprising that employees want their companies to take stances that reflect their own politics and are disheartened when they don’t. Indeed, many in tech are frustrated, even embarrassed, by their company’s tepid response. Some employees have been disappointed by their CEOs refusing to make public their internal, private memos that opposed the executive order. Why keep it private? Others were angered by CEOs who sent out letters stating that since no one in their company was directly impacted by the travel ban that they weren’t going to take any action. Still others, especially at larger tech companies, were upset that their company didn’t sign on to the amicus brief signed by 127 companies filed in support of Washington State’s legal challenge to the first executive order on immigration. 

In contrast, many employees felt proud to work at companies who took strong, public positions against the executive order.

In an industry where many can be choosy about where they work, the implications for recruitment and retention are big if large numbers of employees become unhappy with their company’s politics. If employees get upset, if some leave, reputational damage could be done. “It really doesn’t matter if a boycott is led by consumers or employees,” said professor Brayden King at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management, “when it creates unwanted media attention it can be a bad thing. If the public perception around a company changes and becomes negative, that can impact how current and potential employees identify with the company.”

If tech employees decide they want to work for companies that are more aligned with their values, then companies who take stronger positions vis-a-vi the Trump administration will stand to benefit. 

Since Trump’s election, at hastily called meetings, senior leadership teams have tried to figure out what to do and how to respond. While the stakes are high, there is no clear path forward. Across the industry, companies are carefully weighing standing up for what they think is right with fears about drawing retribution from Trump.  

To be sure, tech has a unique set of tactics at its disposal. “This group has an unusual amount of leverage,” said Penn State business professor Forrest Briscoe. “They’ve got valuable human capital and can walk out the door if they are not happy and get another job easily. They are also well-educated and that is a source of influence too. And they know how to mobilize through technology. It’s the synergy across all these things that’s so powerful.”   

For more on this topic read my article in The Atlantic, The Tech Industry Joins the Political Fray

Follow Marianne on Twitter @Coopermarianne and like her on Facebook For more on how families are coping in an uncertain age see Marianne’s book Cut Adrift: Families in Insecure Times.