In Blind Survey, Majority of Microsoft Employees OK Working With ICE; Majority of Tech Workers Express Objections

Amid continued public protests over ICE and its enforcement of the Trump administration's harsh policies against asylum-seeking migrants, the tech industry has come under fire for providing services to the embattled agency. Employees for Microsoft, which once announced it was "proud" to support ICE, have raised objections over continuing this contractual relationship:

According to Gizmodo, a number of Microsoft employees, who prefer to remain anonymous in the interest of protecting their careers, have stepped forward to report that the computer technology company's relationship with ICE has led to growing dissent among the company's workforce... Microsoft condemned family separation by ICE in a statement to Gizmodo but declined to specify if specific tools within Azure Government, like Face API—facial recognition software—were in use by the agency. The company also did not comment on whether it had assisted in building artificial intelligence tools for ICE, something the agency has been seeking (and courting Microsoft over) for some time.

However, a survey just conducted on Blind, an anonymous online community for tech workers, suggests a more complicated view among Microsoft staff:

Of the 1,180 Microsoft employees who took the survey, 56% were fine with the company continuing its relationship with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, while only 22% wanted to end it immediately. 

Blind has a number of virtual communities for anonymous employees at major tech companies besides Microsoft (Amazon, Apple, Uber, etc.), and many of them also took the survey. Of the 5,166 who responded, a majority expressed objections:

While a plurality (43%) were OK with Microsoft's contract with ICE, 37% supported ending it, while 21% supported continuing it -- but only under new conditions. Of course, the other way of reading these results is that 64% of tech workers are OK with Microsoft having an ICE contract on some level.

These results are probably surprising to anyone who assumes that the tech industry is overwhelmingly anti-Trump and/or monolithically left wing. This survey suggests otherwise -- at least when it comes to direct business relationships that benefit the company or the tech industry in general. When given the chance to express their opinion anonymously, the overall opinion is anything but monolithic.

Data courtesy Blind (a startup I did some consulting for in 2014). 

Comments

[Dartagan Shepherd]

Well, there are some sane people that realize that these were actually Obama's policies to begin with. And know the difference between political rhetoric and actual policy.

"Think of the children" is an old political tactic. In fact some say that it has become a logical fallacy. (Check out Wikipedia for think of the children).

The real issues are a bit less emotional and more about the sheer logistics of controlling illegal immigration, while creating pathways to better legal immigration.

But apparently Mexico has a new President who claims to be a savior of the people, so we should be good, right? I mean who doesn't love a president that wants to give amnesty to drug cartels to improve the lives of Mexicans?

[jimjane]

Microsoft just wants to prevent another foreigner, like Steve Jobs' dad, from
coming to the USA and having a child who created trillions of dollars in new wealth that Microsoft didn't.

[David Cartier]

Most Microsoft employees are smart enough not to be manipulated by the media's cause du jour.

[Hamlet Au]

> actually Obama's policies to begin with

Source for this from a credible non-partisan outlet? This non-partisan fact check site says otherwise:

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/did-the-obama-administration-separate-families/

In defending its “zero tolerance” border policy that has caused the separation of families, the Trump administration has argued that the Obama and Bush administrations did this too. That’s misleading. Experts say there were some separations under previous administrations, but no blanket policy to prosecute parents and, therefore, separate them from their children.

“Bush and Obama did not have policies that resulted in the mass separation of parents and children like we’re seeing under the current administration,” Sarah Pierce, a policy analyst with the Migration Policy Institute, told us.

[Dartagan Shepherd]

@Hamlet These facilities were in place before 2016. It wasn't so much policy as it was handling overflow cases. It's the same in the child care system for American citizens. The adults are held until the legal issues are sorted out and then it's decided on what to do with them.

How do I know this? Because I was in the system as a kid, separated from my parents and a ward of the state. Why? Because they broke the law, in the same way immigrants broke the law.

Guess who else was in the system 40 years ago? Children of illegal immigrants. It's not new now and wasn't new 40 years ago.

[Dartagan Shepherd]

Let me also add that the system is gamed with illegal immigration. You have human trafficking and kids being used by adults who are not actually the parents. Some are guilty of crimes and drugs, etc.

The best thing the system can do is to separate the children, put social workers and psychologists on them in a controlled environment and then get a better idea of where the child is at without fear of the parents. It is safer for the children this way.

When everything is kosher, they're generally reunited.

Again, once you get past the rhetoric and fear mongering, there are actually valid reasons for doing what we do in the child care system.

[Hamlet Au]

Original claim:

"Well, there are some sane people that realize that these were actually Obama's policies to begin with."

After being asked for a credible, non-partisan source for that claim:

"It wasn't so much policy as it was handling overflow cases."

When one assertion falls apart so quickly it's reasonable to suspect related assertions are also untenable.

[jimjane]

Well the US went downhill when they let the Irish in. For many people, God died that day, right Dart?

[Dartagan Shepherd]

@Hamlet Actually you're the one that validated it with your link and then started talking about degrees. I wasn't arguing degrees, I said it was nothing new for the last 40 years.

But with your underhanded comment that the rest of my personal experience is probably a lie, it's time to say goodbye.

This rhetoric isn't about children, it's about political parties and riling up their respective bases for votes. If you don't get that, you don't. It's happening on both sides.

And both parties will be onto a new emotional topic in a few months, each demonizing the other side and neither getting closer to real solutions. Good luck trying to paint Microsoft as the bad guy, though.

So long and thanks for all the fish.

@jimjane Indeed. Damn Irish.

[Dartagan Shepherd]

14,000 legal immigrants became citizens today. Happy 4th of July. You see, there's a right way and a wrong way.

[Dartagan Shepherd]

163,000 legal immigrants are citizens so far this year. Up over 50% from last year. Happy 4th.

[jimjane]

But Dart? Why are so many people from Muslim countries prevented from even applying to be legal immigrants?

Happy 4th indeed.