The Microsoft NDAs Keep Microsoft Employees (and Former Employees) From Talking About Embarrassing (to Microsoft) Facts and Information About Crimes
THIS morning we mentioned Microsoft layoffs again. Someone has since asked me whether the term "NDA" in the article meant "non-disparagement agreement" or "non-disclosure agreement" (or non-disparagement clauses in some contractually-binding agreement).
The whole "non-disparagement" part is actually illegal in most context, even in the US. This has been tested in courts too, even in recent years.
So what Microsoft does with "non-disparagement" clauses - and agreements - is likely overdue for a "proper" court case.
What I meant in today's article was both "non-disparagement agreement" and "non-disclosure agreement" (hence I did not expand the acronym) as Microsoft habitually does both. We know that Microsoft gags staff in this way (they may lose severance pay otherwise) because about a year ago Indian media CONFIRMED this in relation to layoffs at GitHub. This meant that someone spoke to the media on the condition of anonymity, in effect breaking the agreement with Microsoft to just let it be known what Microsoft had done.
See some PBS coverage of "Congress passes law banning non-disclosure agreements in sexual harassment cases". There were similar cases in recent years pertaining to employment (depends on where) and whistleblowers. "It is key to increase awareness about how Microsoft stifles reporting and even discussion," an associate has remarked. █
"Probably useful to specify that both meanings [in "NDA"] are intended. Many people might not think of one or the other." -Anonymous