The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
If Companies Set Up Ethnic Affinity Groups for Employees, Must They Also Set Them Up for Jewish Employees?
Yes, argues the Brandeis Center in a letter to Microsoft.
From the letter:
We write on behalf of Jewish employees of Microsoft who are also members of the Louis D. Brandeis Center Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism ("the Coalition") to explain why Microsoft's refusal to establish a Jewish Employee Resource Group (ERG) alongside its existing network of ERGs has resulted in distributing very real professional benefits and advantages on the basis of ethnic or racial identity, while denying these benefits to Jewish and other employees. Providing all employees equal access to professional benefits and opportunities, including Microsoft's Jewish employees, is the right thing to do and is compelled by various federal and local anti-discrimination statutes. Moreover, by denying Jewish employees the very real advantages that Microsoft claims its ERGs bestow, Microsoft has allowed anti-Semitism to fester at Microsoft.
Microsoft's refusal to acknowledge its Jewish employees' right to an ERG seems to stem from a mistaken pigeonholing of Jewish identity as merely "religious," a category of identity that Microsoft excludes from its ERG program. In fact, Jews are a people with a shared ethnic and ancestral heritage. Irrespective of any shared creed or belief in a deity, Jews share a common lineage, history, culture, and language(s). This is the dictionary definition of ethnicity. Jews who never attend synagogue, observe Jewish holidays, practice Jewish religious rituals, or even believe in the religious tenets of Judaism are still ethnically Jewish, an understanding that is widely supported in academic literature and surveys of Jewish American life.
More importantly here, the law recognizes that Jewish identity isn't protected from discrimination based merely on its religious character, but also on its shared ethnic and ancestral heritage (including where protections based on race incorporate ethnicity).
Microsoft's ERGs share common features of ERGs at most Fortune 500 companies. They are employee-led and driven, so that topics of conversation and action come from the employees themselves based on their lived workplace experiences. They connect employees to company leadership, making it easier to collectively communicate broader workplace equity and inclusion concerns to those with the power to do something about them. They allow employees to represent and express themselves on their own terms, both to corporate leadership and to their colleagues. They facilitate corporate charitable giving to organizations that do work in their communities. And they foster networking and career advancement within the company.
In short, Microsoft's ERGs are a material "term and condition" of employment for Microsoft's workforce and distribute valuable benefits on the basis of identity.
Jewish Microsoft employees are no less deserving or in need of an ERG than other ethnic groups at Microsoft. Currently, Jewish (and other) Microsoft employees are denied various benefits of Microsoft employment:
- Unlike their Black colleagues in the "Blacks at Microsoft" ERG, Microsoft's Jewish employees are denied the opportunity "to develop[] and strengthen[] a strong network of [Jewish] leaders at Microsoft which enhances Microsoft's diverse and inclusive culture, and assists in our mission of empowering customers to achieve more."
- Unlike their Asian, Asian American, and Pacific Islander colleagues in the "Asians at Microsoft" ERG, Microsoft's Jewish employees are denied the opportunity to "bring[] together employees across the company who are dedicated to enhancing Microsoft's diverse and inclusive culture to support all individuals who self-identify as" they do.
- Unlike their Hispanic and Latinx colleagues in "Hispanic and Latinx Organization of Leaders in Action (HOLA)" ERG, Microsoft's Jewish employees are denied the benefits of an ERG that "provides employee community space, helps inspire future employees and advances the careers of current ones" and which "also serves as a resource to communities and organizations worldwide."
- Unlike their Indigenous colleagues in "Indigenous at Microsoft" ERG, Microsoft's Jewish employees are denied the opportunity to "foster[] [Jewish] awareness and belonging, building community through sharing knowledge, and integrating [Jewish] traditions and values into our Microsoft culture" and "recruit and retain [Jewish] talent across" Microsoft. {https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/diversity/inside-microsoft/default}
Instead, Jewish Microsoft employees are only permitted to organize themselves as an "Employee Community," a structure vastly inferior to an ERG in multiple ways. Employee Communities receive no funding and only limited support from Human Resources and are not allowed to host educational events, participate in inclusive product design programs, or work with external groups outside of the annual Microsoft Give campaign.
Microsoft has refused to allow its Jewish employees to graduate from a mere Employee Community into a full-fledged ERG because Microsoft has chosen to narrowly define Jewish identity as strictly "religious," contrary to how its Jewish employees choose to define themselves. This is evident in Microsoft trying to shoehorn its Jewish employees into the putative "Interfaith ERG."
An Interfaith ERG, by its terms, cannot represent the interests of a vast number of Jewish Microsoft employees who do not define their Jewish identity based on their religious faith as discussed above. Nor can an Interfaith Network serve its Jewish members' unique professional development, anti-discrimination, and community building needs.
In fact, sadly but predictably, the Interfaith ERG project became yet another forum for anti-Semitism at Microsoft. Jewish employees participating in the development of the Interfaith ERG report, for example:
- Non-Jewish members of the working group charged with standing-up the Interfaith ERG have stated that the Jewish members "should expect people to blame Jews for what Israel was doing."
- Members of the working group attempted to make Christian prayers a mandatory opening at meetings.
- Jewish members were told that they should stop complaining about global anti- Semitism as "Christians and Arabs face more and worse in the world" and that "there were so many countries where Jews were the majority."
This is why, as you must be aware, Jewish employees have "dropped out" of participating in the Interfaith ERG project.
Moreover, Microsoft's insistence on defining Jewish identity inconsistent with its Jewish employees' own self-definition has contributed to an environment that many Jews at Microsoft view as indifferent to anti-Semitism at best and anti-Semitically hostile at worst. Surely a Jewish ERG at Microsoft could have helped Microsoft avoid repeatedly failing to issue appropriate statements condemning rising anti-Semitism similar to its statements concerning other -isms, and failing to recognize important events in the Jewish calendar as Microsoft does for employees of other identities.
It sends a message to the entire Microsoft community that Jewish employees aren't valued when Microsoft refuses to acknowledge Jewish Heritage Month or schedules significant Microsoft community events on major Jewish holidays. For example, the Microsoft 5K, a highlight of the annual Give Campaign, has been scheduled on Rosh Hashanah or Yom Kippur for multiple years. Jewish employees have raised this as an issue preventing their participation, but this did not change until 2025, when it was rescheduled to the summer to benefit intern participation. A Jewish ERG would afford Jewish Microsoft employees the same opportunity for consideration of these basic indicators of acceptance and worth.
It is no wonder, then, that widespread anti-Semitism within Microsoft has erupted since October 7. This includes anti-Semitic graffiti on campus, inappropriate speakers hosted by other Microsoft employee networks, public protests at Microsoft's 50th Anniversary celebration, and anti-Semitic comments on Microsoft's internal chat platform after the October 7 massacre, such as:
- "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free"
- Referring to Palestine as "the occupied territory of Palestine," and the Israeli Defense Force as the "Israeli Occupying Force," both inaccurate and inappropriate
- Offensive and absurd accusations that Israel is an apartheid state
- Denying Jews the fundamental right to self-determination
- On the Viva Engage internal messaging platform, posts about Microsoft's business and the company itself received multiple negative comments about Israel and the conflict and were not removed.
And because Jewish Microsoft employees lack the "communal" mechanism of an ERG to address anti-Semitism that other employees with ERGs have, anti-Semitism persists at Microsoft. Is it not obvious that the inability of Jewish employees to bring in speakers and conduct programming and training on anti-Semitism in the workplace, as other ERGs have been able to do concerning the discrimination they face, has severely hamstrung efforts, such as they are, to combat anti-Semitism at Microsoft?
The funding, recognition, and institutional support that Microsoft provides to its ERGs is extraordinary. Microsoft is boastful of the professional support and advancement opportunities that it provides its employees of these various ethnicities and shared ancestries.
Microsoft's Jewish employees are every bit as deserving.
That is why the U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism, released in 2023, expressly calls on employers to "support Jewish employees by promoting employee resource groups, including for Jewish staff." Microsoft needs to heed the government's call, and follow the law, and recognize its Jewish employees' right to establish an ERG on the same terms and conditions as other employees at Microsoft based on their ethnicity or shared ancestry. If other major American corporations can recognize a Jewish ERG, such as Meta, Salesforce, and Squarespace, to name just a few, so can Microsoft.
It's time that Microsoft offers its Jewish and non-Jewish employees every opportunity that is provided to any worker to establish within Microsoft's current network of ERGs. Jewish and non-Jewish employees must be provided ERGs on the same terms and conditions as other employees at Microsoft regardless of their ethnicity or shared ancestry. It's the right thing to do, and it's the law.
We would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you to discuss this issue. In any event, we need to hear back from you by May 24, 2025, or we will take legal action to vindicate Microsoft's Jewish employees' rights.
I can say that some cases treat Jewish as a national origin category—or even, for historical reasons, a racial category—covered by antidiscrimination law. Indeed, much hostility to Jews focuses on their ethnicity, applying equally to secular Jews and religious Jews; such ethnic discrimination is indeed forbidden. Whether this antidiscrimination rule extends to employers' provision of ethnic and racial affinity groups, and the various intangible (but potentially significant) benefits that membership in those groups can provide, is a separate matter. It will be interesting to see what Microsoft says, and what courts say if there is indeed litigation.
UPDATE 5/16/2025, 9:57 am: I originally wrote "Meta" in the subtitle rather than "Microsoft"; my apologies for the error.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Legally and scientifically, they are right. Jews are an ethnic group (although they're also divided in Ashkenazi and Sephardi), and can be a religion.
That said, if Ashkenazi Jews are entitled to a group at Meta, then so are Poles, Italians, Greek, Norwegians, and every other white group.
The more relevant question is if WASPS and Scotch-Irish are, as they are distinct groups from the groups you mention.
Or just a single White group.
Yes, there should also be affinity groups for Whites.
What's with legally and scientifically. Ask a normal person and if they can see a group (without genetic testing, ancestral tracing, or combing Ellis Island records)then "Yes, Jews are no different.
As to where to stop --- are you related to Justice Sotomayor ?--- the fact that you see Jews are no different does not mean you have to know if this applies to Pygmy albinos.
Are you including the various African/Asian Jewish groups? Their genetics, cultural, and religious practices are not always very similar, despite many of them being given the right of return.
The issue seems pretty straightforward under Shaarei Tefilla. More fundamentally, even assuming Jews are a purely religious group, Alito’s argument that if you accommodate everyone else you also have to accommodate religion will likely get some traction. In Justice Alito’s view, excluding religion from long lists of accommodated subgroups is intentional discrimination against religion.
And it is to anyone with common sense or logic training.
Your view of my religion is N/A
Also, I would not have dropped out of the project. I would have stayed to prepare reeports to management about intentional discrimination.
If a black person joins a racial harmony committee and learns that it is full of racists who are using it as a cover for help them plan a lynching, he should not drop out. He should stay to be able to document and communicate the plans to try to prevent the committee members from doing further harm. If what is alleged is true, I don’t see this as any different.
As some non-religious Jews like to say, “I’m still Jewish enough for Hitler.” So if they’re giving out ethnic-identity spoils, Jews should get it too.
But what this really highlights is the stupidity of such affinity groups. There’s no logical limit to them. And, yeah, they’re racist. Not just racist if you squint really hard. They’re racist on their face, and therefore a blatant violation of the civil-rights laws. And anyone who only feels comfortable with their “ethnic affinity group” is also a racist. Everyone would agree if it were white people joining such groups. So the same is true of the members of every other group.
Except that such groups do exist for white people. My husband is the treasurer of the local Sons of Norway lodge. I believe Boston has an Irish American Bar Association, or at least it did when I went to law school there. There are organizations for Italian Americans, Polish Americans and German Americans. Arguably, every synagogue in the country is a Jewish affinity group. So complaining that affinity groups is something only minorities do is (1) factually wrong and (2) yet another complaint brought to you by the white grievance industry.
As for their utility, I've used them to meet people when I've moved to a new area. Non-ethnic-group spouses and guests have always been welcomed at social events. If you treat it as a social club for people with at least one thing in common, and nothing more than a social club for people with at least one thing in common, I don't see a problem. Would the world be impoverished if they all disappeared tomorrow? Probably not, but I don't see the harm in having them either.
The complaint here is about a company establishing and funding groups based on race/ethnicity while denying others, not about private groups based on race/ethnicity.
That’s also my point. But I do have a problem with private groups as well. They may be legal, but they’re still unseemly.
I agree on that, I was just addressing what they pretended you said: "So complaining that affinity groups is something only minorities do"
Do you know for a certainty that these companies wouldn't allow a Sons of Italy or Sons or Norway affinity group? My sense is the subject has never come up. But if I were head of HR and there were enough interest, I'd probably be fine with it. I would caution them not to exclude non-Italians who were interested in attending; you don't have to actually have Italian blood to have an interest in Italian things.
No, but if you want to be a made member............
I didn’t say there aren’t white-ethnicity affinity groups. I said they are racist. Which they facially are. There’s other ways to find people that you have something in common with, such as common interests or hobbies. But people join ethnic affinity groups because they feel better around people of their ethnicity, which is inherently racist.
“Arguably, every synagogue in the country is a Jewish affinity group.”
This is just stupid. That’s where Jews go to practice their religion. It’s not an affinity-group meeting place.
People join ethnic affinity groups because they have something to talk about with other members of the group. They like the same ethnic foods, were raised in similar cultures, their families frequently have shared history and shared experiences, they enjoy putting on cultural events. The Greek-American group where I live has an annual Greek festival with great food, national dress, and cultural performances. Sorry, but I think you're reading more into it than is really there. And a lot of them even welcome non-group-members as affiliate members.
And practicing one's religion is not mutually exclusive with being an ethnic affinity group, as the Russian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Moravian Baptist and German Mennonites would be happy to tell you.
Look, trans, active homosexuals, and abortionists could say the same. Any grouping based on deviancy or perversion or anti-social work is not a group
The logical limit is a critical mass of people to participate and perpetuate the group. Just like any other club.
It says a lot about American concepts of religion that they don't recognize Jews as a cultural group.
I can't wait to see them try to disentangle India from Hinduism.
The US census acknowledges nearly 1,500 ethnic groups, but only seven race/ethnicity reporting categories: American Indian/Alaska native, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Middle Eastern or North African, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and White. Microsoft's ERGs appear to line up with these larger race/ethnicity categories; it's not like they have a separate affinity group for Indo-Caribbeans or Irish (or Muslims or Sikhs, for that matter).
Except for the White one. Weird, no?
Or the North African and Middle Eastern one. Or the Native Hawaiian one.
I don't know what Microsoft has against Hawaiians, but maybe they're just haven't kept up with the science with respect to people "North African and Middle Eastern" ancestry.
Up until last year, the US Census Bureau said if you're "Middle Eastern or North African" you were another White guy: "White – A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa."
https://www.census.gov/topics/population/race/about.html
But then, "after years of scientific research," they determined that people from the Middle East and North Africa aren't white after all.
https://www.census.gov/about/our-research/race-ethnicity/standards-updates.html
This is totally new science, and even the census bureau hasn't fully implemented it yet, so can you really blame Microsoft?
Microsoft is really showing it's Northwest/Pacific roots here.
No one in New York would question the categorization of Judaism as a cultural group.
I very much doubt this will lead to litigation, as I suspect Microsoft will cave quickly.
First, this is the policy of an idiot in HR who will be overruled.
Second, the company has no shortage of Jewish employees and customers, and would prefer not to make many of them unhappy.
ERGs are a god-awful idea that should never have been started and, now that they're here, should be exterminated, root and branch. But if you have them, you must apply them with ruthless consistency.
I'm kind of interested in learning more about this one.