As the race to dominate artificial intelligence accelerates, with new models being unveiled at breakneck speed, Google has taken an unusual approach in its bid to retain talent: paying some staff not to work at all.
According to a report by Business Insider, Google is putting certain UK-based employees on extended “garden leave” after signing non-compete clauses—effectively keeping them on the payroll while preventing them from working for competitors or even contributing to Google’s own projects.
The individuals in question are primarily from DeepMind, Google’s London-headquartered AI research lab, which is at the forefront of developing the company’s latest generation of large language models, including the recently launched Gemini 2.5 Pro. The model, unveiled earlier this year, has been billed as Google’s most advanced yet, with notable improvements in coding, mathematics, and visual understanding.
The report cites four former employees who claim that Google is increasingly using restrictive non-compete agreements to block senior researchers from leaving for rival AI firms. These staff members are reportedly being placed on garden leave for up to 12 months—a considerable jump from the six-month notice periods that were more commonly used in the past.
“Garden leave” is a well-known corporate practice where employees remain on the payroll during their notice period but are barred from doing any actual work. In this case, former staff allege that the leave is not only preventing them from joining competitors but also prohibiting them from contributing meaningfully to their current employer’s projects.
In some instances, the employees affected are senior researchers involved in key developments around Google’s flagship Gemini models.
Microsoft VP speaks up
The issue drew wider attention when Microsoft AI vice president Nando de Freitas, himself a former DeepMind director, took to X to express concern. He claimed that several former colleagues had reached out to him, expressing frustration over restrictive clauses that have left them in professional limbo.
Dear @GoogDeepMind ers, First, congrats on the new impressive models.
Every week one of you reaches out to me in despair to ask me how to escape your notice periods and noncompetes. Also asking me for a job because your manager has explained this is the way to get promoted, but…
— Nando de Freitas (@NandoDF) March 26, 2025
“Every week one of you reaches out to me in despair to ask me how to escape your notice periods and noncompetes,” Freitas wrote. “Also asking me for a job because your manager has explained this is the way to get promoted, but I digress.”
In another post, he warned against signing such contracts, calling them an “abuse of power.”
“Above all, don’t sign these contracts. No American corporation should have that much power, especially in Europe,” he added. Google, however, maintains that its employment agreements are industry standard and serve a legitimate purpose. A spokesperson told Business Insider:
“Our employment contracts are in line with market standards. Given the sensitive nature of our work, we use non-competes selectively to protect our legitimate interests.”
The company did not comment on the specific allegations regarding the 12-month garden leave arrangements or the extent to which employees are being kept idle.
The revelations come as competition in the AI space heats up. Major players including Microsoft, OpenAI, Meta, and Google are vying for the brightest minds in artificial intelligence, especially as generative AI becomes central to their business strategies.
By enforcing strict non-compete agreements, Google may be seeking to prevent valuable talent from jumping ship to rivals—particularly those working on breakthrough technologies in foundation models and deep learning. However, critics argue that such practices risk stifling individual freedom and innovation, especially when implemented over extended periods.
The debate also highlights a cultural clash: while such contracts may be common in the US tech world, they face greater scrutiny in the UK and Europe, where employee rights and labour mobility are typically more strongly protected.