Google’s proposed purchase of Spirit Airlines’ internal records has sparked concerns about employee privacy and corporate data ownership.
US lawmakers want stronger protections before the bankruptcy court approves the transaction. The dispute raises questions about companies selling workplace communications for artificial intelligence training. It also exposes gaps in privacy safeguards when businesses enter bankruptcy.
US lawmakers demand employee privacy safeguards
More than 120 US lawmakers have challenged Google’s $10 million offer for Spirit Airlines’ internal data ahead of an October 14 hearing.
Senator Elizabeth Warren and Representative Steven Horsford led the effort alongside 119 other lawmakers in an October 8 letter.
The proposed transaction reportedly covers approximately 100 million emails and 500 million Microsoft Teams messages. It also includes payroll records, tax documents, timecards, and employment contracts.
Lawmakers warned that certain files could contain medical information and requests for disability accommodations. The concerns extend to nearly 1,000 Spirit employees who lost their jobs in Las Vegas.
Horsford argued that employees provided their information for workplace purposes, not for another company’s AI development.
Consequently, lawmakers want Google to exclude sensitive employee records and confidential safety reports. They also seek enforceable restrictions governing future data use.
Google told Reuters that it does not intend to purchase employees’ personal information. The company said independent reviewers would exclude identifying records or remove personal identifiers.
Google outbid AI recruitment company Mercor, which offered $7.5 million in August. Spirit excluded passenger databases covering 97 million customers and hired Tonic.ai to sanitize the remaining information.
However, court-appointed privacy ombudsman Lucy Thomson focused her favorable review on passenger information rather than employee records.
Federal bankruptcy rules require privacy reviews to consider potential risks and benefits for consumers. Those provisions do not offer employees equivalent protections.
AI training demand raises questions about data ownership
Lawmakers also questioned whether removing names provides sufficient protection against identifying individual workers.
Their letter warned that AI systems can combine scattered information to reconstruct identities from supposedly anonymous records.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology has similarly highlighted re-identification risks associated with de-identified datasets.
Privacy organization EPIC also challenged the proposed transaction, arguing that removing identifiers cannot guarantee confidentiality.
Meanwhile, France’s data protection regulator, CNIL, says GDPR protections may apply when AI systems can reveal identifiable personal information.
The dispute comes as technology companies seek corporate datasets to support increasingly sophisticated artificial intelligence systems.
Grand View Research projects the AI training dataset market will grow from $3.9 billion in 2026 to $16.3 billion by 2033. That forecast represents annual growth of 22.6%.
The broader debate also follows Meta’s retreat from employee mouse and keystroke monitoring after workers challenged the proposal.
Union leader Sara Nelson warned that Spirit’s data sale could carry significant consequences for employees across different industries.
The October 14 hearing will determine the transaction’s immediate direction while testing how bankruptcy courts address workplace privacy and AI training.
