- Published on
Meta used AI to tag workers who took leave to be laid off, lawsuit claims
- Authors
- Name
- DeepHorus
Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, has been sued by dozens of employees who allege the tech giant used artificial intelligence tools to unfairly target workers on protected leave for mass layoffs. The lawsuit, filed Monday in federal court in the northern district of California, claims that Meta's AI systems scored and ranked employees for dismissal, disproportionately affecting those who had requested maternity leave, disability accommodation or other protected time off. The case centers on Meta's workforce reduction of about 8,000 employees earlier this year, which the plaintiffs argue was executed using a flawed automated process rather than human judgment.
According to the 71-page complaint, Meta deployed a “constellation of internal artificial intelligence systems” that analyzed performance ratings, productivity metrics, and keystroke- and activity-monitoring data to determine who to lay off. The 26 named plaintiffs assert that these AI tools penalized workers for time spent on leave, as their metrics naturally dropped during absences. One plaintiff, a scientist on approved pre-birth pregnancy leave, was notified of her layoff just two days before giving birth. Another engineer received a “lowered rating” due to time off for an injury, while a manager on medical leave was terminated 16 days into his recovery.
The lawsuit seeks a preliminary court ruling to halt further layoffs while the claims are pursued, along with potential reinstatement, back pay, lost equity and other damages. This case highlights growing tensions over AI decision-making in the workplace, as employees raise concerns about bias, privacy and trust. States including California, Colorado and Illinois have recently enacted laws to protect workers from AI-related bias and “automated decision systems,” signaling increased regulatory scrutiny.
A Meta spokesperson strongly disputed the allegations, stating, “These claims lack merit and are not based on facts. Workforce management and organizational decisions were and are made by people, not AI.” However, the lawsuit alleges that Meta introduced its AI employee-monitoring program earlier this year without proper employee consent, capturing keystrokes, mouse activity, browser history and location data on company devices. CEO Mark Zuckerberg described the program as a way to train AI on “really smart people” at the company, but employee backlash led to its pause in June after over 1,600 workers signed a petition.
The case underscores the legal and ethical challenges of using AI in human resources decisions. If successful, the lawsuit could set a precedent for how companies deploy automated systems in hiring, promotion and termination processes. As regulators and lawmakers increasingly focus on algorithmic fairness, Meta's dispute may accelerate efforts to ensure that AI tools do not inadvertently discriminate against workers exercising their legal rights. The court's response to the plaintiffs' request for an injunction will be closely watched by employers and employees alike.
