Meta sued over alleged AI-driven layoffs
A group of 26 Meta employees has filed a lawsuit against the technology company, alleging that it used artificial intelligence (AI) systems to determine which employees would be laid off, disproportionately affecting workers who were on medical, parental, or family leave.
The lawsuit, filed on Monday in a federal court in Oakland, California, is linked to the wave of layoffs announced by Meta in May, when the company said it would eliminate around 8,000 jobs, or approximately 10 percent of its workforce, CE Report quotes Kosova Press.
According to the complaint, Meta relied on internal AI systems, employee activity monitoring data, keystroke tracking, dashboards measuring the use of AI tools, and algorithm-assisted performance rankings to identify employees for dismissal.
The plaintiffs argue that these systems failed to account for the fact that employees on legally protected medical or family leave could not maintain the same level of productivity as their colleagues. They claim Meta relied on automated assessments without conducting the individualized reviews required by law.
As a result, the lawsuit alleges that employees on protected leave were selected for layoffs at a disproportionately higher rate.
The identities of the 26 plaintiffs have not been disclosed. All had taken protected leave and had requested or received workplace accommodations related to disabilities. Although they have been notified of their dismissal, they remain employed by Meta, with their terminations scheduled to begin on July 22.
According to the lawsuit, about half of the plaintiffs had taken family care leave or leave related to pregnancy and childbirth. Eight of them are women who took maternity or pregnancy leave, four are men who took parental leave, and one woman had taken leave to care for a family member before later taking bereavement leave.
The lawsuit also describes the case of an employee with a serious medical condition and disability that had been approved by Meta's healthcare provider. According to the complaint, a manager discouraged the employee from taking medical leave, warning that doing so would increase the likelihood of being selected for layoffs. The lawsuit further alleges that Meta failed to provide the employee with reasonable accommodations.
In a statement, Meta rejected the allegations, describing them as "without merit and unsupported by the facts." The company said that "workforce management and organizational decisions are made, and continue to be made, by people—not artificial intelligence."
The plaintiffs argue that the layoffs violated several U.S. federal and state laws, including the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.
The lawsuit also relies on the legal principle of "disparate impact," under which a policy that appears neutral may still be considered discriminatory if it disproportionately affects a protected group and is not necessary for performing the job.
The plaintiffs' attorneys claim that Meta's algorithmic system treated time spent on protected leave as reduced performance, disproportionately affecting women, who statistically are more likely to take maternity and family care leave.
The lawyers have asked the court to preserve the employees' current status and suspend the planned layoffs until arbitration is completed. They argue that allowing the dismissals to proceed would cause irreparable harm, including the loss of health insurance during pregnancy or medical treatment, the loss of protected leave rights and financial benefits, and, in some cases, negative consequences for employees' immigration status.
Photo: META
