Meta Faces Lawsuit Over Alleged AI Layoff Bias
Twenty-six Meta employees allege that AI-assisted layoff systems penalized workers who took protected leave or sought disability accommodations.
Topics
News
- L&T Group to deploy Microsoft 365 Copilot for 140,000 staff
- TCS Taps NVIDIA for Bengaluru Industrial AI Engineering Lab
- India Approves $13.2 Billion Plan to Widen Semiconductor Push
- Karnataka Plans State-Backed AI University
- IBM Says It Faltered as AI Spending Upends Enterprise Buying
- AI Use Rises but Engineering Depth Lags, Nasscom Study Shows
Twenty-six Meta employees have sued the company, alleging that AI-assisted systems used to select workers for layoffs discriminated against people who took medical, parental or family leave or sought disability accommodations.
The complaint was filed on Monday, July 13, in the US District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiffs are seeking to block their dismissals while they pursue individual claims in arbitration.
Meta announced in April that it would eliminate about 8,000 jobs, or roughly 10% of its workforce, and began notifying affected employees on May 20, according to the lawsuit.
The plaintiffs allege that Meta used internal AI systems, performance rankings, activity-monitoring data, and dashboards tracking employees’ use of AI tools to help decide who would lose their jobs.
The systems included Meta’s internal AI assistant, Metamate, employee-trained “second-brain” agents, and productivity scores based on data including keystrokes, screen activity, browser history, messages and emails, the complaint said.
It also alleges that the selection process considered performance ratings, output, code contributions, and AI-token usage.
The plaintiffs said those measures disadvantaged employees on protected leave because they could not generate the same levels of activity or output as colleagues who were working.
Meta failed to adjust the data for protected absences or conduct leave-neutral reviews before selecting employees, they alleged.
Each plaintiff had taken or requested protected leave, experienced alleged interference with a leave request, or sought or received a disability accommodation during the preceding two years, according to the complaint.
Several were on pregnancy or parental leave. Others had taken medical leave or returned to work with approved accommodations.
One employee alleged that a manager warned him that taking approved medical leave could increase his chances of being selected for the reduction.
The plaintiffs accuse Meta of violating federal and state laws, including the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.
They also argue that the selection process had a disproportionate effect on women, who are more likely to take pregnancy and caregiving leave.
Meta rejected the allegations.
“These claims lack merit and are not based on facts,” a company spokesperson said. “Workforce management and organizational decisions were and are made by people, not AI.”
The plaintiffs remain employed, though their scheduled separation dates vary. Most are due to leave Meta around July 22, while some employees in New York and Washington have later dates, according to the complaint.
They are asking the court to preserve their jobs, compensation, benefits, stock vesting and protected-leave status while their claims proceed in arbitration.
The employees argue that dismissal would cause harm that could not be fully repaired through damages, including the loss of health insurance, leave rights and unvested stock. Some also face potential immigration consequences.
The allegations have not been tested in court, and Meta has not yet filed a substantive response to the complaint.
