A lawsuit has been filed by a group of 26 Meta employees, alleging that the company utilized artificial intelligence systems to select individuals for layoffs, with a disproportionate impact on those on medical, parental, or family leave. This group is part of the 8,000 employees, representing about 10% of Meta’s workforce, who were slated for layoffs in May. The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Oakland, California, accuses Meta of utilizing internal AI systems, keystroke and activity monitoring data, AI token-usage dashboards, and algorithmically assisted performance rankings to determine the layoff decisions.
According to the lawsuit, certain scores and ratings were designed in a way that employees on protected medical or family leave, or those with reduced output due to a disability, could not accumulate them. Meta allegedly did not consider protected leave when evaluating employees’ scores and failed to conduct the necessary individualized, leave- and accommodation-neutral reviews as required by law. Consequently, individuals on protected medical or family leave were reportedly more likely to be chosen for layoffs.
The lawsuit highlights that all 26 employees who are part of the legal action had taken protected leave, requested accommodation for disability, or received such accommodation. Despite being informed of their impending layoffs, these employees are still currently employed by Meta, with separations scheduled to commence on July 22.
A significant number of the employees involved in the lawsuit had taken pregnancy or parental leave, resulting in reduced measured output during that time. Additionally, some had taken medical leave, with one employee disclosing a serious health condition and disability approved by Meta’s provider. However, the lawsuit claims that this individual was dissuaded from taking leave by a manager who warned that doing so would lead to being selected for layoffs, with Meta allegedly providing no accommodation for the disability.
Meta has refuted the claims, stating that they lack merit and are not grounded in fact, emphasizing that workforce decisions are made by people, not AI. The lawsuit asserts that the layoffs violated various state and federal laws, including the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. The plaintiffs’ legal representatives have stated that the lawsuit aims to maintain the status quo to retain employment for the workers pending arbitration, as irreversible harm could result from final separations, such as loss of employer-subsidized health coverage, extinguished leave rights, forfeited unvested equity, and triggered immigration consequences.