Meta’s latest layoff round has triggered a fresh legal fight, with 26 employees alleging the company relied on AI and automated performance systems that unfairly disadvantaged workers on medical, parental and family leave.
The lawsuit, filed in a federal court in Oakland, California, comes after Meta announced plans in May to eliminate around 8,000 jobs, roughly 10% of its global workforce.
The plaintiffs argue that the company’s layoff process leaned heavily on AI-assisted tools and productivity metrics that failed to account for legally protected leave, news agency AP reported.
AI algorithm questioned
According to the complaint, Meta used a combination of AI-powered evaluation systems, employee activity and keystroke tracking, AI token usage dashboards, and algorithm-assisted performance rankings while deciding which employees would be laid off, the report added.
The lawsuit alleges these systems were inherently biased against employees who were away from work because of approved medical conditions, disabilities or family responsibilities. Since workers on protected leave naturally generated lower activity and productivity data, they allegedly received poorer performance scores that influenced layoff decisions.
According to the news agency, the plaintiffs argue Meta did not adjust its evaluation process to reflect approved leave or provide the individualized review required under employment laws.
Also Read: Gemini Spark, AIβs real money fears, and Tilly Norwood
Employees on parental and medical leave hit
Among the 26 employees involved in the lawsuit, every plaintiff had either taken legally protected leave or requested accommodations related to a disability.
Several employees had taken maternity, pregnancy or parental leave, periods during which they were not actively working. Others were on medical leave for serious health conditions.
The complaint also details one employee’s experience, claiming he was warned by a manager that taking approved medical leave could increase his chances of being selected for the anticipated layoffs. The lawsuit further alleges that Meta failed to provide reasonable accommodation for his disability.
Although all 26 employees have received layoff notices, they remain employed for now, with their separations scheduled to begin on July 22.
Meta’s response
Meta has denied the claims, calling the lawsuit baseless. In a statement, the company said workforce planning and organizational decisions were made by people rather than artificial intelligence, adding that the allegations “lack merit and are not based on facts.”
The lawsuit argues that the company’s evaluation process disproportionately affected employees who took pregnancy or caregiving leave.
Of the plaintiffs, eight women had taken maternity or pregnancy-related leave, four men had used parental leave, and another woman had taken leave to care for a family member before later taking bereavement leave.
The legal filing contends that because women are more likely to take pregnancy and caregiving leave, an algorithm that measures productivity without considering those absences places them at a greater disadvantage.
Multiple discrimination laws cited
The employees accuse Meta of violating several federal and state workplace protections, including the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.
The complaint also relies on the legal principle of “disparate impact,” which allows workers to challenge workplace policies that appear neutral but disproportionately harm protected groups.
The plaintiffs argue Meta’s algorithm-assisted selection process treated time away on protected leave as reduced performance, creating an uneven impact on women and caregivers despite the system appearing neutral on its face.
Also Read: Former Meta techie to relocate to India after spending 14 years in US, shares βgut wrenchingβ experience
Rather than seeking immediate financial damages, the employees are asking the court to preserve their employment while arbitration proceeds.
Their attorneys argue that once the layoffs take effect, the consequences cannot easily be reversed, pointing to the potential loss of employer-sponsored health insurance during pregnancy or medical treatment, the forfeiture of unvested stock awards, the expiration of protected leave rights and possible immigration-related complications for affected workers.
(With inputs from AP)
ππππ/π πππ πππππππ ππππ
