A group of current and former Meta employees has filed a lawsuit accusing the company of using artificial intelligence tools to help select workers for layoffs. The plaintiffs claim the system unfairly affected employees who were on maternity leave, medical leave, or receiving disability accommodations.
The lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California. It involves 26 employees who challenge job cuts that were part of Meta’s broader workforce reduction earlier this year. Meta is the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp.
According to the complaint, the company relied on several internal AI systems to help identify employees for layoffs. The workers allege the technology analyzed performance ratings, productivity data, keystroke activity, and other workplace metrics when determining which positions would be eliminated.
The lawsuit argues that the selection process depended too heavily on automated scoring rather than evaluations made by supervisors familiar with employees’ work. The plaintiffs claim the AI systems ranked workers and helped determine who would be included in the layoffs.
The employees are asking the court to temporarily stop the layoffs while the legal case moves forward. They are also seeking possible remedies that include reinstatement, back pay, restored benefits, lost stock compensation, and other damages if the court rules in their favor.
The lawsuit raises broader questions about the growing use of artificial intelligence in workplace management. Businesses are increasingly adopting AI tools to evaluate employee performance, monitor productivity, and support human resource decisions.
However, labor groups and regulators have expressed concerns that automated systems may unintentionally create unfair outcomes if they fail to consider important personal or legal circumstances.
The Meta lawsuit claims employees on protected leave generated less workplace activity because they were legally away from work. As a result, the plaintiffs argue that AI systems relying on productivity measurements may have assigned lower scores to those workers.
The complaint also alleges that employees with disabilities may have appeared less productive because of approved workplace accommodations. The plaintiffs argue that the technology did not properly account for legally protected leave or medical situations.
Several individual examples are included in the lawsuit. One plaintiff said she received notice of her layoff just two days before giving birth while on approved pregnancy leave. Another employee claimed a lower performance rating followed time away from work because of an injury. A third plaintiff said he was laid off shortly after beginning approved medical leave.
Meta has denied the allegations. A company spokesperson said the claims are without merit and stated that workforce decisions were made by people rather than artificial intelligence systems.
The lawsuit also references an employee monitoring program introduced earlier this year. According to the complaint, the program collected information such as keystrokes, mouse activity, browser history, messages, emails, and location data from company devices.
The plaintiffs argue the monitoring system was introduced without sufficient employee approval or clear consent. They claim many workers were not fully informed before the program began operating.
The monitoring initiative later faced criticism from employees concerned about privacy. Reports indicated that more than 1,600 workers signed a petition opposing the program. Following the internal response, Meta announced that it would pause the monitoring initiative while reviewing concerns.
As part of the legal case, the plaintiffs are requesting an independent audit of Meta’s AI systems. They argue that an outside review would provide greater transparency about how the company selected employees for layoffs.
The workers’ attorneys have also asked the court to allow the plaintiffs to remain anonymous, citing concerns about possible retaliation while legal proceedings continue.
The case highlights increasing legal attention surrounding the use of artificial intelligence in employment decisions. Governments in several US states have recently introduced laws and regulations designed to reduce bias in automated workplace systems and improve transparency when AI is used in hiring, evaluations, or personnel decisions.
The lawsuit remains in its early stages, and the court has not yet ruled on the allegations. The outcome could influence how companies use artificial intelligence in future workforce decisions and how employers balance technological tools with legal protections for employees.
