Meta’s AI Layoff Claims: A New Look at Workplace Bias

A lawsuit filed this week accuses Meta of using artificial intelligence to pick workers for layoffs, specifically targeting those on medical or maternity leave. The case says the company’s AI tools examined performance scores and how much employees used AI, ignoring that people on leave could not accumulate those metrics. These tools supposedly decided who would be added to the termination list during a recent 10 % workforce cut.

The plaintiffs, 26 former Meta staff from California and other states, were let go in a wave of layoffs that began in May. They seek a court order to force Meta into arbitration, hoping for reinstatement, back pay, lost equity, benefits and other damages. The lawsuit also points to alleged violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act and state employment laws.

Meta has denied the accusations, saying that decisions are made by people, not machines. The company claims its AI was designed to support productivity, not discriminate. Yet the plaintiffs argue that Meta’s systems tracked AI usage and other metrics without pausing scores for legally protected absences. They also say the company monitored keystrokes, screen content, browser history and emails to feed its AI models, a practice that would unfairly label employees on leave as low performers.

This case highlights growing concerns about AI in hiring and firing. A 2024 California bill, AB 2930, aimed to ban algorithmic discrimination in employment but was defeated. The American Civil Liberties Association warned that AI screening tools could worsen workplace bias on race, gender and disability. Similar lawsuits have been filed against other tech firms, such as Workday, over alleged discriminatory AI hiring practices.

If Meta is found liable, it could set a precedent for how companies use AI in staffing decisions. The lawsuit also raises questions about transparency and fairness when machines influence job security, especially for vulnerable workers on leave.