Meta is facing a new legal challenge after twenty-six anonymous employees filed a lawsuit claiming that the tech giant relied on discriminatory artificial intelligence systems to select workers for a recent round of sweeping layoffs. The lawsuit, filed in the Northern District Court of California, alleges that Meta used a suite of AI tools—including an internal large-language model called Metamate, algorithmic productivity scores based on keystroke and browser data, and AI-assisted performance review software—to score, rank, and ultimately terminate 8,000 employees in May 2026, representing 10% of the company's workforce.

The plaintiffs argue that these AI systems disproportionately targeted employees with disabilities, those on medical leave, and individuals on parental or family leave. According to the complaint, the emphasis on metrics such as keystroke counts and AI token consumption effectively penalized workers who were absent or had reduced output due to protected medical or family obligations. “The result was that employees who took protected leaves were disproportionately selected for layoff, based on scoring that not only failed to account for their protected leaves, but in effect penalized the employees for exercising their legal rights to these leaves,” the lawsuit states.

Among the most striking examples cited in the filing are several employees who were on maternity leave at the time of the layoffs. One scientist was just two days away from giving birth when she was selected for termination. Another manager, on approved pregnancy-related disability leave, became the only member of her team chosen by the AI system. The plaintiffs also allege that Meta was aware of the discriminatory impact but failed to take corrective action, such as pausing the system for a more neutral review process.

The lawsuit comes as Meta continues to pour hundreds of billions of dollars into artificial intelligence development, a strategy that CEO Mark Zuckerberg has publicly championed. The May layoffs were part of a broader cost-cutting effort to offset these massive AI investments. However, the plaintiffs claim that the same AI systems the company is betting on are now being used in a way that violates employee rights. The complaint seeks a preliminary ruling from the court to block Meta from completing the layoffs on July 22, giving the employees time to pursue their claims in private arbitration as required by their contracts.

Meta has denied the allegations. “These claims lack merit and are not based on facts,” a company spokesperson told Gizmodo. “Workforce management and organizational decisions were and are made by people, not AI.” However, the lawsuit paints a different picture, describing a process where managers had little direct input and the AI tools operated as a black box, generating termination lists with no human oversight.

The legal battle is the latest in a series of employment disputes for Meta. In February 2025, the company was hit with a separate lawsuit alleging that older workers were disproportionately targeted in a round of layoffs affecting 5% of its workforce. At that time, Meta claimed the layoffs were based on performance rankings. One engineer in the current lawsuit noted that he was “aware that employees who took paternity leave had been laid off” in that earlier round as well, suggesting a pattern of systemic bias.

The use of AI in human resources decisions is a growing area of legal concern. Federal agencies, including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), have issued guidance warning that AI-driven hiring and firing tools can inadvertently perpetuate discrimination if not carefully designed and audited. Similar lawsuits have been filed against other tech companies, including Amazon, which faced claims that its AI recruiting tool favored male candidates, and Uber, which was sued for using algorithms that allegedly discriminated against drivers with disabilities.

Metamate, described by Meta as a “second brain” trained on employee communications and internal documents, is at the heart of the allegations. The tool was reportedly designed to help workers with tasks like summarizing meetings and drafting emails, but the lawsuit claims it was repurposed to evaluate employee performance and identify low performers for layoffs. Critics argue that such tools are inherently flawed because they rely on historical data that may contain biases, and they cannot account for extenuating circumstances like medical leave or family obligations.

The plaintiffs are asking the court to act quickly before the scheduled layoff date of July 22. Under their employment contracts, disputes must go through individual arbitration, but the workers argue that this requirement does not apply to requests for temporary relief to prevent imminent harm. Legal experts say the case could set a precedent for how courts view the use of AI in employment decisions, particularly when such systems are opaque and have a disparate impact on protected groups.

The lawsuit also raises broader questions about accountability in the age of AI. If a company uses a black-box algorithm to make personnel decisions, who is responsible when those decisions violate the law? The Meta case could force courts to grapple with whether the company can hide behind a claim that “people, not AI” made the final call, even when the AI system effectively dictated the outcome. Employment lawyers are watching closely, as the outcome could influence how other corporations deploy similar tools.

As of now, Meta has not publicly announced any changes to its layoff process in response to the lawsuit. The company’s spokesperson reiterated that the allegations are unfounded and that Meta will defend itself in court. However, the plaintiffs are hoping to gather enough evidence during discovery to demonstrate a pattern of discrimination that extends beyond individual cases.

The case is one of several high-profile legal actions against major tech firms over the ethical use of artificial intelligence. With AI becoming more deeply embedded in corporate operations, the line between efficient automation and unlawful discrimination is increasingly under scrutiny. The Meta lawsuit serves as a stark reminder that while AI can streamline operations, it can also amplify existing biases if not carefully regulated and monitored.

Source:Gizmodo News