26 former and current Meta employees filed a class-action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, accusing the company of systematic discrimination in layoffs. The plaintiffs allege that artificial intelligence-based algorithms disproportionately selected for termination those on maternity, family, or medical leave, as well as employees with disabilities.
The lawsuit was filed on July 13, and the plaintiffs are proceeding anonymously, fearing pressure from their employer. They received layoff notices on May 20, with actual termination of employment for most scheduled for July 22. In total, about 8,000 people were affected by the 10% workforce reduction.
How AI "Evaluated" Employees
According to the plaintiffs, Meta used a suite of internal AI-based tools to rank personnel. These include the corporate assistant Metamate, trained "second brain" agents, data on AI token usage, automated performance ratings, and information on actions on corporate devices. The key issue: metrics accounted for the volume of work completed, activity, and the number of code changes, but were not adjusted for periods of lawful absence.
"Meta compiled the layoff list not based on informed decisions by managers familiar with employees' work, but based on automated algorithms," the complaint states. The plaintiffs claim the system "penalized" them for exercising legal rights: maternity leave, childcare, or medical treatment.
One plaintiff is a scientist who was on approved leave before childbirth. She received her layoff notice two days before giving birth. Another employee stated their rating was lowered due to a break related to an injury. A manager on medical leave was included in the layoff list on the 16th day of absence.
Meta's Position and Plaintiffs' Demands
A Meta representative called the claims unfounded, stating: "Decisions on personnel management and organizational structure were and are made by people, not AI." However, the plaintiffs insist the company did not audit the automated systems for bias, violating laws prohibiting discrimination against pregnant individuals, people with disabilities, and employees using family or medical leave.
In the initial phase, the plaintiffs seek to temporarily halt layoffs, preserve salaries, health insurance, stock rights, and leave status until the proceedings conclude. They also demand an independent audit of the AI tools used. "Once the layoffs are completed, the consequences will be irreversible: employees will lose health insurance during pregnancy, postpartum recovery, and medical treatment," their lawyers stated.
Context: Data Collection and Reputational Risks
The scandal unfolds against the backdrop of another high-profile incident: in April 2026, Meta launched the Model Capability Initiative program, which recorded keystrokes, mouse movements, screen content, and even audio on corporate devices. The company claimed the data was needed for training AI agents, not for performance evaluation. After a mass protest by over 1,600 employees who signed a petition alleging privacy violations, Mark Zuckerberg suspended the program in June.
This case is a stark example of how automating HR processes can lead to legal and reputational risks. If the court finds that Meta used AI for discriminatory decisions, it would set a dangerous precedent for the entire industry. Tech giants increasingly cite AI implementation as a reason for layoffs, but as practice shows, this often masks a desire to cut costs rather than improve efficiency. Investors and management should consider: are they ready for lawsuits when algorithms start "managing" people?