Twenty-six Meta employees have filed a federal lawsuit alleging the company used artificial intelligence systems to identify workers on maternity leave, medical leave, or disability accommodation for mass layoffs — a claim that raises urgent questions about algorithmic management and the erosion of workplace protections in the tech industry.
The lawsuit, filed Monday in federal court in the northern district of California, centers on Meta's workforce reduction of about 8,000 employees earlier this year. The 71-page complaint alleges that Meta deployed a "constellation of internal artificial intelligence systems" — including AI performance ratings and keystroke- and activity-monitoring data — to determine who would lose their jobs. "Meta did not assemble the termination list through the considered judgment of managers who knew the work," the complaint states. Instead, the 26 workers claim, the company used AI systems "to score, rank and select employees for inclusion on the list."
When Algorithms Punish Protected Leave
The lawsuit describes a system that appears to have penalized workers for exercising their legal rights. Meta's AI tools allegedly gathered data on employees' performance rankings, productivity and other metrics — inputs that don't exist when workers are on medical or family leave. For people with disabilities, those metrics might be reduced. "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 complaint says.
The human cost is stark. One plaintiff, a scientist, was on approved pre-birth pregnancy leave when she was notified of her layoff just two days before she gave birth. Another plaintiff, an engineer, said he received a "lowered rating" because of time he took off for an injury. A third, a manager on medical leave, said he was let go 16 days into his time off.
The plaintiffs are seeking a preliminary court ruling to stop Meta from finalizing the layoffs while they pursue their claims, along with relief that could include reinstatement, back pay, lost equity, benefits and other damages.
The Monitoring Program Meta Tried to Hide
Meta introduced its AI employee-monitoring program earlier this year. It was designed to capture workers' keystrokes, mouse activity, browser history, along with messages, emails and location data on company devices. Mark Zuckerberg, Meta's CEO, said the idea was to train the company's AI systems on its employees' behaviors. "The AI models learn from watching really smart people do things," Zuckerberg said in an internal meeting, according to the Information. "The average intelligence of the people who are at this company is significantly higher than the average set of people that you can get to do tasks."
The lawsuit says Meta quietly launched the monitoring program without employee buy-in. Meta told employees about it through a "low-visibility internal post — made by an engineer rather than a senior leader," the complaint says. "On at least some teams, employees received no consent or acknowledgment prompt at all, and, at least initially, there was no way to opt out."
Employee backlash quickly racked up over the last few months, prompting Zuckerberg to announce that he was pausing the program in June. His about-face came after more than 1,600 employees signed a petition saying the program violated their privacy.
What the Workers Are Asking For
In Monday's suit, lawyers for the plaintiffs asked the court to immediately approve an independent audit into Meta's AI tools. They say it would provide clarification into why the 26 workers, who were on leave or approved for disability accommodation, were let go. "Meta deliberately kept the mechanics of its selection process secret from its employees," the lawyers said in an emailed statement.
The plaintiffs are still Meta employees until 22 July, when their termination is set to begin, according to the lawyers. Citing retaliation concerns, the attorneys are asking the judge to allow the plaintiffs to remain anonymous and for a court-order to preserve the workers' employment status while arbitration is pending.
"Once these separations are final, the harms are irreversible: employer-subsidized health coverage lost during pregnancy, postpartum recovery, and active medical treatment; time-bound leave rights extinguished; unvested equity forfeited; and immigration consequences triggered," the lawyers said.
A Meta spokesperson disputed the allegations. "These claims lack merit and are not based on facts," he said in an email. "Workforce management and organizational decisions were and are made by people, not AI."
Why This Matters:
This lawsuit arrives at a moment when algorithmic management is spreading across industries — and when the legal framework protecting workers hasn't caught up. If Meta's AI systems did target employees on protected leave, it exposes a dangerous gap: algorithms can encode discrimination without anyone intending it, simply by failing to account for legally protected absences. The case also highlights the power imbalance in tech workplaces, where monitoring tools are deployed with minimal transparency or consent. For workers across Europe and beyond, the question isn't just whether Meta broke the law — it's whether employment protections mean anything when decisions are delegated to black-box systems that treat pregnancy leave or disability accommodation as a productivity deficit. The outcome could set a precedent for how AI is allowed to shape hiring, firing, and everything in between.