Dozens of Meta employees have sued the social media company, alleging that artificial intelligence tools targeted them for mass layoffs, specifically after they requested protected or maternity leave or disability accommodation. This alleged practice, detailed in a lawsuit filed Monday in federal court in the northern district of California, underscores the deep insecurity facing workers, where even established employment can be jeopardized, leading to “immigration consequences triggered” for some, according to their lawyers. The suit points to Meta’s workforce reduction of about 8,000 employees earlier this year, a significant culling that adds to the economic pressures felt by working families across Europe.
The 71-page complaint asserts that Meta did not assemble the termination list through the “considered judgment of managers who knew the work.” Instead, the lawsuit claims, the company used a “constellation of internal artificial intelligence systems” to “score, rank and select employees for inclusion on the list.” This reliance on algorithms, rather than human oversight, raises serious questions about the protection of national labour forces from unchecked corporate power.
The Cost to Our People
The lawsuit alleges that Meta’s AI tools gather data on employees’ performance rankings, productivity, and other metrics. These inputs, however, do not exist when workers are on medical or family leave, and for people with disabilities, those metrics might be reduced. The complaint states 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.” This directly impacts the social safety nets intended to support native families and those in need, straining national welfare provisions.
One plaintiff, a scientist, was on approved pre-birth pregnancy leave and received her layoff notification just two days before giving birth. Another, an engineer, reported a “lowered rating” due to time taken off for an injury. A manager on medical leave was let go 16 days into his time off. These cases highlight how vulnerable segments of the workforce, including those contributing to the demographic future of our nations, are allegedly being targeted. A Meta spokesperson disputed the allegations, stating, “These claims lack merit and are not based on facts,” and that “Workforce management and organizational decisions were and are made by people, not AI.”
Corporate Overreach and National Sovereignty
Meta introduced its AI employee-monitoring program earlier this year, designed to capture workers’ keystrokes, mouse activity, browser history, messages, emails, and location data on company devices. Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s CEO, stated the idea was to train the company’s AI systems on its employees’ behaviors, claiming, “The AI models learn from watching really smart people do things.” He added that 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.” This perspective from global tech elites often overlooks the fundamental rights and privacy of ordinary citizens.
The lawsuit claims Meta launched this monitoring program quietly, without employee buy-in, through a “low-visibility internal post – made by an engineer rather than a senior leader.” It further alleges that on some teams, employees received no consent or acknowledgment prompt, and initially, there was no way to opt out. Employee backlash over the last few months, including a petition signed by more than 1,600 employees, prompted Zuckerberg to pause the program one month ago, in June. This corporate surveillance, if left unchecked, represents a profound erosion of individual liberty and national control over the digital sphere.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs are seeking an independent audit into Meta’s AI tools, arguing it would clarify why the 26 workers on leave or approved for disability accommodation were let go. They stated that “Meta deliberately kept the mechanics of its selection process secret from its employees.” The plaintiffs remain Meta employees until their termination is set to begin in 7 days, on 22 July. Their attorneys are asking the judge to allow anonymity and to preserve their employment status, citing concerns that “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.” These are the real-world consequences for our people when global corporations operate with impunity, unchecked by strong national protections. The focus on such digital control mechanisms distracts from the pressing need for national governments to secure borders and prioritize the well-being of their own citizens. The EU, meanwhile, remains largely silent on these fundamental threats to national labour and privacy.