Meta sued over claims AI penalized workers who took maternity leave

Meta is sued by 26 employees who allege the company used artificial intelligence tools to identify workers for layoffs, disproportionately targeting those who had taken protected medical or family leave. The lawsuit claims Meta's AI systems penalized workers on leave because they could not generate productivity data, violating federal laws including the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Meta denies the allegations, stating workforce decisions were made by people, not AI.

Meta sued over claims AI penalized workers who took maternity leave A group of 26 Meta employees has sued the company, claiming it used artificial intelligence systems that disproportionately targeted those on medical or family leave for layoffs - Bookmark Meta /tech/meta-instagram-ai-public-profiles-b3013222.html is facing a lawsuit from 26 employees who allege the tech giant /tech/meta-patent-ai-device-listens-b3012724.html used artificial intelligence to identify workers for layoffs, disproportionately targeting those who had taken protected leave. The lawsuit, filed Monday in federal court in Oakland, California, claims Meta deployed internal AI tools, /tech/meta-staff-surveillance-mci-privacy-ai-b3001251.html keystroke and activity monitoring, AI usage dashboards, and algorithm-assisted performance rankings to determine who would be cut from its workforce. These cuts impacted approximately 8,000 employees, representing about 10% of the company's total staff. The complaint alleges that Meta's system unfairly penalized workers on legally protected leave because those not actively working could not generate productivity data for performance measurement. It claims Meta failed to adjust evaluations for protected leave or disability accommodations, instead counting reduced activity against affected employees. All 26 plaintiffs had taken protected medical, parental, or family leave, or requested disability accommodations before being selected for layoff. Though notified of job eliminations, they began layoffs on July 22, meaning they remained employed. Approximately half took leave related to pregnancy or caregiving, including eight women on maternity or pregnancy-related leave, four men on parental leave, and one employee on family caregiving and bereavement leave. Several plaintiffs contend reduced productivity while on leave made them more vulnerable to Meta's layoff process. One employee claims a manager warned him that taking medical leave for a serious health condition would increase his layoff chances, and the lawsuit alleges Meta failed to accommodate his disability. The complaint asserts the layoff process violated the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. The lawsuit also invokes the legal doctrine of disparate impact, arguing that Meta's allegedly AI-assisted selection process disproportionately harmed workers who took protected leave, particularly women, who are statistically more likely to take pregnancy and caregiving leave. Meta has rejected the allegations, issuing a statement that said: "These claims lack merit and are not based on facts. Workforce management and organizational decisions were and are made by people, not AI." This legal challenge emerges as employers increasingly integrate artificial intelligence into hiring, performance reviews, and broader workforce decisions. The case raises significant questions about whether automated systems can inadvertently discriminate against workers protected under federal and state employment laws. The employees are seeking a court order to prevent their layoffs from taking effect while their claims proceed through arbitration. They argue that losing their jobs would inflict irreversible harm, including the loss of health insurance during pregnancy and medical treatment, forfeited stock awards, and, for some workers, potential immigration consequences.