A new lawsuit claims Meta’s much-publicized layoffs of 8,000 employees weren’t just brutal—they were discriminatory. Twenty-six anonymous former employees filed a complaint in California federal court alleging the company used a suite of internal AI systems to select who got cut, and those tools systematically penalized workers with disabilities and those on protected medical or family leave.
The complaint points to a specific constellation of tools, including an internal system called “Metamate,” AI-token-usage dashboards, keystroke monitoring, and algorithmically-assisted performance rankings. Employees were reportedly categorized as “AI Native,” “AI First,” or “AI Enabled” based on their adoption of Meta’s tools. The core argument is straightforward: if you’re on leave or your output is slowed by a disability, your metrics suffer in ways the algorithm can’t contextualize.
“Those tools draw on inputs… that, by design, cannot be accumulated by an employee who is on protected medical or family leave, or whose output is reduced by a disability,” the lawsuit states. Reuters notes this appears to be the first lawsuit against a major US company challenging AI’s role in conducting layoffs.
Meta flatly denies the claims. “These claims lack merit and are not based on facts. Workforce management and organizational decisions were and are made by people, not AI,” a company spokesperson said, declining to elaborate further. The case tees up a clash that’s been brewing for years: when companies use opaque algorithms to make life-altering decisions, who’s accountable when the math gets it wrong?
