A federal judge in the US denied a request from a group of 26 Meta Platforms employees who demanded a temporary halt to layoffs. These workers argued that the termination decisions were made using artificial intelligence tools capable of harming employees with disabilities or those on sick leave.
Grounds for the Court's Denial
The decision was made by Judge William Orrick in Oakland, California, where the dispute is being heard. The judge determined that the employees had not yet proven that the job loss constituted irreparable harm that would justify an emergency order against the planned layoffs.
Context of Reductions at Meta
This conflict arose amid Meta's announced layoffs in May, when the company reported reducing approximately 8,000 vacancies, which accounts for about 10% of its global workforce. The employees are questioning whether criteria based on AI systems influenced the selection of individuals included in the layoff list.
Allegations of AI Use
The workers claim that the company employed automated mechanisms to assess performance, efficiency, and resource utilization via AI. They assert that these factors put people who were absent due to medical or family reasons at a disadvantage. The lawsuit states that Meta's internal systems, including a language model-based assistant named 'Metamate,' as well as productivity monitoring tools, participated in personnel analysis. According to the accusation, these resources considered data such as internal correspondence, documents, browsing history, and keyboard usage records.
Issues During Leave Periods
The plaintiffs also stated that these systems continued to be used during vacation periods and legitimate sick leave. They estimate that this led to reduced metrics related to AI usage and negatively impacted their standing in the layoff selection process. Meta rejected these allegations, stating that layoff decisions were made by humans, not automated systems. The company did not provide specific comments regarding the court ruling.
Parties' Arguments and Future Course of Action
The employees' defense insisted that an immediate suspension of layoffs was necessary because the workers could lose not only their salaries but also vital benefits, such as stock options and health insurance. Attorney Barbara Cohen emphasized during the hearing that some losses cannot be compensated later, citing examples related to childbirth and medical procedures. Meta's legal representative, Erin Connell, refuted this view, noting that the workers would not be left without medical coverage, and any financial losses could be reimbursed in the event of arbitration victory.
Conclusion and Prospects
Judge Orrick reserved the right to review his decision if new evidence emerges detailing the involvement of artificial intelligence in the staff reduction process. The dispute will continue under private arbitration, according to agreements between the company and its employees. This case is viewed as one of the first lawsuits against a major American corporation challenging the alleged use of artificial intelligence as an auxiliary element in making layoff decisions. The affected employees worked in various fields, including engineering, management, research, and design. They were notified of the layoffs in May, and according to documents presented during the proceedings, many remain on the payroll until the layoffs are complete, although they lost access to the company's internal systems starting May 20.
