Former Meta employees, who say AI helped lay them off, ask judge to restore their jobs

(CN) — A federal judge appeared reluctant Thursday to issue a temporary restraining order against Meta that would effectively restore the jobs of 26 former employees who say they were laid off by supervisors using metrics developed by artificial intelligence.

“The injuries are obviously real to the plaintiffs, but I don’t think that it’s irreparable in the way that the law requires it to be,” Senior U.S. District Judge William Orrick said at the hearing held over Zoom.

Orrick said he might make an exception for the four foreign-born workers, here in the country on temporary work visas, who say they face deportation if their jobs aren’t restored.

The 26 unnamed plaintiffs were all on extended leave when the reduction-in-force notices went out in May to some 10% of the tech giant’s enormous staff. Some were on maternity or paternity leave; others were on medical leave. Those types of leave are “protected,” meaning you cannot be legally fired or retaliated against for taking them. One plaintiff said in the complaint he had been “discouraged and deterred from taking [medical] leave by a manager who warned that doing so would result in his selection for the anticipated reduction in force.”

In their complaint, the plaintiffs say the tech firm, which owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, “used a constellation of internal artificial-intelligence systems,” including a system that monitors employees’ keystrokes and computer activity, “to score, rank and select employees for inclusion on the list.” They say the system failed to control for workers on leave — that not working effectively tanked their scores and earmarked them for layoffs.

Meta has denied using AI to develop metrics to lay off workers.

“There is no evidence that AI was used to make decisions in this reduction in force,” Meta attorney Erin Connell told the judge Thursday. “It’s truly based on speculation and conjecture.”

Furthermore, she added there was nothing about losing their jobs that could be deemed as “irreparable harm” and thus qualify for a temporary restraining order.

“They’re not going to lose their health insurance,” Connell said. “They’re going to lose their employer-subsidized health insurance.” She added: “It’s money. And it’s not a small amount of money.”

Orrick pointed out the laid-off employees could obtain health insurance via COBRA and then potentially get reimbursed for the cost of it during arbitration. He said the plaintiffs would likely be able to afford it, noting: “Many of them appear to have been highly compensated, maybe even more so than a federal district judge.”

As to the foreign-born workers, Connell said, “There’s not been a showing that these individuals are on the brink of deportation.”

Plaintiffs’ attorney Andrea Mazingo argued a temporary restraining order would only “preserve the status quo,” or freeze everything in place, to avoid further harming her clients while they wait for arbitration. She said many of the plaintiffs stand to lose out on equity vesting programs — Meta stock given to them as bonuses — and being forced to look for a new job would also take a toll.

“When they should be bonding with their babies and recovering from illnesses, they suddenly have to look for new employment,” Mazingo said.

Connell said an injunction would not preserve the status quo but reverse a decision made months ago.

“Asking Meta to reinstate them to the positions they had in May would be asking them to go back in time,” Connell said. “Those positions are gone. They don’t exist anymore.”

“Unfortunately, restructuring like this is happening all over the Bay Area,” she added. “Is this in the public interest? What are broader implications?”

Orrick said he would decide on the restraining order within 24 hours and asked for additional briefing to provide details on some of the plaintiffs to help him decide on a different motion for a preliminary injunction.

“Meta [should] explain specifically why those people, how those people ended up on the reduction-in-force list,” the judge said.

He scheduled the next hearing for Aug. 24.

Follow @hillelaron