No immediate relief for Meta workers claiming AI fired them

SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — A federal judge Friday declined to grant a temporary restraining order against Meta in a case brought by 26 former employees who say they were laid off by supervisors using metrics developed by artificial intelligence that targeted workers on protected leave.

“Without downplaying the serious consequences of being laid off from employment, I do not find that the plaintiffs have suffered or will suffer irreparable harm,” Senior U.S. District Judge William Orrick said.

Orrick ruled that none of the plaintiffs’ reported harms — including loss of employer-sponsored health insurance, protected leave time and unvested equity compensation — are irreparable because each can be remedied through damages, back pay or other comparable relief in the arbitration process.

However, the Barack Obama appointee found that loss of legal immigration status for four foreign-born plaintiffs in the country on temporary work visas could rise to the level necessary for court intervention, but declined to make an official ruling without more information on why the workers were included in the layoff.

“Plaintiffs face an imminent threat of removal from the United States, absent finding new employment in the next 60 days. Their harm is more than ‘speculation,’ as Meta characterized at oral argument,” he wrote in the seven-page order.

Orrick asked Meta to file a declaration explaining how and why the four foreign-born plaintiffs with Meta-sponsored employment visas were selected for termination by next Thursday.

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 says 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 one that monitors employees’ keystrokes and computer activity, “to score, rank and select employees for inclusion on the list.” They say the system failed to account for workers on leave, effectively tanking their scores and earmarking 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 at the hearing on the temporary restraining order. “It’s truly based on speculation and conjecture.”

In his order, Orrick noted Meta’s “unequivocal” declarations that it did not use AI in any way with respect to the termination of the workers, adding that the plaintiffs do not have enough evidence to disprove what Meta said it did.

“They were not in the rooms where it happened,” he wrote.

The judge said more discovery was needed to determine if Meta is telling the truth when it says it did not use AI, adding that he would reconsider his findings at the preliminary injunction hearing set for Aug. 24.

In a statement, counsel for plaintiffs said that the ruling “confirms that the core of this case is moving forward.”

“The court found that plaintiffs have raised ‘serious questions going to the merits’ of their claims. It found that the threatened loss of immigration status facing four plaintiffs is ‘more than “speculation”’ and ‘likely constitute[s] irreparable harm and may warrant injunctive relief.’ And it directed Meta to explain, by July 23, ‘how and why’ those four visa-dependent plaintiffs were selected for termination—the first time Meta will be required to account for any of these selection decisions,” they said.

Plaintiffs’ counsel also invited current and former Meta employees who have first-hand information on the layoffs to reach out.

“Consistent with the court’s invitation, plaintiffs’ counsel are continuing to investigate. Meta holds virtually all the relevant information,” they said.

Representatives for Meta did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Follow @mhattridge_