Moscow: courts reinstate a sewing-company manager dismissed after refusing two-hour days that her employer tied to introducing AI, T-Zhurnal reports
T-Zhurnal (T-Bank's magazine) reported on 16 September 2026, in a lawyer's account of two court decisions, that the sewing company employing a Moscow resident as a full-time manager began cost-cutting in mid-2024 and introduced neural-network and AI technology, and told her that from July she would work 09:00 to 11:00, eight hours a week, with pay reduced in proportion. She refused and was dismissed for refusing to continue work after changes to her contract terms. The employer said that since it began introducing AI many of the manager's tasks were done by programs and full-time work was no longer needed, and that she had worked badly; she said the change was a disguised redundancy and that her post was to be cut and partly replaced by programs and AI. According to the article, the district court (case 2-1354/2025) found that other employees confirmed the cost-cutting and that the manager's work was planned to be fully replaced by neural networks, held that the refusal of part-time work had to be treated as a redundancy, and ordered her reinstatement with back pay and moral damages. The Moscow City Court (case 33-34099/2025) upheld the reinstatement and reduced the back-pay calculation; the court's case portal lists that appeal as concluded on 24 July 2025. The amounts are not given.
- AI system
- Unidentified AI tools
- Occurred
- 2024
- Reported
- 16 September 2026
- Event location
- Russia
- What the AI did
- Relation unknown
- Reported harm
- Professional HarmFinancial Loss
- Whose AI use
- An institution’s AI use
- Setting
- Work · Justice
- Evidence
- AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources
- 6 claims: 1 documented, 5 reported. 4 open questions
- People reported harmed
- 1 person
AI system as recorded: Neural-network and AI technology that the employer said it introduced in 2024 and that, per the article, was planned to take over the manager's work; no system is named
Reported harm
According to T-Zhurnal's account of the rulings, the manager's hours and pay were cut to two hours a day as the employer introduced AI, and she was dismissed when she refused; she said the dismissal left her without money and caused her stress. The courts ordered her reinstatement with back pay and moral damages.
Outcome
ResolvedDistrict court (case 2-1354/2025): dismissal unlawful; reinstatement, back pay, moral damages and part of the representation costs. Moscow City Court (case 33-34099/2025, concluded 24 July 2025 per the court portal): reinstatement upheld; back pay reduced for severance paid; late-payment compensation removed. Amounts not stated.
What remains unknown
- The dismissal date (after the July 2024 schedule change).
- Which AI tools the company introduced and what they did.
- The amounts of back pay and damages.
- Whether the company later made her redundant lawfully.
What the evidence supports
AI involvement: reported. The harm is the employer's response to its own adoption of AI: according to T-Zhurnal's account of the rulings, the company introduced neural-network and AI technology in 2024, said programs now did many of the manager's tasks, cut her to two hours a day and dismissed her when she refused; the district court found that her work was planned to be fully replaced by neural networks. No source describes an AI system's output toward her, and no system is named.
6 claims: 1 documented, 5 reported. What the statuses mean
Reported The sewing company began cost-cutting in mid-2024 and introduced neural-network and AI technology, and told the manager that from July she would work 09:00 to 11:00, eight hours a week, with pay reduced in proportion; she refused and was dismissed for refusing to continue work after changes to her contract terms.
Causal attribution. The article's account of the facts as the rulings record them.
- t-j.ru(opens in new tab) supports · Russian
'В середине 2024 года работодатель начал оптимизацию на предприятии: сократил расходы на производство, внедрил нейротехнологии и искусственный интеллект, уменьшил арендуемые площади.'; 'с июля у нее будет новый график работы — с 09:00 до 11:00, то есть восемь часов в неделю. Зарплату пропорционально уменьшили.'; 'Тогда работодатель уволил ее по пункту 7 части 1 статьи 77 ТК РФ'
Reported The employer said that since it began introducing AI many tasks previously done manually were done by programs, so the manager's full-time work was no longer needed; it also said she had worked badly.
Causal attribution. The employer's position in court.
- t-j.ru(opens in new tab) supports · Russian
'недавно начали внедрять на предприятии искусственный интеллект'; 'Многие задачи, которые раньше выполняли люди вручную, теперь делают программы.'; 'Перед увольнением она крайне плохо работала'
Reported The manager said the change was a disguised redundancy, that her post was to be cut and part of its functions replaced by programs and AI, and that the dismissal left her without money and caused her stress.
Causal attribution. The manager's position in court.
- t-j.ru(opens in new tab) supports · Russian
'Мою должность планировали исключить из штатного расписания, а часть функций заменить программами и искусственным интеллектом.'; 'Из-за незаконного увольнения я осталась без денег, испытала стресс и переживания.'
Reported The district court (case 2-1354/2025) found that other employees confirmed the cost-cutting and that the manager's work was planned to be fully replaced by neural networks, held that refusal of part-time work had to be handled as a redundancy, and ordered reinstatement, back pay and moral damages.
Causal attribution. The district court's findings as the article reports them; the ruling was not read.
- t-j.ru(opens in new tab) supports · Russian
'Дело № 2-1354/2025'; 'Работодатель и правда сокращал расходы на предприятии — это подтвердили в суде другие сотрудники. А работу менеджера планировали полностью заменить нейросетями.'; 'работодатель должен восстановить истицу на работе'
Reported The Moscow City Court (case 33-34099/2025) upheld the reinstatement and corrected the back-pay calculation.
Causal attribution. The appellate outcome as the article reports it.
- t-j.ru(opens in new tab) supports · Russian
'Дело № 33-34099/2025'; 'Поэтому суд первой инстанции правильно признал приказ об увольнении незаконным и обязал работодателя восстановить сотрудницу на работе.'
Documented The Moscow City Court's case portal lists civil appeal 33-34099/2025, in the category of reinstatement after dismissal at the employer's initiative, as concluded on 24 July 2025.
Causal attribution. Court record of the appeal's existence, category and completion date; it says nothing about AI.
- mos-gorsud.ru(opens in new tab) supports · Russian
'Завершено, 24.07.2025'; 'О восстановлении на работе в связи с увольнением по инициативе работодателя'
Sources
2 sources inspected. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.
- T-Zhurnal, Было дело: как компания заменила женщину нейросетью, 16 September 2026(opens in new tab)
s1 · t-j.ru · News report · Russian · Inspected · 16 September 2026 · Primary
- Moscow City Court case portal, search result for appeal 33-34099/2025 (concluded 24 July 2025)(opens in new tab)
s2 · mos-gorsud.ru · Court case portal · Russian · Inspected
How the sources were read, and where the events happened
Read in Russian on 2026-10-25 (full article by a lawyer, summarising the employee's and employer's positions and both rulings, with case numbers). Translation by the research agent, an AI. Applies to s1.
Read in Russian on 2026-10-25: the search-result entry for appeal 33-34099/2025 (status, date and case category). The case card and the rulings were not read. Translation by the research agent, an AI. Applies to s2.
Event countries: Russia. Affected-person countries: Russia. Court countries: Russia.
The article describes her as a Moscow resident dismissed under article 77 of the Russian Labour Code, and the cases were heard by a Moscow district court and the Moscow City Court; the employer’s own location is not stated.
Reviewed for publication 2026-10-25: Published as a consequential response to AI adoption: according to the article's account of the rulings, the employer cut a manager to two hours a day while introducing AI to take over her work and dismissed her when she refused, and two courts ordered her reinstatement. The appeal's existence, category and completion date are confirmed by the court portal.
People described
A Moscow resident employed as a purchasing category manager at a sewing company
People reported harmed in this case
1 person
0 AI participants · 1 other person harmed
One manager dismissed and reinstated; she did not use the AI tools herself (employer's adoption).
Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.
Cite this case
Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.
APA
NOPE. (2026). Moscow: courts reinstate a sewing-company manager dismissed after refusing two-hour days that her employer tied to introducing AI, T-Zhurnal reports. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2024-moscow-courts-reinstate-sewing-company-manager-dismissed-after-hours-were-cut-as-employer-introduced-ai
BibTeX
@misc{2024_moscow_courts_reinstate_sewing_company_manager_dismissed_after_hours_were_cut_as_employer_introduced_ai,
title = {Moscow: courts reinstate a sewing-company manager dismissed after refusing two-hour days that her employer tied to introducing AI, T-Zhurnal reports},
author = {NOPE},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {AI incidents},
url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2024-moscow-courts-reinstate-sewing-company-manager-dismissed-after-hours-were-cut-as-employer-introduced-ai}
} Related cases
Moscow court upholds a sales director's dismissal for disclosing trade secrets, including uploading company reports to DeepSeek, and rejects her severance claim
A Moscow district court upheld an engineering company's dismissal of its head of sales for disclosing trade secrets, according to RAPSI and Pravo.ru reports of 27 July 2026. The grounds included uploading protected internal reports to the Chinese chatbot DeepSeek, forwarding company documents to her personal email and disclosing strategic information to a supplier. The court held that uploading trade secrets to DeepSeek is in itself a disclosure. She had sought a dismissal by mutual agreement and a contractual severance payment of 5 million roubles. The court rejected both, annulled a separate reprimand and awarded her compensation for moral harm. The decision was not yet final.
Ninth Circuit fines and suspends two immigration lawyers over briefs with AI-hallucinated citations and denials of AI use; immigration board follows
On 3 June 2026 the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit fined immigration attorneys Mike Singh Sethi and William Rounds $2,500 each and suspended both from practice before the court for six months. Briefs filed in an asylum petition for review cited two cases that do not exist and attributed quotations to opinions that do not contain them. In a motion to correct, the attorneys called the errors typographical, and at oral argument Rounds twice said AI was not used. In their response to the court's order to show cause, they conceded that the errors were probably the product of unauthorised AI use by the firm's unlicensed brief writers and a failure to check citations. The court said the suspension was owed to their repeated failure of candour. The Board of Immigration Appeals then suspended Sethi from practice before the Board, the immigration courts and the Department of Homeland Security for six months, effective 13 June 2026, and designated that decision as a precedent on 1 October 2026.
Paraíba, Brazil: judge fines a lawyer R$32,800 over hidden AI commands in a petition, G1 reports; state bar later suspends two lawyers in such cases
A judge of the 5th Mixed Court of Sousa, Paraíba, found hidden instructions aimed at artificial intelligence tools spread over seven pages of a lawyer's motion for clarification in a public-competition case in June 2026, including an order to ignore impartiality and a note calling it a test of whether the judge used only AI to decide. The judge fined the lawyer two penalties of R$16,400 (R$32,800 in total) for bad-faith litigation and contempt of the court's dignity, and referred the case to the Paraíba bar (OAB-PB) and the state prosecutors, G1 reports. The defence said the commands were not inserted deliberately and blamed an error in exporting a file prepared with AI support. An appeal judge refused to suspend the fines on 30 June, the trial judge kept them on reconsideration, and in July, G1 reports, the OAB-PB preventively suspended two lawyers after opening procedures into two hidden-command cases, one of them the Sousa case.
Pará labour court fines two lawyers about R$84,000 over hidden instruction aimed at the court's Galileu AI; the lawyers deny manipulating the decision
In May 2026 a judge of the 3rd Labour Court of Parauapebas, in the Brazilian state of Pará, fined two lawyers about R$84,000 after text in white font on a white background was found in a document they filed for a worker in a labour claim. According to the sentence as reported by G1, the hidden text was detected while the judgment was being drafted with Galileu, a generative AI tool the labour courts use to help judges and staff draft sentences, and its evident intention was to make the AI produce a superficial defence or a compromised draft judgment. The judge called the technique prompt injection. The lawyers said they disagreed with the decision and that there was never any command to manipulate the judge's decision, describing the text as an attempt to protect their client from the AI; one of them said she did not work on labour cases. In October 2026 the regional labour court announced that a Connecticut Superior Court judge had cited the decision when sanctioning a litigant for misuse of AI.
If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.