{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-04T08:05:08.777Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"termination","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"","evidence":"","year":"2026","response":"","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":2,"coverage":{"cases":2,"countries":2,"languages":1,"unknownLocation":0,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":0,"regulatory":0,"minors":0,"coreRelations":0,"contextualRelations":1,"mixedRelations":0,"unknownRelations":1,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":1},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"2026-kenya-sama-meta-ai-annotation-contract-ended-over-1000-redundancies-announced","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"announced on Thursday that the workers were being laid off after Meta terminated a contract.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"More than 1,000 low-paid workers in Kenya have been abruptly sacked by an outsourcing company contracted by Meta","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"The sacked workers, many involved in AI training, have been given six days’ notice, according to the Oversight Lab","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"In a press release on the 16th April, Sama states it recently received a formal notice by Meta, a key client, that was ending its contract with the annotation firm","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"Less than two months later, Meta ended its contract with Sama, which Sama said would result in 1,108 workers being made redundant.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"Sama claims that Meta’s cancellation of the contract affected 1,108 workers.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"On April 16, that routine came to an end.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"},{"locator":"Sama’s April 16 press release announcing the mass layoffs spoke of compliance with Section 40 of Kenya’s Employment Act","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"On 16 April 2026 Sama, an outsourcing company with operations in Nairobi that did AI-training and data-annotation work for Meta, announced that Meta had given formal notice ending its contract and that a redundancy process would affect more than 1,000 employees. Sama put the number at 1,108 workers. The Oversight Lab, an organisation that advocates for fair technology regulation in Africa, said the workers had six days' notice.","causal_attribution":"The announcement and the 'more than 1 000' figure trace to Sama's 16 April press release as reported by SvD, and 1,108 is Sama's figure as reported by BBC and Ars Technica, so they are one chain. The Guardian states 'more than 1,000' in its own voice without a stated source and attributes only the six days' notice to the Oversight Lab. No press release or redundancy notice was inspected directly, and the final number made redundant is not reported."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Last month, we paused our work with Sama while we looked into these claims.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"We’ve also decided to end our work with Sama because they don’t meet our standards.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Meta says it's because Sama did not meet its standards, a criticism Sama rejects.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"At no point were we notified of any failure to meet those standards","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"After the investigation was published at the end of February, all projects at the subcontractor Sama in Kenya linked to Meta’s smart glasses were halted.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Meta said in a statement reported on 17 April 2026 that 'last month' it paused its work with Sama while it looked into the claims, and that it decided to end its work with Sama because Sama does not meet its standards. Sama says it was never notified of any failure to meet those standards. SvD reports that after the investigation was published all Sama projects linked to Meta's smart glasses were halted.","causal_attribution":"Meta's and Sama's own statements to the outlets, each attributed. SvD says Meta declined to answer follow-up questions, and no source shows Meta's internal reasoning."},{"id":"c3","status":"disputed","evidence":[{"locator":"A Kenyan workers' organisation alleges Meta's decision was caused by the staff speaking out.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"Meta has not addressed that allegation","relation":"context","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"the company has tried to identify who spoke with journalists","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"“After the exposé, they started looking for people who could have leaked the information,”","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"},{"locator":"“From what they told us, they said it was because of the exposé from the Swedish journalists,”","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"},{"locator":"Meta had pulled a major contract citing only compliance with Kenyan employment law.","relation":"context","source_id":"s5"},{"locator":"we do not monitor or track employees for the purpose of identifying individuals who may have spoken to the media","relation":"contradicts","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"we reject any suggestion of retaliatory behavior.","relation":"contradicts","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"A Kenyan workers' organisation alleges Meta's decision was caused by the staff speaking out, and, when the BBC reported it on 30 April 2026, Meta had not addressed that allegation. Employees told SvD that Sama tightened security and tried to identify who had spoken to journalists. A worker quoted by TechPolicy.Press says the workers were told the termination was because of the Swedish investigation, without saying who told them. Sama says it does not monitor or track employees to identify who spoke to the media and rejects any suggestion of retaliatory behaviour.","causal_attribution":"Allegations by a workers' organisation and by unnamed employees, denied or unaddressed by the companies. The TechPolicy.Press worker also says Meta cited only compliance with Kenyan employment law, which differs from Meta's public statement about standards. No document showing the reason for the termination was inspected."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"data annotation work, including working with video, image, and speech annotation for Meta’s AI systems for Ray-Ban Metas.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"The workers the Swedish newspapers spoke to were data annotators, teaching Meta's AI to interpret images by manually labelling content.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"The sacked workers, many involved in AI training, have been given six days’ notice, according to the Oversight Lab","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Last month Meta paused its work with Sama after allegations about the workers viewing private scenes filmed using the company’s Ray-Ban smart glasses","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Sama's Meta work included video, image and speech annotation for Meta's AI systems for Ray-Ban Meta glasses. The Sama annotators who told the Swedish newspapers about viewing private footage from the glasses were data annotators of this kind, and the Guardian reports that many of the workers made redundant were involved in AI training. Meta paused its work with Sama after allegations about the workers viewing private scenes filmed with the glasses.","causal_attribution":"Outlet descriptions of the work. Which of the redundant workers worked on the glasses projects is not reported, and no source states that the workers made redundant were the same people who spoke to the newspapers."}],"effects":[{"label":"More than 1,000 Sama workers in Kenya, many involved in AI training, were given notice of redundancy after Meta ended its contract, on six days' notice according to the Oversight Lab","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"Employees report tightened security and efforts to identify who spoke to journalists after the investigation (Sama denies tracking employees to identify sources)","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/apr/17/kenyan-outsourcing-company-for-meta-sacks-workers","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"guardian-sama-oversight-lab"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.svd.se/a/zOlP6K/meta-halts-ai-training-after-svd-gp-investigation","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"SvD's own English edition of the article, read in English. The Swedish investigation of 25 February 2026 (not cited) was read in Swedish by a language model with no human review.","independence_group":"svd-gp-follow-up"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y7yvgy0w6o","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"bbc-sama-meta-statements"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/04/meta-cuts-contractors-who-reported-seeing-ray-ban-meta-users-have-sex/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"bbc-sama-meta-statements"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://www.techpolicy.press/how-ais-labor-supply-chains-fail-workers/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"techpolicy-worker-interviews"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["work","privacy"],"unknowns":["Sama's press release and Meta's notice of termination were not inspected. The announcement is known through outlets and company statements.","The final number of workers made redundant and how many of them worked on the glasses projects are not reported. The Guardian says 'many' were involved in AI training.","The reason for the termination is disputed and no inspected source shows Meta's internal reasoning. Meta declined follow-up questions from SvD.","The retaliation account rests on a workers' organisation, unnamed employees and one worker quoted by TechPolicy.Press. That worker also says Meta cited only compliance with Kenyan employment law, which differs from Meta's public statement about standards.","No source states that the workers made redundant were the same people who spoke to the newspapers, and the annotators' accounts of the footage are anonymous interview accounts.","SvD's 19 April 2026 article was paywalled (two paragraphs read), The Standard's article on the Kenyan regulator was paywalled, and the SvD article in this record was read in its English edition.","Outlets differ on where Sama is headquartered (the Guardian says based in Nairobi, the BBC says US headquartered, TechPolicy.Press says San Francisco-based with offices in Nairobi, Ars Technica says Kenya-headquartered). This record uses only the location of the workers.","This record covers the April 2026 redundancies. The annotators' reported viewing of glasses users' footage started before 2026 and is not part of this record."],"geography":{"basis":"The Guardian describes the workers as 'in Kenya' and SvD refers to Sama's projects in Kenya and its Nairobi operations. Outlets differ on where Sama is headquartered and that is not used. Where Meta took the decision is not stated and is not used.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":["KE"],"affected_person_countries":["KE"]},"publication":{"basis":"The Guardian (17 April), SvD and GP (17 April), BBC (30 April), Ars Technica and TechPolicy.Press (12 June 2026) were read in full from the saved bodies. The redundancy fact and figure trace to Sama's announcement and are left at reported. Meta's stated reasons and Sama's replies are attributed, and the retaliation allegation is recorded as disputed. The workers are described by role and are not named.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-29"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The workers were data annotators whose work trained Meta's AI systems for its Ray-Ban Meta glasses (c4), and Meta says it paused the Sama work while it looked into claims about annotators viewing private footage from the glasses (c2). No AI system decided anything about the workers: Meta ended the contract and Sama announced the redundancies. The AI link is that the redundancies followed, and are alleged by a workers' organisation to result from, annotators' accounts of a workplace AI practice. Meta gives a different reason and Sama says it was not told of any failure (c3). No relation between an AI system and the workers is established, so the relation recorded is unknown.","status":"disputed"},"person_relations":["unknown"]},"name":"Kenya: Sama announces more than 1,000 redundancies (1,108 by its own figure) after Meta ends its AI data-annotation contract, less than two months after annotators described intimate footage from Meta's AI glasses, and whether the two are linked is disputed","summary":"On 16 April 2026 Sama, an outsourcing company with operations in Nairobi that did AI data-annotation work for Meta, announced that Meta had given formal notice ending its contract and that a redundancy process would affect more than 1,000 employees. Sama put the figure at 1,108 workers, and the Oversight Lab said the workers had six days' notice. The decision came less than two months after the SvD and GP investigation in which Sama annotators said they had seen intimate footage from users of Meta's AI glasses. Meta said it paused its work with Sama the month before while it looked into those claims and then decided to end the work because Sama does not meet its standards. Sama says it was never notified of any failure to meet those standards. A Kenyan workers' organisation alleges Meta's decision was caused by staff speaking out, which Meta had not addressed when the BBC reported it on 30 April 2026. Employees told SvD that Sama tightened security and tried to identify who had spoken to journalists, which Sama denies. The workers are described by role and are not named.","incidentDate":"2026-04-16","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-04-17","aiSystem":"Human review of Meta AI assistant data from Ray-Ban Meta glasses by Sama annotators (AI training and data-annotation work), as reported","aiProduct":"Meta AI (reported)","aiCompany":"Meta","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["professional_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Sama announced that more than 1,000 employees in Kenya, many involved in AI training for Meta, would be made redundant (1,108 by Sama's figure, on six days' notice according to the Oversight Lab) after Meta ended its contract. Whether the termination responded to annotators speaking about footage from Meta's AI glasses is disputed: a Kenyan workers' organisation alleges it did, Meta says Sama does not meet its standards, and Sama says it was never notified of a failure.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"disputed","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1000,"affectedCountStatus":"documented_minimum","affectedCountEvidence":"The Guardian states 'more than 1,000' workers were sacked without saying where the figure comes from, and SvD's 17 April article says Sama's press release announced a redundancy process that 'will affect more than 1 000 employees'. BBC and Ars Technica give Sama's own figure of 1,108. The lower bound of 1,000 is counted and the 1,108 figure is attributed to Sama. The Guardian says many of the workers were involved in AI training and does not say how many. Dependants are not counted. The final number made redundant is not reported.","victimAgeRange":"adult","platformType":"other","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/apr/17/kenyan-outsourcing-company-for-meta-sacks-workers","primarySourceLabel":"The Guardian (17 Apr 2026): Kenyan firm sacks more than 1,000 workers after losing Meta contract","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-29T21:16:44.033365+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:42.812683+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["historical-2026"]},{"id":"2026-us-meta-26-employees-sue-alleging-ai-assisted-may-layoff-selection-penalized-protected-leave","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"OAKLAND DIVISION","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Filed 07/13/26","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Plaintiffs initiated this lawsuit on July 13, 2026, bringing claims against Meta","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"A group of 26 Meta employees has sued the company, claiming it used artificial intelligence systems to select people for layoffs, disproportionately targeting those on medical, parental or family leave.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s6"}],"assertion":"On 13 July 2026 twenty-six anonymous plaintiffs (Does 1 through 26) filed a complaint against Meta Platforms, Inc. in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, Oakland division, alleging employment discrimination in the May 2026 reduction in force.","causal_attribution":"The filing of the complaint is documented by the court record. The complaint establishes only the plaintiffs’ allegations."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"activity-monitoring data, AI-token-usage dashboards, and algorithmically assisted","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"artificial-intelligence-assisted systems to score, rank, and select employees for inclusion","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"algorithmic productivity scoring drawn from keystroke, screen-content, mouse,","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"The parties dispute whether Meta utilized AI in deciding to terminate plaintiffs’","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"They claim that Meta used a number of internal AI-assisted systems to score and rank employees on a termination list.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s7"}],"assertion":"The complaint alleges, on information and belief, that Meta used a set of internal AI-assisted systems to score, rank and select employees for the termination list: the Metamate internal large-language-model assistant, employee-trained \"second brain\" agents, keystroke and other activity-monitoring data, AI-token-usage dashboards, and algorithmically assisted performance ranking and calibration.","causal_attribution":"These are the plaintiffs’ allegations, pleaded on information and belief and supported by plaintiff declarations that were not inspected (they are quoted in the complaint and the order). Meta disputes them (claim c4). The news reports and the court order restate the complaint and are one reporting chain with it."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"be accumulated by an employee who is on protected medical or family leave, or whose","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"protected-leave-takers or accommodation-seekers for individualized human review. Meta","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"On information and belief, Meta did not neutralize any of the foregoing inputs for","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"result was that employees who took protected leaves were disproportionately selected for","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Plaintiffs are twenty-six current and former Meta employees, each of whom Meta","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"selected for separation in the RIF, and each of whom","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"About half the plaintiffs had taken leave for caregiving or pregnancy-related reasons.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s6"}],"assertion":"The complaint alleges that the inputs to these systems cannot be accumulated by an employee on protected medical, family or parental leave, that Meta did not neutralise them for protected leave, and that employees who took protected leave were therefore disproportionately selected for layoff. It states that each plaintiff was selected for separation in the reduction in force and had, within the 24 months before it, taken, requested or been approved for protected leave, or requested or received a disability accommodation.","causal_attribution":"Allegation of the plaintiffs. The court found on 17 July 2026 only serious questions going to the merits and no likelihood of success on that record (claim c5). Whether any AI system affected any plaintiff’s selection is unresolved."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Workforce management and organizational decisions were and are made by people, not AI.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s6"},{"locator":"selection decisions in the RIF were “made by human","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"promotion history over a defined period. There was no AI-","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"was selected based on leave status, disability, or any other protected characteristic,","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"“selection decision [was] made by ‘AI.’” Id. ¶ 11.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"Selection decisions were made by human business leaders","relation":"supports","source_id":"s9"},{"locator":"defined period. There was no AI-assisted “scoring” or “ranking” related to employee","relation":"supports","source_id":"s9"},{"locator":"guidance does not permit AI adoption and usage metrics to be used as negative factors in","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"performance reviews in 2025 or as selection criteria in the RIF.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"Meta denies the allegations. A Meta spokesperson said workforce management and organisational decisions were made by people, not AI. In declarations filed by a Meta human-resources director, Meta states that selection decisions were made by human business leaders using documented neutral criteria, that no AI-assisted scoring or ranking of employee performance was used, that no plaintiff was selected on the basis of leave status or disability, and that no selection decision was made by AI.","causal_attribution":"Meta’s statements and declarations about its own process. They are a party account and had been tested only through briefing and court hearings (claims c5 and c7), not in discovery."},{"id":"c5","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"described below, the TRO is DENIED.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"The parties dispute whether Meta utilized AI in deciding to terminate plaintiffs’","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"plaintiffs have not shown a likelihood of success on the merits, but rather a “serious question[]”","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"Loss of health care, employment, protected leave, and unvested restricted stock units (“RSUs”) are","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"Loss of immigration status is different. Four of the plaintiffs have employment-based,","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"they were not in the rooms where it happened.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"On 17 July 2026 the court denied the plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order. The order records that the parties dispute whether Meta used AI in deciding to terminate the plaintiffs, finds serious questions going to the merits but no shown likelihood of success on that record, finds that loss of health care, employment, protected leave and unvested equity can be remedied in arbitration, and treats the possible loss of immigration status for four plaintiffs with Meta-sponsored visas as a potentially irreparable harm that needed more information.","causal_attribution":"A court order establishes what the court ruled and recorded. It does not establish that AI was or was not used in the selection."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"On May 20, 2026, Meta began notifying the selected employees by email, beginning with","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"finalized on or about July 22, 2026 (and on or about August 20, 2026 for New York","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"laid off on May 20, 2026.” Complaint (“Compl.”) [Dkt. No. 1] ¶ 45 (the “mass reduction in force”","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"Though they have been notified of their layoffs, all 26 remain employed by Meta, with separations set to begin July 22.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s6"},{"locator":"Meta in May notified nearly 8,000 employees, or about 10% of its global workforce, that they were losing their jobs","relation":"supports","source_id":"s7"},{"locator":"Laid-off workers remain on the payroll but lost access to Meta systems on May 20","relation":"supports","source_id":"s7"}],"assertion":"Meta began notifying employees selected in the reduction in force on 20 May 2026 (about 8,000 employees, roughly 10 percent of its workforce). The complaint says the plaintiffs were notified of their selection from that date, and that separations were scheduled for about 22 July 2026 (later for some plaintiffs). Meta said in court filings that laid-off workers stayed on the payroll but lost access to Meta systems on 20 May.","causal_attribution":"The notification date and the scheduled separation dates come from the complaint and Meta court filings as relayed by Reuters. The sources inspected do not report whether each separation took place on its scheduled date, although Courthouse News called the plaintiffs former employees on 24 August 2026."},{"id":"c7","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Hearing on Motion for Preliminary Injunction conducted via videoconference. The Court","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"},{"locator":"summarizes tentative. Argument of counsel heard. Motion taken under submission; written order","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"},{"locator":"I have a record I have to deal with and the record at the moment does not persuade me of the merits","relation":"supports","source_id":"s8"},{"locator":"categorical denial of any impact of AI in the termination process","relation":"supports","source_id":"s8"},{"locator":"whether what plaintiffs think happened, happened","relation":"supports","source_id":"s8"}],"assertion":"The court held a hearing on the plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction motion on 24 August 2026, heard argument and took the motion under submission with a written order to follow. Courthouse News reports that the judge said the record at that time did not persuade the judge of the merits, that the plaintiffs’ evidence raised some potential questions about Meta’s categorical denial of any impact of AI in the termination process, and that the case turns on whether what plaintiffs think happened, happened.","causal_attribution":"The minute entry documents that the hearing occurred and the motion was taken under submission. The judge’s remarks are reported by one news outlet and the transcript was not inspected. No written ruling on the preliminary injunction was found as of 29 September 2026."},{"id":"c8","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"and only Plaintiff Doe 20, hereby voluntarily dismisses","relation":"supports","source_id":"s10"},{"locator":"remain parties and continue to prosecute this action","relation":"supports","source_id":"s10"},{"locator":"Doe 20 was voluntarily dismissed from this action on August 3, 2026 pursuant to Federal","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"is made on behalf of Doe 20, and no relief is sought on Doe 20’s behalf.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"One plaintiff (Doe 20) voluntarily dismissed all of that plaintiff’s claims without prejudice on 3 August 2026 (Dkt. 33), and the notice states that Does 1 through 19 and 21 through 26 remain parties. No reason is given in the notice.","causal_attribution":"A filing by the plaintiffs’ counsel records the dismissal. It does not say whether that plaintiff was selected in the reduction in force or why the dismissal was made."},{"id":"c9","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"They recognize that their claims must be arbitrated, and they have initiated arbitration proceedings","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"with the American Arbitration Association (AAA). Here, they seek a temporary restraining order:","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"while they pursue their claims in private arbitration","relation":"supports","source_id":"s7"},{"locator":"from this Court only the status-quo-preserving provisional relief that Meta’s own","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"G. Reserve to the arbitral forum all relief on the merits, including but not limited to","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The 17 July 2026 order records that the plaintiffs recognize their claims must be arbitrated and that they have initiated arbitration proceedings with the American Arbitration Association. The complaint says the plaintiffs seek from the court only status-quo-preserving provisional relief pending an independent audit of the selection process and arbitration of the merits, and it reserves merits relief such as reinstatement, back pay and damages to the arbitral forum.","causal_attribution":"The order records the plaintiffs’ own statement about their arbitration filings. The arbitration itself is confidential and its progress is unknown."}],"effects":[{"label":"Employees on or after protected leave allegedly disproportionately selected for layoff by an AI-assisted process that did not account for leave (disputed by Meta)","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"},{"label":"Plaintiffs notified of selection for termination on 20 May 2026, with separations scheduled from 22 July 2026 and possible loss of health coverage, unvested equity and (for four plaintiffs) work-visa status","claim_id":"c6","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.474171/gov.uscourts.cand.474171.1.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"meta-complaint"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.474171/gov.uscourts.cand.474171.25.0.pdf","kind":"court_order","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"ndcal-court-record"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.474171/gov.uscourts.cand.474171.42.1_1.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"meta-court-declarations"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.474171/gov.uscourts.cand.474171.46.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"ndcal-court-record"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.474171/gov.uscourts.cand.474171.49.0.pdf","kind":"court_record","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"ndcal-court-record"},{"id":"s6","url":"https://www.cbsnews.com/news/26-meta-workers-sue-ai-aided-layoffs-medical-family-leave/","kind":"wire_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"meta-complaint"},{"id":"s7","url":"https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2026/jul/17/us-judge-wont-block-meta-from-laying-off-workers-w/","kind":"wire_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"reuters-tro-coverage"},{"id":"s8","url":"https://www.courthousenews.com/meta-workers-claiming-ai-fired-them-unlikely-to-see-relief/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"courthouse-news-hearing"},{"id":"s9","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.474171/gov.uscourts.cand.474171.31.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"meta-court-declarations"},{"id":"s10","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.474171/gov.uscourts.cand.474171.33.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"ndcal-court-record"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["work","health"],"unknowns":["Whether any AI system scored, ranked or selected any plaintiff is unresolved. The complaint pleads it on information and belief. Meta denies it in declarations. No discovery had occurred in the sources inspected, and the judge said on 17 July 2026 that plaintiffs were not in the rooms where the selections happened.","The sources inspected do not show how many people beyond the plaintiffs were selected because of leave, or how many of the roughly 8,000 laid-off employees were scored by any AI-assisted system. Only the plaintiffs are counted as reported harmed.","The order on the preliminary injunction motion (argued 24 August 2026, taken under submission) had not been found by 29 September 2026. The hearing remarks were read only through one news report and the transcript was not inspected.","Whether each plaintiff’s separation took place on its scheduled date (22 July 2026 for most, later for some) is not stated in the sources inspected. Reuters and CBS/AP describe the plaintiffs as still employed in July, and Courthouse News called them former employees on 24 August 2026.","One plaintiff (Doe 20) was voluntarily dismissed on 3 August 2026 and no reason is stated. The affected count therefore uses 25.","The complaint and declarations contain individual medical, pregnancy and immigration details. They are anonymised in the public copies and are deliberately not described here.","Reuters and WSJ pages for the initial filing could not be read (HTTP 401). Reuters coverage of the 17 July ruling was read through a Spokesman-Review copy. The Law.com article was behind a subscription wall and was not cited.","The complaint alleges that data captured by a separate Meta employee-monitoring program (the Model Capability Initiative) supplied inputs to the selection process, and Meta denies that AI was used in the selection. That program’s own privacy and security consequences are a different event, recorded as 2026-meta-mci-us-employee-keystroke-and-screen-capture-for-ai-training-then-internal-data-exposure, and are not part of this record."],"geography":{"basis":"The complaint states that the plaintiffs worked in California, Illinois, Washington, New York, the District of Columbia, Pennsylvania and Florida and the suit is in the US District Court for the Northern District of California. Meta also notified employees in other countries in the same reduction in force, but no plaintiff outside the US is described.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":["US"]},"publication":{"basis":"The complaint, the court order denying the temporary restraining order, two Meta declarations, the plaintiffs’ notice of dismissal of one plaintiff and the hearing minute entry were read from the court record (CourtListener copies), with CBS/AP, Reuters and Courthouse News reports. Every AI-related statement is attributed. The plaintiffs are anonymous in the record and are not described individually. Meta denies that AI made or informed any selection decision and the court has not resolved the dispute.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-29"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The complaint alleges, on information and belief, that Meta used internal AI-assisted systems (Metamate, second-brain agents, activity-monitoring scoring, AI-token-usage dashboards, algorithmic ranking and calibration) to score, rank and select employees for the 20 May 2026 termination list. Meta’s declarations say selection decisions were made by human business leaders and that there was no AI-assisted scoring or ranking related to employee performance, and the court described the declarations as saying Meta did not use AI in any way with respect to the RIF. The court recorded that the parties dispute whether Meta used AI in deciding to terminate the plaintiffs and found on 17 July 2026 that the plaintiffs had not shown a likelihood of success on the current record. On 24 August 2026 the judge said the plaintiffs’ evidence raised some potential questions about Meta’s categorical denial. No discovery had tested Meta’s account in the sources inspected.","status":"disputed"},"person_relations":["made_decision_about","made_claim_about"]},"name":"US: 26 Meta employees sue alleging an AI-assisted May 2026 layoff selection penalized workers on protected leave, Meta says people made the decisions","summary":"On 20 May 2026 Meta began notifying about 8,000 employees (roughly 10 percent of its workforce) that they had been selected for layoff. On 13 July 2026 twenty-six anonymous employees who had taken or requested medical, pregnancy, parental or family leave, or a disability accommodation, sued Meta in the US District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint alleges, on information and belief, that Meta used internal AI-assisted systems (including the Metamate assistant, keystroke and activity monitoring, AI-token-usage dashboards and algorithmic performance ranking) to score, rank and select employees, and that these inputs could not accumulate during protected leave, so plaintiffs on leave were disproportionately selected. Meta says workforce decisions were made by people, not AI, and that no selection decision was made by AI. On 17 July 2026 the court denied a temporary restraining order, recording that the parties dispute whether Meta used AI in the terminations and finding serious questions on the merits but no shown likelihood of success. One plaintiff was voluntarily dismissed on 3 August 2026. The preliminary injunction motion was argued on 24 August 2026 and taken under submission. The plaintiffs are pursuing their merits claims in arbitration and the allegations are unproven.","incidentDate":"2026-05-20","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-07-14","aiSystem":"Meta internal AI-assisted systems alleged in the complaint: the Metamate internal LLM assistant, employee-trained \"second brain\" agents, keystroke and activity-monitoring productivity scoring, AI-token-usage dashboards and AI-assisted performance calibration (Meta denies AI was used in selecting employees for the layoff)","aiProduct":"Meta internal AI systems (reported)","aiCompany":"Meta Platforms, Inc.","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"disputed","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["professional_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The complaint alleges that 26 employees were selected for termination in Meta’s May 2026 reduction in force through an AI-assisted process that penalised protected leave, with separations scheduled from 22 July 2026 and asserted losses of employer-subsidised health coverage, unvested equity and, for four plaintiffs, work-visa status. Meta denies that AI was used in the selections. The court found the alleged harms other than immigration status remediable in arbitration and has not decided the merits.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"disputed","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":25,"affectedCountStatus":"documented_minimum","affectedCountEvidence":"The complaint states that each of 26 plaintiffs was selected for separation in the May 2026 reduction in force. One plaintiff was voluntarily dismissed on 3 August 2026 without a stated reason, so 25 active plaintiffs are counted as a documented minimum. The roughly 8,000 other employees notified in the reduction in force are not counted because no source ties their selection to the alleged AI process.","victimAgeRange":"adult","platformType":"other","primarySourceUrl":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.474171/gov.uscourts.cand.474171.1.0.pdf","primarySourceLabel":"Complaint, Does 1 through 26 v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (N.D. Cal., filed 13 Jul 2026)","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-29T21:16:06.345461+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:57.733761+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["historical-2026"]}]}