2023United KingdomUnidentified AI tools
The news agency SWNS reported on 29 October 2026 that Rob Illidge, chief executive of Vulse, a LinkedIn employee-advocacy software company he founded in 2019, says he made more than 64% of his staff redundant over three years starting in 2023, nine employees in total, and replaced their work with AI. By his account the company had grown to 14 employees after venture funding; the marketing, sales and development teams went, and graduate roles were more at risk. He says 'AI could do a better job', that the company's AI tools cost 140 pounds a month and that it saves about 100,000 pounds a year in employment costs. The account is the employer's own; no former employee is quoted and no challenge to the redundancies is reported.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 31/10/2026
29 Oct 2026Event location unknownUnidentified coding tool
In a public post to r/Netherlands created on 29 October 2026, a full-stack web developer with ten years' experience writes that a month earlier they were told they would be fired because AI was able to do their job, and that the day of the post was their last day and last paycheck. In replies the poster quotes the boss as saying 'I can just prompt the AI and it seems to be doing what I need', says they had been at the company five years, worked on one month's notice under a Bulgarian employment, and had watched the company's code repository fill with AI commits. The poster also writes that they used AI heavily in the job and that the company wanted to save money. They say they have applied for developer jobs for 30 days without a workable offer and are thinking of leaving coding; they also say they are in no financial trouble. The account is uncorroborated and the employer is not named.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 30/10/2026
16 Dec 2024SpainUnidentified image tool
A Spanish video game studio that went from a profit in 2023 to losses of about 3.5 million euros in 2024, and had notified a court of its insolvency, opened a collective dismissal (ERE) on 30 October 2024 covering 13 of its 83 employees; an agreement was reached and the dismissals took effect in December 2024. According to a judgment of the High Court of Justice of Madrid as reported by EFE, Xataka and a lawyer's analysis, the dismissal letter given to a 3D artist said that images generated with artificial intelligence improved the visual quality of the studio's games and cut production time per scene, that it was adopting an AI-based production process, and that two senior 3D artists were therefore enough, so her post was abolished. The first-instance court held her dismissal fair and she did not appeal. The High Court's judgment 864/2026 of 8 October 2026 concerned a scriptwriter dismissed in the same procedure, whose letter did not mention AI: it dismissed her appeal, leaving her dismissal unfair but not void. Xataka says the letter relied above all on economic and productive causes, that the studio presented AI as a consequence imposed by its clients rather than as a direct cause, and that AI by itself does not justify a dismissal. The studio is not named and the judgment was not read.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Lawsuit Dismissed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources · Added 30/10/2026
Sept 2025RussiaUnidentified AI tools
A court in Moscow Region, Russia, ruled in favour of a programmer whose employer had disciplined him and ended his employment, according to court materials reported by TASS on 27 October 2026 and relayed by regional outlets. In court the company's representative said the programmer had performed his duties improperly and had abused artificial intelligence when doing work tasks, which the company said its analytical reports showed. The programmer said the employer had pressed him to leave from September 2025 after he refused to sign an agreement moving him to hourly pay, and that he faced five internal inspections and three disciplinary penalties he disputed. The court found that the employer had ignored his written explanations, partly upheld his claim, changed the recorded ground of dismissal to termination at the employee's initiative, adjusted the dismissal date, lifted the penalties and awarded him over 1.2 million roubles in average earnings for the period of forced absence, plus moral damages and costs.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 28/10/2026
Event date unknownItalyUnidentified chatbot
In October 2026 Italian outlets, relaying Il Sole 24 Ore, reported that the Agenzia delle Entrate (the Italian Revenue Agency) had suspended two staff members of its first provincial directorate in Naples from their posts for improper use of artificial intelligence and assigned them to study and research duties at the regional directorate, and that it had opened an internal audit. The reports link the measures to judgment 4759/2026 of the Campania second-instance tax court, which, according to these reports, found that the tax office had put questions to online AI systems while checking a company's research and development tax credit and held that the answers could not serve as evidence. A joint note from six unions expressed deep disappointment at the suspensions and announced initiatives to protect the staff of the directorate. The reports differ on the two people's roles (two managers, or a manager and an official); their names are not published.
AI relation unknown Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 26/10/2026
Oct 2026Event location unknownClaude (reported)
In a public post to r/jobs titled 'We were replaced with AI', created on 24 October 2026, a server and network administrator writes that they and the company's lead developer were terminated that day: their access to various systems was revoked and the chief executive then called them, with major budget cuts as the theme of the call. The poster writes that both were replaced with 'the Anthropic subscription' and, in a reply, that it is an Anthropic subscription of 180 dollars a month that the chief executive mentioned, and that staff had seen him using it to scan the company's infrastructure days earlier. In replies the poster says the company is small, located in Australia, and that they worked for it remotely, that finance staff had calls with the chief executive scheduled for the following Monday, and that they feel their years of loyalty were thrown away. The company is not named. The account is the poster's alone and uncorroborated; no employer statement was retrieved.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 25/10/2026
23 Jun 2025NetherlandsChatGPT
On 23 June 2025 a recruitment agency summarily dismissed a recruitment consultant it had employed since January 2024, giving seven grounds in its dismissal letter. One ground, misuse of company resources and an integrity breach, concerned questions he had put to ChatGPT on his work laptop about how to obtain a severance payment from the employer: the employer said he made defamatory statements about it there and breached his duty of confidentiality with the information he entered. He did not dispute the queries. In a decision given on 27 February 2026, the sub-district judge of the Rechtbank Zeeland-West-Brabant ruled the dismissal invalid, because the employer had not established another ground and the seven grounds formed a single composite reason. On the ChatGPT ground the judge found that private use of the laptop had not been forbidden, that he had shared only information about his employment relationship and no company secrets, and that this was culpable to a limited extent. In a final decision of 22 May 2026 the court awarded him a transition payment of 2,976.04 euros gross, fixed damages of 4,565.70 euros gross and costs, but refused the 25,000 euros of fair compensation he sought, weighing his limited income loss and his own culpable conduct, which it listed as including his sharing of information about the employment relationship. His fixed-term contract would have ended on 1 August 2025, when he started a new job.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 25/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownClaude (reported)
In a public post to r/layoffs titled 'Laid off by claude', created on 21 October 2026, a person who describes themselves in a reply as a data engineer who also did reporting, AI and frontend work writes that executives are of the opinion that Claude can manage a data warehouse, custom tooling, support tickets, servers and new product features, and that they have said the poster's whole job is redundant because AI can do it all. The poster writes that they did not have the mental capacity to argue and accepted what they call 'the MSA', and that they feel numb and are unsure whether they want to stay in the tech industry. The employer, its location and the date of the layoff are not stated. The account is the poster's alone and uncorroborated; no employer statement was retrieved, and no source describes Claude actually taking over the work.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 25/10/2026
May 2023ItalyUnidentified image tool
A graphic designer hired in March 2022 by a cybersecurity company was dismissed in May 2023 for a justified objective reason, which the company gave as an internal reorganisation and the suppression of her post to contain costs during an economic crisis. She challenged the dismissal, arguing that the reorganisation was a pretext and that her tasks had been redistributed to other workers, not eliminated. According to legal press reports of the judgment, the company said the graphic-design tasks were first absorbed by other staff and the residual work was then done partly with the support of artificial-intelligence tools, which the marketing manager used to produce graphics of adequate quality at lower cost and in less time. The labour section of the Tribunale di Roma (judgment no. 9135 of 19 November 2025) found a real crisis and reorganisation, no possibility of redeploying her, and upheld the dismissal. The reports say the court treated AI as one of the tools the company used to make its structure more efficient, not as an autonomous cause of the dismissal; a commentary in Giustizia Insieme calls the publicity around a first dismissal caused by AI out of proportion to the ruling. The judgment itself was not read, and whether it was appealed is not reported.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Lawsuit Dismissed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution disputed · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 24/10/2026
2023Event location unknownUnidentified generative AI tools
Fortune reported on 17 August 2025 that Eric Vaughan, chief executive of the enterprise-software company IgniteTech, replaced nearly 80% of the company's staff within a year after deciding in early 2023 that generative AI was an existential transformation, according to headcount figures Fortune reviewed. Vaughan told Fortune that over 2023 and into early 2024 the company replaced hundreds of employees, declining to give a number. He said staff were required to work only on AI projects every Monday and that 20% of payroll went to AI learning, and that employees who flatly refused were let go ('we said goodbye to those people'); technical staff were the most resistant, raising concerns about what the AI could not do. He said it was extremely difficult and not something he recommends, but that he would do it again. The account is the employer's; no dismissed employee is quoted.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 24/10/2026
Event date unknownUnited KingdomUnidentified AI system
In a public post to r/LegalAdviceUK created on 16 October 2026, a worker at a small UK business writes that about three weeks earlier the owner began a redundancy consultation with HR input and told them they were the only person being considered for redundancy. At the first formal consultation they were told of a proposed alternative role with a pay increase. At the second consultation, held with the HR adviser, the poster said they wanted that role and were told it was no longer considered viable and that the work would instead be completed by AI. After a colleague in the two-person department resigned, the owner said the department would be removed entirely; the poster says the company is now advertising a junior role with a similar title whose duties include assisting AI tools. The poster says they are frightened of losing their income, feel forced out so the owner can hire cheaper labour, and have contacted Acas. Commenters say this may be a lawful redundancy. The account is the poster's alone; the employer is not identified and no employer statement was retrieved. No dismissal had taken effect at the time of the post.
AI relation unknown Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 20/10/2026
2025RussiaDeepSeek
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.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Lawsuit Dismissed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 19/10/2026
2026Event location unknownUnidentified AI model
Times of Malta reported on 18 October 2026, from interviews with anonymous former gambling-sector employees, that iGaming companies are laying off staff as they turn to AI. One former designer, who says they lost their job earlier in 2026, says their team had been told to train an AI model to make design and brand-guideline decisions, presented as a tool to help designers, and that the company later decided the model was fit enough to replace around half of the design team, including those who trained it. The designer says there was no notice, that they were asked to resign later that day and that the severance was the bare minimum. The outlet omitted company names, and the workers said they had signed non-disclosure agreements. GamingMalta, the industry promotion foundation, told the outlet it sees talent being redeployed rather than replaced by AI, and the article notes that others pointed to search-engine changes and higher UK gambling taxes. The account is a single anonymous worker's, relayed by one outlet; the employer and where the job was based are not stated.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 19/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnidentified AI system
In a public post to r/cscareerquestions created on 17 October 2026, a person who says they joined a product company as an associate full-stack developer at the start of the year writes that, while still on probation, they were invited to a Microsoft Teams meeting 'regarding my employment' at which 17 staff were told that their roles were redundant because of AI and that they were no longer needed. The poster says they were writing the probation report due on the 23rd when it happened, that there was no prior hint, and that they feel upset, demotivated and frustrated. In replies the poster agrees with a commenter who suggests that AI was a cover for financial problems, and writes that the reasons given for sackings are not usually the real ones. The employer, its location and the date of the meeting are not stated, and the poster says they are not in the United States. The account is the poster's alone and uncorroborated; no employer statement was retrieved.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 18/10/2026
26 Dec 2024ChinaUnidentified AI data-collection system
A technology company in Beijing employed a worker from July 2009 as a data collector doing manual map-data collection. In early 2024 the company moved that work to automated data collection led by AI technology and abolished the worker's department and post, and on 26 December 2024 it terminated the worker's contract, citing a major change in the objective circumstances on which the contract was based. The worker applied for labour arbitration, and the arbitration commission found the dismissal unlawful, according to a typical case that the Beijing human resources and social security bureau released on 26 December 2025, as reported by China National Radio, China News Service and HK01. The commission said that introducing AI was the company's own business decision and lacked the unforeseeable and unavoidable character the contract-law provision requires, and that the company had shifted the business risk of technical change onto the worker.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 17/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownChatGPT (reported)
In a public post to r/ChatGPT on 15 October 2026, a web developer and designer who builds and maintains websites and web apps for clients writes that they had just lost their best-paying client. The poster says the client, tired of paying for their services, made a full website and webshop with ChatGPT in what the client called a couple of hours, and then emailed to say the poster was no longer needed. In replies the poster says the new site was already live on a new server with the domain connected, that the shop had been reverse engineered without the client asking for the source code, and that in the poster's view the replacement is full of bugs. The poster says they understand the client wanting to save money. The client is not named and no statement from the client is available; the account is the poster's alone and uncorroborated.
AI relation unknown Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 16/10/2026
Jan 2025ChinaUnidentified AI quality-inspection tool
A technology company in Hangzhou, China, employed a worker to check the quality of answers produced by an AI large language model, at 25,000 yuan a month. In January 2025, citing the impact of AI technology on his project, it proposed moving him to an ordinary operations post at 15,000 yuan a month; when he did not agree, it notified him that his contract was terminated, according to a typical case released by the Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court on 28 April 2026 and reported by Hangzhou media and China National Radio. China National Radio, citing CCTV News, reports that the company told him only at arbitration that after a technical upgrade AI could do his inspection work. A labour arbitration panel and then two levels of court in Hangzhou found the termination unlawful and ordered compensation of more than 260,000 yuan. The court said that introducing AI to stay competitive is not in itself the kind of major change in objective circumstances that makes an employment contract impossible to perform, and that the pay-cut offer was not a reasonable proposal. The worker told CCTV that he had not found a suitable new job since the termination.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 7 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 16/10/2026
31 Oct 2025SpainUnidentified AI design tool
A company that designs and manufactures industrial furnaces dismissed a mechanical draughtsman on 31 October 2025 for objective reasons, citing a fall in business and the introduction of new technologies in its engineering department, including a model-based-definition design method and artificial-intelligence tools. According to press reports of the judgment, the dismissal letter put the cost of the tool licences at 4,725 euros a year against his gross annual salary of 29,871 euros and argued that the saving exceeded 80%. The social section of the Tribunal de Instancia de Bilbao declared the dismissal unfair, finding that the company had proved neither its economic losses nor the real implementation of the tools: an employee trained on the new method testified that she had never worked with it, and an implementation report was dated June 2026, seven months after the dismissal. The company must choose between reinstating the worker and paying 12,330.56 euros in compensation, less the amount already paid; the court rejected his claims that the dismissal was void and for a higher job category. One outlet reports that four draughtsmen were dismissed in total. El Periódico, which reported the same judgment in August 2026, dates it to early June 2026 and quotes the dismissal letter's statement that the company had introduced new artificial-intelligence systems that automate technical tasks previously done by specialised staff. The judgment was not read, and whether it is final is not reported.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 5 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 16/10/2026
Aug 2024Event location unknownUnidentified AI presentation and data-analysis tool
A legal officer at an insurance company, responsible for compliance audits and risk checks, uploaded a company audit-issues data table that she had compiled and processed to a third-party AI platform in July 2024, to help make presentations and analyse data. According to the court's account, she did so on the recommendation of company leadership. In August 2024 the company served her a notice terminating her labour contract for serious violation of its rules, arguing that as a compliance employee bound by a confidentiality agreement she had exposed internal audit material to a platform that collects and retains user data for model iteration. The Chaoyang District People's Court in Beijing ruled at first instance that the dismissal was unlawful: the company's rules did not prohibit third-party AI tools, it had given no training on their use, and it had not shown that the table was core confidential information or that any leak or loss occurred. The court revoked the termination notice, ordered the contract to continue and ordered the company to pay the employee's year-end bonus shortfall, performance pay and lost wages. Kuai Keji, citing China National Radio, reported the ruling on 13 October 2026 and Beijing Daily on 14 October; both say the judgment has taken effect. No source names the insurer or the AI platform.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 15/10/2026
3 Apr 2026United StatesTimpani
Angelique Russell, a former manager of data science at HCA Healthcare, sued the hospital chain in federal court in Tennessee on 15 July 2026 for retaliatory discharge. Her complaint alleges that she found that Timpani, an AI system whose daily census predictions help set nurse staffing, overwrote the data behind its predictions so that its staffing decisions could not be audited or reproduced; that HCA placed her on a performance improvement plan weeks after she raised this; and that HCA fired her on 3 April 2026, days after she escalated her concerns to its Director of Responsible AI and its compliance department. She says the performance reasons were pretextual. These are allegations; HCA had not formally responded in court when WIRED reported on the suit on 2 October 2026.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 13/10/2026