How would you feel if your employer kept tabs on your AI usage, letting those metrics influence your opportunities, promotions, and even job security? KPIs in the workplace are common, but with artificial intelligence now in nearly every workplace, many tech companies have begun to factor employee AI usage into their reviews. It might seem innocuous on the surface. However, the situation intensified following reports of a Salesforce AI leaderboard and a recent lawsuit against Meta.
The legal action alleges that Meta utilized AI-driven software that unfairly targeted employees with disabilities or those who had taken medical leave when determining selections for mass layoffs. It is alleged that factors such as AI usage influenced layoff decisions.
AI Didn’t Cause Those Layoffs… Or Did It?
Total tech layoffs for 2026 have hit 121,326 at the time of writing, impacting over 230 companies. By the end of July, this year’s layoffs are projected to equal and overtake the 122,606 total recorded in 2025, reaching this milestone with a striking five months still left in the year.
AI was the most-cited reason for layoffs across every industry for the third month running, according to outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas – challenging existing beliefs on the actual impact AI is currently having on the job market. In the first half of this year, it was likely that AI was merely influencing layoffs rather than directly causing them. Now, AI has much more of a disruptive effect, and it appears that companies are finally being honest about this.
Last month, Oracle admitted that AI had actively replaced some roles within the company, stating that “the adoption and deployment of AI technologies across our operations have resulted, and may continue to result, in reductions to [its] workforce.”
Last year, AI agents and advancements were cited as the driving force behind the “rebalancing” of several hundred Salesforce roles across its customer support division. Fast-forward to today, and the implications surrounding AI and the tech labor market have reached a new peak, as Meta now faces a lawsuit accusing the company of wrongfully using AI to terminate employee contracts.
Meta’s Latest Lawsuit
26 former employees have sued the social media giant, accusing it of using AI to target people for mass layoffs. The lawsuit claims that those AI tools targeted them after they asked for protected or maternity leave or disability accommodation, The Guardian reported.
Not only that, but the 26 plaintiffs also allege that Meta used a “constellation of internal artificial intelligence systems”, including AI performance ratings as well as keystroke and activity-monitoring data, to decide who to lay off.
It is claimed that Meta has been and continues to use AI tools to gather data on its employees’ performance rankings and productivity metrics. These tracking inputs are allegedly completely absent when employees take family or medical leave, and the metrics may be lower for individuals with disabilities.
The lawyers of the plaintiffs said in an emailed statement: “Meta deliberately kept the mechanics of its selection process secret from its employees.”
A Meta spokesperson told SF Ben that “These claims lack merit and are not based on facts. Workforce management and organizational decisions were and are made by people, not AI.”
Tracking Internal AI Usage
Meta is not the only tech leader allegedly tracking AI usage. Amazon employees have reported their AI usage being tracked, with some claiming that Amazon is pressing them to integrate AI across all aspects of their work, even though it is hurting productivity.
Denny, a software engineer at Amazon, claimed that if they didn’t fully pivot into the AI space, they “risk becoming obsolete and being let go in the next layoff.”
SF Ben has reached out to Amazon for comment.
Confusion Over Agentblazer Status
Last month, a report from 404 Media claimed that Salesforce has an internal dashboard that tracks each team’s use of AI, including which teams are using specific tools such as ChatGPT and how much.
It also claimed that Salesforce was handing out digital badges that describe its employees as a “Champion,” “Innovator,” and “Legend” depending on the AI training courses they’ve completed. SF Ben understands this to likely refer to Agentforce Trailhead badges, which have publicly been cited as mandatory. A Salesforce spokesperson clarified that last year, Salesforce asked employees to become Agentblazers – certified through Trailhead.
A Salesforce employee said at the time that employees were not yet aware of expectations or “what keeps [them] off the radar and therefore still employed,” but that they were aware that “AI usage already is or will soon be tied to performance ratings.”
Salesforce has also clarified that Agentblazer Status is not tied to performance reviews and is not a competition, instead being in place to help employees’ skills stay on pace with AI innovation.
Salesforce’s AI Leaderboard
One source, who wishes to remain anonymous, told SF Ben that they were aware of individuals high up in the organization keeping track of employees’ token consumption, which is allegedly tied to Employee 360 profiles – dashboards that track employees’ performance metrics.
They alleged that this information was indeed tracked on a leaderboard and that it was actively noted when an employee was underperforming on the board. Employees are reportedly scrutinized heavily for their AI use, with top performers said to be collated together to guide other employees on their own AI use.
They made it clear that although there is currently no explicit notion of being laid off if AI usage is low, the message behind what the tracking is for is clear.
Internal Guidance
Interestingly, according to internal release guidance seen by SF Ben, Salesforce is actively encouraging its employees to prioritize leveraging AI tools such as Agentforce Coworker, Slackbot, and its Slack skills libraries over external AI tools.
A Salesforce spokesperson told SF Ben that Salesforce “does not have companywide AI usage leaderboards”, indicating that it is likely that only certain parts of the organization have AI usage tracked in this way.
“While we use dashboards to understand AI tool adoption and identify roadblocks, our employees are encouraged to use the AI tools most relevant to their work, and we recognize that usage will naturally vary by team and function,” they said.
Should Workers Worry?
If you’re an employee in one of these large tech companies, this can quickly begin to feel like insurmountable pressure. Within Salesforce, although many employees seem to understand why the company is tracking what it’s tracking, SF Ben has been told that not everyone is entirely comfortable.
One source claimed that some employees are allegedly afraid to admit that they need help with their AI learning and that they don’t know where to start, despite having access to Salesforce’s available learning resources. Some of these employees do not come from a technical background, making it all the more difficult to get up to speed, especially when their progress is actively being monitored.
A Salesforce spokesperson told SF Ben that Salesforce offers a suite of AI Fluency training, workshops, and resources to help employees learn to collaborate with AI and apply it in their daily work. According to the company, 91% of its employees say they are confident using AI in their daily work – a significant metric. However, are the ones who are not confident feeling supported enough?
It is likely that, going forward, AI usage and progress will be tracked in nearly every tech company, especially as businesses work hard to integrate it into their own strategies and aim to make work more efficient. This shouldn’t necessarily stoke worry – it is essentially just another KPI – but workers should be conscious of when it starts to feel discriminatory or unfeasible.
However, it does raise questions about whether or not this kind of tracking is useful for both parties involved. For Salesforce, it provides a whole host of benefits, allowing them to understand how their employees are engaging with AI and solidifying itself as “customer zero”. For the employees, however, is this more cumbersome than helpful, especially when it comes to this kind of tracking? If more companies continue to do this, they will need to heavily consider the ethics of AI productivity tracking and how it is done, especially if it is for marketing or HR purposes.
Final Thoughts
As AI adoption gradually becomes a more ‘normal’ metric to track, employees within the tech space should consider how that affects them. If they’re not up to speed on AI, or could do with some more guidance, now is the time to reconcile with that.
However, they should also feel confident enough not to stand for discriminatory practices surrounding AI usage, especially if it involves factors outside of their control. We will eventually see how this Meta lawsuit plays out, and its result will likely impact the way companies tackle this issue in the future.
