Facebook owner granted more time to respond to toxic work environment suit
Meta Platforms Inc. has been sued by former Facebook content moderators, accusing it of exposing workers to a toxic work environment
Meta Platforms Inc and two companies linked to its content moderation operations in Kenya have been given 21 days to respond to a case in which former Facebook content moderators accuse them of exposing workers to a toxic work environment without adequate disclosure of the nature of their jobs.
Meta Platforms Inc, Meta Platforms Ireland Ltd and Majorel Kenya Ltd asked the Employment and Labour Relations Court on Tuesday for more time to file their responses to the case brought by South African former content moderator Daniel Motaung.
The court granted the request and directed the parties to return on November 9 for further directions.
In the matter, Mr Motaung accuses the companies of failing to provide prospective moderators with adequate information during recruitment, including the fact that the jobs involved reviewing graphic and toxic content likely to affect their mental health.
He claims applicants were not told that they were being recruited as Facebook content moderators and were instead given vague descriptions of the work.
The former moderators also allege that they were pressured to decide within a short period whether to travel to Kenya without being given sufficient information to make an informed decision.
“The contract did not disclose that the work they were being engaged for was Facebook Content Moderation. It did not disclose that the work involved looking at toxic content on a continuous loop and that it was likely that they would suffer from mental illness as a result,” Mr Motaung said in the petition.
He further claimed they were not given copies of their employment contracts and non-disclosure agreements before travelling to Kenya, and that the names Facebook and Meta were omitted from recruitment documents.
Mr Motaung says he brought the case on behalf of former Facebook content moderators engaged in Kenya through Samasource Kenya EPZ Ltd or other outsourcing companies, as well as current content moderators, including those handling TikTok content.
The petitioners accuse the respondents of fraud and deception during recruitment, including using different job titles in advertisements, changing job descriptions during interviews and giving applicants different salary amounts and currencies.
They also allege that the job descriptions used vague and complex language that made it difficult for applicants to understand the nature of the work.
According to the petitioners, the respondents failed to disclose in applications, offer letters and contracts that Meta and its affiliates would be responsible for instructing moderators on the work they were required to perform.
They further allege that the respondents concealed that the jobs involved reviewing toxic content on an “endless loop”.
The moderators also claim they were compelled to sign non-disclosure agreements after arriving in Kenya, before they fully understood the nature of their jobs.
They allege they were required to sign the agreements in the presence of representatives of the respondents, without sufficient time to read and understand the documents or seek independent legal advice.
The petitioners further accuse the companies of requiring moderators to report to the Facebook Content Moderation Centre within hours of arriving in Kenya, despite the effects of international travel and the potentially traumatic nature of their work.
They argue that moderators in other jurisdictions receive better safeguards, including limits on the number of hours they can spend reviewing the most traumatic material, flexible shifts, access to psychiatrists and psychologists and debriefing sessions after exposure to traumatic content.
Also Read: PTSD, depression and anxiety: Ex-Facebook Nairobi staff describe the horrors of their work
The logos of Facebook social network and its parent company Meta. Content moderators have filed a class action lawsuit against Facebook owner Meta and its local agents.
Among the orders sought is a declaration that the petitioner and other Facebook content moderators are victims of human trafficking and that the respondents subjected them to forced labour, servitude and practices similar to slavery in violation of Article 30 of the Constitution.
They also want the court to declare that their constitutional rights were violated under various provisions of the Constitution, including those protecting dignity, equality, freedom from forced labour, privacy, freedom of expression and fair labour practices.
The case is linked to a wider dispute involving 186 content moderators who sued Meta, its Irish subsidiary and Samasource Kenya EPZ over their employment and working conditions.
Last year, ELRC court declined an application by Meta and Samasource to suspend the proceedings pending an intended appeal to the Supreme Court over the jurisdiction of Kenyan courts.
Meta and Samasource had indicated that they intended to challenge a Court of Appeal decision which had dismissed their objection to the jurisdiction of Kenyan courts.
Meta argued that it was a foreign company with no operations in Kenya and that the moderators could not pursue their claims against it in the country.
It also argued that the Constitution did not apply beyond Kenya’s geographical limits and that it risked being ordered to pay Sh10 million to people who were not its employees.
The court rejected the attempt to suspend the case, saying the ELRC could not revisit issues already determined by the Court of Appeal.
“Accordingly, having considered the circumstances of this case, the application is misconceived and an attempt to clothe this court with a mandate it clearly does not have and whose only recourse from the judgment of the Court of Appeal is to hear and determine the petition pending before it,” said the judge.
The court held that it was in the interest of justice and fair play for the petition, filed in 2023, to proceed.
The moderators were recruited from different African countries and worked at the content moderation centre in Nairobi, which served the wider Eastern and Southern African region.
They are seeking damages for subjecting them to human trafficking for labour, violation of their constitutional rights and subjecting them to lasting mental harm due to exposure to toxic content.
Follow ourWhatsApp channel for breaking news updates and more stories like this.
