In a significant ruling delivered on Friday, Kenya’s Court of Appeal upheld the Employment Court’s decision allowing 187 former content moderators to sue Meta, the parent company of Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram. This landmark case marks a pivotal moment in holding multinational corporations accountable for the treatment of workers, particularly in emerging economies like Kenya.
The moderators, previously employed by Sama, a contractor for Meta, allege unfair dismissal and are seeking $1.6 billion in compensation for their treatment while working in Nairobi. This lawsuit is notable as it is the first known challenge against Facebook outside the United States concerning the conditions under which content moderators operate. The decision means that Meta can now be held liable for the treatment of these moderators, potentially paving the way for a settlement after previous negotiations stalled in October.
The judges—D.K. Musinga, Asike-Makhandia, and J. Mativo—asserted that the primary dispute regarding the moderators’ claims of unfair termination remains unresolved, paving the way for a potential trial if an out-of-court settlement is not reached. The court’s decision contradicts Meta’s argument that, as a foreign entity, it could not be held liable under Kenyan law. The ruling thus reinforces the jurisdiction of Kenyan courts in matters concerning labor rights and corporate accountability.
Content moderation is notoriously grueling, with workers often exposed to traumatic material. Moderators have reported being forced to view horrific content for hours on end, all while earning around KES 60,000 (approximately $414) a month—an amount they argue is insufficient given the psychological toll of their jobs. Many have cited a lack of adequate mental health support from Sama, which has been criticized for failing to provide post-traumatic counseling services.
The legal battle has drawn support from organizations like Foxglove, a U.K.-based non-profit advocating for workers’ rights. Mercy Mutemi, the advocate representing the moderators, expressed hope that the ruling would lead to justice and highlight the need for better working conditions in the digital labor market.
In a troubling twist, the moderators allege that they were dismissed following attempts to unionize, despite Sama’s prior claims of supporting union representation. This raises significant concerns about corporate practices aimed at stifling workers’ rights and the implications for labor movements across the region.
The moderators’ case is bolstered by past legal challenges faced by Meta. In 2020, Facebook reached a $52 million settlement with U.S. content moderators who similarly contended that their mental health was compromised due to the nature of their work. The Kenyan moderators’ situation echoes these concerns, emphasizing the global dimensions of worker exploitation in the tech industry.
As the trial progresses, it remains to be seen whether Meta will engage in meaningful negotiations or continue to employ legal tactics to delay proceedings. The outcome of this case could set a critical precedent for the treatment of digital laborers and corporate accountability in the tech industry, potentially prompting similar legal challenges worldwide.
