In a major breakthrough for the technology sector, Meta Platforms, the parent of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, has to contend with a lawsuit claiming it favours hiring foreign employees over American citizens to save on labour expenses. This decision was delivered by U.S. San Francisco Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler on February 25, 2025, and has revived controversies surrounding the employment of H-1B visas and Silicon Valley hiring.
The Rajaram Meta Platforms Inc. case has significant potential to shape the future of Meta and other big tech companies dependent on international talent. Let us explore the details of this suit, its history, and its implications for the wider tech community.
The Lawsuit: What’s at Stake?
The suit was brought by three naturalized U.S. citizens—IT professional Purushothaman Rajaram, software engineer Ekta Bhatia, and data scientist Qun Wang—who say they were qualified for several positions at Meta between 2020 and 2024 but were repeatedly passed over.
Their central argument is that Meta has a “systematic preference” for hiring foreign workers, particularly those on H-1B visas because they can be paid less than their American counterparts. This proposed class-action lawsuit aims to represent a broader group of U.S. citizens allegedly affected by these practices.
Judge Beeler’s ruling to allow the case to go forward is based on substantial evidence, including statistics demonstrating that 15% of Meta’s U.S. employees have H-1B visas—well above the 0.5% national average of such visa holders in all industries. Moreover, the judge referenced Meta’s October 2021 settlement with the U.S. government, under which the company agreed to pay as much as $14.25 million to settle allegations that it preferred temporary visa holders over U.S. workers. The earlier case, brought under the Trump administration in December 2020, adds credibility to the plaintiffs’ present charges.
The H-1B Visa Debate
At the centre of this suit is the H-1B visa program, which enables U.S. businesses to employ foreign workers in speciality occupations, usually in areas such as technology and engineering. Supporters say the program enables businesses to fill skill gaps and stay competitive internationally. Opponents say it’s frequently used to reduce wages and replace American workers.
The Meta lawsuit strikes a chord with this deep-seated tension, highlighting how tech giants walk the fine line between cost savings and equitable employment practices. The plaintiffs contend that Meta’s employment practices illustrate an industry-wide trend in Silicon Valley, wherein firms purportedly prefer H-1B employees not for their distinctive skills but for their lower pay expectations. Daniel Low, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, hoped the suit could “correct the favouritism toward visa workers that is rampant in the tech sector.”
But he also admitted that meaningful change would take more robust enforcement or legislative action—implying the systemic character of the problem.
Meta, meanwhile, has denied any discriminatory intent, asserting that its hiring is merit- and business-needs-based. But the company’s use of H-1B employees—4,566 petitions in recent years, at an average wage of $199,944, according to reports—raises questions about whether cost savings are a factor, particularly when compared with industry rivals such as Microsoft and Intel.
A Broader Context: Tech’s Labor Practices Under Scrutiny
This is not Meta’s initial exposure to legal battles regarding its policies towards employees. In addition to the 2021 settlement, the company has also come under fire for rolling back diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives during a changing legal environment. Other suits, like one filed by former employee Kelly Stonelake in early February 2025, charge gender discrimination and retaliation among Meta’s ranks.
All three cases collectively depict a firm besieged with several charges of discriminatory treatment—either by nationality, gender, or opposition.
The timing of this lawsuit also coincides with heightened political scrutiny of immigration and labour policies. In 2020, then-President Donald Trump temporarily suspended new H-1B visas, arguing they should be reserved for highly skilled, well-paid workers rather than used to replace Americans. While that policy has since lapsed, the sentiment lingers, and the Meta case could fuel renewed calls for reform as the U.S. navigates its economic and technological priorities.
What’s Next for Meta and the Tech Industry?
With the lawsuit proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (case number 22-02920), Meta will have to stand up for its hiring practices in greater detail. A victory for the plaintiffs would result in substantial monetary fines and compel the company to revamp its recruitment efforts. More generally, it could create a precedent for other technology companies, leading to more scrutiny of how they use H-1B visas and handle American job candidates.
For Silicon Valley, it’s a high-stakes game. The tech sector depends on a global pool of talent to drive innovation, but charges of wage suppression and discrimination could erode public trust. If the case takes hold, it might encourage analogous suits against other industry titans, increasing pressure for disclosure and accountability.
Critical Reflections
Though the plaintiffs have legitimate concerns, it’s worth considering the subtlety of tech recruitment. The sector frequently requires unique expertise that isn’t always locally available, and H-1B employees have unequivocally made breakthrough contributions.
However, the difference between Meta’s visa usage and national averages implies there’s more to be critical about regarding whether cost, not need, is motivating some choices. The reality probably falls somewhere in between—a balance of business requirements versus fair access remains an issue that resists easy solutions.
Conclusion
The Meta lawsuit regarding lower-cost foreign workers is more than a court battle; it’s an inciting issue in the broader debate about globalization, labour, and equity in the technology industry. As the case plays out, it will challenge not just Meta’s practices but the industry as a whole to see if it can evolve under increased scrutiny.
Whether this results in substantive change or entrenches the status quo, one thing is sure: the debate over who gets a seat at Silicon Valley’s table is only just beginning. For now, everyone is watching Meta as it fights this high-stakes war in the courtroom—and in the court of public opinion.