Former TikTok content moderators in the UK have initiated legal proceedings against the social media giant, accusing it of "oppressive and intimidating" union busting tactics. The action centres on the dismissal of hundreds of workers just before they were due to vote on forming a union.
Claims of Unfair Dismissal and Intimidation
The case, lodged with an employment tribunal on behalf of three ex-employees, alleges unfair dismissal and breaches of trade union laws. The workers, who were part of TikTok's trust and safety team in London, had sought to establish a collective bargaining unit. Their goal was to secure better protection from the psychological toll of reviewing extreme and violent content, which includes child sexual abuse material, executions, and graphic violence.
According to the claim, the dispute began in August 2025. The Communication Workers Union (CWU) was poised to ballot several hundred moderators and quality assurance agents. However, TikTok announced a global restructuring exercise that put the proposed bargaining unit at risk of redundancy. Approximately 400 moderators were let go before Christmas, with the process initiated just a week before the union vote was scheduled.
TikTok's Defence and the AI Argument
TikTok, which boasts around 30 million monthly active users in Britain, has strongly denied the allegations, labelling the legal claim as "baseless." The company states the job cuts were part of a wider global reorganisation affecting roles in the UK and parts of Asia.
A key element of its defence is the increasing reliance on artificial intelligence. TikTok claims that 91% of content violating its rules is now removed automatically. It argues this technological shift has reduced human moderators' exposure to harmful graphic content by 76% over the past year and is part of an effort to maximise user safety.
Backlash from Unions and Advocacy Groups
John Chadfield, the CWU's national officer for tech workers, which represented about 250 of the affected moderators, condemned TikTok's actions. "This is holding TikTok to account for union busting," he stated. He emphasised the challenging nature of the moderators' roles, describing it as "the most dangerous job on the internet," often low-paid and high-pressure.
The case is being supported by the tech justice non-profit Foxglove. Its co-executive director, Rosa Curling, called TikTok's treatment of staff "appalling." She accused the platform of prioritising union busting over user safety, stating: "By laying off essential safety workers they are putting the platform's users at risk, including millions of children."
Michael Newman, a partner at law firm Leigh Day representing the claimants, framed the case as a vital stand against big tech. He argued that "the fig leaf of AI cost savings should not be allowed to obscure vital safety concerns." The outcome of this tribunal could set a significant precedent for labour rights within the UK's rapidly evolving digital technology sector.
