HR tech giant Workday was dealt a legal blow last week in a suit that is considered a bellwether for how courts will view potential AI-driven bias in employment practices.
In Mobley v. Workday, Inc., U.S. District Judge Rita Lin shot down the company’s assertion that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act does not extend to job seekers. Lin pointed to legal precedent finding the opposite, as well as the fact that the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity interprets the law to cover candidates. The judge did side with Workday in its effort to dismiss several state claims and one discrimination complaint made by an individual plaintiff.
Mobley v. Workday: a guidepost for AI litigation
Mobley was certified as a collective action last summer, with five named plaintiffs over age 40 arguing that the AI-powered recommendation system embedded within Workday discriminates against older applicants. According to Workday, it has more than 11,500 users globally and counts more than 60% of the Fortune 500 among its clients.
That breadth explains why the case is so closely watched among HR and tech circles that increasingly face questions about litigation risks associated with AI use in recruiting and hiring. AI hiring platform Eightfold is facing its own legal challenge—a class action filed in California state court alleging the company’s AI tools unfairly rely on online data about job candidates to make predictions.
HorizonHuman co-founder Sarah Smart recently wrote for HR Executive that the suit against Workday should serve as a “call to action” for HR leaders to become “proficient in AI’s applications, risks and governance.”
HR professionals need to understand not only where AI is being deployed across the HR tech stack, but also how it works, Smart says. They must learn how the AI is trained on data, and help determine whether the process leaves gaps for bias to creep in. HR leaders must also take responsibility for auditing the systems, which can highlight whether tools are optimized for equity or just speed. And when a bias test goes awry, Smart says HR should have a clear handle on course correction.
“The Mobley v. Workday case is a pivotal moment,” Smart writes. “Whether or not Workday is found liable, the message to employers is clear: If you’re using AI in HR, you must understand precisely how it works—and how it may be impacting your decision-making.”
The post Landmark Workday case signals new AI hiring risk appeared first on HR Executive.
This article was originally published on HR Executive. Click below to read the complete article.