Lawsuit claiming discrimination by the Workday HR program could have huge impacts on how AI is used in hiring

Several job candidates over the age of 40 claim that they have been discriminated against during the hiring process

Workday has been sued by multiple job candidates who claim that the human resources software firm’s screening technology is discriminatory. (Workday)

Workday has been sued by multiple job candidates who claim that the human resources software firm’s screening technology is discriminatory.

The collective action lawsuit could have a huge impact on how artificial intelligence is used in the hiring process.

Workday is used by thousands of organizations around the world to recruit new employees. Many companies use it as a first step in the hiring process. It's often the online portal where applications for jobs are submitted.

One program that the HR company offers is called HiredScore AI. This service grades candidates through “unbiased, AI-driven analysis,” according to the firm. The idea behind this program is to allow recruiters a quick way to sort through candidates.

But several job candidates who have submitted applications through Workday have come forward, claiming the company’s algorithms are discriminatory, based on age and other factors.

Workday has been sued by multiple job candidates who claim that the human resources software firm’s screening technology is discriminatory. (Workday)

Derek Mobley, a Morehouse College graduate with almost a decade of experience in financial, IT and customer service work, sued Workday last year, claiming that its algorithms led to more than 100 job application rejections over seven years because of his age, race and disabilities.

Four other job candidates made similar discrimination claims. On Friday a California district judge ruled that the case can move forward as a collective action lawsuit.

All of the plaintiffs are over the age of 40, and they claim that they have submitted hundreds of job applications through Workday collectively, only to get rejected each time.

One of the plaintiffs, Jill Hughes, claimed that she received automated rejections for hundreds of submitted job applications “often received within a few hours of applying or at odd times outside of business hours,” according to court documents.

She claimed this indicated “a human did not review the applications,” the documents read.

Workday said in a statement to The Independent: “We continue to believe this case is without merit. This is a preliminary, procedural ruling at an early stage of this case that relies on allegations, not evidence.

“The Court has not made any substantive findings against Workday, and has not ruled this case can go forward as a class action. We're confident that once Workday is permitted to defend itself with the facts, the plaintiff's claims will be dismissed.”

In a collective action lawsuit, plaintiffs have to opt into it, whereas in a class action lawsuit, a large group of people is included in the case unless they opt out.

Workday still has the option to ask for the claims to be handled by the court individually.

Mobley’s original complaint said that “too often” algorithmic decision-making and data analysis tools “reinforce and even exacerbate historical and existing discrimination.”

If Mobley and the other plaintiffs are successful in their collective action suit, Workday may have to change its practices. This could have a dramatic effect on how companies use AI in future hiring processes to weed out candiates before a manager can even see their applications.