Protecting Jobseekers from AI Discrimination in Recruitment

Protecting Jobseekers from AI-Enabled Discrimination in Recruitment

AI tools are increasingly used in recruitment to screen, rank, and evaluate candidates. In Australia, 62% of organisations applied AI moderately or extensively in hiring processes in 2024. These systems assess personality, behaviour, and skills, influencing who advances in recruitment. But AI’s speed and scale introduce unique risks of unfair bias.

Many candidates aren't aware AI is involved, and decisions made by these systems can be opaque. This lack of transparency makes it hard for jobseekers to understand or contest outcomes.

How AI Can Reinforce Bias

Interviews with HR professionals, recruiters, AI developers, and career coaches reveal AI screening tools may unintentionally discriminate against women, older workers, people with disabilities, and those with non-standard English accents. Bias can enter through flawed training data, algorithm designs, or how employers use the systems.

For instance, some AI personality assessments are not validated for neurodivergent candidates. One career coach shared that a highly qualified neurodivergent student repeatedly failed these assessments due to atypical responses, blocking access to job opportunities.

Transparency Issues Create Barriers

Many AI recruitment tools impose strict time limits on responses without clear communication. Candidates often get cut off mid-answer, which disadvantages those who need more time to process or articulate responses. Lack of clarity also prevents candidates with disabilities from advocating effectively for accommodations.

New Challenges for Jobseekers

AI assessments require reliable internet, a smartphone or computer, and digital literacy. These demands can exclude candidates who lack access or skills, leading some to self-select out of applying. This adds an extra layer of structural barriers to employment.

Legal Protections and Their Limits

Existing anti-discrimination laws cover AI-driven recruitment but have gaps. Currently, jobseekers carry the burden of proving AI discrimination, which is tough given the complexity and secrecy of these systems. Laws should shift the burden onto employers to demonstrate fairness.

Privacy reforms could mandate explanations when AI is used in hiring decisions. The government’s plan to introduce mandatory safeguards for “high risk” AI applications, including recruitment tools, is a step in the right direction. These safeguards should require representative training data, accessibility for people with disabilities, and independent audits.

Clear guidelines are urgently needed to help employers comply with anti-discrimination laws when deploying AI technologies.

Should AI Hiring Systems Be Banned?

Some advocate banning AI in employment decisions without human oversight. The House of Representatives Standing Committee recommended banning AI systems that make final hiring decisions independently. This approach may be wise until robust protections are in place and the systems’ impact on workplace equality is better understood.

As one expert noted, encoding human biases into AI risks permanently excluding certain groups from opportunities.

What HR Professionals Can Do

• Demand transparency from AI vendors about how their tools work and are tested for bias.
• Ensure AI tools are accessible and validated for diverse candidate groups.
• Provide clear information to candidates about assessment formats, time limits, and accommodations.
• Stay informed on evolving laws and guidelines related to AI in recruitment.
• Advocate for audits and independent reviews of AI hiring systems used by your organisation.

For HR professionals seeking to build expertise in AI and ethical hiring practices, training resources can be valuable. Explore relevant courses at Complete AI Training to stay ahead in responsible AI use.