AI hiring tools face legal reckoning as VC money pours in
Date: February 6, 2026
Venture capitalists invested $6.24 billion in work tech during 2025-a 31% jump in average deal size-right as lawsuits against Workday and Eightfold AI threaten to reset how HR is allowed to use AI.
That collision is shifting the conversation. As George LaRocque of WorkTech puts it, this looks like the end of "algorithm as an alibi." The question isn't just what the AI can do. It's how the AI proves it is fair.
The end of "algorithm as an alibi"
WorkTech tracked 193 deals across 31 countries last year. The U.S. led with 88 deals, followed by the U.K. (24) and India (10). Seventeen rounds topped $100 million-up from 14 in 2024-with Rippling's $450 million Series G, isolved's $350 million secondary, and Deel's $300 million Series E leading the way.
Here's the catch: the more AI consolidates across HCM, the more risk concentrates. One system touching compensation, performance, and internal mobility means more points of failure-legal, ethical, and operational.
As LaRocque warns, "Black boxes are hiding in plain sight across the entire HCM and talent management stack." Automated scoring, retention models, sentiment analysis-assumptions are baked in. Those assumptions are now liabilities.
Why this matters for HR now
- Pending suits against Workday allege age bias in hiring algorithms.
- Claims against Eightfold AI involve the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and so-called "hidden dossiers" on candidates.
- If either case sets precedent, it could force sweeping changes in how vendors build, sell, and disclose AI-and how HR teams deploy it.
In short: if your stack relies on opaque models, you're on borrowed time.
Follow the money: where VC is betting
- All-in-one HCM and talent suites that promise consolidation.
- Niche AI-native tools across 44 subcategories (up from 39), from compensation intelligence to agentic sourcing.
- Heavy concentration at the top: 17 mega-rounds drove a big share of total dollars. Early-stage is active (72 seed rounds; $364 million total), but the power-law is real.
Translation for HR: expect more bundled AI features inside your core platform-and more specialized point solutions pushing into sensitive decision flows.
What to do in the next 90 days
- Inventory your algorithms. List every HR decision influenced by AI: resume screening, assessments, compensation bands, performance scoring, promotions, retention risk, scheduling.
- Document data in and decisions out. For each use case: inputs, features, training data source, model owner, human review step, and decision logs.
- Run adverse impact checks. Measure selection rate differences and false negative rates by protected group-before and after model thresholds or filters.
- Tighten FCRA practices. If any vendor or workflow looks like credit reporting or background screening, ensure disclosures, consent, pre-adverse action, and dispute mechanisms are in place. See the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
- Add human-in-the-loop gates. Require human review for high-impact calls (reject, demote, terminate, large pay changes). Track override rates.
- Set a retention and deletion schedule. Reduce liability by limiting how long you keep model features, candidate profiles, and decision logs.
Build for auditability, not demos
- Explainability on demand. Your team should be able to show how a score or recommendation was produced, in plain language.
- Bias testing baked in. Ask vendors for pre-deployment and ongoing bias test results, including methodology and remediation steps.
- Versioning and change logs. Every model change should have a ticket, rationale, and before/after impact analysis.
- Data minimization. Turn off features you don't need. Reduce feature sets to only what materially improves accuracy without unfair impact.
Procurement checklist for AI-enabled HR tools
- Contractual rights: Audit rights, transparency reports, and the ability to export decisions and logs.
- Compliance warranties: FCRA (where applicable), anti-discrimination laws, and clear vendor responsibilities for notices and disputes.
- Bias and security exhibits: Required periodic bias testing, SOC2 or equivalent, incident response timelines, and data deletion SLAs.
- Indemnities and caps: Coverage for regulatory actions tied to algorithmic decisions.
Metrics to track monthly
- Selection and advancement rates by group (screen, interview, offer, hire).
- False positives/negatives and override rates for automated flags.
- Time-to-fill and quality-of-hire alongside fairness metrics-optimize both, not one.
- Candidate complaints and dispute resolution times.
Watch the lawsuits
- Workday: Allegations of age discrimination in hiring algorithms could push providers to increase transparency and offer configurable thresholds with proof of fairness testing.
- Eightfold AI: FCRA-centered claims may tighten rules around candidate profiling, consent, and dispute rights-especially where models assemble dossiers from multiple data sources.
Outcome aside, expect higher expectations for documentation, candidate notices, and auditable decision trails.
Upskill your HR team
- Train recruiters, HRBPs, and comp/PM leaders on AI risk, fairness testing, and model fundamentals. A shared baseline cuts noise and speeds better calls.
- If you need structured learning, see AI learning paths by role at Complete AI Training.
Regulatory resources worth bookmarking
Bottom line
Money is flowing into AI for HR. Legal pressure is building faster. The winners will be the teams that treat transparency, fairness testing, and documentation as core product features-not compliance theater.
Shift your stack from "trust us" to "prove it." The clock is ticking, and the audit is coming.
Your membership also unlocks:
