Job Seekers Face AI Hurdles Amid Recruitment Revolution
A growing 'AI war' in recruitment leaves many job applicants feeling unheard and raises concerns about bias and transparency in automated hiring processes.
An increasing reliance on artificial intelligence in recruitment is leading to widespread frustration among job seekers, many of whom feel their applications go unreviewed by humans. This trend has sparked concerns about potential bias and a lack of transparency in automated hiring systems.
The 'AI War' in Recruitment
The current recruitment landscape is described by some as an "AI war," where candidates increasingly use AI to enhance their applications, while employers leverage AI to manage a deluge of submissions. Sheeraz Gulsher, CEO of the non-profit organization People Like Us, is leading a campaign called "Reject the Rejections" to advocate for greater transparency and accountability in AI-driven recruitment.
"We can't say for certain that every company is operating its automated or AI systems without bias," Gulsher stated. His organization is urging companies to audit their AI systems, publish the findings, and undergo independent assessments.
Research by Censuswide, surveying 2,000 UK workers, found that 75% were unaware of their right to challenge an automated rejection. The Information Commissioner's Office provides guidance that individuals subjected to certain automated decisions have the right to request a human review. People Like Us aims to inform job seekers about this right.
The survey also revealed disparities in how job seekers approach their applications due to fears of AI bias. Seventy percent of ethnically diverse jobseekers admitted to altering or concealing information on their CVs, such as their country of origin, religion, or name, compared to 57% of white candidates.
The Quest for Human Review and Feedback
Job seekers like Vivi, a business consultant who was made redundant, expressed frustration with automated rejections that provide little to no constructive feedback. "There's one instance where applications closed on Friday and I got a reply on a Saturday morning basically saying that I should work on my skills and come back in six months. But it was so obvious that nobody had assessed my skills," she recounted. Vivi believes that knowing she could request a human review might have altered her approach.
Hema, an HR and talent professional, has also experienced rapid automated rejections for her job applications. "A lot of them have been automatically rejected within 24 to 36 hours," she said. "I've always landed a job in 10 applications, so to be nearing 100 is completely out of this world."
While hesitant to jeopardize her application, Hema feels that "a human recruiter can see the fuller picture." She argues that an in-house recruitment team understands company culture and can better assess a candidate's fit based on their CV and cover letter.
The Scope of AI in Recruitment
Data from CV Library indicates that approximately 90 out of 425 surveyed recruiters use AI in the CV screening phase. However, Alec Stanwell, director of marketing, suggests a "perception gap" exists, with candidates overestimating the prevalence of AI in screening processes.
"Candidates almost universally believe that employers are using AI to screen their CVs... and that is happening but nowhere near as much as candidates think it is," Stanwell explained. He warned that this perception leads candidates to write CVs with AI in mind, resulting in applications that "all look the same" and paradoxically increase the likelihood of AI being used for filtering.
Evidence of AI Bias
Research by Stanford analyzing four million job applications processed by an AI hiring tool over four years (ending December 2022) found that some candidates were disproportionately rejected. The analysis also suggested that Black and Asian applicants were recommended for jobs at lower rates. However, the study's authors noted that the evidence was limited, focusing on a single AI tool, and that other factors could have influenced the outcomes.
Legal challenges are also emerging, with a company named Workday facing claims in the US alleging that its tools discriminated against job applicants. Workday denies these claims, stating its tools support rather than replace human judgment.
Diverse AI Applications and Regulations
AI recruitment tools operate in varied ways. Barb Hyman, founder of Sapia AI, which grades candidates through text-based chat interviews, emphasizes that not all AI is the same. "We don't know anything about you from a demographic perspective... So I think you've really got to look at the nature of the AI and how it's built," she said. Hyman also highlighted that companies are increasingly aware of regulations like the EU AI Act, which requires accountability.
Alec Samways, CEO of Splendid Communications, observed a significant increase in applications for their intern program, with many applications appearing identical, suggesting the use of AI. His company's attempt to use AI tools to detect AI-generated content proved unreliable, leading them to revert to human-led sifting.
Regulators acknowledge the potential benefits of AI in recruitment while stressing the importance of safeguarding individuals' rights. The UK's Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) advises employers to be transparent about their use of automated decision-making. A government spokesperson affirmed that existing legal protections, including equality and data protection laws, already apply to AI systems, with a commitment to enacting further protections if needed.