There is a growing body of litigation and regulatory scrutiny regarding the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in employment decisions such as hiring, promotions, job performance, and termination. This is largely because AI is trained with historical data, raising the concern that AI is perpetuating biases that have a disparate impact on protected groups with regard to employment. It follows that plaintiffs in cases involving AI and automated decision making often allege employment discrimination on the basis of race, sex, age and disability – violations of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Recent Employment Law Cases Involving AI – Allegations, Outcomes, and Implications
- An ongoing class action case, Mobley v. Workday, Inc., alleges that an HR software company provided discriminatory AI screening tools that resulted in the plaintiff (an African-American man, over 40, with disabilities) being rejected from over 100 jobs across client companies. The plaintiff alleges that he was subject to automatic “midnight” rejections based on race, age, and disability hinting at algorithmic bias rather than human review of his applications. Last year the court ruled that the software company could be held liable as an “agent” for employers and, more recently, certified the class under the ADEA allowing opt-ins from similarly affected applicants nationwide. The implications are huge in that vendors are not shielded if their tools actively recommend/reject candidates, nor are employers, who could be liable if they fail to audit vendor AI for bias.
- In EEOC v. iTutorGroup, Inc. (settled August 2023), the EEOC sued three related online tutoring companies for using AI software that automatically rejected female applicants over 55 and male applicants over 60, violating ADEA. The EEOC alleged the tool screened resumes without human input, filtering out protected age groups. The resulting consent decree required iTutorGroup and affiliates to pay over $350K as back pay and compensatory damages to affected applicants who were automatically rejected because of their ages. The case highlights the risks in resume-screening AI, and points to the responsibility employers have to ensure human oversight of the employment process.
- D.K. v. HireVue (filed 2024; ongoing) involves an indigenous, deaf woman who alleges HireVue’s video interview AI (using speech recognition) denied her a promotion due to biases against non-white and deaf speakers, violating ADA and potentially Title VII. She further alleges the AI tool scores candidates on “soft skills” like communication, disadvantaging accents or disabilities. The case is in its early stages, but underscores promotion risks and opt-out rights, and the need for video/AI interviews to accommodate disabilities as required under the ADA.
Contact an Experienced Employment Law Attorney for Help
Litigation regarding AI in the employment process is expected to grow, with plaintiffs not only bringing employment discrimination complaints against employers, but also AI vendors through individual claims and collective actions. EEOC investigations surged in 2024-2025 with an expectation that more suits will be brought regarding job termination recommended by AI, denied promotions due to AI biased performance metrics, and discriminatory AI screening for job candidates, spelling trouble for employers and vendors alike.
When you are denied employment, fired from your job, or denied promotion due to biased AI or automated decision making tools, it is important to seek knowledgeable guidance. Contact the employment law offices of Alan C. Olson & Associates for answers at 262-785-9606.
