Please listen to this article
The use of artificial intelligence in employment decision-making has been increasing since its inception. This is not as obvious as a job decision. Employers use AI to screen resumes, schedule candidate interviews, and help them answer questions from applicants. However, with the trends in recent litigation continue to be shown, using AI for employment decisions is not risk-free.
Mobleyv. Workday Here is the latest example of potential legal risks that may arise. Derek Mobley, plaintiff Reed Mobleyv. WorkdayWorkday's AI-based applicant screening tool claims discriminated against him based on a variety of protected characteristics, including his age. More specifically, Mobley has been denied from the over 100 jobs he applied for, claiming that Workday's AI-based screening tool can confirm and interpret the qualifications of the applicant's position and automatically reject applications based on such reviews.
In May 2025, Mobley received a major victory overseeing his case when he determined that he could advance his case as a class action lawsuit. Since the court's decision, nearly 100 individuals have participated, opted in and submitted their consent to become plaintiffs. More individuals are expected to opt-in as plaintiffs, and the Mobley Court's decision to allow cases to move forward as a class action lawsuit will likely spur similar cases against other companies.
Mobleyv. Workday This type of lawsuit is not the only one. For example, in August 2023, EEOC settled a $365,000 lawsuit against three integrated companies offering personalized English tutoring services. in Eeocv. ItutorGroup, Inc., et al. , EEOC alleged that the company's tutor application software automatically rejected female applicants over 55 and male applicants over 60.
Between Mobley and the EEOC enforcement of anti-discrimination laws regarding the use of AI in employment decisions, employers need to recognize the impact of the use of such tools to mitigate legal risks. If employers use AI tools to make employment decisions, or have contracts with vendors using such tools, it is important for these employers to use auditing technology to ensure that their use of AI does not violate the relevant anti-discrimination laws. Certain cities and states, including, but not limited to, Illinois, Maryland and New York City, legally require such audits and once again emphasize their importance.
Employers should also consider creating written policies on how to use AI tools in their employment decisions. It also needs to consider how employers handle situations where such tools do not align with the relevant anti-discrimination laws or other organizational goals. Each of these steps helps reduce the legal risks of employers when using AI tools for employment decisions, but also ensures that employers are not missing qualified candidates or making uninformed employment decisions due to the lack of AI tools they use.
Alyssa Lankford is a labor and employment lawyer at McAfee & Taft.
