A business consultant has sounded the alarm about job interviews being conducted by AI, saying a technology company’s evaluation of him came to some worrying conclusions, including criticizing his “routine” interviews. Google’s Chrome internet browser.
As some companies outsource job interviews to artificial intelligence, rejected candidates may wonder what went wrong.
Daniel Álvarez, based in Spain, decided to find us after he had not been contacted about a job he had applied for at the Madrid marketing company Anteliado.I don’t know exactly how the AI made the decision. he.
He obtained a copy of the AI-generated assessment from Anteriad under the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation. The company uses a third-party company called ChattyHiring to screening Interview.
Alvarez, who is not Canadian but has lived in Toronto for most of the last year, shared the full assessment and transcript with CBC. news. He said he was not impressed with what he found and did not feel that companies should use AI interviewing in their recruitment process.
“For example, when language remediation is happening, it’s not a human-to-human interaction. … I can say something and depending on your facial expression, I can quickly rephrase it,” he said.
That disappeared with this type of interaction.
Is it browser preference or a personality flaw?
Anteriad’s Dec. 22 email to Alvarez included a link to WhatsApp. screening and told him not to use AI in his answers. “We value authenticity and would like to hear your personal perspective,” the email said.
The job was a project involving Google.
Alvarez said the bot sent her a text message with a question on WhatsApp and was instructed to record a voice note in response.
Once, an AI interviewer asked him which internet browser he uses every day and why. He said he uses Chrome, saying he does it “almost out of habit.”
The AI interviewer answered positively, “Chrome is definitely very popular and easy to sync across devices.”
But Alvarez later learned that the AI seemed to perceive his response as an attack against him, and said in his assessment that “habitually using Chrome without exploring other browsers may indicate a lack of adaptability.”
jason Miller, who holds the Canada Research Chair in Ethical Engineering in Robotics and AI at the University of Ottawa, said the question is “ridiculous.”
He characterized this reaction as a “mild hallucination” and said AI has a tendency to make things up in order to answer prompts or perform assigned duties.
“For this very reason, I’m concerned about the unrestricted proliferation of these systems,” Miller said.
Experts who spoke with CBC News agreed that apart from that specific question, much of the AI assessment appears to be benign.
Companies defend AI assessments
A 2025 study by job site Indeed found that 87% of Canadian hiring leaders are using AI in the hiring process for tasks such as writing job descriptions, summarizing resumes, and interviewing candidates.
ChattyHiring CEO Carlos Guerrero said criticism of Alvarez’s assessment is misplaced.
He said in an email to CBC News that Chrome’s criticisms are not graded or weighted, despite being flagged as a “cons” on a “pros and cons” list.
Guerrero said that even a score of 0 will generate a list of “pros” from the AI tool, while a perfect 10 will also generate a list of “cons”, although he said “some of them may sound strange.”
“The purpose is simply to provide additional perspective to the hiring manager, not to influence the evaluation criteria set by the employer,” he said.
guerero state He said that while the hiring company, in this case Unteliad, designs the interviews and evaluation criteria, his company conducts the interviews and communicates the results, but does not make the final decision.
Legal starting point for UnteriadMento told Alvarez in an email shared with CBC News that humans review all automated results before making a hiring decision. The company did not respond to CBC News’ request for comment.
A Google spokesperson said in an email to CBC News that all of the company’s hiring decisions are made by human recruiters.
Reduce the burden on HR with AI interviews
AI interviewing companies are marketing themselves as a way for companies to reduce labor costs, hire better employees, and reduce the workload of HR teams.
Hilke Schellmann is an investigative journalist and author of the following books: Algorithms: How does AI decide who to hire, monitor, promote, and fire, and why we need to fight back? The popularity of AI interviewing comes as companies complain about a “flood” of resumes, he says.
She says this has been an issue since the advent of two-click applications on platforms like LinkedIn. Now that AI agents can also apply for jobs, some HR departments are faced with the “challenging” task of sifting through a seemingly impossible number of resumes, she says.
CBC Kids News asked young people in Toronto and Barrie, Ontario, and Edmonton, Alberta, how they felt about artificial intelligence, and the answers were mixed. From excitement about careers and innovation to concerns about work, the environment and over-reliance on technology, this streeter explores how young people are thinking about AI and the future.
Proponents argue that technology not only saves time, but also eliminates human bias to make better decisions.
But Shellman says that’s not the case.Because the system is set up to do statistical analysis without an ethical or moral compass of its own, that’s not always how things will play out in reality. Companies also tend to keep their internal affairs secret. When something goes wrong with the system, she said, most of the time they end up auditing it themselves.
“It could introduce new prejudices, or it could reintroduce prejudices.”“We’re replicating the bias that’s already in the training data, and we see that over and over again,” Shellman said.
A class action lawsuit in the US alleges that human resources software company Workday’s AI systems discriminate against older candidates, a claim Workday denies. Back in 2018, Amazon retired its automated job applicant ranking tool after it was found to effectively favor men over women.
Shellman says that even when only humans are involved, the interview process itself is flawed and often rewards confidence over ability. And while AI didn’t create these flaws, she says it could make them worse in some cases.
“I think we automated a pretty poor process to begin with.”
Data concerns
Apart from the assessment itself, Alvarez was upset simply that a third-party company was involved, which he said was unexpected and left him wondering who now has his data.
Guerrero said that in this case, ChattyHiring is the data processor and Anteriad is the data owner. ChattyHiring interviews are “completely private,” he says, and his company only collects candidates’ first names and contact information.
Many Canadian companies are using AI interviewing, but experts told CBC News that under Canadian law it would be complicated, if not impossible, for interviewees to obtain the data Mr. Alvarez did from private companies.
Miller also has concerns about data security.AI interviewing has become increasingly important as new companies are emerging all the time and standards are not set in Canada.
While companies in Europe are subject to stricter privacy rules and regulations, Miller wants stronger protections for candidates in Canada, arguing that citizens should have the right to opt out of AI interviews.
“Is the productivity increase here worth it?” he asked.assistance. “Or is this an inhuman act?”
