Talent management is becoming increasingly automated, from CV scanners to AI-analysed video interviews, employers around the world are capitalising on the range of AI-driven and automated talent management tools available on the market. These tools promise to save time, improve candidate experience, and make the process more convenient and flexible, with some even boasting claims of making the workforce more diverse. However, it is no secret that these tools do not always deliver on their promises, particularly in regards to increasing diversity. While it is true that automated tools can overcome human biases, which are notoriously difficult to stamp out, such tools should be extensively tested for bias and the social implications of their use examined for issues such as accessibility in order to ensure they do not just pose different risks.

Although these novel tools are covered under existing equal opportunity legislation, policymakers have begun to take steps to codify requirements to ensure that automated employment tools do not result in intentional or unintentional harm, particularly in relation to bias. California policymakers have been particularly active here, proposing modifications to its employment regulations to address automated decision systems (ADSs). The modifications were first proposed in March 2022 for public workshop, and were then updated in July 2022 and February 2023. Overall, their goal is to protect employees and applicants from unlawful discrimination based on protected characteristics, and in addition to adding new definitions related to automated-decision systems, many of the modifications of the text explicate that discrimination based on these characteristics is unlawful even when decisions are made using an ADS. In this blog post, we highlight the key changes that have been made to the modifications with each iteration.