4 Legal Safeguards To Protect Candidates From AI Recruitment Discrimination

Building trust in AI recruitment

We asked four human resources (HR) and legal experts: ‘How can HR departments assess and address the impact of biased algorithms to ensure compliance with employment laws and equal opportunity standards?’ ‘What legal safeguards should be in place to protect candidates from discrimination when AI algorithms are used in screening, interview scheduling, or decision-making processes?’ 

Their insights reveal both the risks and the roadmap to fair, transparent, and legally sound hiring practices.

From conducting regular AI audits to implementing human oversight and diverse training data, this article explores four critical safeguards to protect candidates and build trust in AI-driven recruitment.
 

• Conduct Regular AI Audits
• Implement Human Oversight
• Test for Disparate Impact
• Appoint an AI Ethics Officer

Conduct Regular AI Audits

Addressing the impact of biased algorithms requires HR departments to partner with legal experts to conduct regular audits on AI tools used in recruitment and screening. These audits should focus on identifying any patterns of bias in hiring outcomes and involve continuous testing to ensure compliance with employment laws.

It is essential to establish transparent AI processes. HR departments should be able to explain how algorithms work and make decisions in plain language. This transparency helps build trust and makes it easier to spot unfair biases.

From my legal perspective, implementing critical legal safeguards, such as data protection measures and bias identification protocols, is crucial. For instance, an organization I worked with regularly reviewed its AI outputs and adjusted algorithms accordingly, significantly reducing bias in recruiting decisions.

Another client I advised adopted diverse training data to feed into algorithms, ensuring a variety of backgrounds and experiences are represented. This proactive approach not only safeguarded against bias but also fostered a more inclusive hiring process.

Real-life evidence from the field shows that appointing a dedicated AI ethics officer within the HR team can be beneficial. This role focuses on ethical AI use and counsels on bias prevention, enhancing both compliance and candidate experience.

If you need more information on legal safeguards and compliance strategies, feel free to reach out.
 

Jonathan Feniak, General Counsel, LLC Attorney

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implement Human Oversight

We have seen firsthand how AI can both help and hurt hiring decisions. The biggest risk is hidden bias in the data these tools learn from. To catch this early, we regularly audit the AI's recommendations by testing diverse candidate profiles and looking for patterns of unfair exclusion. If we spot issues, we adjust the criteria or add a manual review step.

One thing we never do is let AI make the final call. It is a tool, not a decision-maker. Automated screening helps speed up hiring, but human oversight is critical, especially for non-traditional candidates who might get overlooked by an algorithm.

Legally, we stay aligned with EEOC guidelines and ensure transparency. Candidates should know when AI is involved and have a way to challenge decisions. We also train our hiring teams to use AI insights correctly because even the best tools can cause harm if people do not understand their limits.

AI should make hiring fairer, not reinforce old biases. The key is to use it wisely, with checks and balances in place.
 

Vikrant Bhalodia, Head of People Ops, WeblineIndia

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Test for Disparate Impact

Understanding the risks of bias in hiring algorithms AI-driven hiring tools are increasingly used to screen resumes, schedule interviews, and even assess candidate suitability. However, these systems are only as fair as the data they are trained on, and if that data reflects historical biases, the algorithms will perpetuate them. I have seen cases where AI screening tools disproportionately filter out candidates based on gendered language in resumes or where facial recognition software used in video interviews has been less accurate for certain racial groups. 

HR departments need to be proactive in assessing how these tools function, ensuring they do not inadvertently violate anti-discrimination laws like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act or the Americans with Disabilities Act. Legal Safeguards to Ensure Compliance To stay compliant and protect candidates, HR teams should demand transparency from AI vendors understanding how algorithms make decisions and whether they have undergone bias audits. Employers should also implement human oversight at key decision points. AI should be a tool to assist hiring, not the final decision-maker. 

Additionally, organizations must ensure that any AI-driven assessments are job-related and consistent with business necessity to avoid disparate impact claims. Regular audits of hiring outcomes can help identify and correct any discriminatory patterns before they lead to legal action. Building a Fair and Equitable Hiring Process Beyond legal compliance, companies should integrate fairness into their hiring processes by offering alternative evaluation methods for candidates who may be disadvantaged by automated tools. 

For example, if an AI system ranks candidates based on keyword-matching resumes, applicants from non-traditional backgrounds or career changers could be unfairly excluded. Employers should provide clear pathways for candidates to challenge or supplement AI decisions, ensuring a more inclusive process. At Hones Law, I advise businesses to treat AI as a compliance risk area - just like wage laws or harassment policies - requiring ongoing monitoring, training, and accountability to prevent discrimination and ensure fair employment practices.
 

Ed Hones, Attorney At Law, Hones Law Employment Lawyers PLLC

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appoint an AI Ethics Officer

As someone who has worked extensively with New York employment cases, I recognize the valid questions about AI's role in HR decision-making and its potential to amplify existing biases. Here are some suggestions:

Start by looking at the foundation of any AI system - the training data. In my experience, HR teams sometimes underestimate how historical patterns in their own hiring data can skew algorithmic decisions. If your past recruitment favored candidates from specific schools or neighborhoods, the AI *could* unintentionally prioritize those same patterns.

It is also critical to test outcomes rather than just intentions. Track whether the AI's selection rates for protected groups differ significantly from human-led processes. When discrepancies appear, dig deeper - was there an unexpected correlation in the data, or does the algorithm weigh factors differently than intended?

For candidates, create straightforward channels to request human reevaluation of AI-assessed applications. One approach I have seen involves a simple checkbox during the application process: "Would you like a manager to personally review your materials?" This opt-in system may respect applicant autonomy while giving organizations feedback about where their AI might be going off track.
 

Jason Tenenbaum, Attorney - NY State, The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C.

Brett Farmiloe is CEO & Founder of Featured.