The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) in recruitment has transformed how companies hire, but it’s also sparking legal battles over potential biases embedded in these systems. One high-profile example is the Workday AI lawsuit, where Derek Mobley, a job applicant, claims Workday’s AI screening tools discriminated against him based on race, age, and disability. The Mobley v. Workday lawsuit is now advancing in court, raising big questions about accountability for AI-based hiring practices. Here’s what this landmark case means for employers, AI vendors, and the future of AI in hiring.

The Case Overview: Workday’s AI and Alleged Bias

Derek Mobley, the plaintiff in the Workday AI lawsuit, alleges that he was denied employment opportunities repeatedly due to biases in Workday’s AI screening software. Mobley, a Black man over 40 with anxiety and depression, claims he applied to over 100 jobs through companies using Workday’s AI-based recruitment tools and was rejected from every one, despite meeting the qualifications. He argues that these rejections resulted from inherent biases within the AI system, such as identifying his age through graduation dates and his race via his alma mater, a historically Black college.

Mobley’s complaint points to the automated, rapid rejections he often received, some even in the middle of the night, as evidence that these hiring decisions were not overseen by human recruiters but rather generated by the AI. He filed the class action lawsuit in 2023, arguing that Workday’s AI system had a "disparate impact" on him and potentially on thousands of other applicants.

A grayscale photograph of a man in a suit sitting at a table. He is using a smartphone with one hand, while a cup of coffee sits in front of him on the table. His face is partially out of frame, emphasizing his hands and the phone.

The Court’s Ruling and Legal Implications

In July 2024, Judge Rita Lin in California allowed Mobley’s case to move forward, partially rejecting Workday’s motion to dismiss. Here’s what the court’s decision entails:

Agency Theory: The court found that Workday could be seen as an "agent" of the employers who use its tools, meaning that Workday might bear responsibility for AI-driven hiring biases under federal laws like Title VII, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This decision implies that AI vendors, not just employers, could be held liable for discriminatory impacts in hiring.
Employment Agency Argument Dismissed: The court dismissed claims that Workday qualifies as an "employment agency," noting that Workday does not recruit or procure employees directly. This limits the scope of liability but still represents a shift in the potential for legal responsibility among AI vendors in hiring contexts.
EEOC’s Stance: Supporting the plaintiff, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) submitted an amicus brief arguing that federal anti-discrimination laws should cover Workday as an agent of employers. The EEOC’s involvement underscores the growing regulatory scrutiny of AI-powered hiring tools and the potential for expanding liability under agency theories.

Why This Matters: Key Takeaways for Employers and AI Vendors

The Workday AI lawsuit is a wake-up call for employers and AI developers alike. It shows the potential for AI-powered tools to introduce unintended biases and raises questions about who is accountable for such discrimination. Here are some lessons for both parties:

For Employers

Audit AI Tools for Bias: Conduct regular audits of your AI hiring tools to identify any potential biases. This proactive approach can help catch issues before they lead to legal complications.
Maintain Human Oversight: While AI tools can streamline recruitment, it’s crucial to insert human oversight at key stages. A blend of human judgment and AI can minimize the risk of automated bias.
Understand Vendor Liability: Review contracts with AI vendors to clarify liability. Ensure the agreement includes indemnification clauses and specify the vendor’s role in the hiring process to avoid unexpected liabilities.
Keep Up with Evolving Regulations: Employment law around AI is evolving. Stay informed about federal and state regulations regarding AI in hiring, such as the New York City rule requiring candidate notification when AI screening tools are used.
Develop Transparent Hiring Policies: Clearly outline how AI is used in your hiring processes and ensure transparency. Educate your HR team on using AI responsibly and ethically.

For AI Vendors

Design for Fairness and Transparency: Create AI tools with fairness and transparency in mind. Use diverse training data and maintain clear documentation to mitigate potential biases.
Implement Bias Detection Mechanisms: Regularly test and validate your AI tools to catch and correct bias. Bias detection is essential in avoiding the disparate impacts that can lead to lawsuits like the Workday AI lawsuit.
Engage in Risk Management: Work closely with legal teams to understand and mitigate risks associated with AI-based hiring tools. A risk-based approach can reduce exposure to claims of discrimination.
Collaborate with Independent Auditors: Third-party assessments can ensure impartiality in bias detection, validating your tools for ethical compliance.
Monitor Legal Trends and Adapt: Track developments in AI-related employment laws. Legal frameworks are still forming, so being prepared for compliance can protect your business in the long run.

A color photograph of a man wearing a blue blazer and a light shirt, sitting at a desk in a dimly lit room. He appears stressed or focused, resting his head on one hand while looking at a laptop screen. Various office supplies and paperwork are visible on the desk.

The Future of AI in Hiring

As more companies integrate AI into hiring, the Workday AI lawsuit represents a pivotal moment. It shows that while AI has the potential to improve hiring efficiency, it also carries legal risks that cannot be ignored. Employers and AI vendors must navigate this complex landscape carefully, balancing innovation with accountability.

This case also indicates that AI vendors may face increased legal responsibilities, with courts willing to explore liability under agency theories. With regulatory bodies like the EEOC weighing in, companies should expect that compliance requirements for AI tools will only become stricter.

Looking Ahead

The Workday AI lawsuit is more than just a legal battle; it’s a call for responsible AI use in the workplace. As AI continues to play a larger role in hiring, understanding the risks and implementing safeguards is essential. Employers and AI vendors must prioritize fair, transparent, and compliant practices to avoid potential legal pitfalls and ensure their hiring processes are inclusive and ethical.

The evolving legal landscape around AI-assisted hiring underscores the need for both vigilance and adaptability. By learning from the Workday AI lawsuit, organizations can better position themselves to use AI effectively while respecting and protecting the rights of all job applicants.

If you are an organization trying to integrate AI into your hiring process safely, contact await.ai for a demo of Await Cortex, our AI governance solution designed for highly regulated organizations.

await.ai Blog

Subscribe for Updates