Employment law and AI
no explanation as to how they arrive at their decisions. This lack of clarity makes it exceptionally difficult for employers, regulators or affected individuals to identify or rectify discriminatory outcomes. 17 Without insight into the logic of these systems, biases can remain unchecked, allowing employers to unknowingly perpetuate systemic discrimination in the recruitment and performance evaluation processes. Furthermore, the inability to explain or scrutinize the decision-making process of AI leaves employees and candidates with limited recourse to challenge unfair or discriminatory decisions, undermining their ability to hold employers accountable. While the Data Protection Act (section 15.2) does provide some safeguards against this by mandating that ‘meaningful information about the logic involved’ in the decision-making process should be provided, 18 more robust regulations are needed to ensure transparency of AI decision-making in the workplace. Although the existing Equality Act requires employers to consider how their own decisions may affect equality outcomes, it could be made more robust by clearly specifying that this also requires them to audit autonomous decision-making made on their behalf to ensure similar outcomes. AI has undeniably revolutionized recruitment and employee management practices. While it has bestowed tangible advantages on HR departments across the globe, it also introduces marked perils that threaten equity and fairness in the workplace, including privacy violations, bias and discrimination, and accountability gaps. Existing employment law provides a foundation to address these problems but requires updates to create a more robust framework that enhances transparency and fairness in AI applications within recruitment and employee management practices, reflecting legislation such as the Data Protection Act, which is not necessarily as directly related to employment law but is more up-to-date and aware of AI. Only through making employment law more dynamic can we ensure that this technology serves as a tool for progress rather than a mechanism for reinforcing inequalities in the workplace.
17 Chen, Z. ‘Ethics and Discrimination in Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Recruitment Practices’, Humanities and Social Sciences Communications , vol. 10, no. 1, 13 Sept. 2023, pp. 1–12, medium.com/@john.macy/thelimitations-of-black-box-ai-platforms-in-the-hr-domain-embracing-openness- and-transparency-23fb06267f4d, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02079-x. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024. 18 ‘General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – Final Text Neatly Arranged’, General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) , 2013, www.gdpr-info.eu/art-14-gdpr/. Accessed 15 Dec. 2024.
95
Made with FlippingBook - PDF hosting