Bombshell lawsuit says major US HR firm is discriminating against over-40s

Daily Mail​

23-05-2025

Major tech firm Workday is facing a collective action lawsuit alleging that a feature of its recruitment tech is discriminatory against applicants over 40.
In 2024, Derek Mobley sued Workday, a company which provides tech to help firms with hiring and workforce management.
He alleged that the company's job applicant screening algorithm meant that he was rejected by more than 100 jobs over seven years due to his age, race and disabilities.
Mobley is a black man over the age of 40 who identifies as having anxiety and depression.
Four other plaintiffs over the age of 40 have since joined him with allegations of age discrimination.
Earlier this month, California district judge Rita Lin ruled the lawsuit could move forward as a nationwide collective action - similar to a class action.
The plaintiffs claim that they submitted hundreds of applications to the software but were rejected every time - sometimes within a matter of minutes.
According to court documents, they claim Workday's AI-based hiring tools 'disproportionately disqualifies individuals over the age of forty (40) from securing gainful employment.'
Workday denies the allegations.
Some 11,000 companies worldwide use Workday, which provides a platform for firms to post job openings and manage the recruitment process.
It also offers a service called 'HiredScore AI,' which it says uses 'responsible AI' to grade the best candidates and cut down the time recruiters spend screening applicants, CNN reported.
In a court filing opposing the allegations, Workday claims it does not screen prospective employees and that its tech does not make decisions on hiring.
AI tools can help businesses manage a sudden influx of thousands of applications.
But critics of the tech are concerned that AI can contain biases which may deter people being hired based on factors such as their age, gender or race.
The case is still in its early stages. But it serves as a warning that employers could be held accountable for algorithmic screening tools if they disproportionately harm certain groups - even if the bias is unintentional.
For example, The American Civil Liberties Union has previously warned that AI hiring tools 'pose an enormous danger of exacerbating existing discrimination in the workplace.'
In 2018, Amazon had to scrap a 'sexist' AI hiring tool after after it taught itself to prefer male candidates over females.
Mobley claims he kept being rejected, often without being offered an interview, despite having almost a decade of experience and having graduated cum laude from Morehouse College.
According to court documents, he alleges he once submitted a job application at 12:55am and had already received a rejection by 1:50am.
Another plaintiff, Jill Hughes, claimed she also received automated rejections for hundreds of roles 'often received within a few hours of applying or at odd times outside of business hours … indicating a human did not review the applications,' CNN reported.
In some cases, she claims the rejection emails falsely said she did not meet the minimum requirements for the role.
Mobley's original complaint claims: 'Algorithmic decision-making and data analytics are not, and should not be assumed to be, race neutral, disability neutral, or age neutral.
'Too often, they reinforce and even exacerbate historical and existing discrimination.'
Judge Lin's order on May 16 will allow Mobley's lawyers to notify other people who may have similar claims against Workday to join the lawsuit, but the company can still ask the court to deal with the claims individually.
The lawsuit is seeking unspecified monetary damages and a court order requiring the company to change its practices.
'We continue to believe this case is without merit. This is a preliminary, procedural ruling at an early stage of this case that relies on allegations, not evidence.
'The Court has not made any substantive findings against Workday, and has not ruled this case can go forward as a class action.