Popular Culture Review 30.1
the perils in relying on time-saving methods . However , a potential employer may be left with questions about real-world long-term legal risks , and companies who offer these services are quick to dismiss the legal liability .
Currently , algorithmic hiring remains a legal grey area . It can be impossible for a potential employee to know why their resume was excluded from an interview . Even if they can determine they were excluded due to algorithmic hiring , and had access to the exact algorithm , the legal requirements necessary to win such a case would be almost impossible . Victims of discrimination simply do not have access to know if their resume was excluded by a live person , or by a computer . Even if it was excluded by a computer , there is often no means short of a lawsuit to force companies to reveal the criteria used . Worse even with the data , and the criteria used , the data analysis necessary to prove discriminatory hiring practices is often out of reach .
Ultimately , the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ) should be our best resource by giving guidance to employers on how to properly utilize these tools , as well as the best source of hope for victims of discrimination due to systematic disparate impact caused by improperly designed and tested algorithms . By forcing companies who provide or use algorithmic hiring to publicly disclose their criteria and perform rigorous checks on how each data point impacts the makeup of the applicant pool , they may be able to ensure the decades of progress made possible by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are not lost .
HISTORY OF THE PROBLEM
“ Knowledge is power ,” wrote Sir Francis Bacon . 9 It was true in 1597 , and it is true now .
167