Background of the AI Discrimination Case
According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, the New York English tutoring company requested dates of birth from applicants during the online application process. Next, the company allegedly programmed its AI software to automatically reject female applicants aged 55 and older and male applicants aged 60 and older. This practice violates the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). Specifically, the ADEA prohibits employers from discriminating against employees and applicants 40 years of age and older. In this case, applicants were indeed qualified for the position but fell victim to AI discrimination. One female applicant initially stated in her application that she was older than 55 and was subsequently rejected. However, when she resubmitted her application with a more recent date of birth, the company offered her an interview. The lawsuit states that the company rejected more than 200 similarly qualified applicants because of their ages.AI Discrimination and EEOC Guidance
While using AI in hiring decisions can help with a variety of employment matters, there is a risk of discrimination. Using automated systems for evaluating and filtering candidates, monitoring employee performance, and determining pay or promotions can inadvertently discriminate against otherwise qualified candidates based on protected classes. Without proper independent audits and other safeguards, AI systems may risk violating federal civil rights laws. According to recent guidance from the EEOC, employers should do the following to avoid AI discrimination:- Conduct self-analyses of AI tools on an ongoing basis to determine whether their employment practices have a disproportionately large negative effect on protected classes.
- Perform an independent bias audit on the AI tools they use.
- Take additional steps to reduce the adverse impact on protected classes or select a different tool in order to avoid discriminatory hiring practices.
Proposed Consent Decree and Settlement
In EEOC v. iTutorGroup, Inc., et al., the parties entered into a proposed consent decree and notice of settlement for $365,000. The proposed consent decree also would prevent the tutoring company from doing the following:- rejecting qualified applicants age 40 and over because of their age;
- screening applicants based on age or requesting dates of birth before they make a job offer;
- rejecting any applicant based on their sex; and
- retaliating against employees engaged in protected activity.