As firms increasingly rely on artificial intelligence-driven hiring platforms, many highly qualified candidates are finding themselves on the cutting room floor.

an AI resume screener had been trained on CVs of employees already at the firm, giving people extra marks if they listed “baseball” or “basketball” – hobbies that were linked to more successful staff, often men. Those who mentioned “softball” – typically women – were downgraded.

Marginalised groups often “fall through the cracks, because they have different hobbies, they went to different schools”

  • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
    92·
    9 months ago

    You should hate it as a manager. You’re filtering out every single quality candidate because only a deranged nut job would even consider such an unhinged request. Submitting a video, in and of itself, proves they are not worth hiring.

    You don’t need to process every candidate. Just randomly take 5%, or 1%, or .001%, and do a real hiring process. Anything at all is better than requiring a video application.

      • OmanMkIIEnglish
        52·
        9 months ago

        I don’t really get why people are up in arms at this stuff. I hate the idea of doing these type of interviews, sure. But my grad program had 3k applications, 1k video interviews, 300 in person interviews, and only 100 actual roles. How the fuck else do they expect people to handle the sheer size of applications in management/HR roles?

      • bane_killgrind@kbin.social
        1·
        9 months ago

        You are selecting for the people privileged enough to know how or spend the time figuring out how to record and send video. Even if someone has used teams every day for presentations, it’s easy to avoid using recording features when videoconferencing is all live.

        If your workplace creates pre-recorded videos for office use, then sure I guess it’s a skill you can select for.