In the case of Mobley v. Workday, Inc. (2024), Derek Mobley, a Black man over 40 with a disability, alleged that Workdays AI-powered applicant screening platform systematically excluded Black, older, and disabled applicants. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California allowed the claims to proceed, emphasizing the unintended but disproportionate impact of the algorithm on these protected groups.

The court noted that while Workday may not have intentionally discriminated, its use of biased training data likely caused adverse impacts. This case underscores how AI systems can perpetuate discrimination if not carefully designed and monitored. It also highlights the legal risks for companies using such tools, as employers could be held liable for discriminatory outcomes stemming from their reliance on AI technology.

AI has the potential to streamline hiring, but cases like Mobley v. Workday, Inc. reveal ethical challenges. Based on the articles located in the Resources section of this module or other research you conducted, address the following questions:

• What are some advantages and disadvantages of using AI to recruit and hire employees? Feel free to share any experiences you have had in this regard.
• What strategies could companies adopt to balance efficiency with specific ethical and legal concerns related to AI recruitment?

In your response posts to your peers, offer your own perspectives and experience.

To complete this assignment, review the .

Undergraduate Discussion Rubric

Overview

Your active participation in the discussions is essential to your overall success this term. Discussion questions will help you make meaningful connections between the course content and the larger concepts of the course. These discussions give you a chance to express your own thoughts, ask questions, and gain insight from your peers and instructor.

Directions

For each discussion, you must create one initial post and follow up with at least two response posts.

For your initial post, do the following:

• Write a post of 1 to 2 paragraphs.
• In Module One, complete your initial post by Thursday at 11:59 p.m. Eastern.
• In Modules Two through Eight, complete your initial post by Thursday at 11:59 p.m. of your local time zone.
• Consider content from other parts of the course where appropriate. Use proper citation methods for your discipline when referencing scholarly or popular sources.

For your response posts, do the following:

• Reply to at least two classmates outside of your own initial post thread.
• In Module One, complete your two response posts by Sunday at 11:59 p.m. Eastern.
• In Modules Two through Eight, complete your two response posts by Sunday at 11:59 p.m. of your local time zone.
• Demonstrate more depth and thought than saying things like I agree or You are wrong. Guidance is provided for you in the discussion prompt.

Discussion Rubric

CriteriaExceeds ExpectationsMeets ExpectationsPartially Meets ExpectationsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsValueComprehensionDevelops an initial post with an organized, clear point of view or idea using rich and significant detail (100%)Develops an initial post with a point of view or idea using adequate organization and detail (85%)Develops an initial post with a point of view or idea but with some gaps in organization and detail (55%)Does not develop an initial post with an organized point of view or idea (0%)40TimelinessN/ASubmits initial post on time (100%)Submits initial post one day late (55%)Submits initial post two or more days late (0%)10EngagementProvides relevant and meaningful response posts with clarifying explanation and detail (100%)Provides relevant response posts with some explanation and detail (85%)Provides somewhat relevant response posts with some explanation and detail (55%)Provides response posts that are generic with little explanation or detail (0%)30Clear CommunicationExceeds expectations with an intentional use of language that promotes a thorough understanding (100%)Consistently and effectively communicates in an organized way to a specific audience (85%)Shows progress toward meeting expectations, but communication is inconsistent or ineffective in a way that negatively impacts understanding (55%)Shows no evidence of consistent, effective, or organized communication (0%)20Total:100%