All courses / AI Boss / Module 2 / Chapter 7
Learning objectives
After the lesson the participant can:
- Explain why the degree of delegation in screening is set by use and not by the configuration screen.
- Compare the documented failures of automated hiring with the documented record of human recruiters.
- Distinguish prohibited emotion inference from high-risk scoring of interview content, as the chapter draws the line.
- Draft the conditions of a delegation profile that keep a hiring decision with a named recruiter.
Key concepts
- Read below the cut
- A condition that the recruiter reads a defined share of applications ranked below the shortlist before any rejection is sent; DLG-HM-REC-01 starts at 20 per cent. It makes Level 1 Assisted true in practice.
- Blind review
- A monthly sample of rejected applications, 50 in the worked example, re-assessed by a second recruiter without the ranking, so that divergence between people and the system can be detected.
- Configuration as selection guideline
- A screening model's criteria, weights, knock-out questions, reading threshold and excluded features are in substance the requirements a BetrVG section 95 guideline sets out. Treated as a vendor setting, it escapes co-determination.
- Emotion recognition prohibition
- Article 5(1)(f) of the AI Act prohibits inferring emotions in the workplace except for medical or safety reasons; the Commission's guidelines apply it to candidates. It covers inference from biometric data, not sentiment analysis of written text.
- Pause record
- An AI Decision Record of a decision to stop a system, with trigger, questions asked, supplier answers, reasons and conditions for return. AIDR-0601 records Nordvik Region's pause of its screening pilot.
Interactive exercises
Do them here and get feedback at once. Choose a card and then where it belongs, or drag it.
Interactive exercise 1 · Sort
Prohibited, high-risk or exempt in hiring
Sort each use of AI in recruitment by how Chapter 7 says the AI Act and the Commission's guidelines treat it.
Interactive exercise 2 · Match
Cases and studies of hiring
Match each case or study from Chapter 7 with what the chapter reports about it.
Teaching plan
| 15 min | The teacher walks the five stages of the automated funnel and the example of eight hundred applications of which recruiters read the top fifty. |
| 20 min | Groups take one case each (the scrapped Amazon model, iTutorGroup, HireVue, Mobley v. Workday) and one study of human hiring, and report the mechanism in two sentences. |
| 15 min | Presentation of the deployer's duties under Article 26, the applicant's rights, the prohibition in Article 5(1)(f) and the two routes of co-determination, German and Nordic. |
| 30 min | Exercise: groups act as Nordvik Region preparing the screening module's return and write the profile conditions that answer AIDR-0601. |
| 10 min | Debrief with MDR-HM-0070: what the recruiter read, whom she shortlisted and dropped, and what an applicant would be told under Article 86. |
Discussion
- The chapter says unconstrained human discretion is not a neutral benchmark, and that an automated process can at least be measured if the deployer keeps the records. What follows for how the two should be compared?
- The New York audit law produced, in the chapter's words, documents and not scrutiny. What does a transparency duty need around it to have an effect?
- Nordvik Region did not find discrimination; it found that it could not explain a system it had deployed, and stopped. Under what conditions would your organisation take the same decision?
Written exercise
Exercise · 30 minutes
Conditions for the return of a screening module
AIDR-0601 lists three conditions for the return of Nordvik Region's screening module: supplier documentation, a delegation profile with read-below-cut and blind review agreed in negotiation, and a fundamental rights impact assessment. Write the delegation profile. Using DLG-HM-REC-01 as the model, set the degree for M2 Evaluation and M3 Consequence, name the decider, list the forbidden actions (such as rejection without a recruiter decision), and set the reading share, the blind-review sample, the outcome monitoring, the log retention and the applicant information. Add the list of evidence to demand from the supplier, taken from the four questions the union asked, and the triggers on which the module is paused again.
Deliverable: A delegation profile for the screening module with degrees, named decider, forbidden actions, reading and review conditions, supplier evidence list and pause triggers.
Self-test
Choose an answer to see whether it is right, or open the answer below each question.
According to the chapter, which use of a video-interview system has been prohibited in EU recruitment since 2 February 2025?
Show the answer
D. Analysing facial expression or tone of voice to infer nervousness, honesty or another emotional state
Article 5(1)(f) prohibits inferring emotions from biometric data in the workplace, which the guidelines extend to candidates. Scoring transcript content remains high-risk evaluation under Annex III, point 4(a), not a prohibited practice.What did the supplier answer when Nordvik Region's union asked which criteria and weights produced the ranking?
Show the answer
B. It did not disclose them and described them as proprietary
AIDR-0601 records the criteria and weights as not disclosed and proprietary, with no outcome data for the Region's applicants. The Region could therefore not meet Article 86 or its duty to give reasons, and paused.Why does the chapter say a supplier's adverse-impact report based on the US 4/5 rule is not evidence of compliance in Europe?
Show the answer
A. Because the equality law the chapter cites has no such threshold and turns on proportionality and justification, with the burden of proof shifting to the respondent
The chapter notes that a model can be tuned to pass the 4/5 rule whether or not it measures anything job-related, and that Directive 2000/78/EC applies to selection criteria and shifts the burden of proof once discrimination may be presumed.