Employers across the UK are using software to sort applications, rank candidates and schedule interviews, and some firms have linked planned job cuts to the spread of artificial intelligence. Job seekers face automated hiring tools, while staff whose roles are put at risk keep legal rights that continue to apply.
Writing for the software
Many applicant tracking systems scan CVs for words and phrases that match the job advert. The safest approach is to mirror the advert's wording where it is true. If a posting asks for "stakeholder management" and the applicant has done that work under a different label, the advert's phrase is the one to use.
Plain formatting helps. Standard headings such as "Experience" and "Education" are easier for software to read than creative labels. Text boxes, tables, icons and images can be misread or skipped altogether. A simple document saved in the format the employer asks for is usually the better choice.
Each application should be tailored. A single generic CV sent to dozens of employers is more likely to be screened out by keyword matching and by a human reader alike. Keeping a master version with every job, achievement and qualification makes it quicker to build a targeted one.
Online application forms are screened in much the same way. Answers are best drafted in a separate document and pasted in, since a form that times out can lose everything typed into it, and the saved text can be reused for later applications.
Records worth keeping
Applicants should save a copy of every advert, since listings are often taken down once a vacancy closes. A log of dates, employer names, the version of the CV submitted and any automated emails received is also useful. Screenshots of confirmation pages and portal messages add to the record. If a rejection looks unfair, that record is the starting point for a complaint or a data request.
Video interviews and online tests
Some employers use recorded video interviews, online assessments and games as early screening. Candidates can ask the employer, before taking part, whether the results are scored automatically and whether a person reviews them. Employers should be able to answer.
Disabled applicants can request reasonable adjustments to a test or interview format under the Equality Act 2010. That might mean extra time or a different type of assessment. The request is best made in writing so there is a record.
Where a platform offers a practice round, using it helps candidates become familiar with the format and the time limits. A quiet space and a stable internet connection reduce the risk of a technical fault affecting the result, and any problem that does occur should be reported to the employer straight away.
Rights over automated decisions
UK data protection law gives people rights over decisions made solely by automated means where the outcome has a significant effect on them. A job rejection can fall into that category. The rules in this area have been subject to reform, so the Information Commissioner's Office guidance is the best place to check the current position.
Any applicant or employee can make a subject access request to find out what personal data an employer holds. Organisations generally have one month to respond. The request can be sent by email to the company's data protection contact, and it should say plainly what is being asked for, including any application records and similar material. The Equality Act 2010 also applies when a tool produces results that discriminate on grounds such as age, sex, race or disability. The employer is responsible for the tools it chooses.
People who are unhappy with an employer's response can first raise a written complaint with the company. If the problem is not resolved, the Information Commissioner's Office can be asked to look at how personal data was handled. Discrimination claims go to an employment tribunal, and conciliation through Acas is normally required before a claim can be lodged. Strict time limits apply, so advice should be sought early.
If redundancy is proposed
A company citing automation or AI as the reason for cutting jobs is still bound by ordinary redundancy law. The role must genuinely be redundant, the employer must follow a fair process, and the selection method must be reasonable. Larger rounds of redundancies trigger duties to consult collectively with employee representatives or a union.
Staff who are told their job is at risk can ask for several things in writing. These are the business reason for the proposal and how many roles are affected; the selection criteria and how the individual was scored against them; the timetable for consultation; and details of any alternative vacancies within the organisation.
Photo: Unsplash
