• Published

The fear of becoming surplus to requirements because of advancements in AI is one shared by millions of workers, but are AI recruitment tools posing a specific threat to women trying to return to employment?

After a career spanning decades, with senior corporate roles in fashion, and a period of freelancing, 52-year-old Stacey Duguid decided to find "one last job".

What followed was 16 months of sending "gazillions" of CVs, with little more than a handful of automated replies, despite never previously struggling to find work.

Feeling "lonely and shameful" and wondering if it was a "me problem", she posted on social media asking whether other women her age were having the same experience.

The response was overwhelming, with thousands of women saying they were facing similar struggles.

Stacey, who lives in north London, believes AI-powered recruitment tools could be contributing to the problem and has "Botoxed" her CV by removing references to her age and experience.

"AI holds a mirror up to society. It's a reflection of our bias," she said.

"I'm not saying this is just a women's issue; I've had messages from men too. My point is about gendered ageism."

Confidence 'taken a hit'

The BBC has since spoken to more than 60 women aged 40 to 65 across a range of industries who have been struggling to find work.

Most have decades of experience in senior roles and say they've submitted countless CVs, only to receive automated rejections or no response at all.

Like Stacey, many believe AI recruitment tools are playing a role.

Koeyli Jaluka, 49, has held senior roles across manufacturing, corporate and healthcare.

"I've never been in this position before. For the last 10â12 years I've been headhunted. Now I'm hunting for jobs and being relentlessly rejected."

Made redundant nine months ago, she's applied for 442 jobs and has heard back in only a few cases. She's occasionally been told she's "too senior" â which she believes is "code for old". Despite two decades of experience and two degrees, she says her confidence has "taken a hit".

She believes tighter budgets, AI screening and increasingly narrow hiring criteria are all contributing.

"A lot of us have been told by career coaches to shave off the first 10 years of work on our CVs just to ensure we don't come across as having worked for too long."

'I'm on jobseeker's allowance'

Anna Cowie, 52, had a 30-year career in advertising but has been unemployed for almost four years.

She's lost count of the number of CVs she's sent, despite having never previously been without a job.

After decades of working for big brands, most recently helping to launch the new Battersea Power Station, she's now on jobseeker's allowance.

Anna has turned to volunteering for community festivals, and has found networking with real people a much more promising approach.

"You're seen as a human and not just lines on paper."

'Huge repercussions'

While it is impossible to know in many cases whether AI tools played a role in a screening or a rejection because employers rarely disclose details of their recruitment processes, there are widespread fears that AI recruitment tools are disadvantaging mid-life women, external.

The City of London Women Pivoting to Digital Taskforce, which focuses on women in the financial and professional services sector, has raised concerns, external about the growing use of AI in recruitment and its impact on women.

Chair Caroline Haines said the taskforce's research found significant concern that AI used to screen job applications and CVs does not recognise the skills many experienced women can bring.

"There is a high level of concern that AI at initial recruitment level... doesn't account for the skills of a vast body of women that could be very effective and therefore promote economic growth," she said.

For example, women who have taken time out of work for childcare may have gaps in their CVs that some AI screening systems could interpret negatively.

In terms of the bigger picture, the taskforce estimates AI and automation could displace hundreds of thousands of women's jobs by 2035.

Using data from Market and skills projections: 2020 to 2035, Department for Education, external, the taskforce estimates that without significant investment in retraining, firms could face more than £750m in severance costs. ** **

In the digital taskforce's recent survey, external of over 1,000 women, 68% said they had not been given the opportunity by their employer to retrain or transition into digital roles.

"When the country is desperate for economic growth, we need to use whatever resource we have, and the resource of women who are mid-career, mid-experience. If they drop out of the market there are huge repercussions," Haines said.

The BBC understands that some London-based companies have stopped using AI tools for fear of bias in their recruitment.

Laura Holden, an AI lawyer and founder of the Bonsai AI and legal consultancy, said companies often do not understand how the tools work, which has the potential to cause "significant harm".

She argued it is difficult to determine whether there is bias because "there is a lack of regulation globally that requires providers to show how their tools work".

She pointed to CV screening tools and AI-scored interviews as examples of where bias can emerge.

One tool, she said, grades CVs from A to D, encouraging recruiters to prioritise higher-ranked candidates. Others flag factors such as a seven-year career gap as a "thing to note", potentially influencing decisions unfairly.

Holden said providers were "very quick" to claim their tools are safe and reduce bias, while designing and marketing them in ways that encourage employers to reject large numbers of applicants based on AI-generated scores. Although companies describe them as decision-support tools, she said they often functioned as "automated decision-making systems".

She called for mandatory testing and stronger regulation before AI recruitment tools are deployed, arguing existing laws were not designed with AI in mind.

'Completely faulty' logic

Dr Eleanor Drage, a senior researcher at the University of Cambridge, said concerns about AI disadvantaging women in recruitment are "very justified".

She argued that human recruiters were better able to recognise the value of candidates returning from career breaks, such as maternity leave, and the transferable skills they bring - qualities AI may overlook.

While Drage said it was "very difficult" to prove AI recruitment tools are inherently biased, she argued the logic they operate by is "completely faulty" because they cannot assess a person's intrinsic value or personality in the way a human recruiter could.

She added that many recruiters do not fully understand how these tools work, and said companies should use AI to evaluate their own hiring practices rather than to assess "vulnerable populations, like older women going back into the workforce, or people who've had a career break".

While Drage acknowledges the benefits of using the tools, including helping hiring managers identify candidates with similar characteristics to people who have previously been hired, she says often "they're not on the side of the jobseeker".

'Rigorously tested'

The concerns raised in this article by interviewees relate to the use of AI-powered recruitment tools more broadly and are not directed at any single provider.

Workday, the maker of popular AI-powered human resources software, is facing claims, external that it violated Californian law thousands of times by âweeding out job applicants at many major companies for discriminatory reasons.

The case is proceeding, with a ruling expected later this year.

The BBC contacted Workday, which said the claims in the suit were false, adding that its tools don't make hiring decisions.

More generally, Workday highlights that its recruitment tools help recruiters identify candidates who best match a job description based on their skills and experience, supporting rather than replacing human judgement.

The company said its AI was "rigorously tested" through its Responsible AI programme and "does not consider traits such as age or gender".

Workday added that, when used responsibly, AI can help qualified candidates avoid "getting lost in the pile".

A government spokesperson said "While AI can help employers manage large volumes of applications and reduce administrative burdens, it is vital that recruitment processes remain fair, transparent and accessible.

"Existing legal protections, including equality and data protection law, already apply to AI systems, and we will act where additional protections are needed."

A spokesperson for Mayor of London Sir Sadiq Khan said AI presented both opportunities and challenges, particularly as women are more likely to work in AI-exposed roles. They said the mayor had backed recommendations from the London AI and Jobs Taskforce to help employers adopt AI responsibly and support workers through the transition.

As for Stacey, she has set up a community chat and platform to help women feel less alone, and to help companies address the issues in question.

"I want us, as a group, to be heard and seen. And for gendered ageism to become a thing of the past.

"Because if we're lucky, we all get old."