Skip to content
AI Policy Generator

ESWhat applies

Hiring, evaluation or termination of staff

Using AI to target job ads, screen resumes, interview, score candidates or evaluate performance, promotions and terminations. It is the use case with the most laws in force worldwide because of its impact on the right to work and the risk of discrimination.

Examples

By country

We only list countries where an obligation in force or adopted mentions this use case.

How rules treat it, by jurisdiction

JurisdictionLevelDateNote
European UnionHigh riskDecember 2, 2027Annex III(4): hiring, promotion, termination and evaluation; the Art. 6(3) exception does not apply to candidate screening.
European UnionProhibited practiceFebruary 2, 2025Inferring emotions of candidates or workers is banned (Art. 5(1)(f)), except for medical or safety purposes.
SpainSector rulesOctober 5, 2026Workers' Statute Art. 64.4.d (informing worker representatives) and Royal Decree 723/2026 (written notice to each worker from Oct 5, 2026).
SpainData protection—GDPR Arts. 22 and 35; AEPD warning (Oct 2026): human oversight must also cover rejected candidates.
PeruHigh riskSeptember 10, 2027Hiring and labor management is high-risk: records, human oversight and transparency. Labor-sector deadline Sep 10, 2027, or Sep 10, 2026 if the company is in health, education, justice, security or finance.
EcuadorData protectionMarch 10, 2026Data Protection Law Art. 20 (automated decisions), impact assessment for profiling with legal effects and the SPDP general rule on AI.
ColombiaData protection—Law 1581/2012 and SIC Circular 002/2024 (guidance): privacy impact study for high-risk AI.
ChileData protectionDecember 1, 2026Law 21,719, Art. 8 bis: right not to be subject to solely automated decisions, with human review.
ArgentinaData protection—Law 25,326 and AAIP Res. 4/2019: explain the logic of automated decisions.
BrazilData protection—LGPD Art. 20: review of automated decisions; bill PL 2338 would treat it as high-risk.
MexicoData protection—No automated decision rules outside digital platforms; the data protection law applies.
United States (federal)Sector rules—Title VII and the Uniform Guidelines still apply even though the EEOC withdrew its AI guidance in 2025.
New York (incl. NYC)Consequential decision—NYC Local Law 144: annual independent bias audit, published summary and candidate notice.
IllinoisConsequential decisionJanuary 1, 2026HB 3773: notice of AI use in employment decisions and ban on ZIP codes as a proxy; plus the AI Video Interview Act.
CaliforniaConsequential decisionOctober 1, 2025FEHA automated-decision system regulations: keep records for 4 years; anti-bias testing serves as a defense.
CaliforniaConsequential decisionJanuary 1, 2027CCPA ADMT: pre-use notice, opt-out or human appeal and access to logic for employment decisions.
ColoradoConsequential decisionJanuary 1, 2027SB 26-189: notice, explanation within 30 days, correction, human review and 3-year records; Attorney General rules pending.

Common base documents

Depending on your situation

If there are workers in Spain, Mexico, Chile or Colombia, or candidates in New York City or Illinois
If hiring for New York City roles
If the tool comes from a vendor
If candidates are rejected automatically
If video interviews are analyzed (Illinois requires prior notice and consent)

Related kits

Includes 5 documents

HR and AI Recruiting Kit

AI hiring policy, notice to workers and representatives, meaningful human oversight, DPIA and decision review for candidates and employees.

USD 129USD 215

Complete kit · available to buy

Includes 5 documents

US AI in Employment Kit (New York, Illinois, California, Colorado)

Reference template for the impact-ratio bias audit report (in New York City an independent auditor performs it), AI hiring policy, AI-use notice to candidates, human oversight and a decision log, related to New York, Illinois, California and Colorado employment rules.

USD 119USD 215

Complete kit · available to buy

Find out what applies to you (free)