PipeRoll - Agent Incident Registry ·
about ·
contribute ·
data ·
notes ·
constitution ·
seismograph ↗
Mobley v. Workday: AI screening vendor held potentially liable as the employer's "agent"
PIR-2026-0008PIR-2026-0008id: PIR-2026-0008title: Court rules Workday's AI applicant-screening platform can be liable as an "agent" of client employers; ADEA collective conditionally certifieddate_occurred: 2020s (Mobley alleges rejection from 100+ jobs via Workday-powered portals; covered period spans years)date_detected: unknown (pattern surfaced through the plaintiff's own application history)date_disclosed: 2023-02 (complaint filed, N.D. Cal., 3:23-cv-00770); agent-theory ruling 2024-07-12; ADEA collective conditionally certified 2025-05-16status: disputed (discrimination alleged, not adjudicated; doctrinal rulings are on the record)agent_description: Workday's AI-based applicant screening/recommendation platform, used across thousands of employers to score and reject candidates at scale, often with no meaningful human review of individual rejections.operator_type: enterprise (vendor operating on behalf of thousands of client employers)autonomy_level: autonomous-within-policy (alleged: algorithmic rejection without meaningful human review; some rejections within minutes, including overnight)model_stack: unknown (proprietary; contested in discovery)harness: Workday recruiting/HCM platform embedded in client employers' hiring portalsfailure_locus: tool-mcp (vendor platform: the alleged defect sits in a vendor tool performing a delegated function for many operators - the failure-locus pattern the v0.1 amendment was created for)authority_scope: decision authority over hiring outcomes at fleet scale; data access (applicant PII across thousands of employers)funds_at_risk_usd: unknown (no damages adjudicated; potentially one of the largest employment collectives ever)blast_radius: fleet/systemic (one vendor's screening layer across thousands of employers; Workday's own filings state 1.1 billion applications were rejected through its tools in the covered period)root_cause: policy-violation - primary: alleged disparate impact by age/race/disability under ADEA/Title VII/ADA. Contributing: unknown (whether defect is model, configuration, or client-set criteria is the litigation's open question)mechanism: Derek Mobley alleged rejection from 100+ positions through Workday-powered portals, sometimes within minutes of applying, attributing it to algorithmic bias. Judge Rita Lin (2024-07-12) denied dismissal on the theory that Workday acts as an "agent" of client employers when its tools perform the delegated function of screening and rejecting candidates - mapping agency law onto automated systems. On 2025-05-16 the court conditionally certified an ADEA collective; notice goes to a pool potentially including hundreds of millions of applicants.adversary_present: noexploitation_status: in-wild-malfunction (production screening of real applicants; no attacker; harm alleged, not adjudicated - reclassified from in-wild-exploited, which implies an adversary)severity: degraded (no adjudicated loss; systemic exposure documented via certification)direct_loss_usd: unknown (no judgment)indirect_loss_usd: unknowndowntime: n/adata_exposure: nonedetected_by: third-party (rejected applicant inferring the pattern from his own outcomes)time_to_detect: yearstime_to_recover: ongoing (litigation active as of Aug 2026)remediation: none on public recordstructural_fix: none disclosedcontrols_that_worked: none identified - no internal control surfaced the alleged pattern; detection came from an external victimliability_holder: contested - the live doctrinal question: Workday (vendor) as "agent" of client employers, i.e. vendor liability without the employer in the suitprecedent_set: 2024-07-12 agent-theory ruling (AI vendors performing delegated hiring functions can be directly liable) + 2025-05-16 conditional ADEA certification at unprecedented scalesealed_material: unknowntelemetry_grade: operator-logs (vendor-held screening records, contested in discovery)sources:independence: court clearinghouse + multiple independent law-firm analyses - strong on rulings.aiid_incident_id: 489 (https://incidentdatabase.ai/cite/489/) - cross-reference; primaries verified independentlyconfidence: high on the rulings and the 1.1B-applications figure (from Workday's own filings as reported); low-medium on ultimate harm - discrimination is alleged, not proven.Ruling dates (2024-07-12, 2025-05-16), judge, and the 1.1 billion rejected-applications figure verified against court-record trackers and multiple independent legal analyses; all match intake. Blast_radius set to the v0.1 fleet/systemic tier: one vendor layer, thousands of downstream employers. Recorded under the v0.1 legal block.
aiid_incident_id cross-reference (AIID 489), matched against the AIID weekly database export (2026-08-17). A cross-reference, not a re-verification; no claim changed.See also - this event in the AI Incident Database: incident 489.