Sun, Nov 21, 2021 page12

• New York aims to be first to rein in AI hiring tools

  • By Matt O’Brien / AP
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Job candidates rarely know when hidden artificial intelligence (AI) tools are rejecting their resumes or analyzing their video interviews, but New York residents could soon have more say over the computers making behind-the-scenes decisions about their careers.

  A bill passed by the city council in early November would ban employers from using automated hiring tools unless a yearly bias audit can show they would not discriminate based on an applicant’s race or gender. It would also force makers of those AI tools to disclose more about their opaque workings and give candidates the option of choosing an alternative process — such as a human — to review their application.

  Proponents liken it to another pioneering New York rule that became a national standard-bearer earlier this century — one that required chain restaurants to slap a calorie count on their menu items.

  However, instead of measuring hamburger health, this measure aims to open a window into the complex algorithms that rank the skills and personalities of job applicants based on how they speak or what they write. More employers, from fast food chains to Wall Street banks, are relying on such tools to speed up recruitment, hiring and workplace evaluations.

  “I believe this technology is incredibly positive, but it can produce a lot of harms if there isn’t more transparency,” said Frida Polli, cofounder and chief executive of New York start-up Pymetrics Inc, which uses AI to assess job skills through game-like online assessments.

  Her company lobbied for the legislation, which favors firms such as Pymetrics that already publish fairness audits.

  However, some AI experts and digital rights activists are concerned that it does not go far enough to curb bias, and say it could set a weak standard for federal regulators and lawmakers to ponder as they examine ways to rein in harmful AI applications that exacerbate inequities in society.

  “The approach of auditing for bias is a good one. The problem is New York City took a very weak and vague standard for what that looks like,” Center for Democracy & Technology president Alexandra Givens said.

  The audits could end up giving AI vendors a “fig leaf” for building risky products with the city’s imprimatur, she said.

  It is also a problem that the proposal only aims to protect against racial or gender bias, leaving out the trickier-to-detect bias against disabilities or age, Givens said.

  The bill was recently watered down so that it effectively just asks employers to meet existing requirements under US civil rights laws prohibiting hiring practices that have a disparate impact based on race, ethnicity or gender, she said.

  The legislation would impose fines on employers or employment agencies of up to US$1,500 per contravention — although it would be left up to the vendors to conduct the audits and show employers that their tools meet the city’s requirements.

  The New York City Council voted 38-4 to pass the bill on Wednesday last week, giving a month for outgoing New York Mayor Bill De Blasio to sign or veto it, or let it go into law unsigned.

  De Blasio’s office says he supports the bill but has not said whether he will sign it.

  If enacted, it would take effect in 2023 under the administration of New York mayor-elect Eric Adams.

  Julia Stoyanovich, an associate professor of computer science who directs New York University’s Center for Responsible AI, said the best parts of the proposal are its disclosure requirements to let people know they’re being evaluated by a computer and where their data is going.

  “This will shine a light on the features that these tools are using,” she said.

  However, Stoyanovich said she was also concerned about the effectiveness of bias audits of high-risk AI tools — a concept that is also being examined by the White House, federal agencies such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and lawmakers in the US Congress and European Parliament.

  “The burden of these audits falls on the vendors of the tools to show that they comply with some rudimentary set of requirements that are very easy to meet,” she said.

  The audits would not likely affect in-house hiring tools used by tech giants such as Amazon.com Inc. The company several years ago abandoned its use of a resume-scanning tool after finding it favored men for technical roles — in part because it was comparing job candidates against the company’s own male-dominated tech workforce.

  There has been little vocal opposition to the bill from the AI hiring vendors most commonly used by employers.

  One of those, HireVue, a platform for video-based job interviews, said in a statement this week that it welcomed legislation that “demands that all vendors meet the high standards that HireVue has supported since the beginning.”

  The Greater New York Chamber of Commerce said the city’s employers are also unlikely to see the new rules as a burden.

  “It’s all about transparency and employers should know that hiring firms are using these algorithms and software, and employees should also be aware of it,” chamber executive director Helana Natt said.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Mbappe lifts Madrid past Osasuna in La Liga opener

  • 2

    Singaporean PM quotes Taiwanese song in national speech

  • 3

    Eight Taiwanese restaurants win first Michelin stars

  • 4

    Taiwan troops joined military exercise in US

  • 5

    US eyeing TSMC stake, minister says