The laws that constrain hiring software
One page per law: what it actually requires, which duties land on you rather than on your vendor, and where we stand — including the parts we have not done yet.
Four regulations constrain automated hiring in the markets CalHire operates in. The EU AI Act classifies recruitment AI as high-risk and splits duties between the provider building a system and the employer deploying it. NYC Local Law 144 requires an annual independent bias audit, a published summary, and advance candidate notice before the tool is used. India’s DPDP Act and the UAE’s personal data protection law govern candidate data itself. Each page below states the requirement and our position on it.
The EU AI Act and hiring systems
Employment AI is classified high-risk under Annex III. That brings human oversight, logging, transparency and data-governance duties — and the obligations fall on the employer deploying the system as well as the provider building it.
NYC Local Law 144 and automated hiring tools
A bias audit within the last year, a public summary of its results, and ten business days’ notice to candidates — before an automated tool substantially assists a hiring decision in New York City.
India’s DPDP Act and candidate data
India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 makes a hiring employer a Data Fiduciary over candidate data: itemised notice, a lawful basis, a published Grievance Officer, and erasure once the purpose is served.
The UAE PDPL and candidate data
The UAE’s federal personal data protection law covers candidate data like any other personal data — consent, purpose limitation and data-subject rights — and the financial free zones run their own regimes on top.
Try it on one role
Post a role free and review anonymous, skill-ranked candidates before you commit to anything.