Mobley v. Workday (AI Hiring Bias)
Mobley v. Workday, Inc. — AI Hiring Tool Discrimination Collective Action (N.D. Cal.)
United States · Mobley v. Workday, Inc., No. 3:23-cv-00770 (N.D. Cal.)
- Status
- Blocked / in litigation
- Applies to
- AI-screening software vendors who exercise employer-like control over hiring (issue being litigated); employers using such tools
- Enforced by
- Federal courts via private collective and class actions; EEOC (not involved in this specific case)
Derek Mobley's collective action suit in federal court alleges that Workday's AI hiring and screening tools systematically discriminated against Black, disabled, and older job applicants — denying him hundreds of opportunities. As of June 2026, the case has survived multiple dismissal motions; a court authorized notice to class members in February 2026 (March 7 opt-in deadline), and the court rejected Workday's argument that older workers can't be 'applicants' under the ADEA. The case is in discovery and could establish landmark precedent on AI vendor liability.
Who is protected: Job applicants screened and rejected by AI-powered applicant tracking and scoring tools
Legal detail
Mobley v. Workday, Inc., No. 3:23-cv-00770 (N.D. Cal.): Title VII, ADA, and ADEA claims against Workday's Candidate Skills Match and HiredScore AI tools; plaintiff argues Workday is an 'employment agency' or 'agent' under federal civil-rights law. Feb. 2026: court conditionally certified collective, authorized notice; March 7, 2026 opt-in deadline. March 6, 2026: court denied motion to dismiss ADEA applicant-definition argument. March 30, 2026: amended complaint filed reasserting dismissed California state claims. Case in discovery as of June 2026.
Key facts
| Jurisdiction | United States |
|---|---|
| Level | Federal |
| Citation | Mobley v. Workday, Inc., No. 3:23-cv-00770 (N.D. Cal.) |
| Private right of action | Yes, individuals can sue |
| Penalties | If plaintiffs prevail: back pay, reinstatement, compensatory/punitive damages; ADEA liquidated damages; attorney's fees |
| Topics | AI hiring and employment · automated decision-making |
| Court record | Mobley v. Workday, Inc. (N.D. Cal., 3:23-cv-00770) — CourtListener docket |
More AI rules in United States
- Trump AI Innovation & Security EO (June 2026) · In effect
- FERC order directing PJM and other grid operators to reform tariffs on… · Enacted (not yet in effect)
- Chatrie v. United States (Fourth Amendment protection for location… · Blocked / in litigation
- Kids Internet and Digital Safety Act (KIDS Act) (H.R. 7757) · Proposed / pending
- NAIC AI Evaluation Tool Pilot (12 states, 2026) · Proposed / pending
- FTC Proposed Policy Statement — AI Accuracy (July 2026) · Proposed / pending
Related AI hiring and employment rules elsewhere
- CA EO N-6-26 (AI Workforce) · In effect
- Maine LD 61 (employer surveillance disclosure & prohibition) · In effect
- Washington SHB 1672 (employee monitoring notice, ADS restrictions, emotion AI ban) · In effect
- MD HB 1339 (Automated Decision Systems, 2026) · In effect
- Connecticut PA 26-73 (employee electronic monitoring disclosure) · In effect
- AI Gendered Impact Assessment + Interagency Taskforce · Proposed / pending
See something wrong or out of date? Submit a correction. Every entry must carry a verifiable source.