Stacey Duguid, a 52-year-old professional with an extensive background in fashion, has spent 16 months struggling to secure a new role. After sending out countless applications only to be met with automated silence, she eventually resorted to removing older work history from her CV to bypass potential filters. Duguid is among a growing number of women who suspect that AI-driven recruitment tools are fostering a climate of gendered ageism.
This sentiment is echoed by many others. Koeyli Jaluka, 49, reports a similar experience after applying for over 400 positions, often being told she is overqualified—a phrase she views as a proxy for age-related bias. Likewise, Anna Cowie, 52, has transitioned to community networking and volunteering, noting that face-to-face interaction avoids the cold, algorithmic scrutiny of digital screening tools.
The City of London Women Pivoting to Digital Taskforce warns that AI systems frequently fail to value the unique skills of experienced women. Research suggests these tools often penalize career breaks, such as those taken for childcare. Experts like Laura Holden argue that because these systems function as automated decision-making platforms without global regulation, they carry the potential for significant harm. Dr. Eleanor Drage from the University of Cambridge highlights that while AI can identify patterns, it lacks the human capacity to appreciate intrinsic value or transferable skills.
Workday, a major provider of HR software, stated that its systems are designed to support human judgment rather than replace it, asserting that their technology does not consider age or gender. Meanwhile, the UK government maintains that existing equality laws are sufficient to govern AI, though stakeholders continue to call for mandatory testing to ensure fairness and prevent the systemic exclusion of older workers.