Chief People Officer
Owns the AI hiring tools their team has deployed. Is being asked by the CEO and board whether the company can defend its use of those tools.
Why hiring
Hiring AI is where AI law is being written first.
Five active regulatory regimes cite employment AI explicitly. Each puts the deployer — not the vendor — on the documentation hook. We specialize here because the surface area is large enough to justify a productized engagement, and stable enough to build a repeatable methodology against.
The regimes that apply
Five regulations name hiring AI explicitly.
Hiring AI is named as a high-risk system in Annex III.
Hiring decisions are 'consequential decisions' under §6-1-1701. Effective 2026.
Amends the Illinois Human Rights Act to govern AI in employment decisions.
Bias audit and candidate notice requirements for automated employment decision tools.
Vendor-platform Title VII exposure for AI hiring tools — a live federal case.
Who needs this
The buyer profile is consistent.
General Counsel
Got a regulatory inbound, a vendor RFP, or a board paper. Needs a defensible documentation posture before someone external asks.
Chief Privacy Officer
Already runs DPIAs. Now needs to extend the discipline to AI-specific obligations that DPIAs don't cover (Article 9 RMS, Article 27 FRIA, Article 72 monitoring).
Our approach
One methodology, refined per engagement.
The methodology is documented in full on the methodology page. The short version: we do the documentation. You provide access and answers.