The rise in UK unemployment announced last week by the ONS is worrying. At 5.2%, this is the highest level since the pandemic and particularly impacts on 18- to 24-year-old job seekers with one in six (16%) out of work; this does not include those out of work and not looking for a job due to ill health or who are still studying. Nor do these figures reflect that, in some sectors like digital technology, adult social care, construction and engineering, there are critical skills shortages. While the political debate over government policy in respect of the rises to the national living wage, new employment rights and increases to employers’ national insurance continues, it’s important to look beyond the statistics and focus on the human impact of those at this critical stage as they start their careers in an increasingly uncertain world – many of whom are burdened with huge student debt.

It is estimated that there are around 340 applicants for each advertised role although this increases to well over 1,000 for each role on popular graduate programmes. Only around 2% of applicants are successful in securing an interview.

To say that the battle to secure a job is fierce is clearly an understatement; in a recent BBC interview, one young graduate described her and her friends’ search for a job as ‘soul destroying.’ Fulfilling employment is vital in our lives. Identify, income, family, health and wellbeing, vocation, personal growth and development - most of what we need is contingent on the work we do. 

The employment situation is exacerbated by new ways of working including the introduction of AI to remove time-consuming work such as data processing or writing basic reports and communications; this is often cited as a key factor in the reduction of entry-level jobs. Such roles are so often the bridge for those from disadvantaged communities to access white collar jobs and careers.

There is an irony here. The very AI that is replacing entry level roles is now being deployed throughout the hiring lifecycle in screening CVs, undertaking video interviews and assessments (including VR simulations), introducing data-based predictive hiring and in automating the interface between the candidate and the hiring organisation. Some candidates say that they have been unable to access human contact until the fourth stage of the selection process. 

While this offers the hiring organisation the opportunity to streamline their processes, deliver cost savings and better manage high volumes of candidates (ironically, generated by the higher levels of unemployment) there is evidence that the valuable experience and insights gained by candidates is deteriorating as this AI barrier denies them the opportunity to get to know the organisation, its culture and its people. Critical feedback to candidates on their performance throughout the selection process is now almost non-existent; on that basis, how can candidates learn and improve their chances of securing a role? The deployment of AI also raises significant concerns about bias and discriminatory hiring practices being embedded in the selection process and that quality candidates who may not specifically match exact keywords are simply rejected outright. There is also evidence that AI-savvy candidates are securing jobs for which they are not suited.

In 2024, the UK government produced a guide – Responsible AI in Recruitment Guidance – in collaboration with the CIPD. While this is helpful in respect of processes, it does not really focus on the candidate, their needs, and what they experience and the duty of care that hiring organisations have towards them.

It came as a surprise to us that a new service has emerged – reverse recruitment – where candidates pay a professional or an agency to manage their job search for them with the candidate essentially becoming the client. In other words, a reversal of the traditional recruitment model. Fees tend to be on a retained basis or a percentage of the first year’s salary. These services are gaining traction as the recruitment market becomes more challenging and candidates (and their families) become more desperate.

The challenge for organisations, and for the HR profession, is to figure out how we embrace new ways of working including how AI should be deployed. But this cannot be at the expense of the candidate experience which ultimately will result in significant brand damage.

So, what does AI say about this? We asked Chat GPT to outline how AI can improve a candidate’s experience of the recruitment and selection process while enhancing the employer/corporate brand. Its advice makes sense:

1.     Be transparent about AI usage

2.     Use AI to speed up communications (without losing the human touch)

3.     Ensure fairness and bias mitigation

4.     Personalise the candidate journey

5.     Provide constructive feedback

6.     Keep humans in high-impact moments

7.     Design ethical and inclusive AI policies

8.     Measure candidate experience continuously

In recent years, we have spent much time investing in creating compelling employer brands (EVPs) when the competition for the best candidates was intense. We ensured that this came alive at all stages through the hiring lifecycle and smart organisations made sure that this brand promise was delivered when the successful person joined. Every candidate was viewed as a potential brand ambassador; even if you did not secure a job, you felt that you had been heard, treated fairly, and gained insights into an organisation that you would like to work for some day. You also took something away from the experience that would help you in your job search.

This is a perilous moment for recruiters. At times like this, it is often helpful to consider an issue within an ethical and values framework. The CIPD’s ethical code expects HR professionals to have a ‘positive and active impact on working lives by fulfilling the purpose of championing better work and working lives for current and future generations ….  promoting people-centred practice, developing people, being the employee experience champion’. It also asks us to ‘consider our impact on others, showing courage in our approach to difficult decisions and ethical dilemmas’.

Of course, we must adopt emerging technology such as AI to enhance our processes and deliver efficiency/cost gains, but this cannot be at the expense of our organisation’s (and our) reputation. We have an obligation (some would say a moral obligation) to raise the bar in how we treat our candidates; especially those entering the job market for the first time. It is time to lean more heavily into our employer brands and truly put our candidates and their needs at the very centre of our resourcing strategies, policies and practices. When the cycle reverses, which it inevitably will, candidates will remember how they were treated.