Free during launch · up to 3 reports per email each month · Run a free check
Start free
← All postsAI in hiring

AI in hiring gets a rulebook in the UK, and candidates want a human option

The UK launched its first national standard for recruitment technology, and new AI screening tools keep arriving. Surveys show candidates care about how they are told.

· 3 min read
Abstract editorial illustration of a resume flowing through a network of nodes toward a checkmark, in navy and teal

AI tools now touch almost every step of hiring, from ranking applicants to running first-round interviews. Two announcements this weekend show where things are heading: a formal standard for how these tools should behave, and a new wave of AI screening features aimed at busy employers.

The UK sets a national standard

Onrec reports that the UK's first national Recruitment Technology Standard was launched in Parliament, led by the Association of RecTech Providers and the Better Hiring Institute. The providers the association represents handle more than 200 million job applications a year, and a national hiring strategy published earlier estimated that broken hiring costs the UK about £75 billion a year.

The standard sets expectations for the ethical and transparent use of AI, inclusive hiring, and the security of candidate data. The association's chair summed up the aim as making "good innovation easier to recognise," rather than slowing it down. The hope is that employers can use it to spot the systems that genuinely support fair hiring.

More AI screening arrives

Also this weekend, the Daily Tribune reported that Jobstreet by SEEK introduced seekAi, an AI hiring engine, at an employer event in the Philippines. Its workflow features include AI voice pre-screening, applicant ranking, and automated reference checks. Citing its own 2025 hiring report, the company said 27% of employers in Southeast Asia use AI tools in recruiting, and 39% in the Philippines, the highest in the region.

Features like these are appearing in applicant tracking systems and job boards worldwide, including in U.S. healthcare.

What candidates say

A Greenhouse survey published in May puts numbers on candidate experience. Among the U.S. job seekers surveyed, 63% said they had faced an AI interview. Many did not like it: 38% said they had walked away from a hiring process because of one, and 70% said they were not told upfront that AI would be involved. Nearly half, 46%, said they want the option of a human interview.

That matters in healthcare, where experienced nurses, pharmacists, and therapists often have several offers. A clumsy first step can send a strong candidate to a competitor.

Using AI without losing candidates

AI can help recruiters handle volume, especially for high-turnover roles. The difference is in how it is used:

  • Tell candidates upfront. Say in the posting or the first message when AI is part of screening and what it does.
  • Offer a human path. A simple "prefer to talk to a person?" option addresses what many candidates say they want.
  • Keep clinical judgment human. Use automation for scheduling, reminders, and basic eligibility checks like license status. Keep decisions about fit with people who understand the role.
  • Ask vendors hard questions. Standards like the UK's are a helpful model: ask how a tool is tested for fairness, what data it uses, and how candidates can appeal.

What this means for your hiring

For hard-to-fill clinical roles, speed matters, but so does trust. AI can shorten your response time from days to hours. If it also makes candidates feel screened by a machine, you may lose the people you most want. Audit your process from the candidate's side this week: apply to one of your own openings and see what they see.

Want to know which of your openings are likely to be hardest to fill before you post them? Our sample reports show how we score it.

Sources

Curious how hard your own opening will be to fill? Run the free Hire-Difficulty Check, and our sample reports show what you get.