Key Highlights
- Workday is opposing nationwide class certification in Mobley v. Workday Inc., a case alleging discrimination in AI-assisted hiring.
- The proposed subclasses cover African American applicants, women, applicants aged 40 and older, and applicants with disabilities.
- More than 15,000 people had opted into an age-discrimination collective by October 2026, with a class-certification hearing set for March 9, 2027.
Workday Challenges Class Certification in AI Hiring Case
Workday is arguing that the plaintiffs in Mobley v. Workday Inc. have not shown that the company made hiring decisions for the businesses using its platform. The company says that without evidence linking Workday directly to those decisions, there is no common proof capable of tying the claims together in a class action.
The case was first filed in February 2023 and is led by four named plaintiffs. Workday has also argued that the individual configurations used by its customers make it difficult to establish the commonality required for class treatment. If the court accepts that argument, the proposed classes could be rejected before the underlying discrimination claims reach the merits.
Proposed Classes Cover Race, Sex, Age and Disability
The plaintiffs are seeking certification of four subclasses involving African American applicants, women, applicants aged 40 and older, and applicants with disabilities. Their claims focus on alleged repeated automated rejections and contend that Workday’s artificial-intelligence screening features contributed to discriminatory outcomes.
Lead plaintiff Derek L. Mobley is a Black man over 40 who alleges that he was rejected from more than 100 job applications. Mobley and the three other named plaintiffs claim that Workday’s automated screening technology played a role in the alleged discrimination.
Elon Musk Dismisses $120 Billion Anthropic Exit Talk as SpaceX Plans $74 Billion AI Expansion
The scale of Workday’s platform is central to the case. Workday processes hundreds of millions of applications each year and reported more than 356 million applications in 2024 alone. That volume could make the case significant for applicants and employers using automated hiring systems.
Age-Discrimination Collective Already Has More Than 15,000 Opt-Ins
The current dispute is not the first procedural stage in the litigation. In May 2025, an age-discrimination collective was preliminarily certified. By October 2026, more than 15,000 individuals had opted into that collective.
The latest filings address the broader proposed nationwide subclasses based on race, sex, age and disability. Workday filed motions opposing certification of those subclasses on November 10 and 11, 2026. The plaintiffs’ replies to Workday’s opposition are due by December 8, 2026, and a hearing on class certification is scheduled for March 9, 2027.
The litigation has been described as one of the first significant legal actions aimed directly at an AI hiring vendor rather than at an employer that used an AI hiring tool. The outcome of the certification dispute could determine whether the claims proceed on a group basis or remain limited to individual applicants.
Why This Matters for HR Technology
The case raises a central responsibility question for the HR technology industry: whether the company that develops and operates a screening tool can be held responsible for how the tool sorts candidates, or whether liability rests only with the employer that makes the final hiring decision.
Workday’s defense relies on the latter position. If the company prevails at the certification stage, other vendors could gain a strong argument that customer-specific configurations break the common evidentiary link needed for large-scale claims.
If the plaintiffs obtain certification, a vendor whose software is used by hundreds of employers could face group litigation tied to the design and operation of its product, rather than solely to decisions made by its customers. The age-discrimination collective also indicates that a substantial number of applicants are willing to participate, suggesting that the allegations extend beyond the four named plaintiffs.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Mobley v. Workday Inc. about?
The case alleges that Workday’s AI-assisted hiring and screening features contributed to discriminatory rejections affecting African American applicants, women, applicants aged 40 and older, and applicants with disabilities.
What is Workday arguing?
Workday argues that it did not make hiring decisions on behalf of its business customers and that customer-specific platform configurations prevent the plaintiffs from establishing common evidence for nationwide class treatment.
What happens next?
The plaintiffs’ replies to Workday’s opposition are due by December 8, 2026. The court has scheduled a class-certification hearing for March 9, 2027.
