Outdated Drivers Are Slowing You Down
One free scan finds every outdated or missing driver and matches the right update for your exact hardware.Free scan · exact hardware matchWindows Errors? Fix Them Before They Spread
Repair common Windows errors and clear accumulated junk for a smoother, more stable PC - no reinstall needed.Free scan · no reinstallYes. An applicant tracking system (ATS) could be designed to explain a rejection by recording the job criteria, the application evidence considered, the stage where the application stopped, and whether software or a person made the decision. But that design possibility is not the same as a general legal right to receive an individualized explanation. New York City’s automated hiring law requires certain audits and candidate notices for covered tools; those disclosures do not necessarily explain why a particular applicant was rejected.
What would a useful rejection explanation say?
A status such as “not selected” tells a candidate the outcome, not the reason. An explanation-capable ATS would need to preserve a traceable account of how the application was assessed, rather than generate a plausible-sounding sentence after the decision.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
For example, a useful explanation might identify a stated job requirement, show which application information was relevant to it, and clarify whether an automated screen or a recruiter made the decision. If a required qualification was not established in the submitted materials, it could say that—without implying the candidate lacks the qualification in general.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →To make explanations meaningful and reviewable, a system would need to retain:
#1 Best Overall
- The job-related criteria established for the role.
- The application information considered and how it related to those criteria.
- The stage at which the application stopped.
- Whether software, a person, or both contributed to the decision.
- The tool and data involved, plus a record of the result and any later review.
These are product-design recommendations, not features verified in a particular ATS or requirements imposed generally by law. An explanation should also offer a practical route to correct inaccurate information, request an accommodation, or seek human review where appropriate.
Does the law require an employer to explain every rejection?
The sources cited here do not establish a general requirement that employers give every rejected candidate a case-specific hiring rationale. A final status, a notice that an automated tool was used, and an individualized explanation are different forms of information.
Rank #2
New York City Local Law 144 of 2021 sets audit and notice requirements for certain automated employment decision tools (AEDTs). Its coverage depends on the tool and how it is used; an ordinary ATS feature is not automatically covered simply because it uses software. The legal definition focuses on a computational process using machine learning, statistical modeling, data analytics, or artificial intelligence that issues a score, classification, or recommendation and substantially assists or replaces discretionary employment decision-making. See the NYC Administrative Code, § 20-871.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems2Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute3Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsWhat New York City’s automated hiring law does require
For a covered tool used in the relevant employment decision context, the law sets obligations concerning a bias audit, public information, and candidate notice. Those obligations give candidates information about the tool and its use, but they do not necessarily reveal why one particular application did not advance.
Rank #3
- Used Book in Good Condition
- Bias audit: The tool must have been subject to a bias audit no more than one year before its use.
- Public information: Before use, an audit summary and the applicable tool distribution date must be publicly available.
- Advance notice: NYC-resident candidates must receive notice at least 10 business days before use. The notice must identify the qualifications and characteristics the tool will assess and provide a way to request an alternative process or accommodation.
- Data information on request: If the relevant information is not already posted, a candidate may request in writing the type and source of data collected and the retention policy. The law calls for a response within 30 days; exceptions apply where disclosure would violate law or interfere with a law-enforcement investigation.
The NYC Department of Consumer and Worker Protection’s AEDT guidance and NYC311’s candidate overview describe the notice and complaint routes. An audit summary concerns the tool; it is not necessarily an assessment of an individual candidate. A notice describes the tool’s use and assessment characteristics; it is not itself a rejection rationale.
When a background report is involved, different rules may apply
An employer’s use of applicant background information is a separate issue from automated screening generally. EEOC and FTC guidance explains that federal antidiscrimination rules apply when employers use background information. If an employer takes adverse action based on a consumer report from a reporting company, the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) requires specific steps: before the action, the person must receive a copy of the report and a summary of rights; afterward, the employer must identify the reporting company and explain dispute rights. This should not be treated as a rule covering every ATS rejection. See the EEOC/FTC guidance on background checks.
How to ask what happened
- Keep the records. Save the job posting, application confirmation, notices about automated tools, and any relevant background report.
- Ask the employer a specific question. Request the decision stage, the role-related criterion that was not met, and whether an automated tool or a person made the decision. If you think information was inaccurate, identify it and ask how to correct it or request review.
- If you are a NYC resident and suspect an AEDT notice or audit violation, use the official complaint route. DCWP accepts reports about missing audits, summaries, or notices. NYC311 says a complaint should include the suspected violation, the job posting or position, the tool if known, and any notice received. A complaint route addresses possible compliance issues; it does not guarantee an individualized hiring rationale.
- If a consumer report was used, review the report and dispute instructions. Use the reporting company’s process to challenge inaccurate report information and follow the applicable adverse-action notice.
For NYC AEDT compliance information, see DCWP’s official page and NYC311’s complaint guidance.
What to look for in an explanation-capable hiring system
Employers evaluating hiring technology can ask whether it can answer these questions consistently and preserve evidence to support the answers:
Best Value
- Does it name the actual job-related criterion, rather than rely on vague labels such as “fit”?
- Can it point to the application evidence or missing information relevant to that criterion?
- Does it distinguish an automated screen from recruiter judgment?
- Can it identify the data and tool version involved?
- Can a candidate correct information, request accommodation, or seek human review?
- Does the system preserve an audit trail and test outcomes across groups?
These are evaluation questions for product design and procurement, not a claim that any particular ATS provides these capabilities. The legal requirements in New York City directly address matters such as audits, notice, assessed qualifications or characteristics, and certain data transparency; the broader list describes what would help make an individual explanation accountable.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
