If AI can reject us, it can respect us

If AI can reject your job application in seconds, surely it can explain why. The fact it doesn’t is a choice - a choice of non-transparency & disrespect.

A few months ago, a senior executive from an AI recruitment software company published a post celebrating the power of recruitment AI.

I commented with a simple question:

If this technology can reject candidates instantly, why can’t it provide timely, meaningful feedback to rejected applicants?

The response was telling.

The executive openly confirmed that the technology absolutely has the capability to provide feedback - but that many employers and recruiters choose not to use it.

And there it was. The truth. Out in the open. Undeniable.

Amongst my job seeker community, a festering problem is getting worse - not better.

The gap between application and rejection is shrinking

The volume of automated rejection emails is growing

The quality of feedback? Still virtually zero

Candidates are routinely met with:

“We’ve decided to proceed with other applicants.”

“We’ve received a high number of applicants.”

Nothing else.

No context.

No insight.

No dignity.

No opportunity to learn how to improve.

And this is happening at the same time we’re told AI recruitment tech delivers:

~75% faster time-to-hire

Up to 95% reduction in recruitment administration

~30% reduction in cost per hire

“Better quality shortlists”

“Smarter candidate matching”

Fantastic outcomes — for employers.

But here’s the uncomfortable question no one wants to answer:

👉 If AI knows why someone is rejected, why are candidates still kept in the dark?

Every AI-driven rejection has a reason:

keyword weighting

experience mismatch

seniority flags

sector bias

career path penalties

age bias

culture bias

career gap bias

The system knows.

It always knows.

So let’s stop pretending this is a technical limitation.

It’s not.

It’s a deliberate design, usage and avoidance choice.

I fully expect employers and recruiters to stay quiet on this post - because that silence mirrors the system itself:

a recruitment process hiding behind a curtain of non-transparency.

Here’s a basic principle that keeps being ignored:

- If you advertise a vacancy, you are inviting people to apply.

- If someone applies based on that invitation, they have a right to know why they weren’t suitable.

After all, whether someone is suitable or not, they are helping the recruitment process by providing live market data.

That’s not entitlement.

That’s accountability.

You have the tech.

You have the data.

You have the “reason codes”.

You built the system to reject faster.

Now use it to treat people better.

Until accountability becomes a requirement - not an option -

job seekers will keep paying the price for “efficiency”.

Remember one thing - these rejected resumes represent a person - just like you.