Case brief · Updated October 13, 2026
Mobley v. Workday: a case to watch
An ongoing U.S. case asks how discrimination law applies when a vendor’s algorithmic tools screen applicants for its customers.
← All resourcesWhat the applicants allege
The plaintiffs allege that Workday’s algorithm-based applicant screening tools discriminated on grounds including race, age, and disability. Workday disputes the claims. The case concerns alleged discriminatory screening, not an allegation that Workday failed to perform a bias audit under New York City’s Local Law 144. March 2026 court order ↗
What has happened so far
Courts have allowed parts of the lawsuit to proceed. A June 2026 order granted in part and denied in part Workday’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint. An October 8, 2026 order addressed depositions and expert discovery, confirming that the case remained in litigation. A claim surviving dismissal is not proof of discrimination. Order referencing the June ruling ↗ October 2026 discovery order ↗
Why we are watching it
The litigation puts attention on what a tool actually does during screening, what information is available to examine its effects, and how responsibility is shared when a vendor’s system is used by employers. These are audit questions worth asking independently of the outcome of this case.
- Which features score, rank, or screen applicants, and at what stage?
- What evidence supports those outputs for the roles and populations where the tool is used?
- Can the vendor and employer access data needed to investigate different outcomes across groups?
- Who is responsible for monitoring changes and responding to concerns?
This brief summarizes court records available on October 13, 2026. Allegations and procedural rulings are identified separately; the case may change as it proceeds.