What if your next interviewer is an algorithm? What Law 21.719 should require of recruiters
You apply for a role that matches your experience and no one responds. You think your résumé wasn't enough. But it may never have been read by a person.
No one knows with certainty how many jobs artificial intelligence will replace: studies speak of many jobs exposed, but so far there is little evidence that it is reducing employment. What is clear is that it already takes part in deciding who gets one. It doesn't matter if you're an engineer, accountant, salesperson or electrician: more and more decisions are being automated, and sooner or later almost all of us will be evaluated by a system before a human looks at us. The question is not whether it will happen, but what rights we will have when it does.
What exists today
LinkedIn, one of the best-known platforms for finding work, offers recruiters AI tools. Hiring Assistant identifies candidates, ranks them and learns from each recruiter's preferences. LinkedIn states that it is available in seven languages, including Spanish, and in September 2026 its Spanish version was announced with a focus on Spain. AI Interview Screening is in early testing for Hiring Pro customers (a LinkedIn subscription for hiring): an AI interviews up to 40 applicants per role by audio or video and rates them from 1 to 5 based on the ideal answers defined by the employer. According to ALM Corp's analysis of the feature's documentation, transcription can fail by up to 22% with non-standard accents and the score tends to favor those who master the structured interview; that source adds that a human must review before the final decision.
Is this used today in Chile? There is no public information that confirms it. It may happen in bilingual roles at multinational companies, but that is a hypothesis. What we do know is that the tools already speak Spanish, and that for Latin America it is better to have clear rules before they arrive, not after.
A known problem, and already in the courts
This is not new. A Harvard Business School study on so-called "hidden workers" estimated that some 27 million workers in the United States are left out of selection processes despite being qualified and willing to work; among the mechanisms it describes is keyword matching with the job description . The Cardozo Law Review analyzed in 2023 how résumé scanning and one-way video interviews can reproduce gender bias, and the ACM journal calls for human oversight .
In the United States it has already reached the courts. In Mobley v. Workday, an applicant alleges that Workday's screening tools discarded candidates for age, among other reasons; the court accepted that the software provider can be considered an "agent" of the employer and, in May 2025, provisionally authorized a collective action for age discrimination . In January 2026, two applicants sued Eightfold AI: they allege that its software produced, without their knowledge, reports that rank them by their "likelihood of success" . Neither case has a final ruling, and what exists are allegations, not proven facts. But they show two questions Chile will also have to answer: how does a person find out they were evaluated by a system? And when something goes wrong, does the provider respond or the company that hired it?
What Chilean law says
Law 21.719 takes effect on December 1, 2026 (although it is in the process of being postponed). It incorporates into article 8 bis of Law 19.628 the right not to be subject to decisions based on automated processing that produce legal effects or significantly affect the person, with safeguards such as explanation, human intervention, the possibility of expressing one's point of view and of requesting a review of the decision. The law allows exceptions, for example when the decision is necessary to enter into a contract or there is express consent. There lies the fundamental question: when a tool ranks hundreds of applicants and the recruiter only looks at the first ones, is there really significant human intervention, or just a signature at the end of the selection process? Whoever ended up at the bottom of the CV ranking was never seen by a human.
What Europe has already classified
The EU AI Act includes among high-risk systems those used in employment and personnel selection , and places a good part of the obligations on the company that uses them, not on the one that makes them: the fact that LinkedIn has "responsible AI" documentation does not exempt the employer . Those obligations were postponed until December 2, 2027.
What companies and applicants can do
Companies don't need to wait. They can ask themselves today: do we know what AI tools our recruiters use? Is there a real and significant human review before discarding someone, or is the automatic filter the last word? Do we notify the candidate that an AI took part in the selection process? Do we check whether the system discriminates by accent, age or gender? Complying just to comply, with a checklist that doesn't engage with the real selection process, is useless if an algorithm keeps deciding without anyone watching.
And if you are the one applying, according to ALM Corp's analysis of LinkedIn's documentation you can ask the employer for your score, your transcript and your recording, and Law 21.719 also recognizes your right to access the data processed about you. You can ask whether an AI took part and request that a person review the decision.
The next time an application ends in silence, it is worth asking who, or what, made that decision.
References
1 Diario Financiero, article on the World Bank and ILO report estimating that 37% of jobs
in Chile is exposed to generative AI (July 31, 2024). https://www.df.cl/economia-y-
politica/laboral-personas/informe-del-banco-mundial-y-oit-advierte-que-un-37-de-los-empleos-en
2 Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Liberty Street Economics, “Do Job Postings Show Early Labor-Market
Effects of AI?” (May 2026). https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2026/05/do-job-postings-
show-early-labor-market-effects-of-ai/
3 LinkedIn, Hiring Assistant page. https://business.linkedin.com/hire/hiring-assistant
4 LinkedIn, Hiring Assistant page. https://business.linkedin.com/hire/hiring-assistant
5 Silicon.es, article on the launch of Hiring Assistant in Spanish (September 15, 2026).
https://www.silicon.es/linkedin-lanza-hiring-assistant-en-espanol-ia-para-seleccion-de-talento-2584148
6 Social Media Today, “LinkedIn tests out AI-powered interview screening”.
https://www.socialmediatoday.com/news/linkedin-tests-out-ai-powered-interview-screening/814636/
7 ALM Corp, analysis of LinkedIn AI Interview Screening. https://almcorp.com/blog/linkedin-ai-interview-
screening/
8 ALM Corp, analysis of LinkedIn AI Interview Screening. https://almcorp.com/blog/linkedin-ai-interview-
screening/
9 Harvard Gazette, “New study says ‘hidden workers’ are being excluded” (September 15, 2021).
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2021/09/new-study-says-hidden-workers-are-being-excluded/
10 Lori Andrews and Hannah Bucher, “Automating Discrimination: AI Hiring Practices and Gender Inequality”,
Cardozo Law Review, vol. 44, no. 1 (2023). https://www.cardozolawreview.com/automating-discrimination-
ai-hiring-practices-and-gender-inequality/
11 Communications of the ACM, “Algorithmic hiring needs a human face”.
https://cacm.acm.org/news/algorithmic-hiring-needs-a-human-face/
12 Maynard Nexsen, “Emerging Liability for AI-Driven Hiring Tools: Key Developments in Mobley v. Workday,
Inc.”. https://www.maynardnexsen.com/publication-emerging-liability-for-ai-driven-hiring-tools-key-
developments-in-mobley-v-workday-inc
13 HR Dive, article on the lawsuit against Eightfold AI (January 2026).
https://www.hrdive.com/news/eightfold-ai-lawsuit-job-candidate-consumer-reports/810332/ See also
Ogletree Deakins, “Groundbreaking Lawsuit Tests Whether AI Hiring Tools Trigger FCRA Compliance”.
https://ogletree.com/insights-resources/blog-posts/groundbreaking-lawsuit-tests-whether-ai-hiring-tools-
trigger-fcra-compliance/
14 Voto Visible, Boletín 18623-07, bill that amends Law 21.719 and proposes postponing its entry into force to December 1
, 2027 (submitted to the Senate on September 1, 2026).
https://www.votovisible.cl/proyectos/18623-07
15 Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional, Law 21.719 (amends Law 19.628): article 8 bis and first transitional
article. https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=1209272
16 Ibid.
17 Gibson Dunn, “EU AI Act Omnibus Agreement — Postponed High-Risk Deadlines and Other Key Changes”.
https://www.gibsondunn.com/eu-ai-act-omnibus-agreement-postponed-high-risk-deadlines-and-other-key-
changes/
18 Praxikon, analysis of LinkedIn Recruiter under the EU AI Act. https://www.praxikon.com/en/posts/ai-act-
linkedin-recruiter-classification
19 Orrick, “EU AI Act Update: Digital Omnibus Finalizes 8 Compliance Changes” (July 2026).
https://www.orrick.com/en/Insights/2026/07/EU-AI-Act-Update-Digital-Omnibus-Finalizes-8-Compliance-
Changes
20 ALM Corp, analysis of LinkedIn AI Interview Screening. https://almcorp.com/blog/linkedin-ai-interview-
screening/
21 Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional, Law 21.719 (amends Law 19.628).
https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=1209272
