Revelations that artificial intelligence algorithms may have blocked suitable candidates for promotions and new positions within the Australian Public Service should concern all workers, public and private. While AI tools can be used for tasks ranging from the mundane, such as drafting an email, to the gimmicky, generating an image with perhaps not the right number of thumbs, recruitment and HR is one area where the use of AI is very much in the here and now. In 2022, well before the widespread adoption of ChatGPT, the Commonwealth's HR umpire was already directing agencies on how to use AI tools for recruitment. Undoubtedly, there are some cases where the use of AI is appropriate. Marking the resumes of candidates without a degree or professional qualification where these are required for the advertised role comes to mind. These tools will have a useful and productive role to play, particularly in bulk recruitment rounds in the public sector and larger corporations. It would be naive to assume every job application sent to Coles or Woolworths is seen by a human being. But things start to get a little more tricky when AI tools make decisions that would normally be made by a person, with real-life consequences. In one case in the public service, nearly a dozen decisions made by an AI-assisted process had to be overturned, raising questions about whether this tool was right for the job. It is also of concern that US-built and designed tools are being deployed in Australia without being localised for our job market. Some job seekers have reported platforms do not allow candidates to indicate their Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander heritage. It would be tempting to assume this is a problem confined to Canberra and the federal bureaucracy. But the Australian Public Service, one of the largest employers in the country, sets the standard which the rest of the economy tends to follow. Practices accepted in the APS become normalised, and the use, or not, of these AI recruitment tools in agencies and departments creates a template for other employers to follow. The public service's embrace of flexible work practices has become a metric by which workers can judge the offers of private companies and pay standards for large professions such as nurses are set by the public sector. The use of AI in recruitment processes could follow a similar pattern. The union representing Commonwealth, ACT and NT public servants, as well as communications and aviation sector workers, has called for an outright ban on AI in recruitment. While this appears to be unlikely to be taken up, particularly for large recruitment rounds, greater transparency in how AI is used in the hiring process would provide workers with the confidence that the qualities that make them the right pick for the job are being assessed appropriately. There are many intangible, human qualities that go into judging the value of an employee - experience, attitude, creativity and so on - that cannot be accurately weighed up by a machine. As any recruitment officer will attest, choosing the right candidate for a position can be a complex and involved process. While AI tools promise great leaps in productivity, our rush to embrace them shouldn't make us blind to their limitations and the potential for discrimination when judging humans.