I Should Not Have to Fight for Fair Treatment in the Workplace

As a Pawnee woman who is Deaf, I’ve long faced barriers to being evaluated fairly, not because I lack experience or qualifications, but because of systemic bias and technology that wasn’t built with people like me in mind.

So when I was offered a job at Intuit, a financial software company, in late 2019 as a tax associate, I was thrilled. In this role, I helped customers with their tax questions and consistently received high ratings for my service. I took pride in being able to resolve customer concerns quickly and with empathy.

My experience reflects a bigger problem: the systemic discrimination embedded in AI-powered hiring tools.

But, during my first year, I was shocked to learn that one of my key performance indicator scores was unusually low. After meeting with my manager, I learned that Intuit’s artificial intelligence (AI) software—used to measure how closely employees followed call scripts—wasn’t accurately recognizing my speech because of my Deaf accent. Instead of correcting the problem, I was reassigned to a role that no longer involved answering customer calls. Even after that setback, I stayed committed to my work. In 2021, I was promoted to Tax Expert Lead. Over the next three tax seasons, I consistently hit high performance metrics and received positive feedback.

In 2023, I joined Intuit’s Accessibility Team to help identify and address barriers that people with disabilities face across the company’s services. During that time, I raised concerns about Intuit’s use of HireVue—a vendor that provides AI-based video interviewing software—as part of the company’s hiring process. I specifically noted that the platform posed challenges for deaf and hard-of-hearing applicants. The Accessibility Team chair said they would look into it, but I never heard about any follow-up or action taken.

AI should never be used as a barrier. It’s time for action, accountability, and justice.

After the 2023 tax season, my manager—who was also part of the hiring committee—encouraged me to apply for a seasonal manager position. It was the next logical step in my career, and I knew I was qualified. I applied in spring 2024.Soon after, I received an invitation to complete a video interview using the HireVue platform. I immediately knew this would be a problem because the platform didn’t provide consistent subtitles for all audio content. In fact, studies show that the technology underlying HireVue performs worse for non-white speakers and even worse for speakers with a deaf accent.

I requested an accommodation: human-generated captioning for the interview. Unfortunately, Intuit did not provide me with this requested accommodation, instead saying that HireVue had built-in subtitles. But, when I began the interview, those subtitles weren’t there for all the content. I had to rely on Google Chrome’s auto-captions, which were full of errors and made it hard to fully understand the questions. Still, I pushed forward. I did my best, confident in my qualifications and experience.

Weeks later, I got an email letting me know Intuit had moved on with other candidates. The feedback I received was devastating: I was told to improve my communication by being more concise, adapting my style to different audiences, and projecting more confidence. What hurt the most was the suggestion that I “practice active listening. ”As a Deaf woman, that comment was not only ignorant—it was deeply offensive. It made me feel like the HireVue system had completely failed to assess me fairly. Worse, it made clear that the people interpreting the HireVue results didn’t understand the realities of Deaf communication.

My experience reflects a bigger problem: the systemic discrimination embedded in AI-powered hiring tools. These systems were not built for people like me. Native professionals, deaf individuals, and countless others are being unfairly screened out by biased technology that prioritizes data over human understanding.

That’s why the ACLU, the ACLU of Colorado, Public Justice, and Eisenberg & Baum, LLP have filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Division and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The complaint charges Intuit and HireVue with violating the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA), the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

Real change is needed. Companies must stop using hiring technologies that discriminate against disabled and non-white applicants. They must implement accessible, equitable hiring practices that evaluate people based on their skills, experience, and potential—not on biased algorithms.

AI should never be used as a barrier. It’s time for action, accountability, and justice.

Trump's Attempt to Unilaterally Control State and Local Funding is Dangerous, Dumb, and Undemocratic

The Trump administration has not been subtle in its desire to use federal funding for political punishment. Whether threatening to cut off grants to sanctuary cities, to block financial assistance to states that push back against the president’s demands, or to freeze all federal grants and loans for social services across the country, Trump and his allies want us to believe they can wield the federal budget like a weapon. The reality is that the administration’s ability to withhold or condition funding is far more limited than they let on. The Constitution, Supreme Court precedent, and long-standing federal law stand firmly in the way of this brazen abuse of presidential power. Trump’s Attempted Funding Freeze? Blocked Immediately A week into his second administration, Trump attempted to freeze trillions of dollars in federal grants and loans that fund a vast array of critical services already approved by Congress. If allowed to go into effect, this unprecedented and far-reaching...

Documents Reveal Confusion and Lack of Training in Texas Execution

As Texas seeks to execute Carl Buntion today and Melissa Lucio next week, it is worth reflecting on the grave and irreversible failures that occurred when the state executed Quintin Jones on May 19, 2021. For the first time in its history — and in violation of a federal court’s directive and the Texas Administrative Code — Texas excluded the media from witnessing the state’s execution of Quintin Jones. In the months that followed, Texas executed two additional people without providing any assurance that the underlying dysfunction causing errors at Mr. Jones’ execution were addressed. This is particularly concerning given that Texas has executed far more people than any other state and has botched numerous executions. The First Amendment guarantees the public and the press have a right to observe executions. Media access to executions is a critical form of public oversight as the government exerts its power to end a human life. Consistent with Texas policy, two reporters travelled t...

The Supreme Court Declined a Protestors' Rights Case. Here's What You Need to Know.

The Supreme Court recently declined to hear a case, Mckesson v. Doe , that could have affirmed that the First Amendment protects protest organizers from being held liable for illegal actions committed by others present that organizers did not direct or intend. The high court’s decision to not hear the case at this time left in place an opinion by the Fifth Circuit, which covers Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, that said a protest organizer could be liable for the independent, violent actions of others based on nothing more than a showing of negligence. Across the country, many people have expressed concern about how the Supreme Court’s decision not to review, or hear, the case at this stage could impact the right to protest. The ACLU, which asked the court to take up the case, breaks down what the court’s denial of review means. What Happened in Mckesson v. Doe? The case, Mckesson v. Doe , was brought by a police officer against DeRay Mckesson , a prominent civil rights activi...

Search This Blog