Comment by Jason Perillo

Building relationships with candidates is one of the most vital and least automatable parts of hiring. No chatbot can replicate the empathy, intuition, or trust that comes from a genuine human conversation. Candidates want to feel heard and understood—especially when weighing a career change. Over-automation here risks creating a cold, impersonal experience that drives strong candidates away instead of drawing them in. Final hiring decisions should never be fully automated. While AI can help surface red flags or suggest strong fits, human judgment is essential for weighing context, potential, and long-term alignment. There’s always more to a candidate than what shows up on paper or in a test. Removing people from the decision-making loop also increases the risk of perpetuating bias that may be built into the algorithm’s design.
AI Verified source (Jul 11, 2025)
Like Share on X 5mo ago
Policy proposals and claims
votes For
Statement relation verification history AI Verified Report this

Statement relation comments

AI Verified The quote is directly on the complete statement’s issue: it says final hiring decisions should not be fully automated, argues that human judgment is essential, and gives reasons tied to bias and contextual evaluation. That makes the author’s stance on banning fully automated hiring decisions without human review readily determinable. ([theperillogroup.com](https://www.theperillogroup.com/2025/07/11/ai-and-automation-in-hiring-what-you-should-and-shouldnt-automate/)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 15d ago
Vote inference verification history AI Verified Report this

Vote answer comments

AI Verified The author explicitly says “Final hiring decisions should never be fully automated” and adds that human judgment is essential, which directly supports banning fully automated hiring decisions without human review. ([theperillogroup.com](https://www.theperillogroup.com/2025/07/11/ai-and-automation-in-hiring-what-you-should-and-shouldnt-automate/)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 15d ago
votes For
Statement relation verification history AI Verified Report this

Statement relation comments

AI Verified The quote is directly relevant. In the source context, the author argues that parts of hiring can be automated, but that final hiring decisions "should never be fully automated," that "human judgment is essential," and that removing people from the loop raises bias risks. That strongly signals a determinable stance in favor of human-in-the-loop oversight for AI used in a high-stakes decision domain like hiring. ([theperillogroup.com](https://www.theperillogroup.com/2025/07/11/ai-and-automation-in-hiring-what-you-should-and-shouldnt-automate/)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 15d ago
Vote inference verification history AI Verified Report this

Vote answer comments

AI Verified The author is clearly supportive: the article says "Final hiring decisions should never be fully automated" and that "human judgment is essential," with added concern about bias when people are removed from the loop. That directly backs human-in-the-loop oversight for AI in a high-stakes area like hiring, even though the broader statement generalizes beyond this domain. ([theperillogroup.com](https://www.theperillogroup.com/2025/07/11/ai-and-automation-in-hiring-what-you-should-and-shouldnt-automate/)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 15d ago

Quote authenticity verification history

Report this

Quote authenticity comments

AI Verified The source URL is fetchable and resolves to a The Perillo Group article titled “AI and Automation in Hiring: What You Should and Shouldn’t Automate,” credited to Jason Perillo and dated July 11, 2025. The fetched page contains both quoted paragraphs verbatim in the article body, so the quote is authentic, correctly attributed, and the stored date/source are correct. ([theperillogroup.com](https://www.theperillogroup.com/2025/07/11/ai-and-automation-in-hiring-what-you-should-and-shouldnt-automate/)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 15d ago
replying to Jason Perillo