Home » Blog » When Lines of Code Decide Your Fate: Legal and Ethical Risks of Algorithmic Promot

When Lines of Code Decide Your Fate: Legal and Ethical Risks of Algorithmic Promot

Authored By: Giridhar Panuganti

GSKM Law College, Rajamahendravaram

Introduction:

Machines Judging Merit 

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is now part of the appraisal and promotion ecosystem across tech-based corporatiBut in this transition, a fundamental concern emerges: can a system designed to process output truly underThis article examines the absence of legal safeguards against automated bias in employment contexts, esp

Smart Coding, Unfair Scoring 

In technology companies, AI-based appraisal tools often focus on quantifiable metrics: –

Lines of code submitted 

– Code commit frequency 

– Jira tickets closed 

– Task cycle time 

However, such data-driven appraisal systems fail to account for: 

– Smart coders who write concise and efficient code 

– Developers contributing to system architecture or internal debugging 

– Employees who take longer for higher-quality outputs 

These systems can unintentionally penalise brilliance that isn’t immediately visible in quantitative outputs. T

Lack of Legal Safeguards in India 

India’s legal regime offers no express protection against automated employment decisions. Neither the Digit- Explanation rights for algorithmic decisions 

– Anti-discrimination audits of AI systems 

– Procedural fairness or grievance redressal for AI-generated reviews 

The absence of statutory protection creates a silent but dangerous situation where employees may face de

Global Legal Benchmarks 

In contrast: 

– The European Union’s AI Act (2024) classifies employment-related AI as ‘high-risk’ and mandates bias au- California’s AB 13 proposes mandatory disclosure when AI influences job outcomes. – In Uber BV v Aslam [2021] UKSC 5, the UK Supreme Court acknowledged the unequal power between w

Constitutional and Labour Law Concerns 

Automated systems may infringe upon: 

– Article 14 of the Constitution of India: Unequal treatment of caregivers, neurodivergent staff, or remote wor- Article 21: Violations of livelihood dignity and procedural fairness 

Yet, courts in India have not fully addressed how AI appraisal tools interact with constitutional protections orRecommendations

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top