Employers 'Still Playing Catch-Up' on AI Risk Management, Littler Survey Finds
Not legal advice. This article discusses legal and regulatory developments and is generated with AI assistance under human editorial review. It is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws and regulations vary by jurisdiction and are subject to change. You should consult your own qualified legal counsel before taking or refraining from any action based on the content of this article. Read our AI Transparency statement.
The News
Artificial intelligence is the most significant source of workplace policy and regulatory concern for US employers in 2026, surpassing immigration and diversity, equity and inclusion, according to Littler Mendelson's annual employer survey published in May. The share of respondents expecting AI-related regulatory shifts approximately doubled from the 2025 edition of the survey.
The report found that 54% of respondents use AI in HR functions specifically, and 68% have implemented formal AI governance policies — a stark improvement from the 38% reported in 2025. However, fewer than half had instituted measures such as procedures for vetting third-party AI vendors, tool-specific training for AI applications, or a designated internal AI oversight committee. Niloy Ray, co-chair of Littler's AI and technology practice group, said the mismatch between adoption and governance 'could leave employers vulnerable to significant risk.' Data privacy, algorithmic bias, and state-level AI-in-hiring laws topped respondents' litigation concerns.
Why It Matters
For TA leaders, this report draws a direct line between your AI tool procurement decisions and enterprise legal exposure. If your team has deployed AI-powered screening, CV parsing, or candidate matching without a formal vendor review process or documented bias testing, you are in the majority — but that majority is vulnerable. With multiple states now regulating AI use in hiring, the absence of an oversight committee is not a technology gap; it is a governance gap that legal and compliance teams will eventually flag.
Taking Action
All action is situated in your corporate context. These are starting points, not prescriptions — choose what fits.
Connect
Who to talk with in your enterprise
Your Legal and Compliance Team — Invite them to review every AI tool in your TA stack against the Littler findings. Ask them to confirm which state AI-in-hiring laws apply to your organisation and whether your current processes satisfy documentation requirements.
Your Head of HR Technology — Request a governance audit of your TA tech stack, including whether each AI vendor has been formally vetted for bias testing, data privacy, and explainability. Document the results for your next operating review.
Inspect
What to take a closer look at
Audit whether your organisation has an AI oversight committee and whether your TA function has a representative on it. If not, this is the week to request one. Specific tool to look at: Your vendor onboarding checklist — does it include an AI-specific risk assessment step for any tool that touches candidate data?
Reflect
What to think about more deeply
The most interesting question isn't 'How do we adopt AI faster?' — it's 'If 68% of employers claim to have AI governance policies but fewer than half vet third-party vendors, what are those policies actually governing?'