Skip to main content
NOPE
Medium reported severity

Three MAC make-up artists say an algorithm-marked HireVue video interview led to their redundancy; Estée Lauder settled their claims

City AM and Cosmetics Business reported in March 2022, relaying the BBC Three documentary Computer Says No and the Times, that three make-up artists at MAC, an Estée Lauder Companies brand, lost their jobs in a 2020 redundancy process after being told to reapply for their roles through a video interview run by HireVue and marked by an algorithm. City AM reports that they were made redundant partly as a result of the automated judgement. The women said no one could explain how they had been scored, and one said nobody watched the video. Estée Lauder settled their claims out of court; the amount was not disclosed. The company says staff were told in advance about the HireVue skills assessment, that the process was used in tandem with human decision-making, that facial recognition made up about 0.25% of the overall assessment and performance data and qualitative feedback most of it, and that any suggestion facial recognition played a decisive role is false. HireVue said its video-analysis component had been discontinued about two years earlier. How much the HireVue score weighed in each decision is not reported.

AI system
HireVue
Occurred
2020
Reported
17 March 2022
Event location
Unknown
What the AI did
Made a claim about the person · Informed a human decision about the person
Reported harm
Professional Harm
Whose AI use
An institution’s AI use
Setting
Work
Evidence
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution disputed · 2 sources, 1 underlying account
6 claims: 6 reported. 4 open questions
People reported harmed
3 people

AI system as recorded: HireVue video interview and skills assessment, marked by an algorithm, used by Estée Lauder Companies in a 2020 redundancy process at MAC

What Happened

The process. According to City AM and Cosmetics Business, MAC's parent told make-up artists in 2020, after the furlough scheme, that redundancies were being made and that they would have to reapply for their roles. As part of that process each completed a video interview run by HireVue and marked by an algorithm. One woman said the questions, such as how to create a smokey eye, asked them to describe make-up work rather than demonstrate it.

The outcome for the three women. All three lost their jobs following the interview. City AM reports that they were made redundant partly as a result of the automated judgement. The women told BBC Three that no one could explain how they had been scored; one said she had expected a person to mark the video and later found that nobody saw it. They brought legal claims, which Estée Lauder settled out of court; the value was not disclosed.

The company's and vendor's position. Estée Lauder says interviewees were told in advance that the consultation would involve a HireVue skills assessment and that it gave feedback. It says the HireVue process used in tandem with human decision-making produces fairer outcomes, that facial recognition accounted for about 0.25% of the overall assessment, that performance data and qualitative feedback made up most of it, and that any suggestion facial recognition played a decisive role is false. HireVue's chief executive said the video-analysis component of its algorithm had been voluntarily discontinued nearly two years earlier.

Limits. The weight of the HireVue score in each woman's selection, the scores themselves and the terms of the settlement are not reported, and no tribunal finding was made. Where the women worked is described only as MAC UK & Ireland.

Reported harm

Three make-up artists lost their jobs in a 2020 redundancy process after a HireVue video interview marked by an algorithm; City AM reports the automated judgement was part of the reason, and the company disputes that facial recognition was decisive (women's account and company statements relayed by two outlets).

Outcome

Resolved

Estée Lauder Companies settled the three women's claims out of court; the amount was not disclosed and no tribunal finding is reported. The company maintains that human decision-making and performance data made up most of the assessment.

What remains unknown

  • How much each woman's HireVue score weighed against performance data and qualitative feedback in her selection.
  • Whether HireVue's video-analysis component was used in these interviews; HireVue said it had been discontinued about two years before March 2022.
  • The settlement terms and whether any claim reached a tribunal hearing.
  • Where the women worked within MAC UK & Ireland.

What the evidence supports

AI involvement: reported. Both outlets report that the women's video interviews were run by HireVue and marked by an algorithm, and Estée Lauder confirms that a HireVue skills assessment was part of the consultation and was used in tandem with human decision-making. City AM reports the women were made redundant partly as a result of that automated judgement. The company disputes its weight: it says facial recognition was about 0.25% of the assessment and performance data and qualitative feedback the majority, so the AI involvement is confirmed by the employer and how far the algorithm's marking decided each outcome is disputed.

6 claims: 6 reported. What the statuses mean

Reported In a 2020 redundancy process, three MAC make-up artists were told to reapply for their roles and to complete a video interview run by HireVue and marked by an algorithm.

Causal attribution. Both outlets relay the BBC Three documentary Computer Says No and the Times; the company confirms that a HireVue skills assessment was part of the consultation process.

  • cityam.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    The make-up artists lost their jobs after they were told to reapply for their posts via an automated video interview.; The software is made by the recruitment company HireVue, and the process dates back to 2020, following the furlough scheme.
  • cosmeticsbusiness.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    The former MAC retail workers were told by its parent that redundancies were being made, and that they would have to reapply for their roles.; As part of that process, a video interview took place, which was run by US tech company HireVue, and was marked by an algorithm.
Reported All three lost their jobs following the interview; City AM reports that they were made redundant partly as a result of the automated judgement.

Causal attribution. The women's account relayed by both outlets; the company says performance data and qualitative feedback made up most of the assessment and denies that facial recognition played a decisive role.

Reported The women say no one could explain how they were scored in the HireVue interview, and one said nobody watched the video.

Causal attribution. The women's statements in the BBC Three documentary, relayed by both outlets.

Reported Estée Lauder Companies settled the three women's claims out of court; the value was not disclosed.

Causal attribution. Reported by both outlets from the documentary and the Times; no settlement terms or admission are reported.

  • cityam.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    Three former Estée Lauder staff have won a settlement against the cosmetics giant
  • cosmeticsbusiness.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    has settled out of court with three make-up artists; All three women were unable to discuss the value of the agreement reached with ELC in the documentary.
Reported Estée Lauder says interviewees were told in advance about the HireVue skills assessment, that the HireVue process used in tandem with human decision-making produces fairer outcomes, that facial recognition was about 0.25% of the overall assessment, that performance data and qualitative feedback made up most of it, and that any suggestion facial recognition played a decisive role is false.

Causal attribution. The company's statements to City AM, Cosmetics Business and the Times.

  • cityam.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    using the HireVue process in tandem with human decision-making produces fairer outcomes and we stand by it; facial recognition accounted for well under 1% (0.25%) of employees’ overall assessment.; which accounted for the majority of the employment assessment, to make decisions on employment.
  • cosmeticsbusiness.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    All interviewees were told in advance the consultation process would involve HireVue skills assessment and the role that technology would play in the process.; any suggestion that facial recognition technology played a decisive role in any employment-related decision
Reported HireVue's chief executive said the video-analysis component of its algorithm had been voluntarily discontinued nearly two years before the March 2022 reports.

Causal attribution. HireVue's statement relayed by Cosmetics Business; it does not say whether the component was used in the women's interviews.

Sources

2 sources inspected, from 1 underlying account. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.

How the sources were read, and where the events happened

English article of 17 March 2022 read in full on 2026-10-22 by the research agent (an AI) (HTTP 200); no translation required. It relays the BBC Three documentary and the Times and carries a company statement given to City AM. Applies to s1.

English article published 21 March 2022 read in full on 2026-10-22 by the research agent (an AI) (HTTP 200); no translation required. It relays the BBC Three documentary and carries statements from the company and HireVue; it depends on the same documentary as s1. Applies to s2.

Event countries: Unknown. Affected-person countries: Unknown. Court countries: Unknown.

The sources name the employer unit as MAC UK & Ireland and mention the furlough scheme and BBC Three, but do not state where the women worked or where they brought their claims, so no country is recorded.

Reviewed for publication 2026-10-22: Published as a workplace adverse experience: an algorithm marked the women's HireVue video interviews in a redundancy process, the employer confirms it used that assessment alongside human decisions, and the three lost their jobs and settled their claims. The weight of the algorithm's marking is disputed by the employer and is recorded as such.

People described

Three make-up artists employed at MAC, an Estée Lauder Companies brand

People reported harmed in this case

3 people

0 AI participants · 3 other people harmed

Three former make-up artists: 'All three women lost their jobs following the interview' (Cosmetics Business) and 'Three former Estée Lauder staff have won a settlement' (City AM). They were assessed by the system, not its users.

Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.

Tags

#ai-hiring-assessment#redundancy#workplace-ai#video-interview

Cite this case

Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.

APA

NOPE. (2026). Three MAC make-up artists say an algorithm-marked HireVue video interview led to their redundancy; Estée Lauder settled their claims. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2020-mac-make-up-artists-say-hirevue-algorithm-marked-video-interview-led-to-redundancy-estee-lauder-settled

BibTeX

@misc{2020_mac_make_up_artists_say_hirevue_algorithm_marked_video_interview_led_to_redundancy_estee_lauder_settled,
  title = {Three MAC make-up artists say an algorithm-marked HireVue video interview led to their redundancy; Estée Lauder settled their claims},
  author = {NOPE},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {AI incidents},
  url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2020-mac-make-up-artists-say-hirevue-algorithm-marked-video-interview-led-to-redundancy-estee-lauder-settled}
}

Related cases

Low Pangram AI-text detector

Caine Prize reviews its 2026 winning story after a Pangram AI-detector scan cited by The Atlantic flagged it as AI-generated; the author denies using AI

A week after a Zimbabwean writer won the £10,000 2026 Caine Prize for African Writing, The Atlantic published an article on Sunday 11 October 2026 whose central evidence was a scan by Pangram, an AI-text detection tool, flagging almost the entire winning story as AI-generated. The Caine Prize said it had begun a review: according to its chair, the author would send documentation of his drafts and the prize was talking to the judges and to the magazine that first published the story. The chair told the BBC that The Atlantic had published before a full investigation, tainting the prize and the winner, and said a detector should not be the final arbiter. The author denied using AI and said he had a documented history of the story's development; his literary agency said it was confident the story was his own work. No finding has been announced.

Medium Pangram AI-text detector

Académie Goncourt drops Thélyson Orélien's novel as likely AI-generated after Pangram claims; his publisher later says it found AI traces and ends ties

On 21 September 2026 an anonymous X account, Balance ton Claude, said it had run excerpts of Thélyson Orélien's debut novel C'était ça ou mourir through the American AI-detection software Pangram, with some passages scoring up to 100 per cent probability of AI generation. On 25 September the Académie Goncourt removed the novel from the first selection of sixteen books for its 2026 prize, stating that the work is 'in all likelihood very largely the product of an artificial intelligence', based on 'the convergent result of several analyses by researchers and journalists', and also citing plagiarism in older texts by the author published in Canada (at least one short story and articles), which do not concern the novel. Orélien, a 38-year-old Canadian-Haitian writer whose novel had won the Fnac novel prize, denies using AI and says its repetitions and certain rhythms reflect his linguistic and cultural world and may be misread by automated tools. His Montreal publisher Boréal suspended promotional activities, saying it could neither confirm nor refute the allegations. Essayist Samuel Fitoussi said he was one of the people behind the account. AI-detector reliability is contested in the coverage. In October the author acknowledged plagiarism in some of his earlier work while maintaining that no sentence of the novel was generated by a machine. On 17 October 2026 The Canadian Press, published by CBC, reported that Boréal confirmed he had ended an effort to compile evidence of how the novel was written; Boréal said at that point it would keep selling the book, that sales had slowed since the controversy began, and that it could not verify how the novel was written before it received the manuscript on 12 September 2025. A major Quebec bookstore chain reported no significant change in sales. On 21 October 2026 Boréal announced that it was ending its professional relationship with him and would not reprint the novel or publish any further books by him. It said an external analysis it commissioned of all working versions of the novel revealed traces of AI markers in the metadata of certain documents, and that it does not know to what extent AI was used. In a statement the previous week Orélien had said he used AI tools 'here and there' for research but that the text, structure and plot were his own.

Medium GPT-5.4 and Claude Opus 5 (reported)

Massachusetts: fired teacher asks court to vacate an arbitration, saying the arbitrator improperly used AI tools to judge her AI-detector evidence

A kindergarten teacher at a public elementary school in Concord, Massachusetts, was dismissed in August 2025 after an unsatisfactory evaluation. In arbitration she argued that some of the principal's evaluations may have been produced with AI, relying on GPTZero estimates; the principal denied using AI beyond grammar checks. According to the arbitration decision as reported by The Concord Bridge, the arbitrator stated in an appendix that he used two AI tools, GPT-5.4 and Claude Opus 5, to research whether GPTZero was reliable, checked some of the sources they supplied, concluded that GPTZero's results deserved no weight, and upheld the dismissal on 27 August 2026. On 28 September 2026 the teacher asked Suffolk Superior Court to vacate the decision, alleging that the AI-assisted research was an improper investigation outside the hearing record that the parties were not told about or allowed to challenge. These are allegations in a complaint; the district declined to comment and no court has ruled.

Medium Unidentified AI tool

Ninth Circuit fines and suspends two immigration lawyers over briefs with AI-hallucinated citations and denials of AI use; immigration board follows

On 3 June 2026 the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit fined immigration attorneys Mike Singh Sethi and William Rounds $2,500 each and suspended both from practice before the court for six months. Briefs filed in an asylum petition for review cited two cases that do not exist and attributed quotations to opinions that do not contain them. In a motion to correct, the attorneys called the errors typographical, and at oral argument Rounds twice said AI was not used. In their response to the court's order to show cause, they conceded that the errors were probably the product of unauthorised AI use by the firm's unlicensed brief writers and a failure to check citations. The court said the suspension was owed to their repeated failure of candour. The Board of Immigration Appeals then suspended Sethi from practice before the Board, the immigration courts and the Department of Homeland Security for six months, effective 13 June 2026, and designated that decision as a precedent on 1 October 2026.

If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.

Back to all incidents