The admissibility procedure of the disputed AMS algorithm is expected to take even longer due to the recent decision by the Administrative Court. The Court has seen the need for additional clarification on this issue, specifically regarding whether a digital tool designed to determine the prospects of unemployed individuals in the labor market would significantly influence the decisions of AMS staff. This question has been under scrutiny for almost three years.
The Labor Market Assistance System (AMAS) was intended to divide unemployed persons into three categories with high, medium and low opportunities in the labor market using a computer algorithm. The aim was to allocate funding measures more efficiently, with a focus on providing the greatest support to those with medium prospects on the labor market. However, ultimately, it was up to relevant advisers, such as whether someone received expensive skilled worker training or not, to make final jobseeker placement decisions.
Recently, it was decided that the algorithm falls under “significant public interest,” which is a prerequisite for justifying the use of personal data. However, this ruling also confirmed that “profiling” exists within AMS. Whether profiling is acceptable will depend on how much AMS staff’s jobseeker placement decisions are determined by automatically calculated labor market opportunities. Unfortunately, this controversial issue was not addressed by the Federal Administrative Court, so a new procedure will be necessary for its clarification.
As a result of this decision, it remains uncertain when and in what form AMAS might be used in practice. Currently, AMS is reviewing the judgment in detail to determine next steps. The original judgment was published online by Standard.