We will not accept a job order that asks us to screen candidates in or out on the basis of a protected characteristic, and we will not do it on our own initiative either.
1. Our commitment
We are an equal opportunity recruiter. We source, assess, shortlist and introduce candidates without regard to race, colour, ethnicity or national origin, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or gender reassignment, pregnancy, maternity and family status, marital or civil partnership status, age, disability, genetic information, veteran or military status, or any other characteristic protected by the law that applies to the role.
This applies at every stage: sourcing, screening, shortlisting, interview coordination, offer support, and the staffing of offshore seats. It applies to our own hiring too.
2. The laws we work to
Recruitment agencies and employment businesses are covered by anti-discrimination law in the countries where our clients hire. We work to:
- United States: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which applies to employment agencies that refer candidates to covered employers, together with the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, all enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. State and city laws often go further, and we follow them where the role is based.
- United Kingdom: the Equality Act 2010, which applies to employment service providers, and the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses Regulations 2003.
- European Union: the Racial Equality Directive (2000/43/EC), the Employment Equality Framework Directive (2000/78/EC) and the Gender Equality Directive (2006/54/EC), as implemented in each member state.
- Gulf states and elsewhere: the labour law of the country where the role is based, with the standards above as our floor wherever local law is silent.
3. Job orders we refuse
These are examples of requirements we will not work to:
- Age limits, or "recent graduate only" and "digital native" used as a proxy for age, without a lawful reason.
- Requirements framed around sex, marital status, pregnancy, or plans to have children.
- "Native speaker" where the real requirement is a level of fluency.
- Nationality, religion or ethnicity, where not required by law for the role.
- Excluding people with disabilities without an individual assessment of what the role actually needs.
- Filtering by photograph, name, address, accent or school as a proxy for any of the above.
When a brief contains one of these, we say so, explain the lawful version of the requirement (a language proficiency level instead of "native speaker", a right-to-work requirement instead of nationality, a specific physical or scheduling demand instead of a blanket exclusion), and rewrite it with you. If a client insists, we decline the order and the engagement ends. Right-to-work and visa questions that the law requires are lawful and we ask them.
We do not ask candidates for a photograph, date of birth, marital status or number of children, and we do not pass such details to a client if they appear on a CV.
4. Structured, criteria-based shortlisting
- Before we source anyone, we write the rubric for the role: the criteria, their weights and what evidence counts, agreed with the client in writing on Day 2.
- Every candidate for a role is assessed against the same rubric, asked the same core screening questions, and given the same skills screen.
- Scores and the reasons behind them are written down. The client receives them with the shortlist.
- AI-assisted tools organise and pre-score CVs against the rubric only. They are not given protected characteristics as inputs, a person reviews every score, and nobody is declined by software alone.
- We encourage clients to use the rubric as their interview scorecard and to interview with more than one person.
- Where the client tells us why a shortlisted candidate was not selected, we record it, and we pass feedback to the candidate where the client allows.
The process page shows where each of these steps sits.
5. Reasonable accommodations
If you need an adjustment at any stage, tell us. Examples: more time or a different format for a skills screen, captions or an interpreter on a call, written rather than spoken interview questions, materials in another format, or a different interview time because of a health condition or a caring responsibility. Email faraz@athertalent.com or say so in any message.
We arrange whatever is within our control. We pass a request to the client for their stages only with your agreement. Asking for an adjustment never counts against you in our assessment.
6. Pay transparency
We share the salary range for a role with candidates whenever the client allows it, and we ask every client to allow it. Where a law requires a salary range in a posting or on request, as several US states and cities do, we include it. Our comp note on Day 2 benchmarks the range so the client can set it fairly before we source. We do not ask for salary history where the law prohibits it, and we prefer to ask about expectations everywhere.
7. Our own team and offshore seats
The same rules apply to how we hire and treat the people who fill seats on the offshore teams we run for clients: recruitment, pay, assignment, development and how a seat ends. Seat staff have the same concern channel as candidates, described below, and the protections in our ethical recruitment statement.
8. How to report a concern
If you think you have been treated unfairly by us, by a client we introduced you to, or by anyone acting in our name, email faraz@athertalent.com with "concern" in the subject line. The founder replies within 5 business days. We look into it, tell you what we found and what we are doing about it, and we will not treat you less favourably for raising it.
You can also go to the EEOC in the United States, to the Equality Advisory and Support Service or an employment tribunal in the United Kingdom, or to the equality body in your EU country. Raising a concern with us does not affect your right to do that.
9. Review
The founder reviews this statement at least once a year and whenever the law changes in a market we recruit in. This first version was published on 8 September 2026 and is scheduled for its first review on 8 March 2027.