Govern · agent risk record · Human Resources
Succession Slate Agent
depth-agent
Employees are not proactively told a slate exists or that an agent helped build it. Explanation is available on request, which means available to whoever knows to ask. Two fairness alarms are open against this agent.
Classification
Why this agent sits in this class, under which regime
Human oversight
The measure, and the person it is attached to
How an affected person contests this
The route, the named human at the end of it, and the service level
| Reference | Subject | Grounds | Routed to | Age | Review | Outcome | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
APL-0008 Closed | EMP-08117 employee · US · HR case management | Employee questions why a peer with shorter tenure appeared on a slate they were excluded from. | Morgan Idris Function Leader, chairing the talent council | 233h of 240h | 87m human time | Original upheld Slate criteria and both assessments shared. The council confirmed the original slate and recorded the reasoning. | HR3A-1045 #1 |
APL-0003 Closed | EMP-11284 employee · UK · HR case management | Employee was not on the slate for a role they had been developed toward for two cycles. | Morgan Idris Function Leader, chairing the talent council | 188h of 240h | 95m human time | Partially upheld Added to the slate for the next cycle. The council recorded that the readiness signal the agent used was two cycles out of date. | HR3B-1010 #1 |
Adverse-impact readings behind this agent
Succession and promotion slate · Aug 2026
| Cohort | Compared with | n | Selection rate | Reference rate | Impact ratio | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Under 30 age-band | 30 to 39 | 165 | 11.0% | 9.2% | 1.20 | Within threshold Under 30 is selected at 120 percent of the rate for 30 to 39. |
50 and over age-band | 30 to 39 | 85 | 6.7% | 8.9% | 0.75 | Outside threshold 50 and over is selected at 75 percent of the rate for 30 to 39. |
40 to 49 age-band | 30 to 39 | 140 | 7.8% | 8.7% | 0.89 | Within threshold 40 to 49 is selected at 89 percent of the rate for 30 to 39. |
Minority ethnic groups, aggregated Ethnicity | Majority group (per local reporting standard) | 189 | 7.3% | 9.1% | 0.81 | Within threshold Minority ethnic groups, aggregated is selected at 81 percent of the rate for Majority group (per local reporting standard). |
Women Gender | Men | 268 | 6.5% | 8.8% | 0.74 | Outside threshold Women is selected at 74 percent of the rate for Men. |
Open alarms on this decision point
Derived from the readings, never authored by hand
What this record is, and what it is not
Read this before quoting anything above
Fairness readings computed on modeled data demonstrate the instrument, not a real audit result. The classification, the oversight measure, the explanation surface and the appeal route are design decisions recorded here so they can be argued with; the population behind the readings is modeled.
No agent on this register carries an independent third-party conformity assessment. Every assessment on file was made by the operator.
Appeal outcomes are recorded against the evidence spine where a unit reference exists. Where the evidence column reads “not recorded”, the appeal was resolved outside the spine and that is a gap, not a rounding.