AI in pay decisions attracts 67% of job seekers, Resume Now finds

NEW YORK, UNITED STATES — A survey reveals that artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming a significant factor in talent acquisition, with over 60% of 884 United States workers surveyed reporting they would be more likely to accept a job at a company that uses AI to determine compensation. 

The findings of the Resume Now survey conducted on August 28, 2025, suggest that while AI serves as a powerful recruitment tool when tied to market transparency, workers maintain strict boundaries regarding algorithmic authority, insisting on human oversight for final pay decisions.

Why job seekers prefer AI in salary and compensation

The survey showed that 67% of respondents would be more inclined to work in an organization that uses AI to determine pay, compared with 32% who would be less inclined. 

The information indicates that, in most cases, AI participation signals a commitment to data-driven benchmarking and a willingness to take the initiative to eliminate individual prejudice or bias in the package of offers.

On the part of the employers, the data implies that the application of AI is not sufficient, but the technology is to be coupled with clear communication. 

As the report notes, “With clear criteria, manager review, and an appeals path, candidates can compare offers with more confidence and negotiate specifics such as pay bands, location adjustments, and bonus rules.”

AI vs. human managers: Who do employees trust with pay?

Although the survey took place in an era of great openness to AI, it still demonstrated a subtle topography of trust regarding who should make the final decision on earnings. 

Fifty-nine percent of employees still place more trust in their human managers than in AI for pay decisions; 34% now trust AI systems more, driven by perceived consistency. Another 7% are unsure, indicating that the workforce is in disrepair regarding the legitimacy of automated judgment.

Such a dynamic of trust is especially intense in hypothetical conflict situations. Considering the question of who should prevail in a disagreement between a manager and an AI system over pay, 66% of survey participants are firm in their belief that the manager’s decision should prevail. 

The report notes, “Employees tend to support AI as an input rather than the sole decision maker.”

Yet, the possibility that 34% would support AI in such a disagreement indicates the increasing credibility of algorithms. 

To bridge this gap, the report states that organizations create trust by publishing how frequently market data is updated and by ensuring a clear appeal route that ultimately leads to a human decision-maker.

Employee comfort levels and limits on AI pay decisions

Employees are generally comfortable with AI in wage decisions, yet the statistics show that there are stringent rules on how far they can use it. 

Nine out of ten (90%) of the surveyed reported being at least somewhat comfortable with AI affecting pay decisions, with 47% indicating they are very comfortable, and just 1% feeling uncomfortable. 

This ease of mind, however, is conditional: 42% would permit AI to determine 25% of their overall compensation, and 39% would limit it to half, and 6% would not allow AI to affect their compensation.

The final worker support requirement will depend on how the technology can be used to ensure a sense of fairness. A staggering 96% of employees would prefer AI to be involved in their compensation, provided it makes their compensation competitive and based on market data, while only 4% would disagree. 

As the report reads, “Employees respond to AI that validates fairness rather than replaces judgment. Credibility grows when employers publish pay bands, cite market data sources and refresh cycles, and explain how managers review AI-informed recommendations.”

The findings suggest that as AI-driven pay benchmarking becomes a competitive recruitment signal, the future of work will likely center on hybrid compensation systems where AI guides market-aligned offers. At the same time, human managers will retain final authority to preserve trust and accountability in pay decisions.