§ The result
Workable leads Pillar by 8 points.
Workable scores 48 and Pillar 40 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. Workable leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Pillar leads 1, including FRIA Support. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Human Oversight Design (Pillar 48, Workable 62) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Pillar 42, Workable 55), the second being 31% of the weighted advantage Workable holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Pillar
Pillar (now "AI Interview Companion by Employ") is an interview intelligence platform that records and transcribes job interviews, generates AI interview guides and highlight clips, and surfaces candidate insights and interviewer-coaching recommendations.
Vendor profile
Workable
Workable is an all-in-one applicant tracking system and HR platform whose AI feature layer (Workable AI / Workable Agent) sources, screens, scores, and matches candidates and drafts recruiting content within the recruiting workflow.
§ The record
Pillar is filed under Screening AI, Workable under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Pillar is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Pillar | Workable |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Pillar 42 · Workable 55
2.6 weighted points to Workable
15% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Pillar 45 · Workable 58
1.9 weighted points to Workable
12% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Pillar 48 · Workable 62
1.7 weighted points to Workable
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Pillar 33 · Workable 42
1.1 weighted points to Workable
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Pillar 30 · Workable 25
0.8 weighted points to Pillar
18% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Pillar 38 · Workable 42
0.7 weighted points to Workable
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Pillar 50 · Workable 56
0.5 weighted points to Workable
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -7.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -7.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Pillar minus Workable.
| Category | Weight | Pillar | Workable | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 55 | -13 | -2.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 42 | -4 | -0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 58 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 62 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 42 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 50 | 56 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 48 (F) | -8 | -7.8 |
§ Evidence
Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.
An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.
| Criterion | Weight | Pillar | Workable | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Pillar has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Workable has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Workable sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 36 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for Pillar, across 1 distinct source domain, and 17 for Workable, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Pillar last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workable last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.
§ Where next