A recent trend in recruitment has sparked debate: employers asking taxi drivers to observe and report on candidates during journeys to interviews. While this approach may be intended to offer insight into a candidate’s personality or behaviour outside a formal setting, it raises significant legal, ethical and practical concerns.

Data protection and legal risk

Where third parties such as taxi drivers are asked to monitor and report on candidates, employers must recognise that personal data is both being shared and newly generated. Candidates’ identities, behaviours and interactions during the journey may all constitute personal data, particularly where observations are recorded and used in hiring decisions.

In these circumstances, clear written documentation is essential. Employers would need transparent arrangements governing:

  • The purpose of the processing
  • Permitted use of the information
  • Confidentiality obligations
  • Security measures
  • Data retention periods

In practice, this would require explicit disclosure in the organisation’s recruitment privacy notice, alongside a formal data processing agreement between the employer and the taxi driver or taxi firm. Without these safeguards, employers risk falling short of their accountability obligations under the UK GDPR.

Establishing a lawful basis for this type of processing is also highly problematic. Candidates would not reasonably expect informal third-party observations made during a taxi journey; particularly without prior warning, to influence hiring decisions. This makes reliance on legitimate interests difficult to justify, as the processing is arguably covert and disproportionate.

Consent is equally challenging. For consent to be valid under the UK GDPR, it must be fully informed, freely given and obtained in advance. In this context, that would require candidates to be told clearly, before the journey begins, that they are being assessed in this way. Without such transparency, consent is unlikely to be valid.

Absent a lawful basis and clear pre-interview disclosure, this approach risks breaching the UK GDPR’s core principles of fairness and transparency.

There is also a practical exposure point to consider: any notes or feedback recorded by taxi drivers and retained for recruitment purposes would constitute personal data. As such, they may be disclosable under a Data Subject Access Request (DSAR), potentially including informal or unguarded commentary that the employer never intended to share.

Ethical considerations and candidate trust

Beyond compliance, there is a broader ethical dimension. Candidates bring their own expectations of fairness, honesty and transparency to the recruitment process. Where assessments are conducted without their knowledge, there is a clear risk they may feel misled.

This type of undisclosed evaluation can undermine trust; particularly if candidates later discover that informal interactions were used to assess them. Even successful candidates may question whether they want to join an organisation that relies on covert assessment methods.

At a time when employer brand and candidate experience are critical, perceived lack of transparency or fairness can have tangible consequences, including:

  • Candidates declining offers
  • Reputational damage in the market
  • Reduced diversity in applicant pools
  • Negative word-of-mouth or online reviews

Ultimately, recruitment processes that appear opaque or intrusive are unlikely to align with modern expectations of fair hiring practice.

Fair and effective alternatives

The good news is that there are well-established, lower-risk and more robust ways to assess candidates; without resorting to undisclosed or informal monitoring.

Structured and transparent methods not only reduce legal risk but also improve the quality and defensibility of hiring decisions. These include:

Structured interviews
Using consistent questions and scoring criteria helps ensure candidates are assessed fairly and comparably.

Role-specific practical exercises
Work-based tasks or case studies provide direct insight into a candidate’s skills, judgement, and problem-solving ability.

Behavioural questioning
Exploring past experiences (“tell me about a time when…”) allows employers to evaluate how candidates have handled real situations.

Assessment centres and group exercises
Particularly for senior or complex roles, these provide a more rounded view of candidates while reducing individual bias.

Panel interviews
Multiple assessors help balance perspectives and improve objectivity.

Transparent social elements
Where employers wish to observe interpersonal skills in a less formal setting, this can be done openly. For example, through group networking sessions or informal meals that candidates know form part of the process.

Some employers may also review publicly available social media profiles, provided this is done in a compliant and proportionate way and reflected in their privacy information.

These approaches are far easier to justify from both a legal and data protection perspective, particularly if a recruitment decision is later challenged.

Conclusion

While innovative recruitment techniques can be attractive, employers must ensure they remain grounded in legal compliance and ethical best practice. Informal, undisclosed third-party assessments, such as relying on taxi drivers’ observations, create significant risks around data protection, fairness and candidate trust.

A transparent, structured and respectful approach to assessing candidates not only reduces risk but ultimately leads to better hiring outcomes and a stronger employer reputation.