Many applicant tracking systems (ATS) can read an applicant's address or ZIP code and compare it with the worksite. A radius setting then ranks, flags, or rejects anyone beyond a set distance, such as 25 miles. The usual reasoning is that people who live farther away are more likely to decline an offer, arrive late, or quit over the commute. This post looks at what research says about that reasoning and how remote work has changed it.

What the UC Davis Audit Study Found

David C. Phillips ran a resume audit study in Washington, D.C., summarized in a policy brief from the UC Davis poverty research center dated January 27, 2016. The brief states: "I submitted 2,260 fictional job applications to 565 actual online job postings that required only a high school education." The headline result: "Fictional résumés randomly assigned addresses far from the job location receive 14% fewer callbacks from employers than nearby addresses."

The brief adds a comparison: "Living 5-6 miles away from the job results in a penalty equal to that received by applicants with names that according to Census data are common among African Americans." The brief itself compares the size of the distance penalty with a penalty tied to race, which is a reason to examine whether your own rule falls evenly across groups.

What the Study Does Not Tell You

The scope is narrow, and the limits should be stated plainly.

Location data can also be wrong. Addresses on resumes are sometimes outdated, partial, or misread when the ATS parses the document, so a rule can reject an applicant over a data error as well as over real distance. Test a sample of rejected resumes against the original documents.

The fair reading is that, in one low-wage setting, employers treated distance as a negative signal on its own. It does not show that every distance rule is wrong, and it does not show that every distance rule is safe.

Remote and Hybrid Work Change the Question

A radius filter assumes a daily commute. For many roles that assumption no longer holds. The U.S. Census Bureau reported on January 16, 2025: "In 2023, 13.8% of U.S. workers usually worked from home," which was more than twice the 5.7% that did so in 2019. For a remote or hybrid role, the address on a resume describes where someone lives, not whether they can do the work.

Application volume reflects the same shift. Slides presented to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York's Economic Advisory Panel on April 1, 2022, drawing on LinkedIn data, state: "Remote jobs attract over 2.5 times the share of job applications compared to on-site jobs." A posting with no location limit draws a wider pool, and a radius rule applied by habit can quietly narrow that pool again. A wider pool also raises verification questions, which our post on identity checks in remote hiring covers.

Questions to Ask About Any Radius Setting

Does the role require presence? If the posting is remote or hybrid, a distance rule contradicts the posting.

Is the address the right data? A current address may reflect a move in progress, a temporary assignment, a military duty station, or a spouse's relocation. A person may be willing to move for the job.

What is the distance standing in for? If the concern is a punctual arrival, ask about schedule and transportation. If the concern is relocation cost, ask about willingness to relocate.

Who does the circle exclude? Where people live is shaped by housing costs and local history, and a circle can fall unevenly across groups. Whether that creates legal exposure for your organization is a question for employment counsel.

Is the rule documented? Write down the business reason for the radius and who approved it, so the setting can be defended and reviewed.

When a Location Rule Still Makes Sense

Some roles do have a real location requirement. A laboratory technician, a warehouse supervisor, or a retail manager works on site, and some employers have registered to employ people in only certain states. In those cases the posting should state the requirement, and the application should ask directly whether the applicant can work at that location or is willing to relocate. The answer is a more reliable screen than a guess from an address, and it avoids rejecting a person who lives far away today but plans to move.

A Practical Approach

Separate location from qualification. Score skills first. Treat location as a follow-up conversation after a reviewer sees a strong match. Our post on knockout questions shows how a single location question can reject an applicant before any experience is read.

Replace rejection with a question. Instead of removing out-of-radius applicants, flag them for a short screening question about relocation or commute.

Measure the effect. Count how many applicants the radius removed in the last quarter, and sample some to see how many matched the role. The filter audit checklist walks through the pass-rate comparison step by step.

For the broader survey behind these filters, see our overview of how ATS filtering creates hidden workers.

How TrueScan HR Helps

TrueScan HR scores a resume against the job description and shows the matched and missing skills, so a reviewer starts from what a candidate can do and decides separately how location fits the role. The narrative assessment explains each score in plain language, which keeps the skills picture visible when an address is far from the worksite. Veteran Mode translates military codes, duties, and clearances into civilian skills, which helps when a service member's address reflects a duty station and not where the person plans to live. The reviewer makes the decision.

This post is general information, not legal advice. TrueScan HR is not a law firm. Confirm how these rules apply to your organization with employment counsel.

Sources: