Coverage scope
- Automated discipline and discharge decisions
- Discrimination and accountability
- Notice and explanation rights
- Human review and appeals
CURRENT COVERAGE
9 records · 4 articles
Relevant jurisdictions: Illinois, New Jersey, Connecticut.
REGULATORY RECORDS
California SB 947 — Employment: Automated Decision Systems
SB 947 limits employer reliance on automated decision systems in employee discipline and termination and adds human-corroboration, postuse-notice, and employee-data-description requirements when reliance is primary.
Related coverage: California SB 947: What Does Human Review Actually Require Before AI-Driven Discipline or Termination? →Illinois Human Rights Act — Use of Artificial Intelligence in Employment
Illinois amended its Human Rights Act to address employer use of artificial intelligence across recruitment, hiring, promotion, discipline, discharge, and other employment terms.
Related coverage: AI Bias Audits: One-Time Compliance or Continuous Monitoring? →California SB 7 — Employment: Automated Decision Systems
SB 7 proposed notice, access, correction, appeal, and human-oversight requirements for employer use of automated decision systems. The Governor vetoed the bill on October 13, 2025; it did not become law.
Related coverage: California AI Hiring Compliance in 2026: How FEHA and CCPA Automated Decision Rules Fit Together →New York Public-Sector Automated Employment Decision-Making Framework
New York requires state agencies using covered automated employment decision-making tools to publish specified information. A 2026 chapter amendment added a disclosure provision for defined local public entities and extended related protections for public employees.
Related coverage: State AI Employment Laws: What’s Law, What’s Pending, and What’s Guidance →New York Boundaries on Technology Act
The BOT Act proposes impact assessments, notice, restrictions on electronic monitoring and automated employment decision tools, data-access rights, and meaningful human oversight. The official Senate record currently lists S 10147 as active in the Senate Labor Committee.
Related coverage: State AI Employment Laws: What’s Law, What’s Pending, and What’s Guidance →New Jersey Guidance on Algorithmic Discrimination
New Jersey's Division on Civil Rights explains that the Law Against Discrimination applies when automated decision systems or other algorithmic tools cause unlawful discrimination, including in employment advertising, screening, hiring, evaluation, promotion, discipline, and termination.
Related coverage: AI Bias Audits: One-Time Compliance or Continuous Monitoring? →Washington HB 1672 — Technology Used by Employers in the Workplace
HB 1672 proposes restrictions and procedural protections for employer electronic monitoring and automated decision systems. After a substitute received a do-pass recommendation, the bill was referred to House Appropriations and retained in that status for the 2026 session.
Related coverage: State AI Employment Laws: What’s Law, What’s Pending, and What’s Guidance →Connecticut Public Act 26-15 — 2026 Employment Provisions
Public Act 26-15 amends Connecticut employment-discrimination law to address automated employment-related decision technology and adds an AI-related disclosure to Labor Department notices that an employer already submits under the federal WARN Act.
Related coverage: Connecticut’s AI Employment Law Is Now Partly in Effect: What Employers Need to Know →Connecticut Public Act 26-15 — Automated Employment Decision Duties
Sections 7–12 of Public Act 26-15 establish definitions, developer-information duties, interaction disclosures, and pre-decision notices for defined automated employment-related decision technology. Although these sections have an October 1, 2026 effective clause, the operative developer and deployer duties apply to qualifying deployments on or after October 1, 2027.
Related coverage: Connecticut’s AI Employment Law Is Now Partly in Effect: What Employers Need to Know →LATEST COVERAGE
CA
California SB 947: What Does Human Review Actually Require Before AI-Driven Discipline or Termination?
The enacted law requires corroboration when an employer primarily relies on an automated output. It leaves the threshold for primary reliance, and several details of the review, unresolved.
CT
Connecticut’s AI Employment Law Is Now Partly in Effect: What Employers Need to Know
Connecticut’s discrimination and AI-layoff disclosure provisions took effect October 1, 2026. Its narrower automated-employment notice regime does not begin until October 1, 2027.
CA
California Enacts New Workplace AI Rules: What SB 947 and AB 1883 Require
California's new workplace-AI laws add human-review safeguards for certain automated discipline and termination decisions and restrict AI-enabled emotional-state inference and neural-data collection.
IL
Illinois AI employment amendments are now effective
The Human Rights Act now expressly addresses AI used in recruitment, hiring, promotion, discipline, discharge, and other employment activity.