Introduction
The increasing integration of automated decision systems (ADS) in employment practices has prompted significant concerns about worker rights [2] [5], privacy [2] [5], and fairness [2] [5]. In response, California has introduced legislative measures to regulate the use of these technologies, aiming to ensure transparency, accountability [2], and equitable treatment in the workplace.
Description
The increasing use of automated decision systems (ADS) in employment practices has raised significant concerns regarding worker rights [2] [5], privacy [2] [5], and fairness [2] [5]. In response, California lawmakers have proposed the “No Robo Bosses” Act [2] [5], which aims to regulate the use of ADS in the workplace [5]. This legislation would prohibit employers from making employment-related decisions solely based on ADS [5], requiring human review of recommendations and additional corroborating evidence for decisions [5]. Employers must notify workers when ADS influences decisions and allow them to access and correct data used by these systems [5].
The Act applies universally to all employers [5], including non-profits and small businesses [5], and establishes penalties for violations [5], including civil actions by the Labor Commissioner and workers [5]. Compliance with the Act would necessitate increased oversight [5], transparency measures [2] [5], and regular audits of ADS [2] [5], potentially leading to higher operational costs for employers [5]. The requirement for human involvement in key employment decisions may limit the efficiency benefits of AI technologies [5], but it aims to mitigate biases in AI systems [2], promoting equitable outcomes for workers [2].
In addition to the “No Robo Bosses” Act, the California Civil Rights Council has finalized new regulations concerning the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and automated decision-making systems by employers [3] [4], positioning the state as a leader in comprehensive oversight of these technologies in employment contexts [3]. Approved on March 21, 2025 [3], and pending final approval from the Office of Administrative Law [3], these regulations are expected to take effect soon. They clarify that utilizing such technologies for employment decisions may contravene California’s anti-discrimination laws [3], particularly concerning criminal background checks and medical inquiries [1] [3] [4]. Discriminatory practices against job applicants or employees [3] [4], as outlined by the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) [3] [4], are deemed unlawful.
The regulations specify that standard software, such as word processors or spreadsheets [4], is not classified as automated decision-making systems unless it influences employment benefits [4]. Additionally, online application technologies that screen or prioritize candidates based on scheduling restrictions may lead to discrimination based on religious creed [4], disability [4], or medical condition unless justified as job-related and necessary [4]. Employers are required to conduct individualized assessments before denying applicants based on criminal records [1], and inquiries about criminal history through automated systems are prohibited [1].
Moreover, the regulations extend prohibitions against aiding and abetting unlawful employment practices to automated decision-making systems [4], potentially implicating third parties involved in their design or implementation [4]. Evidence of anti-bias testing and proactive measures to prevent discrimination will be pertinent in cases of alleged unlawful discrimination [4].
Employers are advised to assess their reliance on ADS in Human Resources functions [5], negotiate AI contracts carefully [5], and develop transparency plans to inform employees about AI technologies and data collection practices [5]. Procedures should be established to allow workers to challenge AI-driven decisions [2], particularly in sensitive areas such as promotions [2], discipline [2], or terminations [2]. The proposed regulations signal a shift toward stricter oversight of AI-driven decision-making in the workplace [5], aiming to protect workers from biases while imposing significant compliance burdens on employers [5]. Continuous monitoring of legal developments in California is essential for employers to remain compliant with evolving AI legislation [5], aligning the state with others like Colorado, Illinois [1] [4], and New York City in regulating AI technologies [1] [4].
Conclusion
The legislative and regulatory initiatives in California represent a significant step towards addressing the challenges posed by automated decision systems in employment. By mandating human oversight and promoting transparency, these measures aim to protect worker rights and ensure fair treatment. However, they also impose substantial compliance requirements on employers, necessitating careful adaptation to the evolving legal landscape. As other states follow suit, the implications for employment practices nationwide could be profound, potentially reshaping the role of AI in the workplace.
References
[1] https://ogletree.com/insights-resources/blog-posts/californias-wait-is-nearly-over-new-ai-employment-discrimination-regulations-move-toward-final-publication/
[2] https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/no-robo-bosses-proposed-legislation-to-5518123/
[3] https://natlawreview.com/article/californias-wait-nearly-over-new-ai-employment-discrimination-regulations-move
[4] https://www.salary.com/newsletters/law-review/what-employers-need-to-know-about-ca-new-regulations-on-ai-in-employment-decisions/
[5] https://www.swlaw.com/publication/no-robo-bosses-proposed-legislation-to-curb-ai-in-the-workplace/
