AI Regulation: California’s ‘No Robo Bosses’ Act
The California legislature is moving to the forefront of artificial intelligence regulation with the introduction of the No Robo Bosses Act, spearheaded by state Senator Jerry McNerney. This legislative initiative aims to regulate the use of automated decision systems (ADS) in the workplace, particularly focusing on the implications of AI in making critical employment decisions such as hiring, promotions, and terminations.
Key Provisions of SB 7
The proposed No Robo Bosses Act would impose several obligations on employers utilizing ADS:
- Human Oversight Mandate: Employers would be prohibited from relying solely on automated decision-making tools. A human reviewer would need to engage in all major employment decisions, ensuring that human judgment remains integral.
- Notice Requirements: Employers must inform workers when an ADS is utilized for employment-related decisions. This includes a pre-use notice at least 30 days before introducing an ADS, as well as a post-use notice explaining the ADS’s influence on decisions.
- Transparency and Data Access: Employees would have the right to access and correct their data utilized by an ADS, helping to prevent misjudgments arising from inaccurate AI analysis.
- Appeals Process: Employers would be required to establish a clear appeals process for workers contesting ADS-driven employment decisions, including a timeline for review and response.
- Prohibited Uses: The bill explicitly bans certain functions of ADS, such as using AI to predict worker behavior or assess sensitive personal data.
Enforcement and Penalties
The enforcement of SB 7 would fall under the jurisdiction of the labor commissioner, with violations potentially incurring civil penalties of $500 per violation. This could also lead to private lawsuits from employees impacted by non-compliance.
Distinction from Other AI Regulations
SB 7 is not the only AI regulation being considered in California. Assembly Bill 1018 also seeks to regulate AI in employment, but with some key differences:
- While SB 7 emphasizes human oversight, AB 1018 places broader compliance obligations on both employers and AI vendors, including audits and risk assessments.
- SB 7 bans predictive behavior analysis outright, whereas AB 1018 focuses more on impact assessments.
Furthermore, SB 7’s applicability is extensive, covering all employers without exceptions, unlike the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), which applies only to certain business sizes.
Anticipated Debates and Next Steps
The introduction of the No Robo Bosses Act is expected to spark significant debate among labor unions and business groups. Advocates argue for the necessity of human oversight to prevent AI-driven discrimination, while critics claim that current employment laws are sufficient.
Employers are encouraged to prepare for potential changes by auditing current AI systems, implementing human oversight policies, and ensuring compliance with data collection practices. Monitoring the progress of SB 7 and related legislation will be crucial for staying ahead of regulatory requirements.
Conclusion
The No Robo Bosses Act serves as a crucial step in regulating AI in the workplace, reflecting a growing recognition of the need for human involvement in employment decisions driven by technology. As states continue to lead in AI governance, the implications of such legislation will be significant for employers and employees alike.
