View full title
Restricts the use by an employer or an employment agency of electronic monitoring or an automated employment decision tool to screen a candidate or employee for an employment decision unless such tool has been the subject of an impact assessment within the last year; requires notice to employment…
In one paragraph
New York's A 9315-B (the "Boundaries on Technology Act") would add Labor Law Article 36 (§§ 1010-1016). An employer with one hundred or more employees could not use an automated employment decision tool unless it had an impact assessment by an impartial auditor within the prior year, repeated annually, with results sent to the Department of Labor for a public registry within 60 days. Employers would have to notify employees and candidates of the tool. Civil penalties would run up to $1,000, $2,000 and $3,000. Amended and recommitted to Ways and Means May 31, 2024; it never passed either chamber and died at the end of the 2023-2024 session.
Plain-English summary, written with AI assistance. The official text controls.
What it means for business
None: the bill died at the end of the 2023-2024 session. If enacted, employers with 100+ employees using automated hiring tools would have needed annual impact assessments and candidate notices.
Key provisions
- Would add Labor Law Article 36, "Boundaries on Technology Act," §§ 1010-1016; would amend Labor Law § 218 to apply civil penalties of up to $1,000 (first), $2,000 (second) and $3,000 (third and later violation)
- § 1011: unlawful for an employer with one hundred or more employees to use an automated employment decision tool unless it was the subject of an impact assessment conducted no more than one year before use, repeated annually; results go to the department within 60 days for a public registry; documentation kept three years
- If an assessment found a disparate impact, the employer would have to stop using the tool until it took reasonable remedial steps; an employer disagreeing with the finding would have to submit to the commissioner why the tool is the least discriminatory option
- § 1012: employers would have to notify employees and candidates subject to the tool before or at the time a decision is made, including in job postings and on its website in English and the ten most common non-English languages; no sole reliance on the tool for hiring, promotion, termination, discipline or compensation; meaningful human oversight
- § 1013 access to and correction of data (14 calendar days); § 1014 rebuttable presumption of retaliation within 90 days; § 1015 vendor notice; § 1016 commissioner rules and enforcement, and the Attorney General may sue; the text does not expressly create a private right of action
- The operative text does not regulate electronic monitoring (the phrase appears only in the title) and does not mention employment agencies
- Would take effect on the one hundred eightieth day after becoming law; same as S7623; last action May 31, 2024 (amend (t) and recommit to ways and means, print number 9315b)
Latest legislative action
May 31, 2024. amend (t) and recommit to ways and means
Sponsors
| Name | Role |
|---|---|
| George Alvarez D | Primary |
| STERN | Primary |
| Tommy Schiavoni D | Primary |
| THIELE | Cosponsor |
Roll call votes
A Assembly Codes Committee: Favorable refer to committee Ways and Means May 28, 2024
20 yea1 nay1 otherPassed
A Assembly Labor Committee: Favorable refer to committee Codes May 21, 2024
25 yea2 nay2 otherPassed
Topics and industries
Related topics
Affected industries
This page is general information, not legal advice. Summaries are AI-assisted and may contain errors; read the statute for the controlling text and talk to a lawyer about your situation. Full disclaimer · Report an error