Relates to restricting the use of electronic monitoring and automated employment decision tools

◆ The sponsor's argument

Why Kristen Gonzalez says this is needed

The advent of increasingly advanced algorithms and artificial intelli- gence has led to the rise of automated employment decision tools--compu- tational processes derived from machine learning, statistical modeling, or data analytics that produce scores, classifications, or recommenda- tions based on a set of criteria that employers can use to screen, eval- uate, or otherwise make a decision about a current or prospective employee. While these tools may purport to reduce bias and streamline hiring proc- esses, they have at times been shown to discriminate against certain groups, or on the basis of protected characteristics. Amazon, for example, decommissioned its machine learning tool for recruiting in 2018 after it quickly demonstrated a bias against women. Other automated employment decision tools have demonstrated clear bias against African Americans, women, older Americans, and people with disa- bilities. Nevertheless, a February 2022 survey by the Society of Human Resource management shows 4 in 5 U.S. employers already deploy some form of automated systems in recruitment and hiring decisions. While employers may have a valid interest in increasing productivity or streamlining their hiring processes, the use of automated tools to do so should not entrench discrimination, bias, or violations of workers' rights. New York City led the nation by passing Local Law 144 in 2021, subjecting automated employment decision tools to independent public audits. This bill expands on those protections to establish comprehensive guide- lines and guardrails for the use of these tools, including explicitly prohibiting the use of these tools to discriminate or otherwise violate the law, requiring impact assessments of such tools and prohibiting employment decisions made solely on the basis of such tools, and expand- ing the information employers using such tools are required to provide to employees. The bill empowers the attorney general and. the department of labor to enforce the provisions of the act, and employees to request and correct data used to make decisions about them and from retaliation.

This is the sponsor's own case for the bill, quoted from their memorandum. It is not Agora's description of what the bill does.