Consumer Protection and Labor and Employment - Electronic Shelving Labels and Surveillance-Based Price and Wage Setting - Prohibitions
SB889 would prohibit certain uses of data-driven pricing and wage-setting practices in Maryland. On the consumer side, it bars merchants from engaging in “surveillance-based price setting,” defined as setting prices for consumer goods or services based on profiling or other processing of consumer or device data. It also specifically prohibits food retailers from using electronic shelving labels or other digital shelf display technology to show prices, instead requiring nondigital price displays such as paper signs, shelf tags, stickers, or labels.
On the labor side, the bill would prohibit employers from engaging in “surveillance-based wage setting,” meaning the use of surveillance data together with an automated decision system to offer or determine customized wages for employees or groups of employees. It also creates a complaint-based enforcement pathway through the Commissioner of Labor and Industry, with possible referral to the Attorney General for mediation, injunctive relief, damages, or other relief. The bill takes effect October 1, 2026.
The bill would add new provisions to the Commercial Law Article and Labor and Employment Article, creating new statutory prohibitions on surveillance-based pricing and wage-setting and defining key terms such as consumer data, profiling, electronic shelving labels, automated decision system, and surveillance data. It would also make violations of the consumer-protection provisions an unfair, abusive, or deceptive trade practice enforceable under the Maryland Consumer Protection Act, exposing violators to existing penalties and remedies. In addition, it would amend labor enforcement procedures so the Commissioner may investigate alleged violations of the new wage-setting ban based on an employee complaint and seek enforcement through the Attorney General.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill text, the measure appears motivated by consumer privacy, fairness, and transparency concerns, especially around algorithmic pricing and AI-driven compensation. The overall framing is protective and regulatory rather than permissive, suggesting a consumer- and worker-protection orientation.
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s broad restrictions on digital pricing and algorithmic decision-making. Retailers may object to the ban on electronic shelving labels and digital shelf displays, particularly because such systems are often used to update prices efficiently and reduce labor costs. Employers and technology vendors may also object to the wage-setting restrictions and disclosure requirements for automated decision systems, arguing they could limit legitimate pay customization or the use of AI tools. The bill includes exceptions for certain customized prices and wages, but the scope of those exceptions—especially what counts as cost-based pricing, location-based wages, or permissible automated decision-making—could be disputed.