Relates to the disclosure of automated employment decision-making tools; requires the office of information technology services to maintain an artificial intelligence inventory; provides that the use of artificial intelligence systems shall not affect the existing rights of employees pursuant to an existing collective bargaining agreement, or the existing representational relationships among employee organizations or the bargaining relationships between the employer and an employee organization.
Summary
Bill A00433 aims to amend the state technology law and civil service law concerning the use of automated employment decision-making tools by state agencies. It mandates the disclosure of these tools and requires the Office of Information Technology Services to maintain an inventory of artificial intelligence systems utilized by state agencies. The bill emphasizes the need for meaningful human review of automated decision-making processes, particularly those that impact public assistance benefits or individual rights. It also seeks to protect the existing rights of employees under collective bargaining agreements from being affected by the use of such technologies.
Impact
The passage of this bill will significantly alter how state agencies implement automated decision-making systems, ensuring transparency and accountability in their use. By requiring agencies to disclose the tools they utilize and maintain an inventory of artificial intelligence systems, the bill aims to safeguard individual rights and welfare. Additionally, it reinforces employee protections, ensuring that the introduction of AI does not undermine existing labor agreements or displace workers.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding Bill A00433 appears to be largely favorable, as indicated by the voting outcomes in the Assembly committees. The bill received strong support, with a 7-1 vote in the Science and Technology Committee and a unanimous 29-0 vote in the Rules Committee. This suggests a consensus on the importance of regulating automated decision-making tools and protecting employee rights.
Contention
While the overall sentiment is positive, there may be points of contention regarding the extent of regulation imposed on automated systems and the potential impact on efficiency within state agencies. Some stakeholders may argue that stringent requirements for human review could hinder the adoption of innovative technologies. However, proponents emphasize the necessity of oversight to prevent misuse and protect individual rights.
Same As
Relates to the disclosure of automated employment decision-making tools; requires the office of information technology services to maintain an artificial intelligence inventory; provides that the use of artificial intelligence systems shall not affect the existing rights of employees pursuant to an existing collective bargaining agreement, or the existing representational relationships among employee organizations or the bargaining relationships between the employer and an employee organization.
Relates to the disclosure of automated employment decision-making tools; requires the office of information technology services to maintain an artificial intelligence inventory; provides that the use of artificial intelligence systems shall not affect the existing rights of employees pursuant to an existing collective bargaining agreement, or the existing representational relationships among employee organizations or the bargaining relationships between the employer and an employee organization.
Defines employees as individuals employed by a municipality or state covered by a collective bargaining agreement or employment contract, and would redefine an "employer" to those who employ fifteen (15) or more employees.
Defines employees as individuals employed by a municipality or state covered by a collective bargaining agreement or employment contract, and would redefine an "employer" to those who employ fifteen (15) or more employees.
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 candidates of the use of such tools; provides remedies for violations.
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 candidates of the use of such tools; provides remedies for violations.
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 candidates of the use of such tools; provides remedies for violations.
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 candidates of the use of such tools; provides remedies for violations.
House Substitute for SB 51 by Committee on Legislative Modernization - Authorizing the chief information security officer to receive audit reports, updating statutes related to services provided by the chief information technology officer and authorizing the office of information technology services to provide certain services to political subdivisions and hospitals.