Enacts the "food delivery worker safety and fair algorithms act" to prohibit food delivery platforms from utilizing or deploying any algorithmic management system that requires or incentivizes delivery workers to complete deliveries within a fixed or rigid time window that cannot reasonably be met while complying with all applicable traffic laws and safety regulations; penalizes, deactivates, suspends, deprioritizes, or otherwise limits a delivery worker's access to work opportunities for failure to meet delivery time estimates that do not account for traffic patterns, traffic congestion, weather conditions, restaurant delays, or lawful compliance with traffic signals, signage, and rules of the road; directly or indirectly incentivizes speeding, unsafe operation of a vehicle or bicycle, or disregard of traffic control devices, signage, or pedestrian right-of-way; and reduces pay, tips, bonuses, or access to incentives based on a delivery worker's refusal or inability to engage in unsafe or unlawful conduct.
S09089, the “Food Delivery Worker Safety and Fair Algorithms Act,” would add a new article to the New York Labor Law regulating how food delivery platforms use automated and algorithmic management systems. The bill is aimed at app-based delivery services that assign orders, estimate delivery times, evaluate worker performance, and control access to work. Its core purpose is to prevent platforms from using rigid time targets or automated scoring systems that pressure delivery workers to speed, ignore traffic laws, or otherwise act unsafely in order to avoid penalties or maintain access to jobs.
The bill would prohibit platforms from requiring deliveries within time windows that cannot reasonably be met while obeying traffic and safety laws, and from penalizing workers for delays caused by traffic, weather, restaurant preparation, or lawful compliance with road rules. It also bars algorithms from directly or indirectly incentivizing speeding or unsafe operation, and from reducing pay, tips, bonuses, or work access because a worker refused to engage in unsafe or unlawful conduct. Delivery time estimates would have to be identified as estimates only, not as the sole or primary basis for discipline or deactivation.
The bill would create a new labor-law framework specifically for food delivery platforms and delivery workers, regardless of whether workers are classified as employees or independent contractors. It would require written notice to workers about the factors used by algorithmic systems, the metrics that affect compensation or access to work, and the circumstances that can lead to suspension or deactivation. It also gives workers a right to request written explanations for significant adverse actions taken through algorithmic systems. Enforcement authority would be shared among the Commissioner of Labor, the Attorney General, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of State, with coordination provisions to avoid conflicting enforcement. The bill also adds anti-retaliation protections and authorizes rulemaking needed for implementation.
The bill text and context indicate a strongly worker-protective and public-safety-oriented approach. Its findings frame the legislation as a response to unsafe pressure created by app-based delivery platforms and opaque automated management systems. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented legislative debate or formal vote history to indicate broader support or opposition, but the measure is clearly designed to appeal to labor advocates, delivery workers, and traffic-safety interests.
The main points of contention are likely to involve the scope of regulation over platform-based business models, the feasibility of requiring algorithmic transparency, and whether the bill could interfere with how companies manage delivery times, incentives, and worker performance. Platforms may argue that rigid limits on algorithmic management and mandatory disclosures could increase costs, reduce operational flexibility, or create compliance burdens. Supporters would likely emphasize that the bill is narrowly targeted at unsafe incentives, unfair deactivations, and retaliation, and that it protects both workers and the public from dangerous delivery practices.