Regulon.AI — NY-S-09028 · NY S 9028 (AI Employment Discrimination)

Summary

Amends the New York Executive Law (Human Rights Law) to make it an unlawful discriminatory practice for employers to use artificial intelligence in employment decisions—including recruitment, hiring, promotion, discharge, discipline, and terms of employment—where the AI has the effect of subjecting employees to discrimination based on protected characteristics. Also prohibits the use of zip codes as a proxy for protected classes. Requires employers to provide notice to employees when AI is used for these employment purposes. Enforcement is through the Division of Human Rights under existing Human Rights Law procedures, including administrative complaints and private civil actions. The Division is directed to adopt implementing regulations covering notice requirements.

Enforcement & Penalties

Enforcement Authority

The New York State Division of Human Rights is the enforcement authority. The Division is directed to adopt rules and regulations necessary for implementation and enforcement. Enforcement follows existing New York Human Rights Law procedures, which include complaint-driven administrative proceedings before the Division and the ability for individuals to elect to file a civil action in court instead of or after administrative proceedings. Individuals who are aggrieved by an unlawful discriminatory practice may file a complaint with the Division or bring a civil action.

Penalties

Remedies follow existing New York Human Rights Law (Executive Law § 297). Administrative remedies include cease and desist orders, compensatory damages, back pay, front pay, hiring or reinstatement orders, and civil penalties up to $50,000 (or $100,000 for willful or malicious conduct). In civil actions, plaintiffs may recover compensatory damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, and reasonable attorney's fees and costs.

Who Is Covered

Compliance Obligations 3 obligations · click obligation ID to open requirement page

H-02 Non-Discrimination & Bias Assessment · Deployer · EmploymentAutomated Decisionmaking

Exec. Law § 296(23)(a)

Plain Language

Employers may not use artificial intelligence in any employment decision—recruitment, hiring, promotion, renewal, training selection, discharge, discipline, tenure, or terms and conditions of employment—where the AI has the effect of discriminating against employees based on any protected class under the New York Human Rights Law. The statute applies a disparate impact standard: the AI need not be intentionally discriminatory; it is sufficient that its use has the effect of subjecting employees to discrimination. The prohibition also expressly bars using zip codes as a proxy for protected characteristics, closing a common indirect discrimination vector in algorithmic systems.

Statutory Text

(a) It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer to use artificial intelligence for recruitment, hiring, promotion, renewal of employment, selection for training or apprenticeship, discharge, discipline, tenure, or the terms, privileges, or conditions of employment that has the effect of subjecting employees to discrimination on the basis of age, race, creed, color, national origin, citizenship or immigration status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, military status, sex, disability, predisposing genetic characteristics, familial status, marital status, or status as a victim of domestic violence or to use zip codes as a proxy for such protected classes.

D-01 Automated Processing Rights & Data Controls · D-01.5 · Deployer · EmploymentAutomated Decisionmaking

Exec. Law § 296(23)(a)

Plain Language

The express prohibition on using zip codes as a proxy for protected classes establishes a proxy-variable restriction on AI systems used in employment. Employers may not design or deploy AI tools that infer protected characteristics from zip codes (or, by extension under general Human Rights Law principles, other facially neutral proxies) for use in consequential employment decisions. This is a specific application of the broader principle that AI systems may not circumvent non-discrimination requirements through proxy variables.

Statutory Text

H-01 Human Oversight of Automated Decisions · H-01.3 · Deployer · EmploymentAutomated Decisionmaking

Exec. Law § 296(23)(b)-(c)

Plain Language

Employers must notify employees when artificial intelligence is being used for any of the employment purposes covered by the statute (recruitment, hiring, promotion, discharge, discipline, etc.). Failure to provide this notice is itself an independent unlawful discriminatory practice—separate from and in addition to any substantive discrimination. The specific timing, format, and triggering conditions for the notice will be determined by Division of Human Rights rulemaking. Until regulations are adopted, employers should err on the side of providing clear written notice before or at the time AI is used in any covered employment decision. The delegation to the Division means compliance specifics may change; employers should monitor rulemaking.

Statutory Text

(b) It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer to fail to provide notice to an employee that such employer is using artificial intelligence for the purposes described in paragraph (a) of this subdivision. (c) The division shall adopt any rules or regulations necessary for the implementation and enforcement of this subdivision, including, but not limited to, rules on the circumstances and conditions that require notice, the time period for providing such notice and the means for providing such notice.