S-2499
RI · State · USA
RI
USA
● Pending
Proposed Effective Date
2026-02-06
Rhode Island S 2499 — An Act Relating to Labor and Labor Relations — Artificial Intelligence Use and Fair Employment Practices
Regulates employer use of electronic monitoring tools and automated decision systems in employment contexts in Rhode Island. Employers may only use electronic monitoring tools for enumerated legitimate purposes and must narrowly tailor monitoring to be least invasive, provide detailed written notice to employees and candidates, and conduct independent impact assessments. The statute prohibits facial recognition, gait/voice/emotion recognition, off-duty monitoring, and monitoring of private areas. It restricts adverse employment actions based on continuous time-tracking data except for egregious misconduct, requires meaningful human oversight for employment decisions informed by monitoring data, and mandates post-decision disclosure to affected employees. Employees who refuse AI/ADS outputs in good faith based on professional judgment are protected from retaliation. Rulemaking authority is split between the Department of Labor and Training and the Attorney General.
Summary

Regulates employer use of electronic monitoring tools and automated decision systems in employment contexts in Rhode Island. Employers may only use electronic monitoring tools for enumerated legitimate purposes and must narrowly tailor monitoring to be least invasive, provide detailed written notice to employees and candidates, and conduct independent impact assessments. The statute prohibits facial recognition, gait/voice/emotion recognition, off-duty monitoring, and monitoring of private areas. It restricts adverse employment actions based on continuous time-tracking data except for egregious misconduct, requires meaningful human oversight for employment decisions informed by monitoring data, and mandates post-decision disclosure to affected employees. Employees who refuse AI/ADS outputs in good faith based on professional judgment are protected from retaliation. Rulemaking authority is split between the Department of Labor and Training and the Attorney General.

Enforcement & Penalties
Enforcement Authority
Department of Labor and Training has rulemaking authority for implementation. Office of the Attorney General has rulemaking authority to protect consumers and the public good from AI and ADS-related privacy violations and harms. Retaliation violations are subject to penalties as provided in Title 28. The statute does not explicitly create a private right of action, but § 28-5.2-4 protects employees who seek their rights under the chapter and subjects retaliating employers to Title 28 penalties.
Penalties
Violations of the anti-retaliation provisions are subject to penalties as provided in Title 28. The statute does not specify independent statutory damages, civil penalties, or a private right of action with defined remedies for violations of the electronic monitoring or ADS provisions themselves. Specific penalty amounts would be determined by cross-reference to existing Title 28 penalty provisions.
Who Is Covered
"Employer" means any person acting on behalf of or in the interest of an employer, directly or indirectly, with or without their knowledge, but a labor organization or any officer or its agent, shall only be considered an employer of individuals employed by the organization.
"Vendor" means any person or entity who sells, distributes, or develops for sale an automated decision system to be used in an employment decision made by an employer in the state. "Vendor" includes any of the vendor's agents, contractors, or subcontractors.
What Is Covered
"Automated decision system (ADS)" means any computational process, automated system, or algorithm utilizing machine learning, statistical modeling, data analytics, artificial intelligence, or similar methods, that issues an output, including a score, classification, ranking, or recommendation, that is used to assist or replace human decision making, on issues that impact natural persons. "ADS" does not include a tool that does not assist or replace employment decision processes and that does not materially impact natural persons including, but not limited to, a junk email filter, firewall, antivirus software, calculator, spreadsheet, database, data set, or other compilation of data.
"Electronic monitoring tool" means any system, application, or instrument that facilitates the collection of data concerning worker activities or communications by any means other than direct observation by a natural person including, but not limited to, the use of a computer, telephone, wire, radio, camera, electromagnetic, photoelectronic, or photo-optical system, or obtaining employee data from a third-party.
Compliance Obligations 13 obligations · click obligation ID to open requirement page
D-01 Automated Processing Rights & Data Controls · D-01.4 · Deployer · Employment
§ 28-5.2-2(a)-(b)
Plain Language
Employers may only use electronic monitoring tools to collect employee data if the tool is primarily used for one of six enumerated legitimate purposes (essential job functions, quality assurance, periodic performance assessment, legal compliance, health/safety/security, or wage/benefit administration). Beyond having a qualifying purpose, the monitoring must be narrowly tailored and least invasive, limited to the smallest number of workers and least amount of data necessary, and all data must be deleted once the purpose is achieved. Data unnecessary to the purpose must not be disclosed to the employer and must be disposed of by the vendor. Off-duty data collection is prohibited. All necessary data must comply with state data privacy and cybersecurity laws and may not be used for secondary purposes.
Statutory Text
(a) It shall be unlawful for an employer to use an electronic monitoring tool to collect employee information unless: (1) The electronic monitoring tool is primarily used to accomplish any of the following legitimate purposes: (i) Allowing a worker to accomplish or facilitating the accomplishment of an essential job function; (ii) Ensuring the quality of goods and services; (iii) Conducting periodic assessment of worker performance; (iv) Ensuring or facilitating compliance with employment, labor, or other relevant laws; (v) Protecting the health, safety, or security of workers, or the security of the employer's facilities or computer networks; or (vi) Administering wages and benefits. (2) The department of labor and training standards may establish additional exceptions under this subsection, pursuant to chapter 35 of title 42 ("administrative procedures act.") (b)(1) The specific type and activated capabilities of an electronic monitoring tool shall be narrowly tailored to accomplish the employer's intended, legitimate purpose specified under subsection (a)(1) of this section; (2) The electronic monitoring tool shall only be used to accomplish the employer's intended, legitimate purpose specified in subsection (a)(1) of this section, and shall be customized and implemented in a manner ensuring that the execution of its duties are undertaken in the manner least invasive to employees of the employer, while still accomplishing the employer's legitimate purposes as defined by subsection (a)(1) of this section; (3) The specific form of electronic monitoring is limited to the smallest number of workers, collection of the least amount of data which shall be collected no more frequently than is necessary to accomplish the purpose, and the data collected, shall be deleted once the purpose has been achieved; (4) The employer shall ensure that any employee data that is collected utilizing an electronic monitoring tool that is not necessary to accomplish the employer's intended, legitimate purpose shall not be disclosed to the employer and shall be promptly disposed of by the vendor; (5) The employer shall ensure that employee data is not collected when the employee is off-duty; and (6) The employer shall ensure that any employee data collected utilizing an electronic monitoring tool that is necessary to accomplish the employer's intended, legitimate purpose, is stored consistent with the state's data and cyber privacy laws, promptly disposed of as soon as the data is no longer needed, and is not utilized by the employer, the vendor or any other third party for any reason except, as provided in subsection (c) of this section.
D-01 Automated Processing Rights & Data Controls · D-01.1 · Deployer · Employment
§ 28-5.2-2(c)
Plain Language
Before deploying any electronic monitoring tool, employers must provide detailed prior written notice to all affected employees and candidates, obtain written acknowledgment, and post the notice conspicuously in the workplace. The notice must cover eleven specified categories of information including: the monitoring purpose, specific data collected and retention schedule, monitoring dates/times/frequency, whether data feeds into an ADS or employment decisions, storage and use in discipline or litigation, productivity assessment use, data storage location and retention period, explanation of least-invasive justification, employee rights to refuse data sale/transfer/disclosure, and how to exercise chapter rights. This is an extremely granular notice requirement — not a generic 'we use AI' disclosure.
Statutory Text
(c) Any employer that uses an electronic monitoring tool shall give prior written notice and shall obtain written acknowledgment from all candidates and employees subject to electronic monitoring and shall also post said notice in a conspicuous place which is readily available for viewing by candidates for employment and employees. Such notice shall include, at a minimum, the following: (1) A description of the purpose for which the electronic monitoring tool will be used, as specified in subsection (a)(1) of this section; (2) A description of the specific employee data to be collected, stored, secured, and disposed of (and the schedule therefor), and the activities, locations, communications, and job roles that will be electronically monitored by the tool; (3) A description of the dates, times, and frequency that electronic monitoring will occur; (4) Whether and how any employee data collected by the electronic monitoring tool will be used as an input in an automated decision system; (5) Whether and how any employee data collected by the electronic monitoring tool will alone or in conjunction with an automated decision system be used to make an employment decision by the employer or employment agency; (6) Whether and how any employee data collected by the electronic monitoring tool may be stored and utilized in discipline, in internal policy compliance, in administrative agency adjudications, in litigation (whether or not it involves the employee or not as a party); (7) Whether any employee data collected by the electronic monitoring tool will be used to assess employees' productivity performance or to set productivity standards, and if so, how; (8) A description of where any employee data collected by the electronic monitoring tool will be stored and the length of time it will be retained; (9) An explanation for how the specific electronic monitoring practice is the least invasive means available to accomplish the monitoring purpose; (10) That an employee is entitled to notice and maintains the right to refuse the sale, transfer, or disclosure of their employee data, subject to the provisions of subsection (g) of this section; and (11) A clear and reasonably understandable description of how an employee can exercise the rights described in this chapter.
G-01 AI Governance Program & Documentation · G-01.3 · Deployer · Employment
§ 28-5.2-2(d)
Plain Language
Employers must maintain contemporaneous, true, and accurate records of all electronic monitoring data used in hiring, promotion, termination, disciplinary, or compensation decisions for five years and make them available to the employee, their authorized representative, or the Department of Labor upon request. All employee data collected via monitoring must be destroyed no later than 61 months after collection absent informed written consent. Employers must maintain reasonable administrative, technical, and physical data security practices. Employees have the right to request corrections to erroneous data — this data correction right applies independently of any automated decision challenge.
Statutory Text
(d) An employer shall establish, maintain, and preserve for five (5) years contemporaneous, true, and accurate records of data gathered through the use of an electronic monitoring tool and used in a hiring, promotion, termination, disciplinary or compensation decision to ensure compliance with the employee or their authorized representative or the department requests for data. The employer shall destroy any employee information collected via an electronic monitoring tool no later than sixty-one (61) months after collection unless the employee has provided written and informed consent to the retention of their data by the employer. An employer shall establish, implement and maintain reasonable administrative, technical and physical data security practices to protect the confidentiality, integrity and accessibility of employee data, appropriate to the volume and nature of the employee data at issue. An employee shall have the right to request corrections to erroneous employee data.
S-02 Prohibited Conduct & Output Restrictions · Deployer · EmploymentBiometrics
§ 28-5.2-2(e)(1)-(9)
Plain Language
Even where electronic monitoring serves a legitimate purpose, employers face categorical prohibitions on specific monitoring practices. Employers may not use monitoring to violate any state law, threaten employee welfare, or monitor off-duty employees. They may not use monitoring to collect protected-class data (health, race, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, genetic information, pregnancy status, veteran status, etc.) or to target protected labor activity. Audio/visual monitoring of bathrooms, locker rooms, breakrooms, prayer areas, employee residences, personal vehicles, and employee-owned property is prohibited. Facial recognition, gait analysis, voice analysis, and emotion recognition technology are categorically banned as monitoring tools in the workplace.
Statutory Text
(e) Notwithstanding the allowable purposes for electronic monitoring described in subsection (a) of this section, an employer shall not: (1) Use an electronic monitoring tool in such a manner that results in a violation of labor, employment, civil rights law or any other law of the state; (2) Use an electronic monitoring tool or data collected via an electronic monitoring tool in such a manner as to threaten the health, welfare, safety, or legal rights of employees or the general public; (3) Use an electronic monitoring tool to monitor employees who are off-duty or not performing work-related tasks; (4) Use an electronic monitoring tool in order to obtain information about an employee's health, including health status and health conditions, the race, color, religious creed, national origin, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, genetic information, pregnancy or a condition related to said pregnancy including, but not limited to, lactation or the need to express breast milk for a nursing child, ancestry or status as a veteran or membership in any group protected from employment discrimination under title 28 or any other applicable law; (5) Use an electronic monitoring tool in order to identify, punish, or obtain information about employees engaging in activity protected under labor or employment law; (6) Conduct audio or visual monitoring of bathrooms or other similarly private areas, including locker rooms, changing areas, breakrooms, smoking areas, employee cafeterias, lounges, and areas designated to express breast milk, or areas designated for prayer or other religious activity, including data collection on the frequency of use of those private areas; (7) Conduct audio or visual monitoring of a workplace in an employee's residence, an employee's personal vehicle, or property owned or leased by an employee; (8) Use an electronic monitoring tool that incorporates facial recognition; (9) Use an electronic monitoring tool that incorporates gait, voice analysis, or emotion recognition technology;
S-02 Prohibited Conduct & Output Restrictions · Deployer · Employment
§ 28-5.2-2(e)(10)-(12)
Plain Language
Employers face three specific restrictions on adverse employment actions based on monitoring data. First, employers may not retaliate against employees who oppose or refuse to submit to monitoring practices they believe in good faith violate the statute. Second, employers may not take adverse action based on data from continuous incremental time-tracking tools — tools that continuously measure sub-day time increments of employee activity — unless the employee engaged in egregious misconduct (defined narrowly as conduct creating imminent serious physical harm risk, significant demonstrable business harm, discrimination/harassment, or job-related criminal conduct). Third, employers may not take adverse action based on monitoring data measuring performance against an undisclosed standard or based on data collected without proper notice.
Statutory Text
(10) Take adverse action against an employee, based, in whole or in part, on their opposition or refusal to submit to a practice that the employee believes in good faith violates this section; (11) Take adverse employment action against an employee on the basis of data collected via continuous incremental time-tracking tools, except in the case of egregious misconduct; or (12) Take adverse employment action against an employee based on any data collected via electronic monitoring, if such data measures an employee's performance in relation to a performance standard that has not been previously, clearly, and unmistakably disclosed to such employee, as well as to all other classes of employees to whom it applies in violation of this section, or if such data was collected without proper notice to employees or candidates pursuant to this section.
D-01 Automated Processing Rights & Data Controls · D-01.4 · Deployer · Employment
§ 28-5.2-2(f)-(g)
Plain Language
Employee monitoring data is strictly purpose-limited: it may only be used for the purposes disclosed in the notice to employees. Employers may not sell, transfer, or disclose monitoring data to any other entity, with only two narrow exceptions: where required by federal or state law, or where necessary to comply with an impact assessment of an automated decision system. This effectively prohibits secondary monetization, data broker transfers, and sharing with affiliates or third-party vendors beyond what the impact assessment requires.
Statutory Text
(f) An employer shall not use employee data collected via an electronic monitoring tool for purposes other than those specified in the notice provided pursuant to subsection (c) of this section. (g) An employer shall not sell, transfer, or disclose employee data collected via an electronic monitoring tool to any other entity unless it is required to do so under federal law or the laws of the state, or necessary to do so to comply with an impact assessment of an automated decision system used pursuant to this section.
Other · Employment
§ 28-5.2-2(h)
Plain Language
Employers are categorically prohibited from requiring employees to implant subcutaneous or wearable data-collection devices, install monitoring applications on personal devices, or carry devices with location tracking enabled. Location tracking is permitted only if conducted during work hours and strictly necessary for essential job functions. This is a bodily autonomy and personal-device protection provision with no taxonomy equivalent.
Statutory Text
(h) An employer shall not require employees to: (1) Physically implant devices that collect or transmit data, including devices that are installed subcutaneously or incorporated into items of clothing or personal accessories; (2) Install applications on personal devices that collect or transmit employee data or to wear or embed those devices; or (3) Carry or use any device with location tracking applications or services enabled, unless the location tracking is: (i) Conducted during work hours only; and (ii) Strictly necessary to accomplish essential job functions and narrowly limited to only the activities and times required to accomplish essential job functions.
H-01 Human Oversight of Automated Decisions · H-01.6 · Deployer · Employment
§ 28-5.2-2(i)
Plain Language
Employers may not rely primarily on electronic monitoring data for hiring, promotion, discipline, termination, or compensation decisions. Every such decision must involve meaningful human oversight — defined as a process requiring a designated internal reviewer with ADS expertise, familiarity with the most recent impact assessment, and sufficient understanding of system outputs to spot biases and errors. The reviewer must have authority and discretion to dispute, rerun, or reject outputs, and sufficient time and resources to do so. The human decision-maker must independently verify data accuracy, address pending correction requests, exercise independent judgment, and consider non-monitoring information such as supervisory evaluations, personnel files, and peer reviews.
Statutory Text
(i) An employer shall not rely primarily on employee data collected through electronic monitoring, when making hiring, promotion, disciplinary decisions up to and including termination, or compensation decisions. For an employer to satisfy the requirements of this subsection: (1) An employer shall establish meaningful human oversight of such decisions that are based, in whole or in part, on data collected through electronic monitoring. (2) A human decision-maker shall review any information collected through electronic monitoring, verify that such information is accurate and up to date, review any pending employee requests to correct erroneous data, and exercise independent judgment in making each such decision; and (3) The human decision-maker shall consider information other than information collected through electronic monitoring, when making each such decision including, but not limited to, supervisory or managerial evaluations, personnel files, employee work products, or peer reviews.
H-01 Human Oversight of Automated Decisions · H-01.1H-01.2 · Deployer · Employment
§ 28-5.2-2(j)
Plain Language
When an employer makes a hiring, promotion, termination, disciplinary, or compensation decision based in whole or in part on electronic monitoring data, the employer must disclose to the affected employee and their authorized representative — within 30 days of the decision or its effective date, whichever is sooner — four categories of information: that monitoring data was used, which specific tools were used and how they work, the specific data and data-based judgments used in the decision, and any non-monitoring information also considered. This is a post-decision explanation obligation that is more granular than a typical adverse-action notice.
Statutory Text
(j) When an employer makes a hiring, promotion, termination, disciplinary or compensation decision, based, in whole or in part, on data gathered through the use of electronic monitoring, it shall disclose to affected employees and their authorized representative within thirty (30) days of the decision being made or going into effect, whichever is sooner: (1) That the decision was based, in whole or in part, on data gathered through electronic monitoring; (2) The specific electronic monitoring tool or tools used to gather such data, how the tools work to gather and analyze the data, and the increments of time in which the data is gathered; (3) The specific data, and judgments based upon such data, used in the decision-making process; and (4) Any information used in the decision-making process gathered through sources other than electronic monitoring.
H-02 Non-Discrimination & Bias Assessment · H-02.3H-02.6H-02.7 · Deployer · Employment
§ 28-5.2-2(k)
Plain Language
Employers may not use electronic monitoring (alone or with an ADS) unless the monitoring has been the subject of an independent impact assessment conducted within one year of use (or within six months of the chapter's effective date for existing monitoring). The assessor must be independent with no financial or legal conflicts, and a strict five-year look-back applies for conflicts. The assessment must evaluate data security, identify allowable purposes, describe potential legal violations and remediation steps, and analyze negative impacts on employee privacy and job quality. The full assessment must be disclosed in plain language to affected workers and their authorized representatives within 30 days. Workers have the right to comment on, challenge, and collectively bargain over the proposed monitoring based on the assessment's findings.
Statutory Text
(k) It shall be unlawful for an employer to use electronic monitoring, alone or in conjunction with an automated decision system, unless the employer's proposed use of electronic monitoring has been the subject of an impact assessment. Such impact assessments shall: (1) Be conducted no more than one year prior to the use of such electronic monitoring, or where the electronic monitoring began before the effective date of this section, within six (6) months of the effective date of this chapter; (2) Be conducted by an independent and impartial party with no financial or legal conflicts of interest; (3) Evaluate whether the data protection and security practices surrounding the electronic monitoring are consistent with applicable law and cybersecurity industry's best practices; (4) Identify the allowable purpose(s) as defined in this chapter; (5) Consider and describe any other ways in which the electronic monitoring could result in a violation of applicable law and, for any finding that a violation of law may occur, any necessary or appropriate steps to prevent such violation of law; (6) Consider and describe whether the electronic monitoring may negatively impact employees' privacy and job quality, including wages, hours, and working conditions; and (7) Be disclosed in full, in plain language, to all affected workers and their authorized representatives within thirty (30) days of the employer's receipt of the impact assessment. (i) Workers and their authorized representatives shall have the right to comment on, challenge and bargain over the proposed monitoring based on the assessment's findings.
G-03 Whistleblower & Anti-Retaliation Protections · G-03.3 · Deployer · Employment
§ 28-5.2-3(a)
Plain Language
Employees who exercise independent judgment, hold licensure or certification, or have employer accreditation are protected from retaliation for refusing to follow AI or ADS outputs in good faith when they believe the output could harm a person, damage property, violate law, conflict with professional licensing requirements, or be contrary to the employer's goals. To invoke protection, the employee must generally have first notified the employer and the employer must have refused to adjust the output — or, in urgent situations, the employee may refuse without waiting for departmental correction. This is a professional-judgment-based AI override protection, not a general whistleblower right — it is limited to employees with discretion, licensure, or accreditation.
Statutory Text
(a) An employee shall be protected from termination, disciplinary action, retaliation, or other adverse employment action for refusing to follow the output of an artificial intelligence system, automated decision system, algorithm, or other similar technology if the following conditions are met: (1) The employee holds independent judgment and discretion in executing their work duties, or the work duties to be performed by the employee require licensure or certification by the state, as a condition of employment, or independent accreditation by the employer; (2) The employee has notified a supervisor, manager, or their employer that the output from the artificial intelligence system, automated decision system, algorithm, or other similar technology may, in their professional opinion and/or educational or work related- experience, lead to the harm of a natural person, damage to physical property, an illegal action, an action contrary to the licensure or certification requirements of the federal government, state, or an applicable private licensing or certifying authority, or an outcome contrary to the goal of the employer, and the employer refused or otherwise failed to adjust the output; (3) The employee has refused to follow the output in good faith and with the knowledge or reasonable belief, based upon training, education, or experience, that the output would cause harm or have an adverse impact; or (4) Due to the urgency of the potential harm or adverse impact, there is not enough time for the output to be corrected through department action.
Other · Employment
§ 28-5.2-3(b)-(d)
Plain Language
The Department of Labor and Training must promulgate implementing rules for this chapter, and the Attorney General must promulgate rules protecting consumers from AI and ADS-related privacy and harm issues. The AG's regulations must address bias testing, disclosures, notice, client-professional relationships, best practices from other jurisdictions, and documentation for monitoring AI systems. These are rulemaking mandates directed at state agencies — they create no direct private-sector compliance obligation until regulations are adopted.
Statutory Text
(b) The department of labor and training shall promulgate procedures, rules, or regulations regarding the implementation of this chapter. (c) The office of the attorney general shall promulgate procedures, rules, or regulations necessary to further the state's interest in protecting consumers and the public good, from violations of privacy rights and harms, resulting from the use of artificial intelligence and automated-decision systems. (d) Such regulations shall consider, but are not limited to, bias testing, appropriate disclosures, clear, conspicuous, and reasonably understandable notice, whether there exists a client-professional relationship, best and current practices and models utilized by other states and the federal government, to ensure the regulations are responsive to emerging technologies, and appropriate additional documentation that is reasonably necessary to assist the office of the attorney general to evaluate the inputs and outputs and monitor the performance of artificial intelligence and automated decision-making systems, for the risk of bias or consumer harm.
Other · Employment
§ 28-5.2-4(a)-(b)
Plain Language
Employers may not penalize employees for exercising rights under this chapter, including filing complaints with the Attorney General or other agencies, assisting investigations, instituting proceedings, or testifying. Violations are subject to penalties under Title 28. This is an enforcement and anti-retaliation provision that activates existing penalty frameworks but creates no independent compliance obligation beyond the anti-retaliation protections already mapped under § 28-5.2-3(a).
Statutory Text
(a) No employee shall be penalized by an employer in any way as a result of any action on the part of an employee to seek their rights under the provisions of this chapter. (b) Any employer who discharges or in any other manner discriminates against any employee because such employee has made a complaint to the attorney general or any other department, agency, or person, or assists in any investigation under this chapter, or has instituted, or caused to be instituted any proceeding under or related to this chapter, or has testified or is about to testify in any such proceedings, commits a violation of this section and shall be subject to penalties as provided in title 28.