Regulon.AI — VA-HB-1514 · VA HB 1514 (Employment Automated Decision Systems)

Summary

Virginia HB 1514 regulates the use of automated decision systems in employment decisions across state agencies, local government entities, and private employers. All three entity types are prohibited from making employment decisions solely based on automated decision system outputs — a human decision maker must be involved. State agencies and local government entities face additional obligations: they must disclose the use of automated systems and their data inputs, provide opt-out rights, annually test for algorithmic discrimination, ensure staff data handling compliance, and train staff. Private employers face the human-in-the-loop requirement only, enforced by the Commissioner of Labor and Industry through civil penalties up to $500 for a first violation and $1,500 for subsequent violations. The bill is currently pending in committee.

Enforcement & Penalties

Enforcement Authority

The Commissioner of Labor and Industry enforces the private employer provisions (§ 40.1-28.7:12). Enforcement is agency-initiated: the Commissioner notifies the employer of alleged violations by certified mail, and the employer may request an informal conference within 15 days. The Commissioner may also petition a circuit court for injunctive or other relief. For state agencies, the Director of the Department of Human Resource Management has oversight authority (§ 2.2-1202.2). For local government entities, compliance is self-imposed by the respective department, office, board, commission, agency, or instrumentality (§ 15.2-1500.2). Local government entities must establish their own complaint processes. No private right of action is created.

Penalties

Civil penalty not to exceed $500 for a first violation and $1,500 for each subsequent violation, applicable only to private employers under § 40.1-28.7:12. Penalties are assessed by the Commissioner and paid to the Literary Fund. The Commissioner shall consider the size of the employer's business and the gravity of the violation. The Commissioner may also petition a circuit court for injunctive or other relief. No monetary damages are specified for state agency (§ 2.2-1202.2) or local government (§ 15.2-1500.2) violations.

Who Is Covered

"Employer" means the same as that term is defined in § 40.1-2.

What Is Covered

"Automated decision system" means any computational process, including those derived from artificial intelligence systems or machine learning, used to make or assist in making decisions related to employment. "Automated decision system" does not include identity and access management tools, calculators, databases, datasets, or other compilations of data.

Compliance Obligations 15 obligations · click obligation ID to open requirement page

H-01 Human Oversight of Automated Decisions · H-01.3 H-01.1 · Government · EmploymentGovernment System

§ 2.2-1202.2(B)(2)

Plain Language

State agencies that use an automated decision system as a substantial factor in employment decisions must disclose five categories of information to affected individuals: (1) that an automated system is being used, (2) its intended use (e.g., evaluating candidates, compensation, promotion), (3) data input types and sources, (4) how the system fits into the agency's decision-making process, and (5) whether personal data will be shared with third parties or fed back into the system. This is a pre-decision notification and explanation obligation — the individual must be informed both that an automated system is in play and how it operates.

Statutory Text

Disclose (i) the fact that an automated decision system is being used; (ii) the intended use of the automated decision system, including evaluating job candidates, making compensation decisions, or considering employees for promotion; (iii) the type of data inputs received by the automated decision system and the source of such data; (iv) how the automated decision system will be used in the state agency's decision-making processes; and (v) the extent to which an individual's personal data will be shared with third parties or used as future inputs for the automated decision system;

D-01 Automated Processing Rights & Data Controls · D-01.3 · Government · EmploymentGovernment System

§ 2.2-1202.2(B)(3)

Plain Language

State agencies must provide all individuals subject to automated employment decisions the right to opt out of the automated decision system entirely. In addition, agencies must provide a separate process for individuals with disabilities to seek accommodations for the system. This creates both a universal opt-out right and a disability-specific accommodation process.

Statutory Text

Provide to all individuals the right to opt out of the use of the automated decision system for employment decisions and a process by which individuals with disabilities may seek accommodations for the automated decision system;

H-02 Non-Discrimination & Bias Assessment · H-02.1 H-02.8 · Government · EmploymentGovernment System

§ 2.2-1202.2(B)(4)

Plain Language

State agencies must annually test their automated decision systems for algorithmic discrimination — defined broadly to cover unlawful differential treatment or impact across a wide range of protected characteristics including age, disability, ethnicity, genetic information, English proficiency, national origin, race, religion, reproductive health, sex, sexual orientation, and veteran status. Testing may be performed by the agency itself or by a contractor. The agency must also certify the system's compliance with federal and state law. This is a recurring annual obligation, not a one-time pre-deployment assessment.

Statutory Text

Annually test, or ensure that an appropriate contractor employed by such agency annually tests, the automated decision system for algorithmic discrimination and certify its compliance with federal and state law;

H-01 Human Oversight of Automated Decisions · H-01.6 · Government · EmploymentGovernment System

§ 2.2-1202.2(C)

Plain Language

State agencies are categorically prohibited from making any employment decision without a human decision maker in the loop. An automated decision system's recommendation or prediction cannot be the sole basis for any employment decision — including recruitment, hiring, promotion, discipline, or termination. This is a mandatory human-in-the-loop requirement, not merely a right the individual must invoke. The prohibition applies regardless of whether the individual requests human review.

Statutory Text

No employment decision shall be made by a state agency without the involvement of a human decision maker. No state agency shall solely use any recommendation or prediction from an automated decision system to make an employment decision.

H-01 Human Oversight of Automated Decisions · H-01.5 · Government · EmploymentGovernment System

§ 2.2-1202.2(D)

Plain Language

The Department of Human Resource Management must create and publicly advertise a formal complaint process specifically for concerns about automated decision system use in state employment decisions. This process must include both a mechanism for filing concerns and a process for investigating and resolving them. It must be separate from the existing state employee dispute resolution process under § 2.2-1202.1, ensuring a dedicated channel for AI-related employment complaints.

Statutory Text

The Department shall establish and publicize a process for applicants for employment and employees to file concerns and complaints regarding the use of automated decision systems in the Commonwealth's employment decisions and a process for the investigation and resolution of any such concerns and complaints. Such process shall be separate and apart from the dispute resolution process described in § 2.2-1202.1.

Other · EmploymentGovernment System

§ 2.2-1202.2(B)(1), (B)(5)

Plain Language

State agencies must ensure their automated decision systems comply with existing federal and state law — including the Virginia Human Rights Act — and that staff handling personal data collected by the systems follow existing data agreements and privacy policies. These provisions reinforce existing obligations rather than creating new AI-specific requirements.

Statutory Text

1. Ensure that the automated decision system and the use of such system complies with federal and state law, including the Virginia Human Rights Act (§ 2.2-3900 et seq.); ... 5. Ensure that state agency staff who handle personal data collected by the automated decision system and the storage of such data do so in accordance with federal and state law and all state agency data agreements and privacy policies;

Other · EmploymentGovernment System

§ 2.2-1202.2(B)(6)

Plain Language

State agencies must train all staff who use automated decision systems for employment decisions on applicable federal and state law compliance and on ensuring the system does not produce algorithmic discrimination. This is an internal workforce readiness obligation — the agency must invest in training the humans who interact with the system, not just in testing the system itself.

Statutory Text

Train state agency staff who use the automated decision system for employment decisions to comply with applicable federal and state law and ensure that the automated decision system does not result in algorithmic discrimination.

H-01 Human Oversight of Automated Decisions · H-01.3 H-01.1 · Government · EmploymentGovernment System

§ 15.2-1500.2(B)(2)

Plain Language

Local government entities that use an automated decision system as a substantial factor in employment decisions must make the same five-category disclosure as state agencies: that an automated system is used, its intended purpose, data input types and sources, how the system fits into the entity's decision-making, and whether personal data will be shared with third parties or recycled into the system. This mirrors the state agency obligation in § 2.2-1202.2(B)(2) but applies to all departments, offices, boards, commissions, agencies, and instrumentalities of local government.

Statutory Text

Disclose (i) the fact that an automated decision system is being used; (ii) the intended use of the automated decision system, including evaluating job candidates, making compensation decisions, or considering employees for promotion; (iii) the type of data inputs received by the automated decision system and the source of such data; (iv) how the automated decision system will be used in the decision-making processes of the department, office, board, commission, agency, or instrumentality of local government; and (v) the extent to which an individual's personal data will be shared with third parties or used as future inputs for the automated decision system;

D-01 Automated Processing Rights & Data Controls · D-01.3 · Government · EmploymentGovernment System

§ 15.2-1500.2(B)(3)

Plain Language

Local government entities must provide all individuals subject to automated employment decisions the right to opt out entirely, plus a separate disability accommodation process. This mirrors the state agency opt-out obligation in § 2.2-1202.2(B)(3) but applies at the local government level.

Statutory Text

H-02 Non-Discrimination & Bias Assessment · H-02.1 H-02.8 · Government · EmploymentGovernment System

§ 15.2-1500.2(B)(4)

Plain Language

Local government entities must annually test their automated decision systems for algorithmic discrimination and certify compliance with federal and state law. Testing may be done by the entity itself or an appropriate contractor. This mirrors the state agency annual testing obligation and covers the same broad range of protected characteristics.

Statutory Text

Annually test, or ensure that an appropriate contractor employed by such department, office, board, commission, agency, or instrumentality of local government annually tests, the automated decision system for algorithmic discrimination and certify its compliance with federal and state law;

H-01 Human Oversight of Automated Decisions · H-01.6 · Government · EmploymentGovernment System

§ 15.2-1500.2(C)

Plain Language

Local government entities are categorically prohibited from making any employment decision without a human decision maker involved. Automated system recommendations or predictions cannot be the sole basis for any employment decision. This mirrors the state agency human-in-the-loop requirement and is a mandatory structural requirement, not a right the individual must invoke.

Statutory Text

No employment decision shall be made by a department, office, board, commission, agency, or instrumentality of local government without the involvement of a human decision maker. No department, office, board, commission, agency, or instrumentality of local government shall solely use any recommendation or prediction from an automated decision system to make an employment decision.

H-01 Human Oversight of Automated Decisions · H-01.5 · Government · EmploymentGovernment System

§ 15.2-1500.2(D)

Plain Language

Each local government entity using automated decision systems as a substantial factor in employment decisions must create and publicize a formal complaint and investigation process. Unlike the state agency version, each local entity is responsible for establishing its own process — there is no centralized Department equivalent. The process must cover both filing of concerns and their investigation and resolution.

Statutory Text

Any department, office, board, commission, agency, or instrumentality of local government that uses an automated decision system as a substantial factor in any employment decision shall establish and publicize a process for applicants for employment and employees to file concerns and complaints regarding the use of automated decision systems in employment decisions and a process for the investigation and resolution of any such concerns and complaints.

Other · EmploymentGovernment System

§ 15.2-1500.2(B)(1), (B)(5)

Plain Language

Local government entities must ensure their automated decision systems comply with existing federal and state law — including the Virginia Human Rights Act — and that staff handling personal data collected by the systems follow existing data agreements and privacy policies. These provisions reinforce existing obligations rather than creating new AI-specific requirements.

Statutory Text

1. Ensure that the automated decision system and the use of such system complies with federal and state law, including the Virginia Human Rights Act (§ 2.2-3900 et seq.); ... 5. Ensure that the staff of the department, office, board, commission, agency, or instrumentality of local government who handle personal data collected by the automated decision system and the storage of such data do so in accordance with federal and state law and all data agreements and privacy policies of such department, office, board, commission, agency, or instrumentality of local government;

Other · EmploymentGovernment System

§ 15.2-1500.2(B)(6)

Plain Language

Local government entities must train all staff who use automated decision systems for employment decisions on legal compliance and preventing algorithmic discrimination. This mirrors the state agency training requirement but applies at the local government level.

Statutory Text

Train the staff of the department, office, board, commission, agency, or instrumentality of local government who use the automated decision system for employment decisions to comply with applicable federal and state law and ensure that the automated decision system does not result in algorithmic discrimination.

H-01 Human Oversight of Automated Decisions · H-01.6 · Deployer · EmploymentAutomated Decisionmaking

§ 40.1-28.7:12(B)-(C)

Plain Language

Private employers are prohibited from making any employment decision without a human decision maker. No employer may solely rely on an automated decision system's recommendation or prediction for any final employment decision — covering recruitment, hiring, promotion, discipline, and termination. Note that the private employer definition of 'employment decision' is narrower than the government versions, requiring a 'final' decision. Knowing violations are subject to civil penalties up to $500 for a first offense and $1,500 for subsequent violations, assessed by the Commissioner of Labor and Industry after a notice-and-conference process. The Commissioner may also seek injunctive relief in circuit court. The penalty assessment considers business size and violation gravity.

Statutory Text

B. No employment decision shall be made by an employer without the involvement of a human decision maker. No employer shall solely use any recommendation or prediction from an automated decision system to make an employment decision. C. Any employer that knowingly violates the provisions of this section shall be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $500 for a first violation and $1,500 for each subsequent violation. The Commissioner shall notify any employer that he alleges has violated the provisions of this section by certified mail. Such notice shall contain a description of the alleged violation. Within 15 days of receipt of notice of the alleged violation, the employer may request an informal conference regarding such violation with the Commissioner. In determining the amount of any penalty to be imposed, the Commissioner shall consider the size of the business of the employer charged and the gravity of the violation. The decision of the Commissioner shall be final. Civil penalties under this section shall be assessed by the Commissioner and paid to the Literary Fund. The Commissioner shall prescribe procedures for the payment of proposed penalties that are not contested by employers. E. The Commissioner or his authorized representative shall have the right to petition a circuit court for injunctive or such other relief as may be necessary for the enforcement of this section.