Employment: automated decision systems.

Workers can no longer bring their own civil actions for violations. The old version allowed 'any worker, or their exclusive representative, who has suffered a violation' to sue in court for damages including punitive damages. Enforcement is now limited to the Labor Commissioner and public prosecutors only.

Worker data access rights were significantly narrowed. The old version gave workers the right to access 'their own worker data collected or used by an ADS' broadly. The enrolled version limits this to a copy of the most recent 12 months of data 'primarily used by an ADS to make a discipline, termination, or deactivation decision,' with a limit of one request every 12 months.

The explicit right for workers to correct errors in their data used by an ADS was removed from both the employer requirements section and the post-use notice content requirements.

The definition of 'worker data' was narrowed. The old version included information that 'is reasonably capable of being associated with, or could reasonably be linked, directly or indirectly, with' a worker. The enrolled version removes this broader language, limiting the definition to information that 'identifies, relates to, or describes' a worker.

New Section 1538 exempts parties covered by a collective bargaining agreement from the entire part if the agreement explicitly waives it in clear and unambiguous terms, expressly provides for wages/working conditions, and includes protection from algorithmic management. This is a major new exemption for unionized workplaces.

New Section 1537 carves out employers subject to the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), making them still subject to privacy-related ADS regulations adopted by the California Privacy Protection Agency despite the general preemption in Section 1536.

The bill was renumbered from Part 5.6 to Part 5.5.5 of Division 2 of the Labor Code, likely to accommodate other legislation being added to the same division.

The post-use notice trigger was narrowed from 'an employer that has used an ADS' to 'an employer that has primarily relied on an ADS' for discipline, termination, or deactivation decisions. This means employers who merely used an ADS as one input among many no longer trigger the post-use notice obligation.

Pre-use notice data disclosure requirement was relaxed from requiring 'the specific category and sources of worker input data' to only 'a general description of the categories of worker input data that the ADS will use, the sources of worker input data, and how that worker input data will be collected.'

The human reviewer requirement in Section 1524(c)(2) was expanded to explicitly require the reviewer to 'review the ADS output and compile and review other information not used by the ADS that is relevant to the decision,' adding a duty to examine non-ADS information beyond just corroborating evidence.

A new pre-use notice requirement (paragraph 7) was added requiring that for ADS used for discipline, termination, or deactivation decisions, the notice must include a description of the worker's rights to appeal a decision for which the ADS will be used.

The definition of 'employment-related decision' was changed from decisions that 'impact' wages/benefits/etc. to those that 'materially impact' a worker's wages/benefits/etc., raising the threshold for what qualifies as an employment-related decision.

The deadline for existing ADS in use at the time the bill takes effect was changed from February 1, 2026 to April 1, 2026, giving employers an additional two months to comply.

The appeal provision in Chapter 5 was reframed from an employer obligation ('An employer shall provide...') to a worker right ('A worker who is the subject of a discipline, termination, or deactivation decision made by an ADS has the right to appeal'), and the chapter title was shortened by removing 'Employment-Related.'

The formal enrolled document formatting was replaced with a web page layout including navigation elements (home, FAQ, sitemap, login), bill metadata (version history, publication date), and search functionality. The signature/approval block at the end of the enrolled version was removed.

The post-use written notice requirement and the right to appeal an ADS-driven decision are now limited to discipline, termination, or deactivation decisions only, rather than applying to all non-hiring employment-related decisions (which previously included performance evaluations, schedule changes, promotions, etc.).

A new Section 1536 provides that an employer who complies with the notice and appeal requirements of this bill is not required to comply with any substantially similar notice and appeal provisions related to automated decision systems under any other state law. This creates a preemption safe harbor.

The definition of 'worker' was narrowed to remove job applicants. Workers are now defined only as employees or independent contractors providing service to a business or governmental entity in a workplace.

The prohibition on relying primarily on an ADS for decisions was updated to cover 'promotion, discipline, or termination, or deactivation decisions,' adding deactivation as a specifically protected category.

A new notice content requirement (Section 1522(e)(3)) requires disclosure of 'any key parameters known to disproportionately affect the output of the ADS,' introducing a disparate impact-focused transparency obligation.

Extensive section renumbering throughout the bill, with some provisions merged (e.g., notice content requirements consolidated into Section 1522 as subdivision (e) while also retaining a separate Section 1524).

The definition of 'Vendor' was removed from Section 1520, and all references to 'an employer, or a vendor engaged by the employer' throughout the bill were changed to simply 'an employer.' Vendors are no longer directly liable under this law; all obligations fall solely on employers.

The scope of protected decisions was narrowed from all 'employment-related decisions' (which included promotion, hiring-adjacent decisions, etc.) to specifically 'discipline, termination, or deactivation decisions.' Promotion is no longer explicitly protected under the ADS reliance prohibition or appeal rights.

The notice requirement for pre-use disclosure was narrowed from workers who will be 'directly or indirectly affected by the ADS' to those who will 'foreseeably be directly affected by the ADS,' reducing the population of workers entitled to receive notice.

The deadline for employers already using an ADS at the time the law takes effect was extended from February 1, 2026 to April 1, 2026, giving employers two additional months to comply.

A new definition of 'Quota' was added (Section 1520(i)), defining it as a work standard under which an employee is assigned or required to perform at a specified productivity speed, perform a quantified number of tasks, or handle/produce a quantified amount of material within a defined time period, with potential adverse employment action for failure to meet the standard.

A new notice requirement was added (Section 1522(e)(5)) requiring employers to disclose, for each quota set or measured by an ADS: the quantified number of tasks or products, any potential adverse employment action from failure to meet the quota, and whether quotas are subject to change with notice.

The hiring notification requirement was narrowed: employers must now only notify applicants that an ADS is used in hiring 'if the employer will use the ADS in making decisions for that position,' rather than a blanket disclosure. Additionally, notification may now be made 'on a job posting' as an additional method.

The appeal process was restructured: the right to appeal is now framed as belonging to the worker (rather than an employer obligation to provide it), and a new provision gives workers 15 additional days to appeal if they request access to ADS input/output data or corroborating evidence from the human reviewer.

Specific rectification methods were added for when a human reviewer overturns a decision: terminated workers must be reinstated to their former positions at the same pay rate and work schedule, and disciplined workers must have the disciplinary action halted immediately and erased from their personnel record.

The pre-use notice requirement (Section 1522), post-use notice requirement (Section 1528), and appeal right (Section 1532) all now exclude hiring decisions. Employers no longer must provide the full written notice, maintain an ADS list for hiring use, or offer a formal appeal process when an ADS is used to make hiring decisions.

Section 2, which declared 'It is the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation relating to artificial intelligence,' was removed entirely from the bill.

A new subdivision (d) in Section 1522 requires employers or vendors to notify a job applicant upon receiving the application that the employer utilizes an ADS in hiring decisions. This can be done via automatic reply mechanism, making it a lighter-touch requirement compared to the full notice regime for other employment decisions.

The short title changed from 'An act relating to technology. to add Part 5.6...' to 'An act to add Part 5.6...', removing the 'relating to technology' descriptor.

Fiscal committee review changed from 'no' to 'yes', indicating the bill now requires fiscal analysis, likely due to the expanded enforcement and compliance obligations.

Section 1526(a)(2) changed 'Obtains or infers' to simply 'Infers' when describing prohibited ADS functions related to sensitive worker characteristics, slightly narrowing the prohibition by removing the 'obtains' language.

The bill now adds Part 5.6 (Sections 1520-1538) to Division 2 of the Labor Code, creating a full regulatory regime for automated decision systems used in employment decisions. The original bill only contained a single section declaring legislative intent regarding AI.

A preemption clause states the bill does not preempt city, county, or city-and-county ordinances that provide equal or greater protection to covered workers, allowing local governments to adopt stricter standards.

New Section 1520 defines key terms including 'artificial intelligence,' 'automated decision system' (ADS), 'employment-related decision,' 'predictive behavior analysis,' 'vendor,' 'worker data,' and others. Notably, ADS excludes spam filters, firewalls, antivirus software, identity management tools, calculators, and databases.

Employers or vendors must provide written notice to affected workers at least 30 days before introducing an ADS, within 30 days of hiring new workers when an existing ADS is in place, and within 30 days of significant updates. Existing ADS in use at the time the bill takes effect must be disclosed by February 1, 2026.

Employers are prohibited from using ADS that: violate labor or civil rights laws; obtain or infer protected characteristics (immigration status, veteran status, religion, health status, sexual orientation, disability, criminal record, credit history, etc.); conduct predictive behavior analysis; profile workers for exercising legal rights; or rely primarily on individualized worker data for compensation decisions without justification.

Employers may not rely primarily on an ADS for hiring, promotion, discipline, or termination decisions. A human reviewer must independently investigate and compile corroborating information. Customer ratings cannot be the sole or primary input for employment-related ADS decisions.

Workers have the right to access data collected or used by an ADS and to correct errors in input or output data. Workers may appeal employment-related decisions made with ADS assistance within 30 days of notification, with employers required to respond within 14 business days using a qualified human reviewer who was not involved in the original decision.

The Labor Commissioner is designated as the enforcement authority, with power to investigate violations, order temporary relief, issue citations, and file civil actions. Workers or their representatives may also bring private civil actions for damages including punitive damages. Public prosecutors may enforce under existing provisions. Violations carry a $500 civil penalty per violation.

Anti-retaliation provision prohibits employers from discharging, threatening to discharge, demoting, suspending, or discriminating against workers for exercising rights under the bill, filing complaints, or cooperating in investigations.

Coauthors Assembly Members Bryan and Elhawary were added. The fiscal committee designation changed from 'no' to 'yes,' indicating the bill now has fiscal implications requiring committee review.