•  Summary 
  •  
  •  Actions 
  •  
  •  Committee Votes 
  •  
  •  Floor Votes 
  •  
  •  Memo 
  •  
  •  Text 
  •  
  •  LFIN 
  •  
  •  Chamber Video/Transcript 

A00567 Summary:

BILL NOA00567
 
SAME ASNo Same As
 
SPONSORJoyner
 
COSPNSRKelles, Shimsky, Alvarez, Reyes, Taylor, Walker, Jackson, Simon, Rosenthal L, Stirpe
 
MLTSPNSR
 
Add §203-f, Lab L
 
Establishes criteria for the use of automated employment decision tools; provides for enforcement for violations of such criteria.
Go to top    

A00567 Actions:

BILL NOA00567
 
01/09/2023referred to labor
01/03/2024referred to labor
01/10/2024enacting clause stricken
Go to top

A00567 Memo:

NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION
submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)
 
BILL NUMBER: A567
 
SPONSOR: Joyner
  TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the labor law, in relation to establishing criteria for the use of automated employment decision tools   PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL: To limit bias and discrimination against any group on the basis of sex, race, ethnicity, or other protected class that occurs when automated employment decision tools are used to screen candidates for hire.   SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS: Section 1 amends the labor law by adding a new section 203-f. Defines e terms "automated employment decision tool", "disparate impact analysis", and "employment decision". Provides requirements that employers must follow to use automated employment decision tools. Provides enforcement measures. Authorizes the commissioner to initiate an investigation if a suspicion of a violation is established. States that the department may promulgate rules and regulations to effectuate the purposes of this section, on or before the effective date. Section 2 sets the effective date.   DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ORIGINAL AND AMENDED VERSION (IF APPLICABLE): Technical changes made to the definition of "automated employment deci- sion tool". Term "disparate impact report" changed to "disparate impact analysis". Changed to regulate the use of automated employment decision tools by employers rather than the sale of such tools by vendors. Removes the term "disability accommodation policy" and does submitted to the depart- ment annually.not require it be to the department A summary of the disparate impact analysis must be provided annually, rather than the full report of the results.distribution date website prior to Requires a summary of the disparate impact analysis and the of the tool to be made publicly available on the employer's the implementation or use of the tool. Subdivision on penalties for violations removed and replaced with subdi- vision on enforcement by Attorney General.   JUSTIFICATION: In today's job market, employers may receive hundreds of job applica- tions for a single role. To efficiently evaluate candidates, employers rely on employment decision tools, like skills tests, resume reading systems, and automated screening platforms. Many employment decision tools are developed by third-party vendors, but this industry of HR tech providers is largely unregulated. Importantly, employers are not held to any meaningful standards when it comes to disclosing the bias (legally defined as "disparate impact" or "adverse impact") yielded by these products. As a result, many employers continue to use hiring tools that disproportionately screen out racial minorities. Additionally, candidates engaging with these assessments often are not informed about their purpose or what they are designed to measure.   LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: 03/10/22 advanced to third reading cal.474   FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: To be determined.   EFFECTIVE DATE: This act shall take effect immediately.
Go to top

A00567 Text:



 
                STATE OF NEW YORK
        ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                           567
 
                               2023-2024 Regular Sessions
 
                   IN ASSEMBLY
 
                                     January 9, 2023
                                       ___________
 
        Introduced by M. of A. JOYNER -- read once and referred to the Committee
          on Labor
 
        AN  ACT to amend the labor law, in relation to establishing criteria for
          the use of automated employment decision tools
 
          The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and  Assem-
        bly, do enact as follows:

     1    Section  1.  The labor law is amended by adding a new section 203-f to
     2  read as follows:
     3    § 203-f. Use of automated employment decision tools. 1.  For  purposes
     4  of this section, the following terms shall have the following meanings:
     5    a.  "Automated  employment  decision  tool"  means  any system used to
     6  filter employment candidates or prospective candidates for hire in a way
     7  that establishes a preferred candidate or candidates without relying  on
     8  candidate-specific  assessments by individual decision-makers. Automated
     9  employment decision tools shall  include  personality  tests,  cognitive
    10  ability  tests,  resume scoring systems and any system whose function is
    11  governed by statistical theory, or whose parameters are defined by  such
    12  systems,  including inferential methodologies, linear regression, neural
    13  networks, decision trees, random forests and other  artificial  intelli-
    14  gence  or  machine learning algorithms.   The term "automated employment
    15  decision tool" does not include a tool that does not automate,  support,
    16  substantially  assist or replace discretionary decision-making processes
    17  and that does not materially impact natural persons.
    18    b. "Disparate impact analysis" means an impartial analysis,  including
    19  but  not  limited  to testing of the extent to which use of an automated
    20  employment decision tool is likely to result in an adverse impact to the
    21  detriment of any group on the basis of sex, race,  ethnicity,  or  other
    22  protected  class under article fifteen of the executive law. The results
    23  of such analysis shall be reported to the employer implementing or using
    24  an automated employment decision tool.    A  disparate  impact  analysis
    25  shall  differentiate between candidates who were selected and candidates
 
         EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                              [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                                   LBD02768-01-3

        A. 567                              2
 
     1  who were not selected by the tool and shall include a  disparate  impact
     2  analysis  as  specified  in the uniform guidelines on employee selection
     3  procedures promulgated by the United States equal employment opportunity
     4  commission.
     5    c. "Employment decision" means to screen candidates for employment.
     6    2.  It  shall be unlawful for an employer to implement or use an auto-
     7  mated employment decision tool that fails to comply with  the  following
     8  provisions:
     9    a.  No    less   than   annually, a disparate impact analysis shall be
    10  conducted to assess the actual impact   of    any  automated  employment
    11  decision  tool used by any employer to select candidates for jobs within
    12  the state. Such disparate impact analysis shall be provided    to    the
    13  employer  but  shall  not  be publicly filed and shall be subject to all
    14  applicable privileges.
    15    b. A summary of the most recent disparate impact analysis of such tool
    16  as well as the distribution date of  the  tool  to  which  the  analysis
    17  applies  has been made publicly available on the website of the employer
    18  or employment agency prior to the implementation or use of such tool.
    19    c. No less than annually, any employer using an  automated  employment
    20  decision  tool  shall provide to the department such summary of the most
    21  recent disparate impact analysis provided to the employer on that tool.
    22    3. The attorney general may initiate an investigation if a  preponder-
    23  ance  of  the evidence, including the summary of the most  recent dispa-
    24  rate   impact   analysis establishes a suspicion  of  a  violation.  The
    25  attorney  general  may also initiate in any court of competent jurisdic-
    26  tion any action or proceeding that may be appropriate or  necessary  for
    27  correction  of  any  violation  issued  pursuant this section, including
    28  mandating compliance with the provisions of this section or  such  other
    29  relief as may be appropriate.
    30    4.  The  commissioner may initiate an investigation if a preponderance
    31  of the evidence, including the summary  of  the  most  recent  disparate
    32  impact analysis establishes a suspicion of a violation.  The commission-
    33  er  may also initiate in a court of competent jurisdiction any action or
    34  proceeding that may be appropriate or necessary for  the  correction  of
    35  any  violation  issued  pursuant  to  this  section, including mandating
    36  compliance with the provisions of this section or such other  relief  as
    37  may be appropriate.
    38    5.  The  department  may  promulgate rules and regulations as it deems
    39  necessary to effectuate the purposes of this section, on or before  such
    40  effective date.
    41    § 2. This act shall take effect immediately.
Go to top