Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
AI: Jobs, Power & Money
27JUL

US states legislate as Washington stalls

2 min read
10:02UTC

California advanced three AI-employment bills through committee in late June, including the 'No Robo Bosses Act', though none has reached a floor vote.

← Back to SAP freezes R&D headcount as others deny AIJump to analysis ↓
EconomicDeveloping
Key takeaway

AI job protections advance only at state level, reaching only workers in states that pass them.

California moved three AI-employment bills through committee in the final days of June. AB 2545, which would make the state's Employment Development Department build an AI worker-impact dataset, cleared Senate Appropriations 9 to 0 on 29 June. SB 947, the 'No Robo Bosses Act', which would curb AI-only hiring and firing decisions, reached the Assembly Judiciary Committee on 25 June. SB 951, a 90-day technological-displacement notice bill, had an Assembly Privacy Committee hearing on 1 July, but none of the three has yet reached a floor vote. 1

State legislatures keep advancing AI-employment law while the main federal bill has not moved. The only AI job protections gaining ground in the US NOW sit at state level, reaching only workers who live in those states. California cleared AB 2656 through Senate Labor 5 to 0 in mid-June and moved SB 951 through the Senate 28 to 9 earlier ; New York passed its own hiring-impact bill through both chambers the same month .

Deep Analysis

In plain English

While the US Congress has not passed any national law on AI and jobs, individual states are moving ahead on their own. California is furthest along, with three different bills inching through committee in late June, though none has had a full vote yet. AB 2545 would make a state agency start collecting real data on how AI affects hiring and firing, something the federal government currently does not do. SB 947, nicknamed the 'No Robo Bosses Act', would limit AI making hiring and firing decisions without human involvement. SB 951 would require 90 days' notice before a big AI-driven layoff, longer than the 60 days federal law requires.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

AB 2545's requirement that the Employment Development Department build an AI worker-impact dataset exists specifically because the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics has never published a comparable series; California is legislating the exact measurement instrument Washington has left absent for three years running, with only the New York Fed's contradictory job-posting study filling the federal gap so far.

None of the three bills has reached a floor vote because each sits in a different chamber's committee structure, Senate Appropriations for AB 2545, Assembly Judiciary for SB 947, Assembly Privacy for SB 951, so their progress depends on three separate committee calendars converging before the legislative session closes, not on a single shared blocker.

What could happen next?
  • Meaning

    California is moving to collect the AI workforce-impact data that no federal agency currently publishes, positioning state administrative data as a possible substitute benchmark for Stanford's contested JOLTS-based estimate (ID:3584).

  • Risk

    With Congress producing no comparable federal vehicle, California's bills risk becoming a patchwork standard that only applies to workers in one state, while national employers structure AI deployment to concentrate the affected roles elsewhere.

Sources:Stanford Digital Economy Lab
Mentions:California →AB 2545 →SB 947 →SB 951 →Bureau of Labor Statistics →AB 2656 →US Congress →Washington →New York State →California State Legislature →
First Reported In

Update #15 · Oracle names AI in its own annual report

Stanford Digital Economy Lab· 1 Jul 2026
Read original →
Causes and effects
This Event
US states legislate as Washington stalls
State legislatures are the only US venue where AI job protections are gaining ground, and they reach only workers who live in those states.
Led to
California eyes 45-day AI notice rule
Committee action on AB 2545, SB 947 and SB 951 continues California's AI-employment legislative push alongside AB 2656.
Occurred 17 Jun 2026
Read story →
California bill sets 90-day AI layoff notice
SB 951's committee progress continues its path after clearing the Senate 28-9.
Occurred 6 Jun 2026
Read story →
States write the AI law Congress won't
Late-June committee action extends the California bill slate's progress reported alongside New York's A9581 passage.
Occurred 10 Jun 2026
Read story →
California binds AI hiring, EU defers
The three bills continue the committee march this beat logged in late June.
Occurred 1 Jul 2026
Read story →
Different Perspectives
European Commission
European Commission
The European Commission's draft Annex III guidelines, closed for comment on 23 July, treat algorithmic scoring in recruitment, pay and termination as high-risk regardless of whether a human signs off, echoing Spain's Audiencia Nacional ruling 101/2026 on concealed scheduling algorithms. Brussels is shifting the fight from counting AI job losses to assigning legal liability for the tools themselves.
Office for National Statistics
Office for National Statistics
The Office for National Statistics recorded UK vacancies rising to 712,000 on 21 July, the first quarterly increase this beat has tracked, with payrolled employment down 85,000 on the year against May's 210,000 fall. The bulletin names no AI cause anywhere, and that is the point: nothing in the release confirms the displacement story it gets cited to support.
Christian Klein, SAP
Christian Klein, SAP
Christian Klein told investors on 23 July that SAP's research headcount will not grow for twelve months because AI agents and their token costs are absorbing the work, not because SAP is cutting jobs. He frames it as commercial arithmetic: the cost of AI-assisted coding tokens plus the salaries specialist AI hires command, not people being replaced by machines.
Betsey Stevenson, University of Michigan
Betsey Stevenson, University of Michigan
Betsey Stevenson argued that the 187,000 jobless-claims reading describes a market that hires little and fires little, not one AI is emptying. She said the real damage hides in eligibility rules and suppressed job postings, not in the headline layoff counts employers keep denying.
Comisiones Obreras, UGT and Concentrix's A Coruña works committee
Comisiones Obreras, UGT and Concentrix's A Coruña works committee
Comisiones Obreras, UGT and Concentrix's A Coruña works committee blamed Microsoft's push toward AI self-service for the 80 redundancies unions signed off on 22 July, not unavoidable business cause. A second Coruña procedure covering 80 more jobs runs to a 31 August deadline, and the unions want the state, not the employer, setting the pace of AI-driven cuts.
Stanford's 'We Must Act Now' signatories
Stanford's 'We Must Act Now' signatories
More than 200 academics, including 16 Nobel laureates, published a 13 July letter warning of AI-driven labour disruption, citing Daron Acemoglu's NBER estimate that AI's total factor productivity gain stays under 0.66% over ten years. The letter's own cited economics sit well below Goldman Sachs Research's 1.5-percentage-point estimate published the same week.