Skip to content
Welcome, thoughtbot's Giant Robots listeners!Start here
AI: Jobs, Power & Money
6NOV

States write the AI law Congress won't

4 min read
11:10UTC

New York's A9581 passed both chambers on the strength of a Senate vote and now awaits Governor Hochul's signature. California cleared SB 951 through its labour committee 5-0 on Wednesday 10 June. Washington's own federal bill has not moved.

EconomicDeveloping
Key takeaway

New York and California are compelling AI hiring disclosure because the federal bill backing it has stalled in Congress.

New York's A9581, paired with its Senate twin S8706, passed both chambers of the state legislature and awaits Governor Kathy Hochul's signature⁠1. The bill would require firms with more than 50 employees to file an annual report on how AI affects their hiring. The Assembly had already passed A9581 alone on 3 June; the Senate vote is the new step that puts the measure on the governor's desk.

The design answers a specific failure. New York's updated WARN Act, the layoff-notification law, became the world's first to require disclosure of AI's role in mass layoffs, and in its first year produced zero attributions from 162 companies covering 28,300 workers. A notice-only law gave firms no reason to attribute, so none did. An annual mandatory report shifts the default from voluntary disclosure to compelled filing, which is why the reporting trigger matters more than the headline.

California advanced three bills in the same week. SB 951, which would require 90-day notice of technological displacement, cleared its Senate labour committee 5-0 on Wednesday 10 June and heads to the Assembly, having already passed the full Senate 28-9 on 6 June. SB 947, the No Robo Bosses Act on automated decision systems, is working through Assembly amendments, and AB 2545, a worker-impact data assessment, reached Senate committee after passing the Assembly on 21 May⁠2. Colorado's signing of SB 26-189 had already shown state momentum was real.

The state channel is filling a federal vacuum. Senators Mark Warner and Mike Rounds have a disclosure bill, S.3339, endorsed by Microsoft and Google, but it has not moved in Congress. A patchwork of state thresholds raises multi-state compliance cost for large employers, yet if New York and California collect the data, those filings could become the de facto national evidence base that Washington has so far failed to assemble.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

When a company lays off workers in the US, it has to give 60 days' notice under a federal law called the WARN Act. That law requires companies to say how many jobs are going and where, but asks nothing about the cause. New York added a clause requiring disclosure of AI's role in mass layoffs, and in the first year not one of 162 companies covering 28,300 workers cited AI as the reason, even though many of those cuts happened in sectors where AI adoption is well documented. New York's new bill, A9581, tries a different design. Rather than requiring AI disclosure only at the moment of a mass layoff, it requires every company with 50 or more workers to file an annual report on how AI affects their hiring. California's SB 951, SB 947, and AB 2545 advance similar requirements through the state legislature. Forcing a regular annual check creates a paper trail that shows patterns, rather than relying on a moment of crisis when companies have every incentive to say nothing about AI.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

The federal vacuum has two structural sources. The Warner-Rounds S.3339 bill takes a commission-and-study approach, explicitly avoiding compelled disclosure in favour of a data-gathering exercise. It attracted Microsoft and Google endorsements precisely because it carries no compliance requirement.

The Hawley-Warner S.3108 Clarity Act, which did require AI-layoff reporting, stalled in committee before S.3339 replaced it as the live vehicle. Congress has not passed a compelled AI-employment disclosure law partly because the industry lobby spent $150 million on the 2026 midterms, with the Leading the Future PAC targeting pro-regulation candidates.

The WARN Act's forty-year design gap created the immediate trigger for A9581. The 1988 law required employers to file 60-day notice of mass layoffs but imposed no obligation to attribute the cause.

In 1988, factory closures were assumed self-evident; in 2026, a company can cut 28,300 workers and legally describe every departure as restructuring. New York's own WARN Act layer, added to require AI attribution, produced zero attributions in its first year because voluntary disclosure under a notice-only law generates no incentive to attribute.

What could happen next?
  • Consequence

    New York and California annual AI-hiring reports, if collected and published, would produce the first structured US state-level dataset on AI-attributed hiring changes, filling the gap the WARN Act left and the federal S.3339 bill avoids.

    Medium term · Suggested
  • Risk

    A patchwork of state disclosure thresholds, 50 employees in New York against the 25-percent-workforce trigger in California SB 951, raises multi-state compliance costs for large employers with operations across both states.

    Short term · Assessed
  • Precedent

    The state-channel strategy mirrors the pre-1988 WARN Act period when state advance-notice laws preceded the federal floor; as before, state data collection could force a federal response or invite federal pre-emption.

    Long term · Suggested
First Reported In

Update #13 · Washington pulls a live AI model

Bloomberg Law· 13 Jun 2026
Read original →
Causes and effects
Different Perspectives
Korea's four largest banks, as reported by News1
Korea's four largest banks, as reported by News1
KB Kookmin, Shinhan, Hana and Woori rehired 1,013 retirees last year, equal to 79.1% of their graduate intake, according to News1. Graduates face a smaller entry intake while returners take fixed-term credit-screening roles at lower pay, News1 reports.
High Court of Justice of Madrid
High Court of Justice of Madrid
The court's employment chamber ruled in judgment 864/2026, dated 8 October and made public in early November, that introducing AI is not on its own a ground for dismissal. Employers must prove AI's effect through the four causes the Workers' Statute already lists.
Singapore Ministry of Manpower
Singapore Ministry of Manpower
The Singapore Ministry of Manpower put third-quarter retrenchments at 4,800, concentrated in information and communications, financial services and manufacturing, with business reorganisation the main driver. Its release does not mention AI.
Challenger, Gray & Christmas
Challenger, Gray & Christmas
Challenger reported on 5 November that market and economic conditions overtook AI as the leading stated reason for 2026's US job cuts, at 130,531 against 121,401. AI was cited for 1,265 cuts in October, its lowest month of the year.
Office for Budget Responsibility
Office for Budget Responsibility
The OBR's 28 October outlook showed output per worker in information and communication growing 7.6% a year, yet kept AI's boost to UK productivity at 0.2 percentage points a year. It does not attribute the faster growth to AI.
Central Bank of Ireland
Central Bank of Ireland
Governor Gabriel Makhlouf said on 2 November that AI investment has supported Irish activity and flagged the debt financing behind it as a financial-stability risk. On jobs, he named skills bottlenecks and mismatches, not job losses.

Written with AI from Lowdown's published reporting. Not individually reviewed by an editor. Editorial standards.