California wants a person to check the AI before you fire anyone

On August 30 and 31 the California Legislature passed a bill called the No Robo Bosses Act. It's sitting on Governor Newsom's desk right now, and he has until September 30 to sign it or veto it.

The short version: if software helps you decide who gets written up or fired, a person has to review that decision and check the software's work before you act on it.

If you have employees in California, this one's yours. If you don't, keep reading anyway, because Colorado and Illinois are moving on the same ground and your state is probably next.

What SB 947 actually says

The bill covers what it calls automated decision systems. Crowell & Moring's read of the bill defines that as any computational process built on machine learning, statistical modeling, data analytics or AI that stands in for human judgment about your employees.

That's broad as hell. On purpose.

Here's what it would require, per CDF Labor Law's breakdown published September 3.

When you mostly rely on software output to discipline or fire someone, a human has to review it and corroborate the decision against other available information. If the recommendation can't be verified, or turns out to be wrong, you can't act on it.

You'd also owe the employee a written notice afterward, in plain language, saying software was used, that a person checked it, who that person is, and that they can ask for a description of their own data. Retaliating against someone for asking is off the table.

Penalties run $500 per violation, enforced by the California Labor Commissioner.

Now the part that catches small businesses off guard. There's no size cutoff. CDF's analysis says the law applies to public and private employers "without regard to the number of workers employed." 3 employees or 3,000, same rules. The only carve-out is for workers under a collective bargaining agreement that expressly waives it.

If Newsom signs, the requirements start July 1, 2027, according to Ogletree's September 15 roundup of the 13 employment bills currently on his desk. The bill's sponsor, Senator Jerry McNerney, put it plainly in the August 31 announcement: "AI must remain a tool controlled by humans, not the other way around."

Why this lands harder on small businesses

A big company has an HR department and outside counsel. You have a scheduling app and a bookkeeper.

So go look at what you already use.

Your scheduling software flags who clocks in late. Your POS system ranks servers by sales per hour. Your delivery app scores drivers. Your time clock emails you when someone's hours look off. Your CRM tells you which rep is behind.

None of those were sold to you with the word AI on the box. These laws are written broadly enough to cover them anyway. If a number from one of those tools is the reason somebody gets written up, the law is talking about you.

Colorado is doing the same thing to hiring

Colorado's Attorney General filed proposed rules on August 11 to implement the state's Automated Decision-Making Technology Act. The official rulemaking page is at coag.gov/ai, and the rules take effect January 1, 2027.

They cover hiring, promotion, pay and discipline. Fisher Phillips pulled out the line that matters most: if a tool produces a rank, a score or a threshold about a person, it's presumed to have materially influenced the decision. So yes, the applicant tracking system that sorts your resumes counts.

Under the proposal, a rejected applicant could ask what data you used and ask you to correct it if it's wrong. You'd have 30 days to explain the software's role and the main reasons for the rejection, including the actual scores it produced.

One thing to flag: the sources disagree on the comment deadline. Fisher Phillips says comments close October 5. Colorado's own AG page says October 26 at 11:59 p.m. MST. If you want to weigh in, go by the earlier date and use the official comment form.

Illinois changed three things for January

Different subject, same deadline. Hinshaw & Culbertson laid out three Illinois changes on September 1, all effective January 1, 2027.

Paid jury duty. Public Act 104-0683 means employers with more than 25 employees pay regular wages for jury service. At 25 or fewer, it stays unpaid. Fisher Phillips has a 5-step prep list for it.

Menopause accommodations. The Illinois Human Rights Act now covers menopause-related conditions, with reasonable accommodations like flexible scheduling and temperature-adjusted workspaces. (Hallelujah!) No size threshold on this one.

Driver's license job postings. HB 4758 bars you from requiring a valid driver's license in a job posting unless driving is an essential function of the job. If it is, the posting has to briefly say why.

That last one is the cheapest to fix and the easiest to forget. If "valid driver's license" is sitting in your postings out of habit, and the job doesn't involve driving, take it out.

What to do this month

Open a blank doc. List every piece of software that produces a number about a person on your team. Scheduling, time tracking, point of sale, CRM, delivery, call monitoring, the lot.

Next to each one, write what happens when that number looks bad. If the answer is "I go talk to them," you're in good shape. If the answer is "the system flags it and I act on the flag," star that one.

Then pick the human. One named person who reviews before anything happens to anyone's job. Write the name down. That single decision is most of the compliance work in all three of these laws.

Then go read your job postings. That takes 10 minutes and it's free.

Knowing which of your tools make calls about people, and who checks them, is the whole job here. That's a question you can answer today without learning a thing about how the software works underneath.

I teach live AI workshops for people with no tech background, where we go through your actual tools and your actual work. Next dates are here.