As artificial intelligence becomes more integrated into the modern workplace, a growing number of Californians are raising concerns about how these technologies impact job conditions, employee rights, and workplace health. While much of the national conversation has been sparked by public-sector legislation in other states, including a widely discussed bill in Washington that would require collective bargaining over AI in government workplaces, California is quickly emerging as a key front in the broader debate over AI and labor rights.
In 2025, California took a significant step by updating its employment discrimination laws to explicitly regulate automated decision-making systems. The California Civil Rights Department (CRD), in collaboration with the California Civil Rights Council, approved new regulations that went into effect on October 1, 2025. These rules require employers to ensure that any AI or algorithmic tools used in hiring, promotions, or other personnel decisions do not result in discrimination based on protected characteristics like race, gender, age, or disability. Employers must also retain relevant records for at least four years, giving regulatory bodies the ability to audit decisions and investigate potential violations.
Simultaneously, state legislators introduced the “No Robo Bosses Act,” officially known as Senate Bill 7, aimed at further regulating how AI systems are used in employment. The bill proposes that companies provide employees with prior notice when they intend to use automated systems for managerial decisions. It also mandates human oversight for key employment outcomes such as promotions, terminations, and performance evaluations. In addition, workers would be granted the right to appeal decisions made or influenced by AI.
These legal developments have ignited conversations across industries in California. Employees in health care, logistics, customer service, and tech sectors are increasingly asking for transparency regarding how AI is used in their workplaces. Concerns have been raised about algorithmic scheduling systems, surveillance technologies, automated hiring tools, and data-driven performance evaluations. Workers say they want assurances that AI tools will not replace human discretion or introduce biases that could threaten job stability and fairness.
Labor unions have amplified these calls, framing the rise of workplace AI as not merely a technical or operational issue but a human one. They argue that the unchecked use of AI risks undermining job security and worker autonomy. As such, unions are demanding a seat at the table to help shape how and when these tools are introduced. This demand for oversight is not just about economics, they argue, but also about health — both mental and physical. Automated systems that over-schedule workers, surveil them constantly, or misclassify performance could contribute to increased stress, burnout, and job dissatisfaction.
From a public-health perspective, experts are beginning to echo these concerns. Health policy analysts note that the introduction of AI into the workplace, particularly in ways that reduce human interaction or increase productivity pressure, can have ripple effects on well-being. The loss of human judgment, they argue, could lead to unfair decisions that affect employees’ income, time off, and general mental health. In a state like California, where the tech sector is robust and innovation moves quickly, the urgency of these issues is especially pronounced.
For employers, the changing legal and cultural climate presents both challenges and opportunities. Companies must now navigate a more complex regulatory environment that demands both compliance and transparency. Some are beginning to reassess the risks associated with over-reliance on AI, shifting toward a more cautious, human-centered approach to automation.
California’s evolving stance could soon influence national trends. As federal agencies and other states consider how to regulate workplace automation, the policies and precedents set in California may serve as a model. If legislation like SB 7 passes, it will likely become a reference point for how private-sector employers across the country balance innovation with worker protection.
What’s clear is that California workers are not passively accepting the integration of AI into their daily routines. Instead, they are organizing, asking questions, and demanding a voice. This engagement is reshaping the narrative around automation — from one of inevitability to one of accountability and shared governance. In doing so, Californians are helping to define the future of ethical and equitable work in an increasingly digital age.
