New York City Local Law 144: bias audits and notices for AI hiring and promotion tools

New York City was one of the first places to pass a law aimed directly at AI in hiring. Local Law 144 of 2021 covers automated employment decision tools, often shortened to AEDTs, used to screen candidates for jobs or employees for promotion. It does not ban these tools. It requires an independent bias audit, public results and advance notice. This page explains the law for job seekers, employees and employers, from the text of the law and the guidance of the city's Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP).

The short answer: in the city, an employer or employment agency must not use an AEDT to screen a candidate or employee for an employment decision unless the tool has had a bias audit no more than one year before its use and a summary of the results has been made public on its website (Admin Code s20-871(a)). City residents must be told about the tool at least 10 business days before it is used (s20-871(b)). The law took effect on 1 January 2023, and DCWP began enforcement on 5 July 2023 (DCWP FAQ).

What counts as an automated employment decision tool

The law defines an AEDT as any computational process, derived from machine learning, statistical modeling, data analytics or artificial intelligence, that issues simplified output, including a score, classification or recommendation, that is used to substantially assist or replace discretionary decision making for employment decisions that impact natural persons (s20-870). Tools such as junk email filters, firewalls, calculators, spreadsheets and databases are excluded where they do not substantially assist or replace discretionary decisions and do not materially impact people.

An "employment decision" means screening candidates for employment or employees for promotion within the city (s20-870). DCWP says this includes screening at any point in the hiring or promotion process, not just the final decision, but that the requirements do not apply to using a tool to scan a resume bank, conduct outreach or invite applications from people who have not applied for a specific position (DCWP FAQ, I.5 and I.6).

DCWP's FAQ says the law applies where the job location is an office in New York City at least part time, or the job is fully remote but associated with a city office, or the employment agency using the tool is in the city (DCWP FAQ, I.4).

The bias audit

• What it is: an impartial evaluation by an independent auditor, including testing the tool for disparate impact on the race, ethnicity and sex categories employers report to the federal government (s20-870). DCWP says it must at least calculate selection or scoring rates and impact ratios across sex, race and ethnicity, and intersectional categories (DCWP FAQ, II.1).
• How often: the audit must be no more than one year old when the tool is used (s20-871(a)(1)).
• Who is independent: DCWP says an auditor is not independent if they work for the employer or the tool's vendor, were involved in using, developing or distributing the tool, or have a direct or material indirect financial interest in either (DCWP FAQ, IV.2). DCWP does not approve auditors.
• Data: DCWP says audits should use historical data from the tool's real use, may use data pooled from several employers in some cases, and may use test data where there is not enough historical data. Imputed or inferred demographic data cannot be used (DCWP FAQ, III).
• Who is responsible: the employer or employment agency, not the vendor, though a vendor can have its tool audited (DCWP FAQ, V).
• What the results require: according to DCWP, the law requires the audit but not any specific action based on its results. Other anti-discrimination laws still apply (DCWP FAQ, II.2).

Publishing the results

Before using the tool, the employer or agency must make public on its website a summary of the most recent audit results and the distribution date of the tool (s20-871(a)(2)). DCWP says the summary must include the audit date, the source and explanation of the data, the number of people assessed who fall in an unknown category, and the number of applicants or candidates, selection or scoring rates and impact ratios for all categories (DCWP FAQ, II.3).

Notices to candidates and employees

• That a tool will be used: notice no less than ten business days before use, allowing a candidate to request an alternative selection process or accommodation (s20-871(b)(1)).
• What it assesses: the job qualifications and characteristics the tool will use, also no less than 10 business days before use (s20-871(b)(2)).
• Data on request: if not on the website, information about the type and source of data collected and the data retention policy must be available on written request and provided within 30 days (s20-871(b)(3)).
• How notice can be given: DCWP says in a job posting, by mail or email, or on the employment section of the website for applicants, or in a written policy for promotion candidates (DCWP FAQ, VI).

The notice duties apply to employees and candidates who reside in the city (s20-871(b)).

Penalties and enforcement

• A civil penalty of not more than $500 for a first violation and each additional violation on the same day, and not less than $500 nor more than $1,500 for each subsequent violation (s20-872(a)).
• Each day a tool is used in breach gives rise to a separate violation, and each missing notice is a separate violation (s20-872(b)-(c)).
• The law does not limit any right to bring a civil action or the powers of the city's Commission on Human Rights (s20-874). DCWP refers discrimination claims to the Commission (DCWP FAQ, VII.2).
• Anyone can complain to DCWP through 311 or the DCWP website, without creating an account (DCWP).

Practical steps

• Employers: list every tool that scores, ranks or classifies candidates or promotion candidates, decide which are AEDTs, get a current independent audit for each, publish the summary, and build the 10 business day notice into the hiring timeline.
• Job seekers and employees: look for the audit summary in the employment section of the employer's website, ask for an alternative process or accommodation if you need one, and request the data information in writing.

For the wider picture, including other US state rules and the EU AI Act, see AI in hiring. For Illinois, see Illinois AI hiring laws. For federal discrimination law, see AI and workplace discrimination under US federal law.

This page covers New York City and is general information based on the law and DCWP guidance as published when checked on 2 November 2026, not legal advice. Check the DCWP page for any later changes.