[Update (7/25/25): From Data Centers to Ideology: Decoding the Latest AI Executive Orders]
On January 23, 2025, as one of the first actions of his second term, President Trump signed Executive Order (EO) 14179, “Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence,” making good on a campaign promise to rescind Executive Order 14110 (known colloquially as the Biden AI EO).
It is not surprising that AI was at the top of the agenda for President Trump’s second term. In his first term, Trump was the first president to issue an EO on AI. On February 11, 2019, he issued Executive Order 13859, Maintaining American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence. This was a first-of-its-kind EO to specifically address AI, recognizing the importance of AI to the economic and national security of the United States. In it, the Trump Administration laid the foundation for investment in the future of AI by committing federal funds to double investment in AI research, establishing national AI research institutes, and issuing regulatory guidance for AI development in the private sector. The first Trump Administration later established guidance for federal agency adoption of AI within the government.
The current EO gives the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, the Special Advisor for AI and Crypto, and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, in coordination with agency heads they deem relevant, 180 days—until July 22, 2025—to prepare an AI Action Plan to replace the policies that have been rescinded from the Biden Administration.
On September 12, 2024, the Regional Director of the National Labor Relations Board’s (“NLRB”) Region 22 in Newark, New Jersey, issued an unfair labor practice complaint against a New Jersey building services company, alleging that employee non-hire (or “no poach”) provisions in the company’s contracts with its building clients violate the National Labor Relations Act (the “Act”).
According to the NLRB’s news release, the complaint alleges that Planned Companies D/B/A Planned Building Services, which is a janitorial, building maintenance, and concierge services provider, “has maintained provisions in its contracts with its client buildings that interfere with, and are inherently destructive of, workers’ rights under Sections 8(a)(1) and (3) of the National Labor Relations Act.” It further alleges that “Planned Companies restricts its client buildings from soliciting its employees to work for them in a similar job classification for a period of six months after the agreement is terminated, or from hiring employees after they leave Planned Companies’ employment. Any entity retained by the client building to replace Planned Companies is also bound by the hiring restriction.”
A hearing before an NLRB Administrative Law Judge has been set for November 12, 2024.
After releasing an initial two-page “fact sheet,” Congress publicly posted the bill text of the No Robot Bosses Act (the “Proposed Act”), detailing proposed federal guardrails for use of automated decision-making systems in the employment context. Robert Casey (D-PA), Brian Schatz (D-HI), John Fetterman (D-PA), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) currently cosponsor the Proposed Act.
On Friday, September 23, 2022, the New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (“DCWP”) released a Notice of Public Hearing and Opportunity to Comment on Proposed Rules related to its Automated Employment Decision Tool law (the “AEDT Law”), which goes into effect on January 1, 2023. As we previously wrote, the City passed the AEDT Law to regulate employers’ use of automated employment decision tools, with the aim of curbing bias in hiring and promotions; as written, however, it contains many ambiguities, which has left covered employers with open questions about compliance.
As of December 11, 2021, the Bill regulating employers’ use of automated employment decision tools has been enacted. Compliance with the Bill’s requirements begins January 1, 2023.
***
Joining Illinois and Maryland, on November 10, 2021, the New York City Council approved a measure, Int. 1894-2020A (the “Bill”), to regulate employers’ use of “automated employment decision tools” with the aim of curbing bias in hiring and promotions. The Bill, which is awaiting Mayor DeBlasio’s signature, is to take effect on January 1, 2023. Should the Mayor not sign the Bill within thirty days of the Council’s approval (i.e., by December 10), absent veto, it will become law.
In a recent Bloomberg Law article, we reported on legislative developments regulating the use of artificial intelligence (“AI”) in employment law decisions. On May 11, 2020, one of the pieces of proposed legislation we discussed, Maryland’s H.B. 1202, became law without Governor Larry Hogan’s signature. As we reported, H.B. 1202 prohibits employers from using facial recognition technology during pre-employment job interviews without the applicant’s consent. To use facial recognition services in interviewing employees, an employer must obtain an applicant’s ...
We encourage our readers to visit Workforce Bulletin, the newest blog from our colleagues at Epstein Becker Green (EBG).
Workforce Bulletin will feature a range of cutting-edge issues—such as sexual harassment, diversity and inclusion, pay equity, artificial intelligence in the workplace, cybersecurity, and the impact of the coronavirus outbreak on human resources—that are of concern to employers across all industries. EBG's full announcement is here.
Click here to subscribe for email notifications—you’ll receive a confirmation email to click.
(And if you haven't ...
We encourage our readers to visit Workforce Bulletin, the newest blog from our colleagues at Epstein Becker Green (EBG).
Workforce Bulletin will feature a range of cutting-edge issues—such as sexual harassment, diversity and inclusion, pay equity, artificial intelligence in the workplace, cybersecurity, and the impact of the coronavirus outbreak on human resources—that are of concern to employers across all industries. EBG's full announcement is here.
Click here to subscribe for email notifications—you’ll receive a confirmation email to click.
(And if you haven't ...
As we wrote last month, the state of Washington passed legislation barring most inquiries into salary history by employers, as well as requiring employers to divulge salary bands for posted jobs. On May 9, 2019, the governor of Washington, Jay Inslee, signed the bill, confirming the law statewide. The law will take effect on July 28, 2019, and prior to that date, Washington employers should plan to amend any employment applications and hiring practices to conform to the new law.
* * * *
If you have questions, please reach out to the author(s).
The Workforce Bulletin blog is currently edited by Adam S. Forman, Greta Ravitsky, Elizabeth S. Torkelsen, and Jennifer Stefanick Barna.
In an attempt to reduce the gender wage gap, the Washington State Legislature passed HB 1696,(“the Bill”), legislation that will prevent all private employers in Washington State from inquiring into the salary history of prospective employees or requiring that an applicant's prior wage or salary history meet certain criteria. Additionally, the Bill mandates that, upon an applicant’s request, an employer with 15 or more employees must provide the applicant with certain details about the pay rate or salary range for the open position.
If, as expected, the measure is signed ...
Employers in the technology industry should take note of last week’s decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in EEOC v. New Breed Logistics (PDF). The court declined to reconsider a panel holding that, in the context of a retaliation claim, “a demand that a supervisor cease his/her harassing conduct constitutes protected activity under Title VII.”
Three former employees of New Breed Logistics, a supply-chain logistics company, asserted that they had engaged in protected activity by telling their supervisor to stop making advances and sexual comments. The ...
With the ever-increasing amount of information available on social media, employers should remember to exercise caution when utilizing social media as a part of their Human Resources/ Recruitment related activities. As we have discussed in a prior blog post, “Should Employers and Facebook Be Friends?” we live in a digital-age, and how people choose to define themselves is often readily showcased on social networking sites. Whether – and how – employers choose to interact with the online presence of their workforce will continue to develop as the relevant legal standards ...
In Thompson v. Real Estate Mortgage Network, the Third Circuit addressed a variety of ways in which a plaintiff could pursue claims against entities that claimed they were not her employer.
The plaintiff was hired as a mortgage underwriter by defendant Security Atlantic Mortgage Company (“SAMC”). Allegedly in response to an investigation being conducted into SAMC 's mortgage practices, the plaintiff and others were directed to complete job applications for Real Estate Mortgage Network ("REMN"), a “sister company” of SAMC. The plaintiff completed ...
Our colleague Kara M. Maciel of Epstein Becker Green wrote a wage and hour update in this month’s Take 5 labor and employment newsletter.
Here’s a preview of the five items:
1. IRS Will Begin Taxing a Restaurant's Automatic Gratuities as Service Charges
2. The New DOL Secretary, Tom Perez, Spells Out the WHD's Enforcement Agenda
3. DOL Investigates Health Care Provider and Obtains $4 Million Settlement for Overtime Payments
4. Federal Court Strikes Down DOL Tip Pooling Rule
5. Take Preventative Steps When Facing WHD Audits
Read the full article here.
* * * *
If you have questions, please reach out to the author(s).
The Workforce Bulletin blog is currently edited by Adam S. Forman, Greta Ravitsky, Elizabeth S. Torkelsen, and Jennifer Stefanick Barna.
It is Employment Law 101 – employment in the United States is generally at-will. Equally elementary to HR professionals and employment counsel is the use of a good, strong at-will policy and/or agreement. So common is the use of at-will policies and agreements that you would be hard pressed to find an employment handbook or an employer that does not make some use of them.
Notwithstanding this universal use, the National Labor Relations Board is poised to target non-union employers which maintain at-will policies or agreements. Although the NLRB has taken several steps to ease the ...
Recent Updates
- Watch: Change Is Coming from the EEOC—but When? - Employment Law This Week
- The EEOC Moves to End EEO Reporting – Comments Invited Through August 24
- Watch: New York Employers Face New Restrictions on Severance, Tuition Repayment, and Sick Time - Employment Law This Week
- Attention Connecticut Warehouse Employers: Deadline for New Quota Notices Approaching
- New Jersey Department of Labor’s Guidance Clarifies Expanded Job Protected Leave Rights for Employees