No Robot Bosses Act

Bill Number: H.R. 6371
Origin Chamber: House
Congress: 119th Congress, Session 1
Policy Area: Labor and Employment
Status: Introduced
Latest Action: 2025-12-03: Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on House Administration, and Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Last Updated: 2026-06-26T08:07:53Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose of the Legislation

The "No Robot Bosses Act" (H.R. 6371) aims to regulate the use of automated decision systems—such as AI or software that processes data to influence employment choices—by employers. It seeks to prevent discrimination, ensure human oversight in key employment decisions, and promote transparency and fairness in the workplace, while building on existing anti-discrimination laws.

Key Provisions

Definitions:
An automated decision system is any software or process using computation (e.g., AI, machine learning) to make or aid decisions, generate scores, or collect data related to employment, excluding basic infrastructure like web hosting.
Covered individuals include employees, contractors, and job candidates working for remuneration.
Employers are entities with 15 or more covered individuals, including private businesses, public agencies, and certain government offices (e.g., congressional or executive branch employing offices).
Employment-related decisions cover hiring (recruiting, screening, interviewing, selecting), firing, discipline, demotion, pay, scheduling, benefits, promotions, and other job conditions.

Restrictions on Automated Systems (Section 3):
Employers cannot rely solely on an automated system for employment decisions.
Use of system outputs is allowed only if:
The system undergoes pre-deployment testing for effectiveness, compliance with anti-discrimination laws (e.g., Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Americans with Disabilities Act), absence of bias (based on race, sex, age, disability, etc.), and adherence to NIST's AI Risk Management Framework.
Annual independent testing for bias, with public results.
Disclosure to workers about the system's use, inputs, outputs, and appeal process (before hiring decisions or application acceptance; updates for changes).
Human oversight to verify outputs.
Post-decision documentation provided to workers within 7 days, including system details, input data (in machine-readable format), how it influenced the decision, and reasoning.
Workers can dispute outputs or appeal decisions to a qualified human (different from the verifier).
Training required for system operators on inputs, biases, limitations, and appropriate use.
Workers managed by automated systems can opt out for human management.

New Division in Department of Labor (Section 4): Establishes the Technology and Worker Protection Division, led by a presidentially appointed Administrator. It includes advisory boards (User, Research, Product, Labor) with experts in privacy, civil rights, tech, and labor to advise on data practices. The division can hire specialists and is exempt from some federal advisory rules.

Regulations (Section 5): Secretary of Labor issues rules for most employers, consulting agencies like FTC, EEOC, and NLRB. Separate rules for congressional, executive, and federal personnel offices, mirroring Labor's rules unless modified for good cause.

Whistleblower Protections (Section 6): Prohibits retaliation against workers for exercising rights, filing complaints, or participating in investigations related to the Act.

Enforcement (Section 7):
DOL investigates complaints, inspects records, and resolves issues like FLSA violations; can refer criminal matters to DOJ.
Private lawsuits allowed by affected workers or labor unions in federal court, with remedies including actual/treble damages ($5,000–$100,000 statutory damages per violation, adjusted for inflation), injunctions, attorney's fees, and temporary relief (e.g., reinstatement).
States and Tribal governments can sue on behalf of residents, with sovereign immunity waived for federally funded programs.
No pre-dispute arbitration or class-action waivers for Act violations.
Special procedures for congressional, executive, and federal workers.

Other Provisions:
Coordination with federal/state regulators (Section 8).
Does not preempt other federal/state laws or agency authorities (Section 9).
Severability clause (Section 10) ensures the Act survives if parts are invalidated.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

Builds on anti-discrimination statutes (e.g., Civil Rights Act, ADA) by mandating specific AI testing for bias and compliance, which were not previously required.
Introduces novel requirements like mandatory disclosures, human corroboration, appeal rights, and opt-outs for automated management—extending beyond general labor laws like FLSA.
Creates a dedicated DOL division for tech-related worker protections, filling a gap in federal oversight of AI in employment.
Invalidates arbitration agreements for these disputes, overriding common employment contract practices upheld in cases like Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis (2018).
Waives sovereign immunity for states and Tribes receiving federal funds, enabling more lawsuits against public employers.

Potential Impacts

On Government Agencies: DOL gains a new division with hiring flexibility and advisory resources, increasing administrative workload and costs. Other agencies (e.g., EEOC, OPM) must align regulations, potentially straining budgets for compliance training and testing.
On Citizens (Workers and Candidates): Enhances protections against biased AI decisions, providing transparency, appeal options, and recourse, which could reduce discriminatory hiring/firing and empower workers, especially in tech-heavy industries. However, smaller employers might face barriers to adopting efficient tools.
On Employers: Requires costly system audits, training, and documentation; prohibits full automation, potentially slowing recruitment but promoting fairer practices. Small businesses (under 15 employees) are exempt.
On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though it could influence U.S. tech exports or multinational firms by setting standards for AI use in global workforces.

Main Stakeholders Affected

Employers: Private companies, public agencies, and government offices with 15+ workers, including tech firms using AI for HR.
Covered Individuals: Employees, contractors, and job applicants, particularly those in automated roles (e.g., gig workers, office staff).
Labor Organizations: Gain standing to sue and represent workers, strengthening their role in AI oversight.
Government Entities: DOL, EEOC, states/Tribes (via enforcement and immunity waivers), and advisory board members (experts in civil rights, tech, labor).
Tech Providers: Vendors of automated systems must ensure compliance for clients, facing liability risks.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

Legal: Expands private rights of action and state enforcement, potentially increasing litigation; integrates with existing laws without preemption, avoiding conflicts but requiring coordination. Statutory damages and fee-shifting incentivize suits, similar to FLSA but tailored to AI.
Constitutional: Waives 11th Amendment sovereign immunity for states/Tribes using federal funds, enabling suits for injunctive relief—echoing Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer (1976) but applied to employment tech. No direct free speech or due process challenges noted, though human oversight mandates could be tested for vagueness.
Political: Advances labor and civil rights priorities by curbing "black box" AI, appealing to worker advocates but criticized by business/tech lobbies for innovation stifling and compliance burdens. Advisory boards ensure diverse input, mitigating partisanship, but could spark debates on federal overreach in private employment.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Bonamici, Suzanne [D-OR-1]

Cosponsors (6)

Rep. Deluzio, Christopher R. [D-PA-17], Del. Moylan, James C. [R-GU-At Large], Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10], Rep. Adams, Alma S. [D-NC-12], Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9], Rep. Carson, André [D-IN-7]

Recent Actions

2025-12-03: Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on House Administration, and Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2025-12-03: Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on House Administration, and Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2025-12-03: Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on House Administration, and Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2025-12-03: Introduced in House
2025-12-03: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

No Robot Bosses Act — issued 2025-12-03 — PDF (48 pages)