An Overview of NYC Automated Employment Decision Tool (AEDT)

Contributors

Anas Baig

Product Marketing Manager at Securiti

Sadaf Ayub Choudary

Data Privacy Analyst at Securiti

CIPP/US

Published October 15, 2024

Listen to the content

I. Introduction

In response to the growing use of data processing activities and with artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) technologies, the City of New York has enacted Local Law 144, which regulates Automated Employment Decision Tools (AEDTs).

The law imposes specific obligations on employers who utilize these AEDT technologies and regulates automated decision-making tools in employment and hiring practices in New York City. It prohibits employers and employment agencies from using an automated employment decision tool, mandates employers to ensure transparency and accountability, implement non-discriminatory practices, conduct regular bias audits, and notify candidates when AEDT tools are used in hiring, promotion, and other employment considerations.

The law became effective on 1 January 2023, with enforcement starting on 5 July 2023. The Final Rules provide further details on AEDT usage covered under Law 144.

This guide dives into NYC AEDT’s requirements and highlights the steps employers must take to ensure swift compliance with the regulation.

II. What is an Automated Employment Decision Tool (AEDT)?

An Automated Employment Decision Tool (AEDT) is a computational process or software application that utilizes machine learning, statistical modeling, data analytics, or artificial intelligence to assist in employment-related decision-making.

Employers actively utilize the streamlined outputs produced by AEDTs, such as scores, classifications, or recommendations, to “substantially assist or replace discretionary decision-making” in procedures like hiring, promotions, and other employment-related considerations. “To substantially assist or replace discretionary decision making” refers to any automated tool used in employment decisions that:

  • Relies solely on its output without considering other factors.
  • Uses its output as the most heavily weighted criterion among multiple factors.
  • Uses its output to override other conclusions, including those made by humans.

The term "automated employment decision tool" does not include a tool that does not automate, support, substantially assist, or replace discretionary decision-making processes and that does not materially impact natural persons, including, but not limited to, a junk email filter, firewall, antivirus software, calculator, spreadsheet, database, data set, or other compilation of data.

III. Who Needs to Comply with NYC AEDT

The law applies to employers and employment agencies using automated decision tools (such as algorithms or machine learning models) to assist in hiring or promotion decisions for New York City-based jobs. The tools covered include systems used to evaluate candidates' qualifications or make decisions about promotion.

IV. Key Regulations Under NYC AEDT

A. Annual Bias Audit Requirement

A core element of the NYC AEDT Regulation is the requirement for an annual bias audit of any AEDTs. Employers or employment agencies cannot use or continue to use an AEDT if more than one year has passed since its most recent bias audit.

An independent auditor must conduct the audit, assessing whether the tool’s results show any bias or discrimination based on race, ethnicity, sex, or other protected characteristics. This bias audit must include the following steps:

  • Calculate the selection rate and impact ratio for each category.
  • Perform these calculations separately for:
    • Sex categories (e.g., comparing selection rates between male and female candidates).
    • Race/Ethnicity categories (e.g., comparing selection rates between Hispanic/Latino and Black/African American candidates).
    • Intersectional categories combining sex, ethnicity, and race (e.g., comparing selection rates between Hispanic/Latino males and Black/African American females).
  • If the AEDT classifies candidates or employees into specific groups (e.g., different leadership styles), apply the calculations for each group.
  • Report the number of individuals assessed by the AEDT excluded from the required calculations due to unknown category information.

A category representing less than 2% of the data may be excluded from calculations. The summary must explain the reason for exclusion and include data for the excluded group.

B. Public Disclosure of Annual Bias Audit

Before using an AEDT, employers or employment agencies must make publicly available on their website:

  • The date of the most recent audit,
  • A summary of the results, including:
    • Source and explanation of data used for the audit.
    • The number of individuals assessed falling into an unknown category.
    • Total number of applicants or candidates.
    • Selection or scoring rates.
    • Impact ratios across categories.
  • Distribution date of the AEDT.

The publication requirement can be met by providing an active hyperlink on the website, clearly labeled as a link to the bias audit results and distribution date. This information should be available for at least 6 months after the AEDT’s latest use.

C. Notice to Candidates and Employees

Employers must notify candidates or employees at least 10 business days before using an AEDT. This notice must include:

  • The disclosure that an AEDT is being used to evaluate their application or promotion.
  • The specific job qualifications or characteristics that are being evaluated by the tool.
  • The process for requesting an alternative evaluation method or accommodations if available.
  • Employers must also provide information about the categories of data collected and the tool’s decision-making process if the candidate requests it.

Notification may be sent via email, mail, the employer’s website, or a written policy. By providing notice, individuals are informed about the technology used and how they are being assessed.

D. Data Retention and Transparency

Employers must:

  • Provide clear information on their website regarding AEDT data retention policies, types of data collected, and the source of such data.
  • Include instructions on how to request this information and respond to written requests within 30 days.
  • Provide reasons if disclosure of data would violate local, state, or federal laws or interfere with a law enforcement investigation.

V. Regulatory Authority

The New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) is the regulatory authority for the NYC AEDT law. It is responsible for enforcing compliance, issuing regulations and guidelines, and announcing penalties for noncompliance.

VI. Penalties for Non-Compliance

Employers that fail to comply with NYC AEDT requirements may incur penalties, including:

  • Penalty of up to $500 for the first violation and each additional violation occurring on the same day.
  • Subsequent violations may result in penalties ranging from $500 to $1,500 per violation.

Violations can include failing to provide adequate notice or using an AEDT without a bias audit.

VII. Compliance Strategies for Employers

Employers must take certain actions to ensure compliance with NYC AEDT regulations, especially if they utilize or intend to use AEDTs. These include:

a. Conduct Independent Bias Audits

Employers should conduct comprehensive bias audits in collaboration with independent auditors, including examining its inputs, outputs, and processed data, among other factors.

b. Establish Clear Communication Protocols

Employers must establish a mechanism for notifying candidates and employees about using AEDTs and how it may affect their applications or employment status. The notification must be uniform so that all candidates get the same information transparently.

c. Vendor and Technology Assessment

Employers must examine their AEDT technology, particularly if provided by a third-party. It's critical to evaluate if these providers comply with bias audit requirements and whether their tools ensure adequate transparency.

d. Data Transparency

As a good business practice, employers must disclose AEDT's data sources, the tool's methodology, and the duration of data retention. Additionally, employers must explain, upon request, the precise categories of data assessed by the tool and how it impacts hiring choices.

VIII. Conclusion

As employers rapidly embrace AI technology, ensuring compliance with these rules is crucial to establishing a fair and inclusive workplace. Employers must proactively conduct bias audits, explicitly notify candidates and employees of relevant information, and ensure data transparency.

Analyze this article with AI

Prompts open in third-party AI tools.
Join Our Newsletter

Get all the latest information, law updates and more delivered to your inbox



More Stories that May Interest You
Videos
View More
Rehan Jalil, Veeam on Agent Commander : theCUBE + NYSE Wired: Cyber Security Leaders
Following Veeam’s acquisition of Securiti, the launch of Agent Commander marks an important step toward helping enterprises adopt AI agents with greater confidence. In...
View More
Mitigating OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025
Generative AI (GenAI) has transformed how enterprises operate, scale, and grow. There’s an AI application for every purpose, from increasing employee productivity to streamlining...
View More
Top 6 DSPM Use Cases
With the advent of Generative AI (GenAI), data has become more dynamic. New data is generated faster than ever, transmitted to various systems, applications,...
View More
Colorado Privacy Act (CPA)
What is the Colorado Privacy Act? The CPA is a comprehensive privacy law signed on July 7, 2021. It established new standards for personal...
View More
Securiti for Copilot in SaaS
Accelerate Copilot Adoption Securely & Confidently Organizations are eager to adopt Microsoft 365 Copilot for increased productivity and efficiency. However, security concerns like data...
View More
Top 10 Considerations for Safely Using Unstructured Data with GenAI
A staggering 90% of an organization's data is unstructured. This data is rapidly being used to fuel GenAI applications like chatbots and AI search....
View More
Gencore AI: Building Safe, Enterprise-grade AI Systems in Minutes
As enterprises adopt generative AI, data and AI teams face numerous hurdles: securely connecting unstructured and structured data sources, maintaining proper controls and governance,...
View More
Navigating CPRA: Key Insights for Businesses
What is CPRA? The California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) is California's state legislation aimed at protecting residents' digital privacy. It became effective on January...
View More
Navigating the Shift: Transitioning to PCI DSS v4.0
What is PCI DSS? PCI DSS (Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard) is a set of security standards to ensure safe processing, storage, and...
View More
Securing Data+AI : Playbook for Trust, Risk, and Security Management (TRiSM)
AI's growing security risks have 48% of global CISOs alarmed. Join this keynote to learn about a practical playbook for enabling AI Trust, Risk,...

Spotlight Talks

Spotlight 59:11
Data Controls for AI: Findings from the 2026 GigaOm DSPM Research
Watch Now View
Spotlight 1:02:06
Consent by proxy: When AI agents start deciding for us
Watch Now View
Spotlight 1:00:41
Future-Proofing for the Privacy Professional
Watch Now View
Spotlight 50:52
From Data to Deployment: Safeguarding Enterprise AI with Security and Governance
Watch Now View
Spotlight 11:29
Not Hype — Dye & Durham’s Analytics Head Shows What AI at Work Really Looks Like
Not Hype — Dye & Durham’s Analytics Head Shows What AI at Work Really Looks Like
Watch Now View
Spotlight 11:18
Rewiring Real Estate Finance — How Walker & Dunlop Is Giving Its $135B Portfolio a Data-First Refresh
Watch Now View
Spotlight
Choosing the Right DSPM: An Industry Analyst’s Perspective
Watch Now View
Spotlight 13:38
Accelerating Miracles — How Sanofi is Embedding AI to Significantly Reduce Drug Development Timelines
Sanofi Thumbnail
Watch Now View
Spotlight 10:35
There’s Been a Material Shift in the Data Center of Gravity
Watch Now View
Spotlight 14:21
AI Governance Is Much More than Technology Risk Mitigation
AI Governance Is Much More than Technology Risk Mitigation
Watch Now View
Latest
EU Digital Sovereignty View More
EU Digital Sovereignty is Moving from Policy to Procurement: What Organizations Need to Know
Digital sovereignty in Europe is moving from policy ambition toward something much more concrete: a framework that can determine how cloud services are assessed,...
Australia’s Office of AI: Why Annual Audits Miss What Your AI Can Reach View More
Australia’s Office of AI: Why Annual Audits Miss What Your AI Can Reach
Picture this: a fictional but entirely plausible scenario. An Australian financial institution's AI systems spend six months accessing a customer data repository nobody has...
Metadata Management View More
What Is Metadata Management? Definition, Benefits & Best Practices
Metadata management is the control plane for enterprise data. Securiti’s latest blog explains how it works, why passive catalogs go stale, and how it...
IAB EU TCF v2.4: What Organizations Need to Know View More
IAB EU TCF v2.4: What Organizations Need to Know
Learn what’s changing in IAB Europe’s TCF v2.4, how it affects consent management for publishers and vendors, and steps to prepare for compliance.
From Compliance to Continuous Assurance View More
From Compliance to Continuous Assurance: The Next Era of Saudi Data Protection
PDPL compliance didn’t end with the deadline. Learn how to comply with SDAIA enforcement requirements, govern cross-border transfers, and prepare your data for AI.
Context Is the New Coverage View More
Context Is the New Coverage
Classification alone can’t secure data and AI. Learn why context like access, usage, and lineage is key to reducing risk across data and AI...
The PDPL Operational Lifecycle View More
The PDPL Operational Lifecycle
Find it. Fix it. Prove it. Repeat. Explore the 10-stage PDPL operational lifecycle, key deadlines, and the evidence regulators expect.
The Toxic Combination Problem in DataAI Risks View More
The Toxic Combination Problem in DataAI Risks
Discover how siloed security alerts create hidden toxic risk combinations and how correlated context helps reduce alert fatigue and uncover compound risks faster.
View More
Take the Data Risk Out of AI
Learn how to prepare enterprise data for safe Gemini Enterprise adoption with upstream governance, sensitive data discovery, and pre-index policy controls.
View More
Navigating HITRUST: A Guide to Certification
Securiti's eBook is a practical guide to HITRUST certification, covering everything from choosing i1 vs r2 and scope systems to managing CAPs & planning...
What's
New