National Institute for Workers’ Rights lays out a five-part framework for meaningful human oversight as California’s Assembly weighs the No Robo Bosses Act of 2026
CONCORD, Calif. — The National Institute for Workers’ Rights (NIWR) today released AI Is Not the Boss of Me: A Meaningful Human Oversight Requirement for Workplace Decisions, a policy brief showing how and why to implement a guarantee that the decision to discipline or fire a worker is made by a human.
Roughly 4 in 10 U.S. workers now receive their schedules or assignments from automated systems that screen, rank, discipline, and terminate them in warehouses, call centers, delivery platforms, hotels, and offices. Most never learn these systems exist. They receive a warning or a termination notice with no way to know whether a human was involved, what data was used, or whether that data was accurate—and because most workers are employed at will, almost no way to challenge it.
“When an algorithm ends someone’s livelihood and no one can say why, we’re living in an unfair, sci-fi version of ‘at will’ employment,” said Jason Solomon, Director of the National Institute for Workers’ Rights. “We are not asking employers to stop using AI. We are asking for the common-sense principle of meaningful human oversight over workplace decisions: specifically, that a human has the final decision on whether a worker loses their job.”
The brief sets out five elements that make the principle operational:
• Human ownership of the decision. A person with authority must review any automated recommendation to discipline or terminate before it is final.
• Notice and transparency. Advance notice that an automated system is in use, and notice after the fact when one drives an adverse decision.
• Data access. Workers can obtain and correct the recent data used against them.
• Appeal. Review by a human not involved in the original decision, backed by a private right of action.
• Anti-retaliation. Workers who assert these rights are protected.
The brief lands as the California Assembly considers SB 947, the No Robo Bosses Act of 2026, which the state Senate passed 29-9 in May. Authored by Sen. Jerry McNerney, SB 947 would bar employers from relying solely on automated systems to fire or discipline workers. It is a narrower successor to SB 7, which Gov. Newsom vetoed last year as “overly broad.”
“California is a major test case for the whole country, and this bill answers the Governor’s objection by focusing on the decisions that matter most,” Solomon said. “A critical test for Governor Newsom is coming when this bill hits his desk: will California lead the way on developing a sensible framework for pro-worker AI? States that move forward on this are on the right side of both public opinion and where the law is heading.”
These requirements are analogous to what employers already do in related contexts. The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act has long required notice, a copy of the report, and a chance to respond before an employer rejects an applicant over a background check. IBM and FedEx have run voluntary appeal processes for decades in largely non-union workforces.
And some jurisdictions are already moving forward with elements of this framework for employment decisions. Seattle and Minnesota now require notice, records access, and human review before app-based workers can be deactivated—and Colorado and Connecticut have already passed notice and data-access requirements for use of these “automated decisions systems” in workplace decisions for all employees.
###
About NIWR. The National Institute for Workers’ Rights is an advocacy organization focused on making it harder for employers to violate workers’ rights and easier for workers to fight back.
