New York City Local Law 144 of 2021 applies to employers and employment agencies that use an automated employment decision tool (AEDT) for hiring or promotion decisions in the city. In outline, the tool must have had a bias audit within the year before use, a summary of the results must be public, and candidates and employees must receive notice. The city’s Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) enforces the law.
Key takeaways
- The law covers tools that support or replace human judgment in hiring and promotion for jobs in New York City.
- A bias audit must be done within one year before the tool is used, and a summary of the results must be made public.
- Candidates and employees must receive notice. DCWP guidance says notice must be given 10 business days before use.
- DCWP enforces the law, and anyone can file a complaint.
- If you do not use any scoring or ranking tool, the law may not apply. Check the definitions in the official text.
What the law is
Local Law 144 is a city law. It does not ban automated tools. It sets conditions for using them: independent testing for bias, public information, and notice to the people affected. The city describes the requirements on its DCWP page on automated employment decision tools, which links to the law, the rule and a set of frequently asked questions. Read those documents; this guide is a plain-language orientation and not a substitute.
According to the city page, DCWP began enforcing the law and the rule on July 5, 2023. The page also records that DCWP held roundtables in May 2023 and clarified in June 2023 that the notice must be provided 10 business days before the tool is used. Rules and guidance can change, so check the page before you rely on this summary.
Who is covered
The law covers employers and employment agencies. Based on the city’s description, it applies where such a tool is used to make employment decisions about candidates or employees for jobs in New York City. Where the job is located matters. A company outside the city may be covered if the job is in the city. Remote roles raise questions that you should put to a lawyer.
What is an automated employment decision tool?
The law defines an AEDT using a few elements. In general, it is a computational process derived from machine learning, statistical modelling, data analytics or artificial intelligence that produces a simplified output, such as a score, classification or recommendation, and that is used to substantially assist or replace discretionary decision-making. The text of the law and the DCWP rule explain these words in detail, including what “substantially assist” means. Read them for your tool.
| Tool example (generic) | Likely question to ask |
|---|---|
| A resume screening tool that ranks applicants by a score | Does the score substantially assist or replace discretionary decisions? Likely to be considered |
| A tool that highlights CV text next to job requirements for a person to read | Does it produce a score, classification or recommendation? If it only shows evidence and a person decides, ask a lawyer how the definition applies |
| A scheduling tool | Does it evaluate candidates? Probably not |
| A video interview tool that scores speech or facial features | Likely to be covered if it produces a score or recommendation that informs the decision |
| A job board that recommends jobs to candidates | The law concerns decisions about candidates, not job recommendations. Check the definition |
This table gives questions, not legal conclusions. A tool’s design and your use both matter. Ask your vendor and your adviser.
The three main duties
1. A bias audit
The city page states that a tool may be used only if it has undergone a bias audit within one year before its use. The audit must be done by an independent auditor. The rule describes the calculations the audit must include; in general, these compare how the tool’s results differ between groups defined by sex and by race and ethnicity categories. Read the rule for the exact method and for how to treat small groups and intersectional categories. An audit report is not a guarantee that a tool is fair, but it is a legal condition of use.
2. A public summary
Information about the audit must be publicly available, and a summary of results must be posted. Check the rule for where it must appear and what it must show. Many employers link it from their careers page.
3. Notice to candidates and employees
Candidates and employees who live in the city must receive notice that a tool will be used, and DCWP guidance says to give it at least 10 business days before use. The rule lists what the notice contains, which includes information about the job qualifications and characteristics the tool will assess and, on request, about the data it uses. It also addresses how a person can request an alternative selection process or a reasonable accommodation where available. Read the rule text for the current wording.
What to do in practice
- List every tool used in hiring and promotion for New York City jobs. Include screening, chatbots, video tools and assessments.
- Classify each one. Does it produce a score, classification or recommendation? Does it substantially assist or replace human judgment? Write the reason.
- Ask each vendor for an audit. Request the audit date, the auditor, the summary and the data it used. If the audit is more than a year old, it does not meet the condition for continued use.
- Check the data in the audit. An audit that uses data from other employers may be allowed by the rule in some cases. Ask your adviser how it applies to you.
- Publish the summary. Put it on a page that candidates can find, and keep a record of when it was posted.
- Send the notice. Build it into the application flow or the invitation. Keep a record of when each notice was sent.
- Set up an alternative route. Decide how a person can ask for another process or an adjustment, and who answers.
- Train recruiters. They should be able to answer a candidate’s question about the tool and the notice.
- Review each year. Put the audit date in a calendar with a reminder.
Enforcement and complaints
DCWP enforces the law. According to the city page, workers and others can file a complaint online, including about a missing audit, a missing audit summary or missing notices. The law and rule set the penalties; read them rather than relying on summaries. Treat a complaint as a chance to fix a process. Keep your records ready: tool list, audit reports, publication dates and notice logs.
Other laws that still apply
Passing a bias audit does not remove other duties. Federal anti-discrimination law covers decisions made with or without tools. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission explains the statutes on its page on Title VII and the principles for selection procedures in 29 CFR Part 1607, the Uniform Guidelines. Enforcement priorities on disparate impact at the federal level have changed since 2025, but the statutes and state and city laws remain. Our guide to the four-fifths rule explains one common screening statistic and its limits.
Other places have their own rules, and new ones are being proposed. In Illinois and some other states, laws address AI in employment or video interviews. In the EU, the AI Act covers some hiring systems, and in the UK and EU, data protection rules on automated decisions apply. See our guides on GDPR Article 22 and the EU AI Act and hiring tools. Check the current position in each place you hire.
Questions for your vendor
- Do you consider your product an AEDT under Local Law 144? Why or why not?
- When was the latest bias audit, who did it, and where is the public summary?
- Which data did the auditor use? Can you share the full report under an agreement?
- Can we turn off any scoring or ranking function?
- Can you supply text for the candidate notice and support the alternative process?
- How will you tell us if the product changes in a way that affects the audit?
Our guide to choosing recruiting software includes 25 questions for vendors, several of them on automated features.
FastHire is being built to keep people in charge. It shows each job requirement next to the exact CV passage that supports it. FastHire does not rank, score or reject candidates. People make every decision. FastHire is coming soon, and we will publish our approach to fairness testing when it is ready.
A compliance log you can keep
A simple log helps you show that you followed the rules. Keep one row for each tool.
| Tool | Used for | Counts as AEDT? (reason) | Audit date | Auditor | Summary link | Notice added to | Alternative route | Next review |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Example screening tool (fictional) | Screening for NYC roles | Yes, produces a score used in decisions | Date | Auditor name | Link | Application page and invitation email | Email to a named contact | Date |
| Example scheduling tool (fictional) | Booking interviews | No, does not evaluate candidates | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | Date |
Fill the log from your own facts. Have a lawyer check the classification column. Keep copies of notices as they appeared on the day. If a tool changes, update the log and ask the vendor whether the audit still applies.
Wording for a candidate notice (outline only)
The rule sets the required content, so check it. In plain terms, a notice should say that an automated tool will be used in the assessment, which job qualifications and characteristics the tool will assess, and how to ask for another process or an adjustment. It should also say how to ask about the data the tool collects. Keep it short and put it where candidates see it before they apply or are assessed. Have a lawyer approve the final text.
Notice about automated tools
We use [tool name], an automated tool, to help review applications for [role] in New York City. The tool looks at [qualifications and characteristics it assesses]. A person makes the final decision.
A summary of the latest bias audit is at [link].
If you would like us to use a different process, or if you need an adjustment, write to [email] at least [number] business days before [date].
Only use wording that matches the tool and your process. If the tool does more than the notice says, the notice is wrong.
Plan the timing too. If notice must be given before a tool is used, build it into your process early: in the job advert, in the application form or in the first email. Do not add the notice after the tool has already run. Also plan for what happens if a candidate asks for an alternative process. Decide who handles the request, what the alternative looks like, such as a manual review of the CV by two people, and how long it takes, so the candidate is not disadvantaged by asking.
Frequently asked questions
Does Local Law 144 apply to my company if we are outside New York City?
It can apply if the job is located in the city. Remote roles and mixed roles raise questions that a lawyer should answer.
Is a bias audit a legal guarantee of fairness?
No. It is a legal condition of use under the city law, and it measures differences in outcomes between groups. Other laws still apply to your decisions.
Do I need to give notice if a person makes the final decision?
The law applies to tools that substantially assist or replace discretionary decisions, so a human final step does not by itself remove the duty. Ask a lawyer how the definition applies to your tool.
Where can I find the official text?
On the DCWP page linked in this guide, which links to the law, the rule and the FAQ.
Do other US cities have similar laws?
Some states and cities have passed or proposed laws on AI in hiring. Check the official sources for each place where you hire.
Related guides
- Hiring guides for fair and compliant hiring
- Automated decisions about applicants under GDPR Article 22
- Data protection impact assessments for hiring tools
- The four-fifths rule in hiring
- All hiring guides for employers
- US law on AI and hiring: what employers should know
This is general information, not legal advice.