On November 8, 2024, the California Privacy Protection Agency (the “Agency” or the “CPPA”) Board met to discuss and commence formal rulemaking on several regulatory subjects, including California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) updates (“CCPA Updates”) and Automated Decisionmaking Technology (ADMT). Shortly thereafter, on November 22, 2024, the CPPA published several rulemaking documents for public review and comment that recently ended February 19, 2025. If adopted, these proposed regulations will make California the next state to regulate AI at a broad and comprehensive scale, in line with Colorado’s SB 24-205, which contains similar sweeping consumer AI protections. Upon consideration of review and comments received, the CPPA Board will decide whether to adopt or further modify the regulations at a future Board meeting. This post summarizes the proposed ADMT regulations, that businesses should review closely and be prepared to act to ensure future compliance.
Article 11 of the proposed ADMT regulations outlines actions intended to increase transparency and consumers’ rights related to the application of ADMT. The proposed rules define ADMT as “any technology that processes personal information and uses computation to execute a decision, replace human decisionmaking, or substantially facilitate human decisionmaking.” The regulations further define ADMT as a technology that includes software or programs, uses the output of technology as a key factor in a human’s decisionmaking (including scoring or ranking), and includes profiling. ADMT does not include technologies that do not execute a decision, replace human decisionmaking, or substantially facilitate human decisionmaking (this includes web hosting, domain registration, networking, caching, website-loading, data storage, firewalls, anti-virus, anti-malware, spam and robocall-filtering, spellchecking, calculators, databases, spreadsheets, or similar technologies). The proposed ADMT regulations will require businesses to notify consumers about their use of ADMT, along with their rationale for its implementation. Businesses also would have to provide explanations on ADMT output in addition to a process for consumers to request to opt-out from such ADMT use.
On May 17, 2024, Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed into law SB 24-205—concerning consumer protections in interactions with artificial intelligence systems—after the Senate passed the bill on May 3, and the House of Representatives passed the bill on May 8. In a letter to the Colorado General Assembly, Governor Polis noted that he signed the bill into law with reservations, hoping to further the conversation on artificial intelligence (AI) and urging lawmakers to “significantly improve” on the law before it takes effect.
SB 24-205 will become effective on February 1 ...
As anticipated, the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment (CDLE) has published proposed updates to its Equal Pay Transparency Rules (the “Updated EPT Rules”), which implement the Colorado legislature’s recent amendments (the “2024 Amendments”) to the Equal Pay for Equal Work Act (the “Act”) that take effect January 1, 2024. Below, we identify four areas in which the Updated EPT Rules provide much-needed clarity to Colorado employers regarding their obligations under the 2024 Amendments.
Defined Terms
The Updated EPT Rules incorporate the 2024 ...
With amendments to the Colorado Equal Pay for Equal Work Act (the “Act”) set to take effect on January 1, 2024 (the “2024 Amendments”), the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment (“CDLE”) has started the process of updating its compliance guidance for employers. The first update comes in the form of a revised Interpretative Notice & Formal Opinion ("INFO") #9, which the CDLE published on July 28, 2023.
Governor Jared Polis recently signed into law legislation (SB 23-105 or the “Amendments”) that will soon change Colorado employers’ disclosure and notice requirements under the state’s Equal Pay for Equal Work Act (“Act”).
As we previously reported, in addition to prohibiting sex-based wage discrimination, the Act requires all employers, regardless of where they are located, with at least one Colorado-based employee to (1) notify their Colorado-based employees of internal opportunities for promotion and (2) disclose salary and benefits information in job postings for all positions that are or can be performed in Colorado. The Amendments modify the Act by:
In recent years, wage discrimination has been a hot topic and with it, the question of whether employers may rely on a worker’s salary history to justify a pay disparity between male and female employees. In a 2018 case involving the federal Equal Pay Act (“EPA”), Rizo v. Yovino, (about which we wrote here), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (“Ninth Circuit”) ruled that employers may not rely on prior salary to excuse unequal pay. On petition, the Supreme Court vacated the decision and remanded the case on a technical ground (i.e., because the judge who ...
As we explained in an earlier post, the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment (“DLE”) has issued new Health Emergency Leave with Pay (“HELP”) Rules in response to the coronavirus. Effective March 11, 2020, the HELP Rules mandate employers provide four (4) days of paid sick leave for employees in certain industries who have flu-like symptoms to receive COVID-19 testing. The DLE has since released FAQs to clarify some ambiguities in the HELP Rules.
Four Calendar Days of Paid Sick Time
Per the FAQs, the four days of paid sick leave are measured in calendar days. This ...
On March 10, 2020, Colorado Governor Jared Polis issued an executive order directing he Colorado Department of Labor and Employment (“DLE”) to create emergency rules to “ensure workers in food handling, hospitality, child care, health care, and education can get paid sick leave to miss work if they exhibit flu-like symptoms and have to miss work awaiting testing results for COVID-19.”
The DLE issued the Colorado Health Emergency Leave with Pay (“HELP”) Rules, which mandates four days of paid sick leave for employees in certain industries who have flu-like symptoms to ...
New York is the latest state to adopt a law that requires businesses that collect private information on its residents to implement reasonable cybersecurity safeguards to protect that information. New York now joins California, Massachusetts and Colorado in setting these standards. New York’s law mandates the implementation of a data security program, including measures such as risk assessments, workforce training and incident response planning and testing. Businesses should immediately begin the process to comply with the Act’s requirements effective March 21, 2020 ...
Colorado has joined a growing movement of states in passing laws that provide greater protections to employees and job applicants. Among these are the Equal Pay for Equal Work Act and a ban the box law, which limits criminal history inquiries for job applicants. The following is a breakdown of Colorado’s newest employment laws and how their implementation may impact employers and employees alike.
Equal Pay
Effective January 1, 2021, the Equal Pay for Equal Work Act (the “Act”) will expressly prohibit employers from paying employees of different genders different wages for ...
Our colleague Amanda M. Gomez
Following is an excerpt:
Additionally, employers that can demonstrate a good faith effort through proactive measures to comply with the Act may be able to mitigate liability should a claim arise. Similar to “safe harbor” provisions in equal pay laws in Massachusetts and Oregon, such ...
Our colleague Amanda M. Gomez
Following is an excerpt:
Additionally, employers that can demonstrate a good faith effort through proactive measures to comply with the Act may be able to mitigate liability should a claim arise. Similar to “safe harbor” provisions in equal pay laws in Massachusetts and Oregon ...
On June 4, the Supreme Court voted 7-2 in favor of a Christian Colorado baker and owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, who had refused to create a custom wedding cake for a gay couple due to his religious objections to gay marriage.
Although the case previously had been litigated on free speech grounds, the Court’s opinion largely avoids this constitutional question, and does not address whether Title VII prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation. Instead, the decision focuses on the Colorado Civil Rights Commission’s decision finding against Masterpiece Cakeshop and ...
Blog Editors
Recent Updates
- New York City Employers: It’s Time to Post Your Lactation Policy
- Podcast: Trade Secrets on Trial - Strategic Decisions for the Courtroom – Employment Law This Week
- Video: 100 Days In - What Employers Need to Know - Employment Law This Week
- New Federal Agency Policies and Protocols for Artificial Intelligence Utilization and Procurement Can Provide Useful Guidance for Private Entities
- Video: Non-Competes Eased, Anti-DEI Rule Blocked, Contractor Rule in Limbo - Employment Law This Week