In a move that could reshape how artificial intelligence is deployed in public workplaces across the United States, Washington state lawmakers have advanced House Bill 1622, a proposed law that would require government agencies to negotiate with unions before implementing or modifying AI technologies that affect public employees’ working conditions. If enacted, HB 1622 would be the first law in the nation to mandate collective bargaining over artificial intelligence in the public sector, setting a legal precedent with national implications.
The bill targets a growing concern among labor advocates: that AI tools are increasingly being integrated into employment systems—ranging from scheduling and productivity tracking to performance evaluation and surveillance—without worker input or oversight. These technologies, often implemented in the name of efficiency or cost savings, have been shown in some cases to exacerbate bias, reduce transparency, and undermine worker autonomy. For unionized public employees, HB 1622 would provide a structured, legal mechanism to negotiate not just the implementation of these tools, but also their scope, oversight, and impact on labor rights.
Under current Washington law, decisions related to workplace technology are often considered a management right. That means public employers can adopt algorithmic systems without being required to consult the employees affected. HB 1622 would change that. It proposes that any AI system affecting wages, hours, job evaluations, or work assignments be treated as a mandatory subject of collective bargaining. This reclassification would put AI tools in the same legal category as other core labor issues like pay raises, healthcare benefits, and job classifications.
Legal scholars and labor law experts view the bill as a potential game-changer. By reframing AI use as a labor-management issue, HB 1622 acknowledges that algorithmic decision-making is no longer a distant or purely technical matter—it is, fundamentally, about power, oversight, and worker dignity. Requiring bargaining could compel public agencies to provide transparency about how AI systems work, what data they use, and what safeguards are in place to prevent discrimination or misapplication. It could also create a public record of these negotiations, offering a layer of democratic accountability for technologies that often operate in opacity.
Read Also: https://jurisreview.com/u-s-supreme-court-upholds-worker-protections-in-landmark-employment-ruling/
The implications for public-sector employment are significant. Many state and municipal agencies already use automated tools to manage workloads, assess employee performance, or monitor work activity. Without proper checks, such systems can unfairly penalize workers, automate biased assumptions, or remove human discretion from disciplinary decisions. By mandating union involvement, HB 1622 would give public employees a formal role in determining how—and whether—these systems are used.
From the employer’s perspective, the legislation could introduce new complexities. Agencies would need to consider bargaining timelines, data transparency obligations, and potentially even the modification or delay of AI implementation. However, supporters of the bill argue that these steps are necessary to ensure the ethical deployment of AI. Without worker input, they contend, the rush to automate could lead to a loss of trust, morale, and fairness in public workplaces.
The bill also touches on deeper legal questions about the future of labor law in the digital age. As AI tools become more sophisticated, many traditional definitions of work, supervision, and employment rights are being challenged. HB 1622 suggests that states may begin reasserting labor protections by proactively regulating how emerging technologies intersect with collective bargaining rights.
While the bill still awaits final legislative approval, its momentum reflects broader concerns across the country about unregulated AI use in employment. Public‑sector unions in Washington have rallied behind the bill, and legal observers are watching closely to see whether other states might follow suit. If the measure passes, it could become a template for legislation elsewhere—especially in states where unions play a prominent role in public administration.
As the 2026 legislative session approaches, the future of HB 1622 will offer important insights into how governments, labor unions, and legal systems adapt to the accelerating pace of technological change. At its core, the bill represents a call for democratic control over technologies that affect human lives, work, and dignity—a call that could define the next chapter in U.S. labor law.
