Employers and employment agencies must obtain an independent bias audit before using an automated employment decision tool
Context fileUnder NYC Local Law 144 (automated employment decision tools), NYC Administrative Code Section 20-871(a)(1); 6 RCNY Section 5-301
What does it require?
An automated employment decision tool may not be used to screen candidates or employees for hiring or promotion in New York City unless it has been the subject of a bias audit by an independent auditor within the year before use. The audit calculates selection rates and impact ratios by sex, race/ethnicity and their intersections, and scoring-rate comparisons for tools that score rather than select, using the employer's historical data or, where insufficient, test data as the DCWP rules allow.
Practical action
Commission an annual independent bias audit for each tool, supplying historical outcome data by protected category, and calendar the twelve-month expiry.
Who does it apply to?
Employers and employment agencies using an automated employment decision tool for candidates or employees who reside in New York City; vendors are not directly liable but commonly supply the audit.
- Sectors
- Employment and HR
- Use cases
- AI in hiring and employment
Applies from:
Which controls meet this duty?
Satisfies: the control, operated properly, does the work the duty asks for. Supports: it contributes but the duty needs more. Each control page lists every other duty it serves, so work done once can be counted once.
-
satisfiesTechnical measureQuality or testing lead · at launch and on material changeAccuracy, robustness, fairness and security testing
Serves 15 recorded duties · evidence: Pre-release test report, Test plan and acceptance criteria, Release test sign-off
Disparate-impact testing performed by an independent auditor on the statutory metrics.
-
supportsProcessProcurement or vendor risk lead · once per ai systemVendor and third-party AI due diligence
Serves 6 recorded duties · evidence: AI supplier due-diligence assessment, AI supplier and component register, Supplier onboarding decision
Vendor supplies data and audit access for the tool.
What evidence would a reviewer expect?
| Evidence | Type | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Independent bias audit report | report | Impact ratios by category with audit date and auditor independence statement. |
| Audit data extract and category mapping | record |
Framework mappings
Original editorial crosswalks. They cite clause numbers only and reproduce no standard text; confidence reflects how direct the mapping is.
See every New York (United States) duty mapped this way →
| Framework | Reference | Note | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| NIST AI RMF 1.0 | MEASURE 2.11, MEASURE 1.3 | Fairness evaluation by independent assessors. | high |
| ISO/IEC 42001:2023 | Annex A.6.2.4; Clause 9.2 | Verification and validation; independent audit. | medium |
Cite this record
AIPolicyTracker (2026). “Employers and employment agencies must obtain an independent bias audit before using an automated employment decision tool (NYC Local Law 144 (automated employment decision tools))”. https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-new-york-city-local-law-144-bias-audit (accessed 24 September 2026). Data licensed CC BY 4.0.
Cite the official text alongside it: Automated Employment Decision Tools (AEDT), NYC Department of Consumer and Worker Protection, https://www.nyc.gov/site/dca/about/automated-employment-decision-tools.page.
Similar obligations in other instruments
- Achieve appropriate accuracy, robustness and cybersecurity — EU AI Act, European Union
- Providers of systemic-risk GPAI models must secure the model and its infrastructure — EU AI Act, European Union
Informational only, not legal advice. Verify every claim against the linked official sources and consult qualified counsel before acting.