evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

New York City Local Law 144 — AI Hiring Bias Audit Mandate

United States of America · New York City · See the United States of America profile · See the New York City profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 80% 37/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

NYC's Local Law 144 (2021), the first law to require bias audits of AI hiring tools by sex and race, took effect July 2023. A 2024 study of 391 employers found only 4.6% posted audit reports; a 2025 state audit called enforcement 'ineffective'.

391 employers
Employers surveyed in compliance study (2024)
4.6 %
Employers that posted required bias audit report (2024)
3.3 %
Employers that posted required transparency notice (2024)
75 %
311 hotline test calls about AEDT complaints misrouted (2025)
2 complaints
Formal AEDT complaints received by DCWP (Jul 2023–2025 (two-year audit period))
500–1,500 USD
Penalty range per violation
New York City Local Law 144 — AI Hiring Bias Audit Mandate New York City Local Law 144 — AI Hiring Bias Audit Mandate

Details

Promoter
NYC Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP)
Period
Enacted December 2021; enforced July 2023–present
Keywords
algorithmic accountability, employment law, AI governance, gender & race equity

Context

New York City's Local Law 144, enacted in December 2021 and enforced since July 2023, was the first law in the world to mandate independent bias audits of AI-based hiring tools (Automated Employment Decision Tools, or AEDTs) by sex and race.

Objectives

To increase transparency and accountability around algorithmic hiring bias by requiring employers to test their AI hiring tools for disparate impact by sex and race, disclose results publicly, and inform candidates of their right to an alternative process.

Activities

Employers using an AEDT must commission an independent annual bias audit calculating selection and scoring rates by sex, race/ethnicity and their intersections, publish a summary of results, and notify candidates when an AEDT is used. The NYC Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) is responsible for enforcement, including a complaints hotline and civil penalties of US$500–1,500 per violation.

Results

Independent evidence of compliance is weak. A 2024 peer-reviewed study tracking 391 New York employers found only about 4.6% had posted a bias audit report and about 3.3% had posted the required transparency notice. A December 2025 New York State Comptroller audit found that 75% of test calls to the city's complaints hotline were misrouted, that DCWP's own review of posted audits missed most of the compliance issues later found by the Comptroller, and that only two formal complaints were received in the law's first two years of enforcement.

Conclusions

Local Law 144 remains an influential first-mover model for framing algorithmic hiring bias as a sex- and race-equity issue, but the available evidence indicates that transparency-only, employer-self-scoped regulation has not yet produced verifiable compliance or measurable reductions in hiring bias.

Implementation

Indicative cost
Medium (€50k–€500k)
Time to results
Medium (1–3 years)

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful