by Jenna Rode and Cecilia Kim
Jenna N. Rode and Cecilia Kim. Photos courtesy of Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP.
On September 30, 2026, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law California Assembly Bill 1883 (“AB 1883”), which prohibits employers from using certain AI-powered workplace surveillance tools to recognize, predict, or infer employees’ emotional states or to collect employees’ neural data. The law will take effect on January 1, 2027.
AB 1883 defines “workplace surveillance tool” broadly to include any system, application, instrument, or device that collects or facilitates the collection of employee data, activities, communications, actions, biometrics, or behaviors by means other than direct observation by a person. Examples include video or audio surveillance, continuous incremental time-tracking tools, geolocation, electromagnetic tracking, photoelectronic tracking, and similar technologies.
“Neural data” is defined as information generated by measuring the activity of an employee’s central or peripheral nervous system, where that information is not inferred from non-neural information.
Only workplace surveillance tools that use AI are subject to the law’s requirements. AI is defined as an engineered or machine-based system that varies in its level of autonomy and that can, for explicit or implicit objectives, infer from the input it receives how to generate outputs that can influence physical or virtual environments.
AB 1883 contains limited exceptions. The law does not prohibit the use of a workplace surveillance tool that uses AI to ensure safety. It also includes a narrower exemption for certain federal compliance contexts, such as the development of aircraft for use in the national airspace or the development of products or services for national security, military, space, or defense purposes, but only where use of the tool is reasonably necessary to comply with a federal statute, federal regulation, or binding federal contract.
The bill will be enforced by the Labor Commissioner and public prosecutors, who will have the authority to investigate alleged violations, issue citations, and bring civil actions. Employers that violate the bill could face civil penalties of up to $500 per violation.
Jenna N. Rode is Counsel and Cecilia Kim is an Associate at Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP. This post was originally published on the Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP blog.
The views, opinions and positions expressed within all posts are those of the author(s) alone and do not represent those of the Program on Corporate Compliance and Enforcement (PCCE) or of the New York University School of Law. PCCE makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness and validity or any statements made on this site and will not be liable any errors, omissions or representations. The copyright of this content belongs to the author(s) and any liability with regards to infringement of intellectual property rights remains with the author(s).
by Jenna Rode and Cecilia Kim
Jenna N. Rode and Cecilia Kim. Photos courtesy of Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP.
On September 30, 2026, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law California Assembly Bill 1883 (“AB 1883”), which prohibits employers from using certain AI-powered workplace surveillance tools to recognize, predict, or infer employees’ emotional states or to collect employees’ neural data. The law will take effect on January 1, 2027.
AB 1883 defines “workplace surveillance tool” broadly to include any system, application, instrument, or device that collects or facilitates the collection of employee data, activities, communications, actions, biometrics, or behaviors by means other than direct observation by a person. Examples include video or audio surveillance, continuous incremental time-tracking tools, geolocation, electromagnetic tracking, photoelectronic tracking, and similar technologies.
“Neural data” is defined as information generated by measuring the activity of an employee’s central or peripheral nervous system, where that information is not inferred from non-neural information.
Only workplace surveillance tools that use AI are subject to the law’s requirements. AI is defined as an engineered or machine-based system that varies in its level of autonomy and that can, for explicit or implicit objectives, infer from the input it receives how to generate outputs that can influence physical or virtual environments.
AB 1883 contains limited exceptions. The law does not prohibit the use of a workplace surveillance tool that uses AI to ensure safety. It also includes a narrower exemption for certain federal compliance contexts, such as the development of aircraft for use in the national airspace or the development of products or services for national security, military, space, or defense purposes, but only where use of the tool is reasonably necessary to comply with a federal statute, federal regulation, or binding federal contract.
The bill will be enforced by the Labor Commissioner and public prosecutors, who will have the authority to investigate alleged violations, issue citations, and bring civil actions. Employers that violate the bill could face civil penalties of up to $500 per violation.
Jenna N. Rode is Counsel and Cecilia Kim is an Associate at Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP. This post was originally published on the Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP blog.
The views, opinions and positions expressed within all posts are those of the author(s) alone and do not represent those of the Program on Corporate Compliance and Enforcement (PCCE) or of the New York University School of Law. PCCE makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness and validity or any statements made on this site and will not be liable any errors, omissions or representations. The copyright of this content belongs to the author(s) and any liability with regards to infringement of intellectual property rights remains with the author(s).
