Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ai Protections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Union inserts AI protections into bargaining proposal; parties agree to await state legislation
Summary
Ithaca teachers negotiators added contract language copied from a state bill defining AI and prohibiting displacement of unit members by automated decision‑making systems; district negotiators said they preferred to wait for the legislation to resolve at the state level before adopting district policy.
Get email alerts on the Ai Protections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Union negotiators presented a proposed contract clause mirroring language from a New York bill to prohibit artificial intelligence or automated decision‑making tools from displacing bargaining‑unit employees or reducing their hours, wages, or benefits.
Union negotiators said they “pulled exactly from the bill” and provided the parties with the Senate and Assembly versions; at the time of the session the bill had passed through several committees and was “moving fast,” the union said. The union read the proposed legal text into the record: “artificial intelligence systems and automated decision making tools shall not result in the discharge, displacement, or loss of position, including displacement such as a reduction in hours, wages, or employment benefits due to the members of this unit, nor shall these aforementioned systems result in the transfer of duties or functions performed by members of the unit to artificial intelligence systems or automated decision making tools pursuant to education law.”
District negotiators expressed concern that the state legislature could preempt local policy and said they preferred to “wait and see” the final legislation. One district speaker said it was premature to adopt a district‑level contract clause before the text was finalized in Albany.
The parties did not reach a binding agreement on local contract language; union negotiators said they would “reserve the right” to keep the language until ratification but understood the district’s preference to await final state action.

