House subcommittee hears calls for stronger AI guardrails to protect workers
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Witnesses and Democratic members urged transparency, human review, and worker and union involvement in workplace AI, citing surveillance, wage-setting algorithms and the need to update enforcement capacity at agencies such as the EEOC and Wage and Hour Division.
The House subcommittee examined how artificial intelligence is being used in workplaces and whether federal policy should step in to protect workers.
Tanya Goleman, a fellow at Workshop, told the panel that ‘‘workers are already experiencing harms’’ from algorithmic management, including use of AI to set pay and monitor employees. She cited surveys and sector-specific examples — from call centers to health care — to argue for disclosures when AI affects employment, human review of significant employment decisions, and testing systems for bias. ‘‘Workers and their unions should have a role in these processes,’’ Goleman said.
Rivanna Shifuddin, a research fellow at the Marketa Center at George Mason University, recommended adding an AI supplement to the Current Population Survey so federal statisticians can track how workers use AI and which job tasks it alters. ‘‘Good policy requires good data, and we currently don’t have it,’’ she said.
Members of the subcommittee pressed the need to strengthen enforcement. Goleman said worker-protection agencies are under-resourced: ‘‘The EEOC has 1,000 fewer investigators than it had in 1980,’’ and Wage and Hour had about 600 investigators for 165 million workers as of May 2025, she said, arguing agencies need staff and technologists to inspect algorithmic decision-making.
Democratic members including Rep. Macbeth and Rep. DeSaulnier framed unions as an effective means for workers to shape AI deployment. Macbeth pointed to recent agreements in entertainment unions that protect covered work from being replaced by generative AI, and Goleman and other witnesses said collective bargaining can set local protections and feedback loops.
The hearing did not include votes; members focused on policy options ranging from demanding disclosure and human review to directing impact assessments and improving agency investigatory capacity. The chair left the record open for 14 days for written statements and submitted materials.
The subcommittee will consider testimony and proposals as it weighs potential legislation and requests for additional agency resources.