NYC Local Law 144 and AI hiring tools: a plain guide

Not legal advice
This is a summary of public sources as we read them on October 18, 2026. It is not legal advice, and it does not cover every situation. Laws and rules change. Confirm your obligations with an employment lawyer before you rely on it.

What the law is

Local Law 144 of 2021 regulates automated employment decision tools, or AEDTs. It is enforced by the NYC Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP). According to DCWP's FAQ, the law took effect on January 1, 2023 and enforcement began on July 5, 2023. DCWP's rules, in Title 6 of the Rules of the City of New York, fill in the details.

In short, an employer or employment agency may not use an AEDT for a covered job unless the tool had a bias audit within the past year, a summary of that audit is public, and the required notices have been given.

What counts as an AEDT

DCWP's FAQ describes an AEDT as a computer-based tool that does all three of these things:

• uses machine learning, statistical modeling, data analytics or artificial intelligence;
• helps employers or employment agencies make employment decisions; and
• substantially assists or replaces discretionary decision-making.

The rules define "substantially assist or replace" narrowly. In plain terms, it covers relying only on the tool's output (a score, tag, classification or ranking) with no other factors; using that output as one of several criteria but weighting it more than any other; or using it to overrule conclusions from other factors, including a person's judgment. Whether a given tool meets that test depends on how you use it, which is a question for your lawyer.

"Employment decision" includes screening, not only the final offer. The FAQ also says the requirements do not apply to scanning a resume bank or outreach to people who have not applied for a specific position.

Who it applies to

The law applies to tools used "in the city". Per the FAQ, that means:

• the job is located at an office in New York City, at least part time; or
• the job is fully remote but associated with a NYC office; or
• the employment agency using the tool is located in NYC, or one of the above is true.

Notice duties apply to candidates and employees who live in New York City. The FAQ is clear that the employer or employment agency is responsible for compliance, not the vendor that built the tool.

The bias audit

A bias audit is an impartial evaluation by an independent auditor. At a minimum, according to the FAQ, it must calculate:

• selection rates or scoring rates, and
• impact ratios,
• across sex categories, race and ethnicity categories, and intersectional categories (for example, Hispanic or Latino women).

The rules define the terms. A selection rate is the share of a category that the tool moves forward or classifies into a group. For tools that produce a score, the scoring rate is the share of a category that scores above the median score of everyone assessed. The impact ratio is a category's selection rate divided by the selection rate of the most selected category, or its scoring rate divided by the scoring rate of the highest scoring category.

Other points from the FAQ worth knowing:

• Timing: the audit can be relied on for one year. You need one done within the past year before each use.
• Data: it must use historical data from real use of the tool. If there is not enough, test data or pooled data from other employers using the same tool can be used, under conditions. Demographics cannot be inferred or imputed.
• Small categories: a category that makes up less than 2% of the data can be left out of the calculations.
• Independence: the auditor cannot work for you or the vendor, cannot have been involved in building, using or distributing the tool, and cannot have a financial interest in either.
• Vendor audits: a vendor can commission an independent audit of its tool, but you remain responsible for making sure one exists.
• Results: the law does not require specific action based on results, but anti-discrimination laws still apply.

What you must publish

Before using the tool, publish on the employment section of your website (or link to) a summary with:

• the date of the most recent bias audit;
• the source and an explanation of the data used;
• the number of people assessed who fall into an unknown category;
• the number of applicants or candidates, the selection or scoring rates, and the impact ratios for all categories; and
• the date you started using the tool (the "distribution date").

Candidate notices

For candidates and employees who live in NYC, the law and FAQ require you to tell them:

• that an AEDT will be used to assess them, and the job qualifications and characteristics it will assess;
• how to request an alternative selection process or a reasonable accommodation;
• at least 10 business days before the tool is used, in the job posting, by mail or email, or on the employment section of your website.

The law also requires information about the type of data collected, its source and your data retention policy. If that is not on your website, a candidate can ask in writing and you must provide it within 30 days.

Penalties and enforcement

The law sets a civil penalty of up to $500 for a first violation (and each additional violation the same day), and $500 to $1,500 for each later violation. A December 2025 audit by the New York State Comptroller found that DCWP had received only two AEDT complaints between July 2023 and June 2025, and that DCWP's review of 32 companies found one issue of non-compliance where the auditors found at least 17 instances of potential non-compliance. Complaints go to DCWP through 311; discrimination claims involving these tools go to the NYC Commission on Human Rights.

Federal law still applies

Local Law 144 sits on top of federal anti-discrimination law, not in place of it. Under the federal Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures, agencies generally treat a selection rate for any race, sex or ethnic group that is less than four-fifths (80%) of the highest group's rate as evidence of adverse impact. The EEOC's own Q&A calls this a rule of thumb, not a legal definition: a starting point for asking whether a step in your process needs a closer look. Disability law also requires reasonable accommodations, such as more time or another format. Other places, including Illinois, Colorado and the EU, have their own rules on AI in hiring; this guide covers NYC.

Where Infyva stands

We would rather be clear than reassuring:

• Infyva has not had an independent bias audit. If you hire for NYC roles and use Infyva in a way that substantially assists the decision, you need an audit before using it for those roles.
• We have adverse impact tooling. When candidates answer the optional demographic questions, our team can calculate selection and scoring rates and impact ratios by group, flag ratios under 0.80, and leave out groups too small to report. That data can support an independent auditor. Ask legal@infyva.ai.
• People make the decisions. Infyva does not advance or reject anyone. How much weight your team puts on the score is your choice, and it affects whether the law applies.
• Our candidate notice is not your LL144 notice. Candidates see a notice and consent screen before the interview, but the law's 10-business-day notice is yours to give.

Full details of what Infyva scores and does not score are on our AI and fairness page, and our controls are on the security page.

A short checklist

1. List the NYC roles where you would use the tool, and how the score feeds the decision.
2. Ask your lawyer whether that use is an AEDT under the rules.
3. If it is, arrange an independent bias audit and publish the summary and distribution date.
4. Add the notice to job postings or your careers page at least 10 business days before use, with how to request an alternative or accommodation.
5. Publish, or be ready to provide within 30 days, the data type, source and retention policy.
6. Set a reminder to renew the audit within a year.