Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram
More provisions of Connecticut’s artificial intelligence (AI) law, Public Act 26-15, take effect today (Oct. 1), with broader workplace requirements scheduled to begin next year.
While Connecticut is still implementing the law, legislators are already considering another round of AI regulations. Legislative leaders want tougher rules for AI developers, while labor unions are seeking additional protections for workers affected by the technology.
Connecticut could be writing another set of AI rules before the largest provisions of its current law have had a chance to take effect.
What Takes Effect October 1
The first change concerns large layoffs. Under the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, certain employers must give advance notice of a mass layoff or plant closing. Starting today, an employer sending that notice to Connecticut’s Department of Labor must also disclose whether the layoffs are related to its use of AI or another technological change.
The requirement does not prevent a layoff. It could, however, give the state a better record of where technology is changing employment.
Employers also remain responsible for discriminatory employment decisions made with automated technology. If a company uses software to screen applicants, it cannot dismiss a discrimination claim by saying the computer made it do it.
For consumers, companies that make generative AI systems with more than 1 million monthly users and sell subscriptions in Connecticut must spell out key terms, including limits on use and whether they can reduce or cut off access. Customers must accept those terms in writing when they sign up or renew.
Large AI providers face another rule. When technically and commercially reasonable, they must include information that helps identify certain images, audio and video as computer-generated.
State agencies can still put AI to work, but they must follow state standards when using it to deliver public assistance or perform work that could significantly affect residents’ rights, safety or welfare. Agencies authorized to purchase AI must complete an impact assessment.
Software helping staff answer routine questions is one thing. Software involved in a family’s benefits is another.
More Requirements Are on the Way
Other provisions of the law will take effect over the next two years.
In January 2027, companies offering AI companions — chatbots meant to form an ongoing relationship with users — must add safeguards against responses that encourage self-harm or violence, with additional protections for minors.
The law’s broader workplace notice rules reach employers that roll out AI tools to help make hiring or other job decisions on or after Oct. 1, 2027. If an applicant or worker interacts with one, the employer generally has to say so. It also must give written notice before relying heavily on the tool’s output to make a job decision.
Knowing that AI was used in a hiring decision is useful. It does not tell an applicant whether the decision was fair.
Finally, in January 2028, new rules will limit when online platforms can use a minor’s activity to determine what appears in the child’s feed without parental consent.
Lawmakers Are Already Considering Additional Restrictions
Senate President Martin Looney (D-New Haven), Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff (D-Norwalk) and Sen. James Maroney (D-Milford) want to go further. In July, they praised an Illinois law and called for tougher rules on companies that build AI systems. They want Connecticut to act in 2027.
CBIA Vice President Christopher Davis drew a line lawmakers should keep in mind. He supported limiting oversight of powerful AI models to the companies building them, while warning against imposing those rules on small businesses using tools they bought off the shelf. Looney, Duff and Maroney have not released a Connecticut bill, so whether their proposal would cross that line remains to be seen.
Big labor wants more than notice when AI affects a worker. AFSCME Council 4 Deputy Director Zak Leavy urged lawmakers to make AI’s deployment and use a mandatory subject of collective bargaining.
Connecticut AFL-CIO President Ed Hawthorne proposed language requiring bargaining when AI could affect wages, hours, job duties, discipline or other working conditions. He wanted that requirement to cover municipal employees and teachers, too. Neither proposal became law.
New York put an even tighter restriction on the books. Its law bars covered public-sector employers from handing AI work their employees already do, even when no one’s job is eliminated.
An analysis from the Manhattan Institute warns that New York’s restriction could keep agencies from using AI to improve public services.
Public employees deserve fair treatment when their jobs change. They do not own every task the government currently pays them to perform. If software can clear a backlog or get residents an answer faster, let the agency use it. If it wrongly denies someone a benefit, the agency, not the software, must answer for that decision.
Lawmakers return in January with a UConn study of AI’s effect on Connecticut jobs due just before the session and recommendations from their AI working group due in February. Those reports may identify problems worth fixing. Before adding restrictions, lawmakers should be able to name the harm they would prevent and explain what useful work their rules might hold up.
Connecticut has plenty of experience making people wait on government. It doesn’t need an AI law that makes them wait longer.
Stay updated with the latest in the Constitution State with The CT Centinal
