Federal Lawmakers Release Discussion Draft of Great American AI Act with Potential Workplace Implications

On June 4, 2026, Federal lawmakers released a discussion draft of the Great American Artificial Intelligence Act of 2026, a bipartisan proposal intended to create a federal framework for artificial intelligence governance. While much of the proposal focuses on frontier AI systems, cybersecurity, research, education, and national AI competitiveness, several provisions are directly relevant to employers, HR professionals, and workforce planning.

At this stage, the proposal is not law and does not require immediate changes to employer policies or practices. However, it is notable because it reflects growing federal attention on how AI may affect workers, job duties, layoffs, retraining, and future workforce development programs.

Proposed AI-Related WARN Act Disclosure

The proposal would amend the Federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, commonly known as the WARN Act, to require additional disclosures when AI is a substantial factor in a covered mass layoff. In that situation, the employer’s WARN notice would need to identify the type and use of AI involved, provide a good-faith estimate of the percentage of employment loss attributable to AI, and describe any upskilling or retraining efforts taken before the layoff.

This provision would not apply to every technology-related layoff. It would apply only to covered WARN Act events where AI substantially contributed to the employment loss. For employers, the proposal highlights the importance of documenting AI-related workforce decisions, including the business rationale, the role AI played, and whether retraining or redeployment options were considered.

Increased Focus on AI Workforce Data and Forecasting

The draft legislation also includes provisions focused on studying AI’s impact on the labor market, including directing federal agencies to analyze AI-sensitive occupations, develop employment forecasts, and evaluate how AI may automate or augment certain tasks and roles.

For employers, this could eventually provide useful data for workforce planning, job redesign, succession planning, reskilling, and recruiting strategies. While these provisions would not impose direct compliance obligations on most employers, they signal that AI-related workforce planning is becoming a federal policy priority.

Retraining and Worker Adjustment Assistance

The proposal would also require a study on a potential Rapid Artificial Intelligence Adjustment Assistance Program to examine how workers impacted by AI could be identified and supported through retraining, reemployment, income support, or other transition programs.

For employers, this reinforces that AI adoption is increasingly being viewed as a workforce transition issue, not just a technology issue. Employers considering AI tools should evaluate training, job redesign, redeployment, and transition support before moving to job eliminations.

AI Whistleblower and Anti-Retaliation Considerations

The proposal also includes anti-retaliation protections for certain individuals who report AI-related violations or participate in related investigations or proceedings. For employers, this reinforces the importance of maintaining effective reporting channels and ensuring that complaint, ethics, compliance, and anti-retaliation policies are broad enough to cover AI-related concerns, including bias, data privacy, accuracy, unauthorized use, or unsafe deployment.

State AI Laws Still Need to Be Monitored

The draft includes a federal preemption provision aimed at state laws that specifically regulate AI model development. However, the proposal states that it would not preempt state laws that apply to activities occurring upon or after deployment of an AI model, including laws governing the implementation, deployment, distribution, offering, or use of AI systems, products, or services.

This distinction matters for employers. Many state and local employment-related AI laws focus on how AI tools are used in hiring, promotion, performance management, or other employment decisions. Based on the current draft, employers should not assume that the proposal would eliminate the need to comply with existing or emerging state and local employment AI laws.

Employers using AI in employment-related decisions should continue monitoring requirements related to notice, bias audits, impact assessments, human review, recordkeeping, and anti-discrimination protections in the jurisdictions where they operate.

What Employers Should Do Now

Because the Great American AI Act is still a discussion draft, employers do not need to make immediate compliance changes based solely on the proposal. However, employers using or considering AI should take steps now to strengthen governance and reduce future risk.

Employers should identify where AI is being used in HR and workforce decisions, document the business purpose for each tool, confirm the role of human review, assess vendor responsibilities, and ensure safeguards are in place to reduce discriminatory or inaccurate outcomes. Where AI may affect staffing levels or job duties, employers should also evaluate training, redeployment, or job redesign options before moving to reductions in force.

Employers should also continue monitoring federal, state, and local AI developments, as the draft reflects the growing role of AI-related workforce impacts in employment law and HR compliance.

How HR Works Can Help

HR Works can assist employers with evaluating AI use in the workplace, developing AI policies and governance practices, reviewing employment-related AI risks, supporting workforce planning efforts, and monitoring federal, state, and local compliance developments. Employers considering AI tools or workforce changes connected to AI should ensure their approach is documented, consistent, and aligned with applicable employment laws.

Contact us to learn more about how HR Works can support your AI compliance efforts.