Employers covered by the New York State WARN Act should take note of a recent change that adds a new reporting requirement to the mass layoff and closure notification process. While the federal WARN Act applies to employers with 100 or more employees and requires 60 days’ notice for layoffs affecting at least 50 employees at a single site, New York’s law is broader. It applies to employers with 50 or more employees and covers layoffs involving 25 or more workers or at least one-third of the workforce at a specific location.
In addition to providing 90 days’ advance notice to affected employees, employers must also notify the state. Under amended enforcement regulations, the state’s WARN submission process has been updated to include a new question asking whether artificial intelligence or algorithmic tools were used to support or inform the layoff decision.
Updates to WARN Submission
The New York State Department of Labor (DOL) has updated its WARN notice submission form to include a required question asking whether any form of artificial intelligence or algorithmic decision-making was used in determining which employees were selected for layoff. Employers must respond “yes” or “no” and, if applicable, provide a brief explanation. This new question is now part of the standard electronic WARN filing process through the DOL portal.
While the AI-related disclosure may seem straightforward, its inclusion represents a notable policy development. New York is the first state to formally inquire about the use of AI in workforce reduction decisions, reflecting increasing scrutiny of how emerging technologies influence employment outcomes. The DOL has not yet provided guidance on what qualifies as “algorithmic decision-making,” but employers are advised to interpret the term broadly. This may include tools that automate employee evaluation, such as systems that rank employees based on performance metrics, attendance, or role redundancy, even if those tools were not the sole factor in the decision-making process.
Employers should also consider whether AI played an indirect role. For instance, if data generated by an AI system was used to inform discussions about a reduction in force, that may still warrant disclosure. In the absence of a clear definition, it is advisable to err on the side of transparency, particularly if the information could be subject to later review.
It remains unclear how the DOL intends to use the information it collects. The agency has not stated whether it plans to audit, analyze, publish, or share the AI disclosures with other jurisdictions. Until additional guidance is issued, employers should treat the disclosure as part of the public record and ensure that responses are accurate, legally vetted, and consistent with the organization’s overall risk approach.
Next Steps for Employers
This new requirement has implications for human resources, legal, and compliance teams involved in workforce planning. Employers should begin by evaluating whether any AI tools, systems, or vendors were involved in the reduction in force (RIF) process, directly or indirectly. If such tools were used, companies should verify that the selection criteria were job-related, validated, and did not create an adverse impact on protected groups.
In addition, employers should review and update internal WARN checklists and procedures to ensure the new AI disclosure requirement is captured in the planning process. Human resources and compliance staff may also benefit from targeted training on identifying and documenting the use of AI in employment decisions.
Multistate employers should view this development as a potential indicator of broader trends. As AI continues to shape workforce management practices, other jurisdictions may follow New York’s lead in requiring disclosures or imposing guardrails around its use. Employers who invest now in documenting their processes, validating AI tools, and developing responsible governance protocols will be better equipped to navigate evolving regulatory expectations.
