A Closer Look at Algorithmic Bias and Employment: What You Need to Know Ahead of Friday’s Public Hearing

A Closer Look at Algorithmic Bias and Employment: What You Need to Know Ahead of Friday’s Public Hearing

By Ken Wang

With the economy opening back up and a post-pandemic hiring boom around the corner, more and more employers will be turning to artificial intelligence (AI) and algorithms to save costs and streamline hiring and recruitment. Massive data collection, machine learning, and other advanced computational techniques are transforming traditional pre-employment assessments to help employers assess the skills, aptitude, and fit of prospective workers.

So, what do these new technologies mean for workers?

To explore this question, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing will be hosting the first-ever virtual public hearing on algorithms and bias this Friday, April 30th. The hearing will be from 10:00 AM – 3:00 PM PST, with the employment section from 10:00 AM – 11:40 AM. You can RSVP using this link and tune in via Zoom

As employers increasingly move to automating hiring and other HR functions, it is imperative that we explore the growing role of algorithms in the workplace and assess whether our existing labor and employment laws are adequately protecting workers’ rights. For example, websites like Facebook use a vast amount of user information to target ads to a precise audience. Unlike the traditional paper ads placed in the classified section, accessible to all those who pick up the paper, the new world of micro-targeting means you only see opportunities that are targeted to you. Facebook’s “Affinity Group” feature categorizes users based on interests and demographics, allowing advertisers to precisely target their desired audience. This can be used to limit ad delivery to specific age bands, such as those from ages 18-38. 

Consider Facebook’s “Lookalike Audience” feature, which allows the ad buyer to import a “sample audience,” using a variety of data points that includes demographics information, from which Facebook can generate a target ad audience that “looks like” that sample. When used in the employment context, a sample audience with skewed demographics — such as a tech firm with overwhelmingly white, young, and male staff — will result in a target ad audience that is similarly skewed. 

You’d be right to wonder how these features could possibly withstand scrutiny under our anti-discrimination laws. In 2019, Facebook settled a lawsuit brought by national civil rights groups and agreed to make significant changes to the way these features are used for housing, employment, and credit ads.

These Facebook features present obvious issues, but other forms of algorithmic hiring tools can make discrimination virtually impossible to detect. Our friends at Upturn have done a nice overview of the kinds of tools being deployed in each step of the “hiring funnel” — the process by which prospective applicants turn into new hires. Here are a few examples at each stage:

  • At the “screening” stage:
    • Employers may use employee assessment tools to measure the skill, personality, or other traits of applicants. For example, the tool asks applicants to play games to measure traits such as processing speed, memory, and perseverance. The data is used to predict and rank who is the best match with the best performers of the employer’s workforce. 
    • This means that the applicants that are selected to advance will likely mirror the existing workplace demographics.
  • At the “interviewing” stage:
    • Employers may record an applicant’s interview using technology capable of facial recognition. Verbal responses, tone, and facial expressions are recorded to analyze word choice, enthusiasm, and other criteria in order to predict future job performance. 
    • This means that applicants who do not speak English as a first language may perform poorly.
  • At the “selection” stage:
    • Employers may use automated background check tools that trawl for information online in order to flag potential risks in hiring an applicant. For example, a tool can automatically analyze an applicant’s social media history to determine the likelihood of that person to engage in toxic behavior. The tool may also surface information that reveals information that is otherwise protected from disclosure
    • This means that an otherwise qualified applicant may be denied a job because a tool misinterpreted a previous social media post or revealed information about private health information.

These are just a few examples of how AI and algorithms have been used in the employment context. What’s clear is that there is so much more that we don’t know and we hope that Friday’s hearing is the first of many to explore this important topic. As worker advocates, we must ensure that our state agencies are staying engaged on these issues and that our employment laws are developing in a way that keeps pace with these evolving technologies. In addition to Friday’s hearing, you can also view an issue briefing CELA recently co-hosted on this same topic here

About Ken Wang, Esq.

Legislative Policy Associate, California Employment Lawyers Association

新型冠状病毒 – 加州劳工法指南

新型冠状病毒 – 加州劳工法指南

Written by Andy Katz, Translated by Ken Wang

当新型冠状病毒疫情广泛传播之际,许多工薪阶层人士正在思考如何保护他们自己和家庭—同时忧虑他们的工作和财务状况。

正当这篇博文书写之际(2020年3月27日),为力延缓病毒的快速扩散,加州州长纽森(Newsom)已下令,除了关键基础设施部门的工作以外,所有居民应呆在家中。

加州公共卫生局已发布了关于社交间距的建议,敦促年龄在65岁或以上且存在某些健康问题的人士,为高危人群,例如,心脏病、肺病、糖尿病、肾病以及免疫系统脆弱等老年患者。加州地方卫生局,包括Alameda、Contra Costa、San Francisco、San Mateo、 Santa Clara、Santa Cruz 和Sonoma县,指定所有60岁以上的居民为高危人群。加州大学旧金山分校专家建议,“除非紧急情况,所有60岁以上人士应呆在家中。”

这篇博文提供了一个总括有关工人如今所享受的权利,以便大家能权衡工作上的重要决定并让工人了解向雇主提出他们的要求时所需的信息。牢记许多宣传小组,包括加州劳工法律联会(CELA)和美国劳工法律联会(NELA)正在推动国会和州立法会通过立法,所以情况可能迅速改变。以下是有关加州工人在新冠疫情期间劳工权益的问题的重要回复。

失去了工资,如何求助?

如果加州工人因残障或减少工时而失去工资,可以向政府申请工资替代

需要工资替代来支持社交距离和居留在家的雇员,加州有两种福利或许会有帮助——州残障保险(State Disability Insurance – “SDI”)和失业保险(Unemployment Insurance – “UI”),均由就业发展部(Employment Development Department – “EDD”)管理。纽森州长已颁布了特别行政令,对于那些因COVID-19失业或致残的人士,取消通常的一周等待周期。

如果雇主因为COVID-19而关闭工作场所(例如公共卫生令要求居民留在居所),并不出薪或只出一部分薪水,雇员可以申请UI或SDI。失业金代替50%的工资,高达每周$450,应税。最近通过的联邦紧急补救法案(CARES Act)增加了失业金补助。该法案在现有福利的基础上每周增加$600,延长福利领用期至39周(原26周),并且允许从1月27日算起的追溯福利。联邦法律并为每位纳税人提供$1,200的税收抵免和每个小孩$500。年收入$75,000 – $99,000 的人士(或年薪$150,000 – $198,000的夫妇)得到的税收抵免按照收入程度逐步减少。

EDD公布了针对自雇人士和独立承包商如何申请失业金的指引。SDI只适用于那些参加了选修保险的独立承包商。自从加州通过AB5法,被误归类为独立合同工的工人,即便被雇主称为独立合同工,也应享有UI和其他劳工权益。联邦CARES Act为自雇人士提供长达39周的收入损失,从2020年1月27日至12月31日。

SDI规定,任何妨碍工人进行日常工作的疾病或受伤都属于残障保护范围内,福利覆盖由60%-70%工资,至最多每周$1300,共52周,且豁免所得税。一个工人必须不能工作至少8天,且必须在申领福利前提交有医生证明。从因疾病或受伤而停止工作那一天算起,工人可在49天内向EDD申请SDI。

虽然EDD未能确认是否批准高危人群中的申请人引用年龄原因来申请SDI,他们确认那些由于“正在或将要暴露在”COVID-19的人士,并且可提供医学文件证明,则可完成SDI的申索。

高龄工人,指那些根据年龄属于高危人群,且获得与年龄条件相关的“疾病”的医疗证明,或许有资格申领残障福利,尽管目前还没有明确的答案。当医生或保健提供填制残障证明时,他们应该考虑使用“R54”条款,即疾病国际分类法中的“与年龄相关的体质虚弱”,当没有其它确切的症状。

除了残障保险以外,EDD还负责管理有薪家庭假(Paid Family Leave – “PFL”)福利。此福利允许那些因COVID-19照顾患病或隔离的家人而无法工作的州民。申请者必须提供医生证明。PFL提供的工资代替与SDI相同,但最多长达6周。

如果雇主因COVID-19关闭工作场所,包括由于政府居留在家令,并完全不付或只提供支付一部分雇员工资,则工人可以申领失业金,或,符合条件者可申领SDI。UI覆盖大约50%工资,最多至每周$450,应税。

如果孩子的学校因冠状病毒关闭该怎么办?

加州学校紧急假和失业救济(法)或许可以对某些工人提供帮助

如果因为学校关闭而要照顾孩子丢掉工作,你或许符合申领UI的条件。EDD正在对关校申请进行个案到个案的处理,并鼓励那些被雇主减少工时的工人申请UI。UI规定通常要求申请人必须有能力随时恢复工作,EDD尚未决定是否取消该条例。但UI通常的七天等待期已被取消,所以工人可以立即申请UI福利。

上周国会通过了《新型冠状病毒疫家庭保护法》,并在4月3日生效。该法律为工人提供长达12周的假期,高达2/3 的工资替代(最多每日$200,总额$10000)。法律要求有500员工以下得雇主必须提供该福利,但工人必须为该雇主工作起码30天。

加州劳工法也提供休假福利。在同一个工作场所雇佣25位工人以上的雇主必须为员工提供每年长达40小时的假期。该假期只能用于工人因处理孩子在学校或托儿所遇到的紧急情况而需要离开工作。诚然,雇员必须提前知会雇主。

当我得病或需要照顾家庭时?

加州和地方法律对生病或病假提供的保护

生病雇员可获得有薪病假。尽管加州要求雇主提供至少三天的有薪病假,有些城市规定的更多些。如何具体计算生病天数仍取决于雇主的规定。为50或更多雇主服务的雇员,或许有资格获得最长至12周的无薪假期。已回家但被要求工作的雇员,必须得到普通薪水获。在这种情况下,雇主不能扣员工所累积的病假。

2014年健康工作场所和健康家庭法案》规定所有加州雇主,向合资格雇员提供三天有薪病假。Los Angeles、San Diego、San Francisco、Santa Monica、Oakland、Berkeley、和Emeryville各有每年6至9天有薪病假的本地规定。

那些刁难告病假雇员的雇主,依法必须承担违规终止雇佣关系的法律责任。但法律保障的有薪病假依然不够,尤其是当雇员需要隔离14天,或必需面对家庭中高危成员的不确定因素。自从加州通过AB5法,被误归类为独立合同工的工人,也应享有与雇员同样的病假权利,即便被雇主称为独立合同工。被不当分类的雇员,可向法庭或加州劳工部(Department of Labor Standards Enforcement – “DLSE”)提交索赔状。

对于那些服务于至少有50名雇员、工作地点在75英里范围内的单个雇主的人士,根据加州法律,其雇主被要求提供每年12周的保职假期,具体的法律依据来自《家庭医疗假期法案》(FMLA)或《加州家庭权益法案》(CFRA),旨在解决雇员或其家庭成员的严重健康问题。享受此保职假期的条件,要求雇员必须为雇主工作至少满一年,以及在上个日历年度完成工作量1250个小时。至于雇员或其家庭成员一旦染上COVID-19疾病,他们或许可以得到有关医疗假期法律的保护。这些法律或许也保护那些因家里有免疫系统受损的人士而获得医生病假单的工人,因为他们或其家庭成员正在遭受慢性病的影响。

FMLA和CFRA规定的是无薪假期,了解这一点非常重要(尽管SDI或许可以索赔)。

如果我是COVID-19高危人员将如何?

加州的残疾人权利法要求雇主提供合理便利措施

根据加州《公平雇佣和居住法》(Fair Employment and Housing Act – “FEHA”),对于符合残疾资格的雇员,法律要求雇主必须为该雇员提供合理便利措施,例如安排员工居家工作或者提供病假。这里必须具体情况具体分析,但患有免疫系统疾病或有医疗风险的雇员,应主张他们的权利或要求留在能保证安全的措施。

拥有至少5个雇员的加州雇主,必须提供合理便利措施,除非雇主能证明提供该措施将导致对他运作的过度困难。

社区法律援助机构Legal Aid at Work提供了“如何申请合理工作安排”的指南。在申请合理工作安排时最好的做法就是提供残疾和工作安排要求的书面文件,包括医生证明。如果因医疗系统受损而无法提供这类文件,雇员可向雇主解释或提供可资参考的公共信息,证明合理处所的实际需要。比如说,加州公共卫生局鼓励高危人群“呆在家中”,三藩市公共卫生局则敦促工作人员“尽可能远程通勤”,并“避免接触患病人士”。

COVID-9所带来的风险,更多工人将会复合那些在FEHA规定下有资格享受合理工作安排。在FEHA规定下,“残障”解释为身体残障,包括对免疫系统产生影响并且因此对主要日常活动产生限制。法律还认定了所谓“主要日常活动”,包括与他人的互动、工作、以及免疫系统的主要功能。虽然该法律指定普通感冒和普通流感为例外,这不包括COVID-19因为这种病毒是前所未有。

“合理工作安排”措施的目的是保证雇员能继续工作和赚到工资。因此,须考虑的首要可行性是在家工作。如果雇员可以持续发挥他们工作中的关键功能,在家工作是一种合理的工作安排。对于那些可以通过电脑、视像会议和电话工作的雇员,在家工作是一个理想的选择。

如果让雇员在家工作会过度增加雇主经营的困难,雇主可以予以拒绝。如果员工在家无法完成工作,法律允许工人请假。但假期必须“允许雇员在假期结束时再回来工作,这样既可以或无需进一步提供合理工作安排措施,从而不会增加雇主的经营负担。”

雇主不可以以包揽政策(blanket policies)为理由而拒绝在家工作或病假(或任何其他可能合理工作安排)。而应该将心比心地真诚互动,去寻找有效的合理处所。任何对残障人士的歧视性或或报复性行为,包括非一视同仁的纪律惩罚、威胁或除名,都是受加州法律禁止的。这些保护措施可以延伸至那些被雇主假定或“认为”是残障的人士。雇主固然可以要求提供有关残障的医生证明,或雇员劳动力限度的证明,却不可以强迫雇员披露特定的健康条件或残障状况的个人信息。

如果我家里有人是高危人群怎么办?

以上提过的加州家庭权利法 (California Family Rights Act – “CFRA”)不单只要求雇主提供长达12周的无薪假期,并确保雇员的工作岗位。该假期可用于照顾受到严重的健康状况的家人。有薪家庭假期PFL可以通过EDD申请。

FEHA禁止在工作上针对残障人士或与残疾人士有关的人的歧视性或报复性行为。此保护包括申请合理工作安排,无论雇主是否提供了安排。如过你家人属于高危人群而认为你需要得到合理的工作安排,请向劳工法律师请教你的法律权益。

如果在工作场合暴露在COVID-19将如何?

雇主疾病和工伤预防及工人补偿计划

加州职业安全局(Division of Occupational Safety and Health – “Cal/OSHA”)提供了为应付COVID-19的有关指引。该指引覆盖大部分行业,包括托儿和医疗,积极鼓励有病患的雇员呆在家里,将有急性呼吸道症状的员工立即回家,做好疫情爆发的反应预案。针对健康护理行业的雇员,指引还强调了培训、操作实践以及个人保护设施的使用等方面。

加州残障福利和医疗隐私法通常禁止雇主查问雇员的身体健康情况。但如果雇主,根据客观的证据,合理的相信雇员的生体情况妨碍他完成工作的基本职能或生体情况直接威胁工作安全,雇主可以提问雇员的健康情况或要求雇员接受身体检查。例如,雇员告诉雇主他得了COVID-19,雇主应该确定该雇员在过去14天接触过的员工并且通知该员工有关暴露的消息。雇主不可以提供被感染的员工的名字或其他的个人信息。

加州法律保护员工“吹哨子”行为,例如向上司投诉工作场所安全问题。如果情况严重,员工也可以直接向Cal/OSHA递交投诉信。如果继续工作会产生真实和明显的危害,员工可以拒绝工作。在这种情况下,该员工可以索求损失的工资。如需详细信息,请参考WorkSafe网站。因为这种情况非常复杂,鼓励工人向劳工法律师请教你的法律权益。

我的工作属于关键行业内吗?

加州公共卫生官员提供了“关键基础设施部门”的清单。该部门必须继续遵守残障保护法和其他工地安全规定。各县和城市有具体指定某些商业为关键服务。

工伤保险

雇主有责任通过工人补偿系统向工作中受伤的雇员提供补偿。

那些在工作接触COVID-19而受伤害的雇员,可通过填制DWC1表并呈交给雇主,申请索赔。

任何工作场所,必然是雇员受伤的重要因素。雇主经常会为是否因工作受伤争论不休。这些争议,通常通过工人赔偿上诉委员会(Worker’s Compensation Appeals Board)所指定的医学检查小组(通常由免疫系统或内科专家组成)的医学报告做出裁决。

如果索赔获得通过,赔偿金将包括临时残障工资、医药费,以及永久伤残补偿等构成。遗憾的是,雇员误分类为独立合同工的人士,要等到2020年7月1日才有资格申领工人赔偿金。

在公共卫生紧急事件中,工人须要更多保护措施

加州州长纽森、加州立法会议员、以及国会发布了公告,介绍了将加强旨在保护因隔离令受到歧视或报复的工人,提供临时收入补贴等其他提案。随着法律的改变,本文将会陆续更新。

About Ken Wang, Esq.

Legislative Policy Associate, California Employment Lawyers Association

10 fresh worker protections in 2020

10 fresh worker protections in 2020

SACRAMENTO – From breastfeeding accommodations to gender pay equity to combatting bias against hairstyles, several new laws took effect last month that impact California workers and their jobs. While AB 5the landmark bill regulating whether workers are employees or independent contractors – dominated headlines, there are 10 laws now on the books that will also have a significant impact on the workplace.

Saying “no” to privatized justice

Our labor laws mean nothing if workers are forced to waive those rights by signing a mandatory arbitration agreement. These agreements operate to suppress workplace claims by barring workers from bringing a lawsuit and exposing workplace abuse.

California law should now prohibit employers from coercing workers into signing these arbitration agreements as a condition of employment, but the law already is being challenged in court. If the challenge fails, workers could reject a mandatory arbitration agreement (making arbitration truly optional to resolve an employment dispute). Importantly, the new law also protects workers from retaliation – meaning they cannot be fired or not hired – if they refuse to sign an arbitration agreement.

For workers who do end up in arbitration, the odds are stacked against them. Increasingly, employers are refusing to even pay their share of arbitration fees, as a way to stall cases indefinitely. Now another new law will level the playing field by empowering workers to proceed to court, instead of arbitration, if the employer delays paying their share of fees.

Greater protections for harassment survivors

State lawmakers have continued advancing #MeToo reforms to combat sexual harassment. Now, workers have an extra two years to bring harassment or discrimination claims under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act. Also, building on the new law that bans secrecy around sexual harassment settlements, employers can no longer use “no-rehire” clauses – which punish victims by barring future employment with the employer and related entities, as a condition of settling.

A more equitable workplace

Workplace equity is the focus of several new measures now taking effect. First, many working mothers will have safe and clean lactation rooms with access to water, electricity, and refrigeration. Second, the CROWN Act will combat workplace bias against hairstyles that disproportionately impacts African American women. This new law will make it unlawful to discriminate against natural hairstyles and textures historically associated with race.

Equity extends beyond the traditional workplace, as exemplified by the US Women’s National soccer team in their quest for their fourth World Cup – which featured a prize pool valued at a paltry one-tenth of the men’s tournament. California will do its part by requiring permitted events on public lands to offer equal prize money, regardless of gender.

Finally, a new law will allow workers to collect a monetary penalty from their employer if they are paid late. This escalating penalty will deter repeat offenders and encourage employers to always pay their workers on time.

A justice system for all

Earlier this year, the Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court spoke out about the chilling effect of recent arrests of undocumented immigrants in our state’s courthouses. California law will now protect undocumented workers from civil arrest while attending a proceeding or other legal business in the courthouse.

California also took another step towards the promise of equal justice under the law. Soon, all judges, public-facing court staff, and attorneys will be required to attend implicit bias training to help identify their own biases in order to more fairly uphold our laws.

The upcoming legislative session is already looking packed, with proposals on major issues, such as workplace privacy, paid family leave, and adjustments to AB 5. We hope you stay tuned.

About Ken Wang, Esq.

Legislative Policy Associate, California Employment Lawyers Association