The civic record
Read. Follow. Verify.Indiana Restricts Employer Use of Automated Decision Systems and Establishes Worker Appeal Rights
Last action · January 8, 2026: First reading: referred to Committee on Employment, Labor and PensionsSponsor: Earl Harris
Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.
What This Bill Proposed
House Bill 1421 prohibits employers from relying exclusively on s for employment choices and bans the use of algorithmic outputs unless systems undergo rigorous pre-deployment and annual bias testing, human oversight, and mandatory worker disclosures. The measure applies to employers with 11 or more workers, state agencies, and political subdivisions, taking effect on July 1, 2026.
Workers gain statutory rights to dispute algorithmic evaluations, request plain-language documentation within seven days of a decision, and opt out of automated management, while employers face civil lawsuits and statutory damages ranging from $5,000 to $100,000 for violations.
- Automated decision systems and artificial intelligence tools are increasingly utilized by employers for resume screening, candidate ranking, worker monitoring, and performance evaluations. context
- The National Institute of Standards and Technology released its Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework in January 2023 to help organizations manage risks associated with AI technologies. context
Who It Would Have Affected
Groups the bill's text would have affected, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.
Covered individuals and candidates
Workers and job applicants gain rights to receive disclosures, access documentation, dispute automated outputs, appeal decisions to a human, and opt out of algorithmic management.
Employers with 11 or more workers, state agencies, and political subdivisions
Employers must conduct pre-deployment and annual bias testing, provide mandatory disclosures, ensure human oversight, maintain compliance records, and face potential civil liability and statutory damages.
Indiana Department of Labor
The department is authorized to receive complaints, investigate employer practices, require compliance reports, intervene in civil actions, and adopt administrative rules.
Key Facts
You don't have to trust us. Each fact below is taken straight from the official document - click any one to see the exact passage, highlighted in the original.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which employers must follow these rules on automated decision systems?
What rights do workers have if an automated system is used in an employment decision?
What penalties can employers face for violating the automated decision system regulations?
What else do you want to know?
News Coverage
Follow the record
Votes, people, money & the original sourceWhere This Stands
This bill did not become law - Died at adjournment · in House committee.
Procedural history
2 actions- Jan 8, 2026HouseIntroducedFirst reading: referred to Committee on Employment, Labor and Pensions
- Jan 8, 2026HouseAuthored by Representative Harris
Version history
Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.
View official text →Lobbying Activity
No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.
Full breakdown
Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.
Sponsors
Discoveries
Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.
Establishment of Algorithmic Accountability in State Labor Law
The bill marks a significant regulatory shift by imposing strict pre-deployment validation, mandatory annual bias testing, and employee appeal rights specifically for automated management and hiring technologies.
Connected Entities
Sources
iga.in.gov
Analysis Score
0–100- Significance20Lowered because this bill did not pass (its text scored 85)
- Controversy75Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
- Entertainment10Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
- Buzz60Current news / social attention level
Publisher tools