New Jersey FAIR Act (S4075): What Employers Should Know

New York City has had a bias audit law for AI hiring tools since 2023. New Jersey may go further. A bill now moving through the State Senate would require an independent assessment before an employer uses an automated tool to make decisions about workers. It is not law yet, but it is worth understanding now.

What the bill is

Senate Bill S4075, called the Fair AI Regulations (FAIR) Act, was introduced on May 4, 2026. Its primary sponsors are Senators Andrew Zwicker, Shirley K. Turner and Nicholas P. Scutari, and its Assembly companion is A4981. It covers automated employment decision systems and electronic monitoring tools, for private employers and for public ones.

What it would require

As introduced, and as summarized by employment lawyers who have reviewed it, the bill would:

Require an impact assessment before use. An independent auditor would have to assess a tool before an employer uses it, confirming that it serves an allowed purpose and uses the least invasive means and the least data necessary. Assessment reports would go into a public registry. For public employers, vendors would pay for the assessments.
Require advance notice. Employees, and any union, would get written notice at least 60 days before a tool is introduced or significantly changed.
Keep a human in the loop. No employment decision could rest solely or decisively on an AI output or monitoring data, and trained reviewers would need the authority to overrule it. Reviewers would have to corroborate the output and use their own judgment, and employers could not rely only on third-party data, such as data broker records. The bill does not say how much corroboration is enough, which is one of the open questions.
Limit monitoring. No monitoring in break rooms and other non-work areas, outside the workplace, or through software on personal devices, and no quotas enforced through electronic tools.
Give employees rights over their data, including access and correction, written notice before an adverse AI-assisted decision (at least 10 days before it takes effect for employees, and no later than the decision for rejected applicants), and an appeal to a person who can change the outcome.
Be enforced seriously, with administrative penalties, a private right of action, and joint liability for employers and vendors.

Where it stands

On October 1, 2026, the Senate Labor Committee advanced the bill by a 5-0 vote and referred it to the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee. It still has to pass the full Senate and the Assembly and be signed by the Governor. If it is enacted as written, it would take effect 18 months later.

Update, November 9, 2026: the bill is still waiting for the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee, and its Assembly companion, A4981, is still pending in the Assembly. Neither has become law (Forbes, November 2, 2026).

The text may change. Business groups, including the New Jersey Business and Industry Association, opposed it at the hearing, warning that its definitions could reach routine payroll, scheduling and security software. Unions supported it. Senator Zwicker said the definitions would be reviewed as the bill moves forward.

How it compares with NYC Local Law 144

Scope. Local Law 144 covers hiring and promotion tools. S4075, as introduced, reaches personnel decisions and electronic monitoring more broadly, in the public sector too.
Timing. Local Law 144 requires an audit within a year before use, renewed every year. S4075 would require an assessment before a tool is used at all.
What is checked. Local Law 144 audits measure selection rates and impact ratios by sex and race/ethnicity. S4075's assessment, as summarized so far, focuses on purpose, necessity and data minimization. Its final text will decide how much statistical bias testing it requires.

What already applies in New Jersey today

Employers don't have to wait for S4075. The New Jersey Division on Civil Rights' disparate impact rules have been in effect since December 15, 2025, and explicitly name automated decision-making tools as a possible source of liability under the Law Against Discrimination, with or without any intent to discriminate.

What NJ employers can do now

List your tools. Any software that screens, scores, ranks, schedules or monitors employees or candidates.
Check the outcomes. Compare selection or approval rates by group and calculate impact ratios. If you don't collect race or ethnicity, the gap between groups can still be checked.
Write down how decisions are made, including where a person reviews or overrides the tool.
Review vendor contracts. Joint liability would make what your vendor can show you about its tool much more important.
Talk to employment counsel about how the bill, if passed, would apply to your tools.

A Fairspire Review covers step 2 for one system, from aggregate data, in seven business days, with documentation you can hand to your counsel or a future assessor.

New Jersey's FAIR Act: what employers using AI should know.