Next year, the Washington State Legislature will again debate whether public sector unions can negotiate over the adoption of artificial intelligence technology by employers.
House Bill 1622 would consider requiring government employers to bargain with labor unions over the use of this technology if it affects wages or worker performance reviews.
The bill passed the House on mostly party-line lines with Democratic support this Congress, but stalled in the Senate.
Opponents, including business groups and city officials, argued that the measure would shift the power relationship between employees and management too far in favor of workers. It also said the mandate could slow innovation in the workplace.
Hoping to cross the finish line in 2026, the bill’s lead sponsor, Rep. Lisa Parshley, D-Olympia, introduced the idea Thursday to the state’s artificial intelligence task force. Congress established a special committee in 2024.
“Public sector bargaining covers wages, hours, and working conditions, and government agencies are already required to negotiate changes in these areas, but without legislation, bargaining will occur post-implementation,” said April Sims, president of the Washington State Labor Council. “This same thing would have happened before with a law like House Bill 1622.”
A state law passed in 2002 bars classified employees of state agencies and institutions of higher education from negotiating over technology.
“The biggest technology decision that management made was what kind of desktop, what kind of fax machine, what kind of phone to use,” Parshley said of the era when the law took effect. “Is it fair that the technology we have is actually going to impact workers in ways that we haven’t even begun to realize yet?”
Meanwhile, another law governing workers in cities, counties and other agencies requires bargaining over technology when it affects issues such as wages, hours and working conditions.
Many workers are concerned about what the rapid rise of artificial intelligence will mean for their job security.
A Pew Research Center survey conducted late last year found that more than half of workers are concerned about the future impact of AI on the workplace, and about one-third believe it will lead to fewer jobs. Approximately one in six employees said that some part of their job is already done by AI.
Maryland, for example, has partnered with AI company Anthropic to help residents apply for food assistance, Medicaid, and other social welfare programs.
In early 2024, then-Governor Jay Inslee issued an executive order outlining the future of state government’s use of generative artificial intelligence. The state is “committed to harnessing the potential of generative AI in an ethical and fair manner for the benefit of state employees.”
In line with this guidance, a September directive from the state Department of Financial Management requires union-represented state employees to be given six months’ advance notice of the use of generative AI if it “results in a material change in the wages, hours, or working conditions of employees.” Under the memorandum, unions can demand negotiations over the use of this technology.
“Including workers in the first place is not a courtesy; it’s a practical necessity,” Sims said. “It identifies risks, ensures human oversight where necessary, and builds trust among the staff who will ultimately operate, troubleshoot, and rely on these systems.”
The memo also requires human review when such systems are used for employment-related decisions.
Pashley called the directive “a great first step.” But she said her proposed bill would “enable future administrations to be held accountable” by codifying the legal order.
Meanwhile, President Donald Trump is reportedly considering an executive order directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to sue states that pass AI regulations. However, since it does not directly regulate the technology itself, it is unclear whether this law would cover potential laws like this one.
This is the latest salvo in the debate over federal versus state approaches to technological guardrails. During the summer debate over Trump’s signature Tax Cuts and Spending Act, Congress considered suspending state-level artificial intelligence regulations. Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) led the charge to remove this provision from the final law.
One potential measure requested by state Attorney General Nick Brown could put Washington in the crosshairs of the Trump administration.
Senate Bill 5708 aims to protect children from social media applications that utilize artificial intelligence. This year, the bill passed the Senate before stalling in the House. There is a possibility that it will be revived in 2026.
Mr Parshley said he was part of a new parliamentary workgroup focused on AI “so that we can be part of this great discussion”.
The Washington State Standard is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by a coalition of grants and donors as a 501c(3) public charity. The Washington State Standard maintains editorial independence. If you have any questions, please contact editor Bill Lucia at info@washingtonstatestandard.com.
