Imagine logging in for a shift and finding out a piece of software has decided you are done. No manager, no conversation, just an automated message and a deactivated account. For some delivery drivers and warehouse workers, that is not a thought experiment. It is how the day ended. A law signed on September 30, 2026 and operative July 1, 2027 is designed to put a human being back in the room before a computer can end someone's livelihood.
That law is Senate Bill 947, better known as the No Robo Bosses Act of 2026. It was signed on September 30, 2026 and takes effect July 1, 2027. This post explains in plain English what it will require once it is operative, how it moved through the Legislature, and what it could mean for both workers and employers.
What Is the No Robo Bosses Act?
SB 947 was introduced by State Senator Jerry McNerney on February 2, 2026 and signed on September 30, 2026. It amends Division 2 of the California Labor Code to set rules for how employers use what the bill calls "automated decision systems," or ADS.
An automated decision system is a broad idea. The bill describes it as any computational process built on machine learning, statistical modeling, data analytics, or artificial intelligence that replaces human judgment when issuing scores, recommendations, or decisions that seriously affect workers. In plain terms, if a piece of software is helping decide who gets written up, suspended, fired, or, for gig workers, deactivated, this bill is aimed at it.
The core idea is simple and is captured in the nickname. A robot should not be the boss who fires you. A human should.
This Is the Second Try: What Happened to SB 7
If the concept sounds familiar, that is because lawmakers tried something similar last year. In 2025, the Legislature passed SB 7, an earlier version of the No Robo Bosses Act. It cleared both the Senate and the Assembly, but Governor Newsom vetoed it in October 2025.
In his veto message, the Governor said the earlier bill was too broad. He worried it would have placed heavy notice requirements on businesses using even simple, harmless tools, and that the restrictions on how employers could use these systems were too sweeping.
SB 947 is the rewrite. Senator McNerney's office has described it as a version built to answer those concerns. It narrows the notice rules so they apply after a decision rather than before, and it spells out more clearly the specific situations where an employer may not use an automated system at all.
What the Law Will Require From July 1, 2027
The heart of SB 947 is a rule against letting software make the final call on serious employment decisions without a person involved. Here is what that looks like in practice.
When it applies. The act is codified at Labor Code § 1520 and following and is operative July 1, 2027. Nothing below is required of any employer before that date.
A Human Has to Be in the Loop
The bill would bar employers from relying only on an automated system to discipline, fire, or deactivate a worker. Before acting on what the software recommends, the employer would need to apply real human review and find independent evidence that backs up the decision. A manager glancing at a score and clicking "approve" is not the kind of meaningful review the bill is aiming for.
Some Uses Would Be Off Limits Entirely
SB 947 would prohibit employers from using these systems to do certain things at all, including:
- Predicting your behavior or state of mind. Software could not be used to guess a worker's behavior, beliefs, intentions, personality, or emotional state.
- Guessing protected characteristics. A system could not be used to infer things like race, religion, or gender.
- Punishing workers for using their rights. A system could not be used to identify, profile, or take adverse action against a worker for exercising a legal right.
The bill also limits how individualized worker data can feed pay decisions, unless the employer can clearly show that pay differences for similar work are tied to real cost differences in the task itself.
You Would Get a Plain-Language Notice
If an employer primarily relied on an automated system to discipline, fire, or deactivate someone, the worker would be entitled to a written notice after the fact. That notice would have to be in plain language and would generally include details about the system, the data it used, contact information for a human reviewer, and a statement that the worker cannot be retaliated against for raising concerns.
You Could Ask to See Your Own Data
A worker would be able to request a copy of the most recent 12 months of their own data that the system mainly used to make a disciplinary, termination, or deactivation decision. That gives a person a way to actually understand what the machine was looking at.
How the Rules Would Be Enforced
A right with no teeth does not change much, so the bill includes several enforcement paths. The Labor Commissioner could enforce the rules, and public prosecutors could bring enforcement actions as well.
The bill sets a civil penalty of 500 dollars per violation, and it allows for other relief that can include punitive damages and attorney's fees in appropriate cases. It also includes an anti-retaliation rule, so an employer generally could not fire, demote, suspend, or threaten a worker for asserting their rights under the law.
There are some carve-outs. Workplaces covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement could be exempt if the agreement meets certain conditions and explicitly waives the bill's provisions, and there is language addressing employers meeting requirements tied to federal government work. The bill also carves out uses required by, or reasonably necessary to comply with, federal law, and uses tied to contracts for aircraft development or national defense.
Where the Law Stands
SB 947 was signed on September 30, 2026 and is now Chapter 859, Statutes of 2026. The most recent amended version is dated August 21, 2026, when it was amended on the Assembly floor. The California Senate passed the bill on its own floor on May 19, 2026 by 29 to 9, and on May 26, 2026 it was referred to three committees in the Assembly. The Assembly passed the amended bill on August 30, 2026 by 53 to 14 and returned it to the Senate, which concurred in the Assembly amendments on August 31, 2026 by 28 to 10 and ordered the bill to engrossing and enrolling. That completed its passage through the Legislature, and the Governor signed it on September 30, 2026.
In other words, it is enacted but not yet operative. This is a good moment to understand the law, but nothing in it is binding on any employer before July 1, 2027.
What This Could Mean for California Workers
Once SB 947 is operative, the biggest practical change will be transparency. Workers who suspect an algorithm played a role in losing a shift, a job, or platform access would have a written explanation and a way to see the underlying data. That matters, because it is very hard to challenge a decision you cannot even see.
Even before the law is operative, the issues it raises are real today. If you believe an automated tool may have played a part in your discipline or termination, it generally helps to keep your own records: save messages, app screenshots, performance dashboards, and any explanation you were given. Our guide on documenting workplace issues in California walks through how to do this. Existing California law, including protections against wrongful termination and rules on workplace privacy, may already apply depending on the facts.
What This Could Mean for California Employers
For employers, SB 947 is worth reading early, well ahead of its July 1, 2027 operative date. Automated tools that touch scheduling, performance scoring, discipline, and termination are squarely in the Legislature's sights, and this is the second year in a row a version of this bill has advanced.
Employers that want to stay ahead of the trend can start by taking simple steps now: make a list of every automated tool that influences how workers are managed or removed, make sure a trained human actually reviews and can explain those decisions, and keep records of the data behind them. These are sensible practices now that the law is on the books, and they line up with California's broader move toward regulating AI in employment decisions.
How Wiser Workplace Can Help
Disputes about automated discipline and termination are often emotional and confusing for everyone involved. The worker feels blindsided by a faceless system. The employer may not fully understand what its own software did. That gap is exactly the kind of thing structured mediation is built to close.
A neutral mediator can help both sides slow down, lay out what the tool actually does, look at what data exists, and work toward a resolution without a long and costly court fight. That can be especially useful when an employer would rather fix a flawed process and preserve a working relationship than litigate.
At launch, Wiser Workplace will connect California workers and employers with independent mediators. The platform is built around California's mediation confidentiality protections, and it is designed to be accessible to workers without a lawyer and to employers who want to resolve issues efficiently. You can learn more about how workplace mediation works in California.
The Bottom Line
The No Robo Bosses Act is California's latest attempt to make sure that when serious decisions about a person's job are on the line, a human being is accountable for them. SB 947 does not ban automated tools. It requires a person to review the big calls, gives workers an explanation and access to their data, and creates penalties when employers cross the line. It is not operative until July 1, 2027, but the direction is clear. The conversation about who, or what, gets to be the boss is only getting louder.