SHRM Member Testifies Against California Assembly Bill 1221

On May 1, SHRM member and HR professional Hedy Holmes testified before the California Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee in opposition to Assembly Bill 1221. In her testimony, Holmes underscored SHRM and SHRM California’s commitment to advancing policies that protect workers without hindering innovation. Her testimony reflects SHRM’s broader advocacy mission: ensuring lawmakers hear directly from HR experts shaping today’s workplaces.

AB 1221 proposes expansive regulations on the use of employee monitoring technologies and automated decision-making systems in the workplace. While SHRM and SHRM California share the bill’s intent to promote transparency and safeguard worker privacy, the legislation — if enacted as drafted — would create significant compliance burdens, expose employers to new legal risks, and restrict responsible uses of common workplace technologies.

Holmes noted that the bill’s sweeping scope would apply even to low-risk tools such as scheduling software and productivity trackers, without distinguishing between their purpose or potential impact. “While we support transparency and accountability,” she told the committee, “AB 1221 risks imposing complex, costly requirements on employers without improving outcomes for workers — particularly small and midsized businesses striving to remain compliant and competitive.”

Holmes also highlighted SHRM’s research demonstrating that the ethical use of AI in hiring can help employers reach more diverse candidates and reduce bias in decision-making. Limiting the use of such tools, she warned, could have unintended consequences for inclusive hiring efforts.

SHRM and SHRM California submitted a formal letter of opposition to the committee on April 17, outlining the operational and legal challenges AB 1221 would create for employers of all sizes. The letter emphasized that while SHRM and SHRM California support efforts to promote transparency and employee rights, the bill’s broad definitions, lack of clarity, and potential litigation risks would impose undue burdens — particularly on small and midsize employers. SHRM and SHRM California urged legislators to engage with HR professionals and other stakeholders to craft more workable, balanced policy solutions.

Member participation in advocacy — like Hedy Holmes’ testimony — is critical to ensuring that the voice of HR is heard and that policy decisions are informed by on-the-ground expertise. Interested in testifying before policymakers or sharing your HR expertise on key workplace issues? Contact SHRM Government Affairs at governmentaffairs@shrm.org to get involved.