On May 21, 2026, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Executive Order N-6-26 (the Order), directing several state departments and agencies to prepare California’s workforce, small businesses and communities for what he describes as “the economic disruption that artificial intelligence will bring to the workforce.” The Order, which focuses on anticipating and mitigating labor market impacts rather than regulating artificial intelligence (AI) systems directly, establishes policy review processes and deliverables extending into 2027.

The Order does not have the force of law, but it is further evidence of California’s intent to stake out a leadership position on AI policy. As in prior AI-related executive orders, Governor Newsom proclaimed here that “no state has taken more aggressive action to strengthen the safety, security, and consumer privacy of technology and online platforms, including AI.” The Order mobilizes state agencies, labor experts, universities and industry stakeholders to develop policy recommendations, gather data and identify early indicators of workforce disruption associated with AI adoption.

The Order’s Directives

• Within 90 days, the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA), the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development (GO-Biz), and the Department of Finance are to review academic research identifying the potential impact of “technological shifts” on the workforce, including “AI’s impact on California’s labor market and potential disproportionate impacts on demographic groups.” These agencies are to report on “best practices … on early economic warning signals of future labor disruptions.”
• Within 90 days, the Employment Development Department (EDD) is to launch a dashboard applying Unemployment Insurance data to measure AI’s impacts on employment across various sectors.
• Within 180 days, LWDA is to assess how California’s Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act can serve as an early-warning mechanism for “emerging industry trends.”
• Within 180 days, LWDA is to review and provide recommendations to the Governor concerning:
• Policies and practices that “provide displaced workers with a safety net, including severance and other forms of compensation such as stock or other forms of equity”;
• “[E]xpanding awareness” of employment insurance programs, including the state’s Work Share program, which provides “employment stability payments”;
• Service opportunities for “those experiencing long-term unemployment and other potential employment disruptions”; and
• “[O]ptions for improving efforts to connect unemployed workers to opportunities for training and upskilling,” including through the Workforce Pell Grant Program.
• By October 15, 2026, LWDA is to review how the collective bargaining process is making use of new technologies like AI, including “how worker voice is incorporated in adoption of emerging technologies.”
• By October 15, 2026, LWDA is to review existing workforce training programs “to ensure programs are fit for purpose and targeted towards growing industries and professions” and the EDD shall “develop an AI playbook to expand dislocated worker strategies for occupations exposed to AI.”
• By October 15, 2026, in consultation with a variety of academics and experts, the Government Operations Agency is to suggest methods to “alter incentive structures and increase [the] likelihood of AI development and deployments that advance the public good and address critical problems and emerging opportunities facing society.” These recommendations may include “public-private partnerships, voluntary or mandatory programs that direct a portion of revenue generated by AI companies to support beneficial deployments of AI that otherwise would not be pursued based solely on market incentives, and securing dedicated access to computing power for research and development of AI that meets specified criteria for advancing the public good.”
• Twice yearly through the end of 2027, the EDD is to include, as part of the California Labor Market Review, “a summary of feedback from businesses about the role of technological adoption in determining hiring or workforce decisions.”
• The Jobs First Council is to work with “local leadership on opportunities to support regions facing systemically high unemployment.”
• GO-Biz and the Governor’s Office of the Small Business Advocate are to “evaluate and, where appropriate, support opportunities to expand and enhance worker ownership models to support broad-based capital growth and build wealth from productivity gain among workers.” These opportunities may include “exploring any existing regulatory barriers to employee-owned company structures, as well as best practices leveraged in other states to provide direct and indirect economic support for the formation of or conversion to employee-owned companies.”
• The Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development is to engage in initiatives to facilitate business adoption of “opportunity AI,” a term left undefined in the Order. These initiatives may include education as to the use of “emerging technology, including AI, to support competition and broad-based economic growth while supporting workforce training and retention.”
• Higher education institutions, in coordination with the California Education Interagency Council, are to:
• Evaluate and build out “existing measures to support a workforce able to leverage the opportunities presented by technologies in the future while mitigating risks and potential harms”; and
• “Evaluate opportunities to include on-the-job training as part of their comprehensive academic offerings.”
• Several departments and agencies are to leverage the Office of Data and Innovation’s “single online platform to enable Californians to more easily navigate government services and, ultimately, help Californians identify all social services for which they may be eligible.”
• All California departments and agencies named in the Order are to incorporate, “to the extent practicable, the findings from Engaged California’s newly launched engagement around AI into all of the above work streams.”

Legislative and Regulatory Context

The Order arrives amid a rapidly evolving AI regulatory landscape at both the state and federal levels. A growing patchwork of state AI laws and executive orders—including measures in California, Connecticut, Illinois, Colorado, New York City, and Texas—now differ in enforcement, scope, and notice and audit obligations, creating a complex compliance matrix for multi-state employers. For more detailed coverage of state-specific AI developments in 2026, please refer here.

California Legislative Activity

In California, legislators continue to advance proposals focused on the use of AI in the workplace. On May 19, the California Senate approved SB 947 (the “No Robo Bosses Act”), which would impose guardrails on employer use of automated decision systems (ADS). This iteration of the No Robo Bosses Act revises the 2025 No Robo Bosses Act (SB 7), which Governor Newsom vetoed out of concern that the bill was “overly broad” and “unfocused.” As revised, the bill defines an ADS as “any computational process derived from machine learning, statistical modeling, data analytics, or artificial intelligence that issues simplified output, including a score, classification, or recommendation, that is used to assist or replace human discretionary decision-making and materially impacts natural persons.” If enacted, the bill would generally:

• Prohibit employers from relying solely on ADS to make disciplinary, termination, or deactivation decisions, and require human review with independent corroboration before taking adverse employment actions based on ADS outputs;
• Require employers to provide affected workers with written notice when the employer primarily relied on an ADS to make a disciplinary, termination, or deactivation decision, including contact information for a human reviewer and information about the worker’s right to access their data;
• Provide workers with the right to request a copy of their own data used by an ADS to make disciplinary, termination, or deactivation decisions (limited to one request every 12 months);
• Prohibit employers from using ADS to infer a worker’s protected status or conduct predictive behavior analysis with the intention of using the analysis to make an employment-related decision; and
• Prohibit employers from predicting or taking adverse action against a worker for exercising their legal rights.

At the time of writing, the No Robo Bosses Act remains pending in the California Assembly.

Federal-State Dynamics

The patchwork of state-level developments expands the distinctions between state and federal approaches to AI policy. Together, these developments leave businesses to navigate an increasingly fragmented and evolving AI regulatory landscape.

While federal direction remains uncertain, the regulation of AI is currently largely happening at the state level. At present, there is no federal statute specifically governing the use of AI in employment, and the federal government has not yet significantly pushed forward its previously stated plans for AI deregulation. As covered by Akin previously, a December 2025 White House executive order directed the Department of Justice (DOJ) to challenge “burdensome” state AI laws, and a March 2026 federal framework recommended preemption of such laws, but the DOJ has challenged just one such law to date, and no preemption legislation has yet been enacted.

At the same time, the White House’s most recent executive order on AI, titled “Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security,” suggests the federal government is warming to the regulation of AI in certain arenas. In its June 2, 2026, order, the White House affirmed that it “refuse[s] to stifle” American AI innovation “with overly burdensome regulation” while also establishing a framework for the developers of “frontier models” (i.e., the most advanced AI models) to interface with the federal government prior to public release regarding potential cybersecurity risks. In keeping with the Trump Administration’s stated practice of “slashing the bureaucratic constraints” on American AI developers and researchers, this framework is voluntary. Nevertheless, this order marks a pivot in the administration’s decidedly deregulatory approach to date.

For further coverage on AI developments at both the state level and the White House, please see our prior alert here.

Takeaway for Employers

• Workforce-focused AI policy is accelerating in California, while the federal government has continued its noninterventionist stance. Governor Newsom’s Order signals California’s increasing focus on the effects of AI on the labor market. The Order builds on other recent California employment legislation, including revised California Consumer Privacy Act regulations regarding the use of ADS for “significant” employment decisions (covered by Akin here) and the No Robo Bosses Act, reflecting the state’s continued focus on worker protections in the context of technological change.

Looking Ahead

• We expect California agency recommendations and reports in connection with this Order to arrive between August and November of this year. 
• The California Legislature has until August 31, 2026, to pass the No Robo Bosses Act and Governor Newsom has until September 30, 2026, to sign or veto it if passed.
• We will report on these developments as they become available.
• If you have questions as to how any of these developments may affect your business, we welcome you to reach out to a member of Akin’s Labor & Employment team.