Workforce Bulletin

Third time’s the charm. After two consecutive vetoes by former Governor Glenn Youngkin, Governor Abigail Spanberger signed Senate Bill 215 into law on April 22, 2026,[1] bringing Virginia in line with pay transparency laws already on the books in neighboring Maryland and Washington, D.C.

For employers operating across the region, the clock is ticking: the Act takes effect July 1, 2026, and imposes both pay disclosure requirements and restrictions on when they may consider an individual’s prior compensation when making employment decisions.

On Friday, May 27, 2026, Governor Ned Lamont signed into law broad legislation addressing the use of AI in Connecticut.

The new AI law has significant implications for employers in the Nutmeg State who use any type of “automated employment-related decision technology” and those contemplating mass layoffs or plant closings.

Use of AI Tools to Interact with Job Applicants and Employees

Starting October 1, 2027, employers who deploy an automated employment-related decision technology to directly interact with job applicants or employees must ensure that they disclose in plain language that the individual is interacting with such technology, unless a “reasonable person would deem it obvious” that they are doing so. The AI law does not explain what a reasonable person would deem obvious, so employers should exercise caution and provide actual disclosures until the state provides further guidance.

What employers should know about key developments this week:

• EEOC Proposes Eliminating EEO-1 Reports: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is proposing the complete elimination of EEO-1 reports (which include employee demographic data, such as race and gender), along with the rescission of EEO-2, EEO-3, EEO-4, and EEO-5 reports. 
• Fifth Circuit Rules on Remote Work Accommodations: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit found that in-person attendance is an essential job function and that COVID-era accommodations do not define that standard today—a ruling that could prove informative as more employers implement return-to-office policies.
• New Non-Compete Restrictions in Tennessee: Beginning July 1, 2026, non-compete agreements will be unenforceable in Tennessee for employees who earn less than $70,000 a year (inclusive of wages, salary, commissions, nondiscretionary bonuses, and other forms of remuneration).

The Chicago Department of Business Affairs and Consumer Protection (BACP) Office of Labor Standards (OLS) adopted new rules for administering Chicago’s Fair Workweek and Paid Leave and Paid Sick and Safe Leave Ordinances. The new rules were published on May 18, 2026, and went into effect on June 1, 2026. A separate blog post addressing the new rules to the Fair Workweek Ordinance can be found here. Without re-hashing all the details about compliance obligations under the Paid Leave and Paid Sick and Safe Leave Ordinance, here’s a summary of what’s important to know as these rules go into force.

Employers in Chicago: new rules may require your attention, especially if you employ workers in cooperation with another employer or operate within any of the industries covered by the city’s Fair Workweek Ordinance.

On May 15, 2026, the Illinois Department of Human Rights (“IDHR”) announced proposed regulations (the “Regulations”) that address required employer notification arising from the use of AI to make employment decisions. The publication of the Regulations in the Illinois Register triggered a 45-day public comment period that ends on June 29, 2026.

On May 14, 2026, Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed SB 26-189 into law, which repeals and reenacts the Colorado Artificial Intelligence Act (“CAIA” or “SB 24-205”) and substantially alters the obligations of employers using AI to make employment-related decisions. This law marks a shift in regulating high-risk artificial intelligence and automated decision-making technology (“ADMT”). SB 26-189 becomes effective on January 1, 2027.

In the More Than 20 Federal and State Employment Trials She Handled, Only $1 Was Awarded to the Other Side. Meet Jessica Giambrone Palmese.

Most employment disputes never see the inside of a courtroom. But when they do, the attorney standing next to you matters more than you might think.

Jessica Giambrone Palmese is an Epstein Becker Green attorney whose record speaks for itself: lead counsel on 20 federal and state employment trials taken to verdict, nearly undefeated, and with a practice built on 17 years of litigating on behalf of New York City.

In this one-on-one conversation with fellow Epstein Becker Green attorney George Whipple, Jessica explains how that depth of experience shapes her approach to every case—whether it goes to trial or not.

What employers should know about key developments this week:

• Virginia and Maine Pay Transparency Laws: Both states require employers to disclose compensation ranges in job postings starting this summer (Virginia on July 1 and Maine on July 29), with key distinctions that will affect compliance strategies across industries.
• Remote Work Compliance Risks: Pay transparency laws can apply to any employer with even a single remote employee working in a covered state, which means that multistate and remote-first employers face heightened exposure regardless of where they are headquartered.
• Evolving Pay Equity Landscape: From salary history bans to pay transparency mandates, states continue to layer on new pay equity requirements, making proactive human resources (HR) training and policy audits more critical than ever.

In this episode of Employment Law This Week^®, Epstein Becker Green attorneys Adam M. Tomiak and Nancy Gunzenhauser Popper discuss Virginia’s and Maine’s new pay transparency laws, how they differ from other state laws, what the growing patchwork of pay equity requirements means for employers, and the steps organizations should take now to prepare their recruiters, HR teams, and job posting practices.

What employers should know about key developments this week:

• Arbitration Agreement Drafting Pitfalls: Vague or imprecise language regarding discovery, confidentiality, neutrality, and mutuality can hand employees a roadmap for challenging—or defeating—your arbitration agreements in court.
• AI-Assisted Drafting Risks: Artificial intelligence (AI) tools may generate arbitration agreement language based on existing law but can miss evolving legal arguments in pending cases, making attorney review essential before finalizing any agreement.
• Strategic Decision-Making for Arbitration Programs: Employers should clearly identify their primary goals for an arbitration program, familiarize themselves with the chosen forum’s rules, and ensure consistency across all arbitration provisions company-wide.

In this episode of Employment Law This Week®, Epstein Becker Green attorneys Jonathan M. Brenner and Victoria Sloan Lin discuss how imprecise drafting can leave arbitration agreements vulnerable to court challenges, why AI-assisted drafting requires careful attorney oversight, and how employers can build a more defensible and strategically sound arbitration program.