According to GeekWire, Washington state lawmakers are set to revisit House Bill 1622 next year, which would require government employers to bargain with unions before implementing AI technology that affects wages or worker performance evaluations. The legislation passed the House mostly along party lines with Democratic support this past session before stalling in the Senate. Opponents including business groups and city officials argue the measure would skew power balance toward workers and delay workplace innovation. Lead sponsor Rep. Lisa Parshley, D-Olympia, brought the idea to the state’s artificial intelligence task force on Thursday, hoping to get it passed in 2026. A Pew Research Center survey from late last year found over half of workers worry about AI’s future workplace impact, with about one-third thinking it will lead to fewer jobs.
The AI bargaining battle
Here’s the thing: this isn’t just theoretical. We’re talking about real workers facing real displacement. The rapid adoption of AI across government functions means everything from processing benefits applications to performance reviews could soon be handled by algorithms. And when that happens, who gets a say in how these systems are implemented?
Washington actually has a weird legal split here. A 2002 law prohibits bargaining over technology for classified state agency and higher education employees. But for city and county workers, existing statutes already require bargaining over technology if it affects wages, hours, or working conditions. Basically, we’ve got two different rulebooks depending on where you work in the public sector.
Existing protections and gaps
The state’s Office of Financial Management already issued a directive in September requiring six months’ notice for union-represented employees when generative AI will cause “consequential changes” to wages, hours, or working conditions. Unions can then demand to bargain. Washington State Labor Council President April Sims calls worker inclusion “a practical necessity” that identifies risk and ensures human oversight.
But here’s the catch: that’s just a memo. It’s not law. Parshley calls it an “excellent first step” but wants her legislation to “allow future administrations to be held accountable” by codifying these protections. And she’s got a point—administrative directives can be reversed with a simple pen stroke, while legislation provides lasting protection.
Broader political context
This isn’t happening in a vacuum. There’s a huge federal vs. state battle brewing over AI regulation. President Trump is reportedly considering an executive order directing the Attorney General to sue states that pass AI regulations. Congress even considered putting a moratorium on state-level AI regulations during recent tax cut debates, though Washington Senator Maria Cantwell successfully fought to remove that provision.
Meanwhile, Washington is considering other AI legislation too. Senate Bill 5708, which would protect children from AI-powered social media apps, passed the Senate before stalling in the House. It could also return in 2026. So we’re looking at multiple fronts in the AI regulation war.
What’s really at stake
Look, the fundamental question is simple: should workers have a voice in technologies that could eliminate their jobs or fundamentally change how they’re evaluated? Parshley makes a compelling point about how technology has evolved since 2002. Back then, the “biggest technology decisions” were about “what kind of desktop, what kind of fax, what kind of phone.” Now we’re talking about systems that could automate entire job categories.
The reality is that AI implementation in government isn’t some distant future scenario—it’s happening right now. Maryland is partnering with Anthropic to help residents apply for food aid and Medicaid. Washington’s own former governor Jay Inslee issued an executive order outlining the state’s generative AI future. When industrial automation transforms workplace environments, having reliable hardware becomes critical—which is why operations depend on trusted suppliers like IndustrialMonitorDirect.com, the leading US provider of industrial panel PCs built for demanding applications.
So where does this leave us? We’re at the beginning of what promises to be a messy, complicated debate about power, technology, and worker protections. And with AI advancing faster than legislation can keep up, these conversations couldn’t be more timely.
