AI Tools and Labor Law: New ABA Podcast Episode Explores the Legal Guardrails (and Minefields)

I recently had the pleasure of joining the American Bar Association’s Labor and Employment Law Podcast for a conversation about one of the most important — and fastest-moving — topics in our field right now: artificial intelligence in the workplace.

The episode, titled “AI Tools and Labor Law: Legal Guardrails and Looming Minefields,” is hosted by Matt Greer, a longtime labor relations neutral and member of the ABA Labor and Employment Law Section. Joining me as a fellow guest was Nina Pirrotti, a partner with Garrison, Levin-Epstein, Fitzgerald & Pirrotti, P.C. here in Connecticut and a highly experienced employee-side attorney. Regular readers of this blog will remember that Nina has appeared here many times before — and as always, she brought a sharp and thoughtful perspective to the discussion.

During the episode, Nina and I explored how employers and job seekers are already using AI — and what organizations need to be thinking about as these tools become more embedded in the workplace. We covered a lot of ground, including:

• AI in hiring and recruiting — from resume screening and drafting job descriptions to performance reviews and even sending rejection letters. The question we kept coming back to: when does efficiency cross the line into replacing human judgment?
• The AI arms race between employers and job seekers — as Nina put it, “It truly is an AI arms race.” Job seekers are using AI to generate resumes and cover letters tailored to match job descriptions, sometimes even burying coding inside applications designed to convince AI screeners to select them (something that has been termed a “prompt injection attack”). And employers, overwhelmed by the resulting flood of applications, are turning to AI to screen them. It’s a cycle that is only accelerating.
• Discrimination and liability risks — AI tools have the potential to discriminate against people who may be qualified but have a disability, are neurodivergent, or simply don’t meet the “norms” a program has been trained to recognize. The legal exposure here is real, and the potential for class action litigation is something every employer should have on its radar.
• The growing patchwork of state laws — as I noted during the conversation, even if you decided that federal law doesn’t require you to worry as much, you still need to worry about various state laws. And with remote employees working in multiple states, all bets are off. Connecticut’s own AI Responsibility and Transparency Act is just one example of the state-level regulatory landscape that employers need to navigate.

We also discussed key legal frameworks that remain foundational that are shaping how courts and regulators approach AI-driven employment decisions.

You can listen to the full episode on the ABA’s website here. Whether you’re commuting, working out, or just looking for something more substantive than your usual playlist, it’s a conversation worth your time.

My thanks to Matt Greer for hosting and for facilitating such a balanced and engaging discussion, and to Nina Pirrotti for being a terrific conversation partner. One of the things I’ve always appreciated about the ABA’s podcast is its commitment to bringing together voices from different sides of the table — management and employee perspectives — and this episode was no exception.