Ohio lawmakers in Columbus are taking a hard look at hiring by algorithm, rolling out a proposal that would put guardrails around how employers use artificial intelligence to size up workers. House Bill 828, introduced this week, would block companies from leaning entirely on automated tools, require a human to review any AI-driven decision, and give applicants the right to ask for a non-AI evaluation. Backers say the move is about keeping biased code from slamming doors on qualified people, while some business interests and legislators warn about slamming the brakes on a fast-changing technology.
The bill would carve a new section into the Ohio Revised Code spelling out what counts as an “automated employment decision tool” and exactly what employers have to do if they want to use one. Companies would have to give workers or applicants written notice at least 10 days before deploying an automated system and spell out the qualifications the tool checks, the type and source of the data it relies on, and how long that data sticks around. It also says employers, staffing agencies and placement services "shall not rely solely" on an automated tool, and that any output must be reviewed by a human, according to the bill text.
The measure was filed April 21, 2026, by Reps. Ismail Mohamed (D‑Columbus) and Veronica R. Sims (D‑Akron). The official bill page lists multiple Democratic cosponsors and links to the full language, according to the Ohio House of Representatives.
Rep. Mohamed has argued that automated systems can quietly bake in existing bias and put extra hurdles in front of certain applicants and employees. Skeptics have countered that lawmakers should be careful about clamping down too early on a young industry, a concern noted in coverage by NBC4.
What the bill would require
If HB 828 passes, employers that want to use an automated employment decision tool would have to warn people first and pull back the curtain a bit. Written notice would be required at least 10 days before the tool is used, along with an explanation of what the system is looking for and where it gets its inputs. Workers and jobseekers could request an alternative, non-AI assessment, and if they do, the employer would have to make the hiring or employment decision using that alternate route. The proposal also requires employers to disclose how long they plan to keep any data fed into these systems, according to the bill text.
Statewide context
Ohio is not operating in a vacuum here. Across the country, states are experimenting with rules that keep AI on a shorter leash when it comes to high-stakes calls like hiring and pay. Colorado and Illinois, for example, have already adopted disclosure, audit or bias-mitigation requirements for certain automated employment tools, according to HR Executive. At the Statehouse in Columbus, lawmakers have been busy floating a range of AI-related ideas this year, from limits on deepfakes to rules around chatbot accountability, as tracked in coverage highlighted by WOUB.
What’s next
HB 828 is still at the starting line, officially listed as introduced on April 21, 2026, and waiting for its first hearings, according to LegiScan. The House Technology and Innovation Committee, which has already been juggling several AI proposals this session, is the most likely venue for the bill’s initial debates.
If the measure wins approval, Ohio employers that lean on hiring software will face stricter paperwork, more transparency about how their tools work and a clear obligation to offer human-centered alternatives. For Columbus employers and jobseekers alike, HB 828 is one to watch as it starts winding its way through the Statehouse calendar.
