Public Hearing Testimony of Commissioner Danté Bartolomeo
Department of Labor
General Law Committee
March 4, 2026
Good morning, Senator Maroney, Representative Lemar, Senator Cicarella, Representative Rutigliano, and members of the General Law Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to provide you with written testimony regarding SB 5: AN ACT CONCERNING ONLINE SAFETY. My name is Danté Bartolomeo, and I am the Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Labor.
The Connecticut Department of Labor (CTDOL) understands that the intent of Section 24 of SB 5 is to establish the “Connecticut AI Academy”. CTDOL appreciates that Section 24 would require the Board of Regents to consult with our agency in establishing the academy and agrees that employers should also be a part of the process.
We would, however, like to make the committee aware of our concern with subdivision (b)(6) of Sec. 24 which would require the academy to “Develop courses concerning artificial intelligence that the Labor Department and Workforce Investment Boards may incorporate into workforce training programs.”. We would respectfully request that the committee consider removing CTDOL from this subdivision, as the Department does not provide training directly to participants. All state and federal training dollars directed to CTDOL are administered and contracted to the Workforce Development Boards for their employees and subcontractors to provide training, or they are contracted to statutorily prescribed entities for their direct programming and workforce training.
We would also respectfully request that the committee amend the term “Workforce Investment Boards” in lines 1325 and 1339 and replace it with the current designation per CGS 31-3k, “Workforce Development Boards”.
CTDOL understands that Section 26 of SB 5 would require CTDOL to provide information on the Connecticut AI Academy to individuals filing for Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits. While CTDOL supports providing information to UI claimants, this would result in a fiscal impact to the agency that is not currently accounted for in the Governor’s proposed budget adjustments and not an allowable federal expenditure. There are both staff and vendor costs to design, develop and produce such a change in ReEmployCT, our state’s UI claims portal. There may also be future costs to remove the information from the ReEmployCT portal should there be an end date to the period of time that CTDOL is required to provide this information to UI claimants. Lastly on Section 26, CTDOL would appreciate dialogue with the General Law Committee regarding ReEmployCT changes already in the queue and potential conflicts with the effective date of January 1, 2027, if this bill passes as written.
Section 34 of SB 5 would require all employers which serve written notice to CTDOL pursuant to the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act (29 USC 2102(a)) to also notify CTDOL if the layoffs that triggered the notice are “related to the employer's use of artificial intelligence or another technological change.” We would welcome and appreciate continued dialogue with the Committee to ensure that this requirement would not result in an additional fiscal impact to CTDOL.
Section 38 of SB 5 requires CTDOL to establish an Artificial Intelligence Workforce Research Hub that would be required to “(1) track the impact of artificial intelligence on the state's workforce, (2) conduct research to evaluate the impact of artificial intelligence on the state's workforce, including, but not limited to, the experiences of those members of the state's workforce whose employment has been impacted by artificial intelligence, and (3) produce recurring analyses, conduct scenario planning for a range of potential artificial intelligence impact levels and generate actionable insights to inform policy for training programs to mitigate any adverse impact of artificial intelligence on employment in the state.”
CTDOL cannot implement Sec. 38 within available state appropriations and this would not be a permissible expenditure of federal grants. CTDOL’s Office of Research does not currently have the staff capacity nor subject matter expertise to establish the AI Workforce Research Hub, conduct the necessary surveys, and write the mandated reports. Implementing this section would result in a fiscal impact to the agency. CTDOL would need to hire one associate economist and one research analyst. If the Committee does move forward with this section, we would also respectfully request that the effective date be amended to January 1, 2027, at the earliest.
Section 39 requires the Office of Workforce Strategy (OWS) to “…develop, implement and promote programs to improve the skills of the state's workforce in relation to artificial intelligence and a plan to create apprenticeships for technologists in the field of artificial intelligence.” We would like to note that Registered Apprenticeship Programs in the State of Connecticut are solely administered by CTDOL’s Office of Apprenticeship Training, the only federally recognized State
Apprenticeship Agency in CT. For any Registered Apprenticeship Program to be developed, an employer must commit to hiring the Registered Apprentice before or upon commencement of the Program and must partner with the agency to design and sign off on the program. All Registered Apprenticeship Programs must include 1) direct industry involvement 2) structured on the job learning 3) related instruction and 4) a progressive wage scale. CTDOL would appreciate being
included in continued conversations with the proponents of this bill and OWS regarding the stated goal of developing Registered Apprenticeship Programs for technologists or any other occupation with employers of the AI industry.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide the Committee with this written testimony. My staff and I are reachable to further discuss SB 5 by directing any questions you may have to Billy Taylor, Legislative and Administrative Advisor at william.b.taylor@ct.gov or 203-947-4136.
