You don’t need a technical explanation of artificial intelligence to know something feels off.

We see it online, where the same product costs different amounts depending on who’s buying.

We see it when a loan, insurance rate, or service price changes based on data we never agreed to share or can’t see.

We feel it at work, where decisions are being made by systems no one can explain.

Call it AI, algorithms, or “dynamic pricing”—the label doesn’t really matter.What’s actually happening is the already rigged system is getting even more unfair. 

One of the clearest examples is happening right now in grocery stores.

Across the country, and right here in Connecticut, there’s growing concern about algorithmic pricing tools that can raise prices in real time based on demand, location, or consumer behavior.

To corporations, it’s efficiency. But to consumers, it’s price gouging.

Because when prices can be adjusted instantly and invisibly, the question becomes: what’s stopping companies from charging the absolute maximum people can bear?

Christopher DeCiantis is a P4 Steward and Information Technology Analyst 3 for the Department of Administration’s Bureau of Information Technology Solutions (BITS) in service to the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) (say that three times). He submitted testimony last month to legislators around AI-protections, “When you use A.I., if it does not know the answer, it will confidently give you the wrong answer.”

That’s not just a technical flaw. That’s a real-world problem when those “answers” determine someone’s schedule, paycheck, or job security.

That same dynamic is already showing up on the job. AI systems are increasingly being used to set schedules, monitor productivity, evaluate performance and flag workers for discipline or termination. 

Bianca Beland, a P4 steward and Environmental Analyst with DEEP, described the impact to workers when this happens during last month’s hearing, “When I worked in retail, my manager personally created our schedules because she knew we are all human and that compassion and flexibility was often needed due to staff needing time off for things like births, deaths, and illnesses. Automated decision systems aren’t human - and they can’t be programmed to have real human compassion, sympathy, or empathy.”

That kind of flawed data doesn’t just sit in a spreadsheet. It feeds into performance metrics, evaluations, and decisions about workers’ futures.

Information Technology Subject Matter Expert and P4 Steward, Lester Tillman (Department of Administrative Services/Bureau of Information Technology in service to the Department of Developmental Services), gave an example to legislators of the impact that taking humans out of the loop will have “Currently the state has technology engineers that use automated systems to facilitate processes and work flows in the sharing and distribution of information. This is understood to help improve work performance, but even with these automated processes there are human engineers running them.”

There’s a pattern emerging, when AI is introduced without guardrails, companies gain more control while workers and consumers lose visibility and mistakes become harder to challenge. While the bottom 90% eat up the costs. 00

Even the infrastructure behind AI follows the same pattern. Massive data centers require enormous amounts of energy, putting pressure on electric grids and driving up costs for ratepayers.

So again, the question is simple: who benefits, and who pays?

Right now, Connecticut is already pushing back on some of the most visible harms—like AI-driven price manipulation.

But we also need to recognize that the same technology reshaping prices is reshaping workplaces.

That’s where Senate Bill 435 comes in which would establish basic protections around automated decision systems in the workplace—ensuring that when AI is used to make decisions about workers, there are protections and guardrails in place. 

Technology should make life better—not more expensive, less transparent, or harder to challenge. Workers and consumers deserve to understand the decisions that affect their lives. And no one should lose a job, a paycheck, or the ability to afford basic necessities because of a system that doesn’t know what it’s doing—but pretends it does.

This legislative session, lawmakers must take on AI protections which includes passing SB 435, not to stop innovation, but to make sure it works for everyone.