Where the Fashion Workers Act Stands, One Year In

One year ago today, New York signed the Fashion Workers Act into law, legislating access to workplace protection for models, and enforcing tighter regulation policies for the management companies that represent them. Now, the one-year grace period for the act’s mandatory registration requirements has ended, meaning agencies must be registered as model management companies or groups with the New York Department of Labor (NYDL) to better enable models to discern legitimate representation.

Since the Fashion Workers Act took effect, at the time of publishing, 67 companies have registered as model management companies or groups, including DNA Models and Elite Model Agency. As of Thursday, companies including IMG Models and Wilhelmina had not yet registered, but both confirmed they were in the process of doing so in the days ahead of the end of week deadline.

Registration helps to protect models by providing clarity about which management companies are legitimate. “In light of this global reckoning with the history of systemic abuse in the industry, and more coming to light about teenage girls who were trafficked under the guise of modeling work, I’ve been banging the drum for a really long time,” says Sara Ziff, founder and executive director of industry non-profit Model Alliance. “It’s better late than never.”

It’s a legislative win for the Model Alliance. How will it impact the industry and its workers – and will it set the stage for further legislation?

In addition to registering as a model management company or group, under the Fashion Workers Act, agencies must provide financial transparency; advance delivery of contracts; compliance with legal requirements for employment involving nudity or explicit material; a 20% commission cap; itemized expense and deduction disclosures with prior written approval; a three-year maximum contract term; a ban on upfront fees; and renewal every two years (no fewer than 90 days before expiration).

The registry is an important tool for models seeking to distinguish legitimate businesses from scams, Ziff says, while cautioning that an agency being listed doesn’t automatically mean that it’s complying with all of the Fashion Workers Act’s requirements. But if a company isn’t registered, that should be a red flag for any model looking for representation, she flags.

Modeling agencies that fail to comply will face monetary penalties. The state labor commissioner can impose fines of up to $3,000 for an initial violation, and up to $5,000 for subsequent violations. The act also allows models to file a complaint with the NYDL within six years of the alleged conduct, while prohibiting retaliation. “If a model management company is found to have violated the act, it will be liable to the model for actual damages, reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, and liquidated damages — unless the model management company had a good faith basis to believe they were in compliance,” says Jeffrey Weston, partner at ArentFox Schiff.

Clients for whom the model is working are also responsible for certain duties under the act. These include: overtime pay, meal breaks, liability insurance, written anti-harassment policies, and allowing a model to bring a representative to set. These are the duties that brands are responsible for.

The Model Alliance is now turning its efforts toward enforcing the act — and it’s getting the necessary government support, Ziff says. On Tuesday night, the organization hosted an event marking one year since the Fashion Workers Act passed. “We had the commissioner of the New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection under [New York City mayor Zohran] Mamdani and he’s brilliant,” Ziff says. “He is just very forward thinking on these issues.”

“We have ushered in a new standard for worker protections in fashion, but passing a law is just the beginning,” Ziff acknowledges. “The next step is implementation, making sure workers know their rights, companies understand their responsibilities, and, of course, that violations are addressed when they happen.”

For Model Alliance, enforcement is twofold. First, it involves providing models with resources to understand what their rights are. The organization also provides recourse when these rights are violated. Since the law was enacted, about a third of the hundreds of inquiries they’ve fielded have involved scams or potential trafficking schemes. Now that the law is in place, models have a private right of action to enforce their rights if their agencies are in violation of the Fashion Workers Act. (Model Alliance can’t provide legal advice, but can connect models to the right lawyers.)

That the Fashion Workers Act is now law provides a baseline level of protection the organization could previously not default to. “We have strong enforcement mechanisms now,” Ziff says.

Companies, too, will have to change how they operate. “We’ve been doing this work against a backdrop of an industry that’s operated with remarkably few safeguards for models and workers more broadly,” Ziff says. “Models were often expected to sign one-sided contracts with their agencies. They’d work without knowing the basic terms of a job, like whether or how much they were being paid. They were expected to trust their agencies with enormous power and control over their working lives, even though these agencies had no legal obligation to act in their interests.”

Now they do. The law ought to afford models transparency into the contracts they’re signing, protections against “bogus” fees and expenses, and baseline health and safety standards, Ziff says. “This is so basic and almost feels ridiculous to have to celebrate rights and protections you would think models would already have, but that’s where we are,” she says. From here, Model Alliance is looking to partner with more government bodies and industry stakeholders to ensure everyone is aware of and engaged with these new regulations.

ArentFox Schiff’s Weston has been having his clients meet with the team that negotiates these agreements or deals directly with models and third parties, so that they understand the requirements, he says. “During these meetings — often in-person, so we can have an actual discussion — we discuss real scenarios that they are facing and how to address those going forward in a legally compliant way,” he says. “These meetings are helpful, because clients will obtain an understanding of the different requirements while giving them practical advice on how to comply.”

The gray area lies in the definition of ‘client’ in the act, Weston flags. It includes anyone who receives services from models, whether they’re hired by the brand directly or through a staffing agency. If a brand hires a model directly (rather than through a model management company), the act is not clear regarding whether the brand is required to comply with the duties imposed on model management companies, he says.

“[Brands] looking to stay ahead of the curve may wish to err on the side of complying with model management company requirements, as applicable, as well as those of clients at large,” Weston says. For brands, the safest bet is to hire models via an agency to ensure that they are not liable for the model management company requirements, in addition to the client (brand) duties.

In the modeling industry, the main concerns about AI center around the use of a model’s likeness without their consent. In the four years since the Fashion Workers Act was first proposed in 2022, discussions about the role and use of AI in the industry have continued to heat up.

“There has been an uptick in lawsuits from models claiming that companies have used AI computer-generated photos inappropriately, including modifying the original pose of the model into something different, and at times more provocative,” Weston says.

The act dictates that if a model’s digital replica is created or used — meaning an AI-generated representation of their face or body is produced — they have to consent.

As artificial intelligence infiltrates fashion, brands face a reckoning over ethics, artistry and employment.

To this end, companies ought to act on the side of caution, Weston advises. “Companies should audit existing contracts to address AI likeness rights, as required by the act. Broad boilerplate likeness grants are oftentimes insufficient,” he notes. “I encourage companies to define key terms such as ‘stylistic alterations’, so that there is no ambiguity as to what a company can do with AI-generated images. Companies should also explain what happens after the contract ends to any AI-generated or AI-altered depictions of the model.”

The Fashion Workers Act was one of the early laws to address the use of generative AI in the workplace, Ziff says. “At this moment, when AI is rapidly transforming many industries, not just fashion, the Fashion Workers Act recognizes something very simple but important: that workers deserve a say in how these technologies are used. This is not a silver bullet, but we’re building a foundation for labor rights in the digital age.”

J.Crew CMO Julia Collier on Marketing Americana in Modern Times

Can Sun-Protective Clothing Ever Be Chic? These Brands Think So