A federal inquiry has asked the government to classify HR systems that use AI technology “high-risk” and require “meaningful consultation and transparency” with staff around any use of workplace surveillance tech.
The Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training published its findings [pdf] late on Tuesday, putting employers, and IT and HR teams on notice.
The inquiry is pushing for substantial extra workplace and worker protections around how and where AI and automated decision-making (ADM) technology can be used.
If the committee has its way, it would mean all “AI systems used for employment-related purposes … including recruitment, referral, hiring, remuneration, promotion, training, apprenticeship, transfer or termination”, would be classed as “high-risk”.
This, it appears, would make these systems subject to AI safety rules being drawn up by the Department of Industry Science and Resources (DISR) in the form of “mandatory guardrails”.
Employers and HR teams would also have to disclose uses of AI or ADM systems in the workplace, and use of the technology would be “banned for final decision-making without any human oversight, especially human resourcing decisions”.
Employees, meanwhile, would gain “a legislative right to an explanation” of how AI or ADM is used in the workplace, and have to be consulted “on the use of surveillance measures and data” by these systems.
“With the increasing digitisation of workplaces – from work-from-home arrangements to phone recordings – there is a surge in worker data being collected by employers,” the committee wrote.
“This can have significant impacts on workers. Excessive monitoring and surveillance of workplaces can negatively affect workplace health and safety.
“Technology used to track workers’ attainment of KPIs can create unsafe workplaces. This can lead to significant physical and psychosocial harms. It can reduce dignity and job control for workers, leading to mental health impacts.
“Excessive monitoring and surveillance technologies can also facilitate bullying, harassment, discrimination, and other inappropriate conduct in the workplace. The evidence suggests that is even more pronounced for marginalised cohorts.”
The committee added its view that “with the rapid digital transformation of workplaces, employers are arguably engaging in excessive data collection.”
For tech teams, consultation with users could become a requirement of any project.
The committee sought “strengthen[ed] obligations on employers to consult workers on major workplace changes before, during, and after the introduction of new technology.”
“This should include consideration of whether the introduction of a technology is fit for purpose and does not unduly disadvantage workers,” it wrote.
At present, these are all recommendations from the committee, and it is unclear how many – if any – the government might choose to adopt.