HR Policy Vice President of Workplace Policy Daniel Chasen served as an expert on a National Artificial Intelligence Advisory Committee panel on the implications of AI in the workforce.
The NAIAC, launched in April 2022, is tasked with providing recommendations to the President on the current state of AI, including its use in the workplace. Panelists agreed that AI tools have the potential to be helpful in the workplace but can have a negative impact on the workforce without appropriate oversight.
Mr. Chasen highlighted the ways companies are leveraging technology to:
- Identify learning opportunities and facilitate flexible, personalized upskilling, which can strengthen talent pipelines and improve retention rates.
- Facilitate workplace access and involvement of traditionally marginalized workers. This can mean improving work-life balance by improving workplace culture, automating flexible scheduling, or assisting workers with disabilities, among other developing use cases.
- Increase efficiencies in the labor market, connecting companies with talented workers who have non-traditional educations, career paths, and/or backgrounds.
There are many current examples of employer-driven efforts to ensure AI is used ethically and responsibly, Mr. Chasen noted, including several that HR Policy Association has led or joined. These include HR Policy Association’s AI principles(Opens in a new window) for company adoption, the World Economic Forum’s “Human-Centred Artificial Intelligence for Human Resources Toolkit, the Data & Trust Alliance, and efforts by a number of individual companies.
Mr. Chasen noted that member companies support standardized guidelines, and that any recommendations should, first, take into account that AI is not a monolithic concept. Therefore a “one-size-fits-all” approach to oversight may inadvertently expose workers to risk. Second, new guidelines should align with existing government policies and commonly adopted employer best practices, particularly as state and municipal efforts to regulate AI in the work environment multiply. And finally, guidelines should not require employers to undertake third party audits due to the fact that mature, auditable, and accepted standards to evaluate bias and fairness of AI systems do not yet exist.
Some forms of AI in the workplace do not eliminate inefficiencies but instead shift the burden to workers, argued Dr. Karen Levy, Associate Professor, Department of Information Science, Cornell University. Dr. Levy outlined that many forms of productivity monitoring force employees to focus on quantifiable aspects of their jobs due to the inability to capture thought or engagement with customers. Those in the trucking industry that have been most vocal against AI and most likely to leave the industry due to AI technologies are those with decades of safe driving histories. They argue the technology treats them like a child, rather than improving their workflow and reducing burden.
Workers should be at the center of AI technologies: Randi Weingarten, President, American Federal of Teachers opened her comments focusing on worker voice and the importance of their involvement; otherwise AI “gets done to people, not with people.” Ms. Weingarten described an environment with more examples of deskilling technology, which takes autonomy away from the worker, than assisted technology, which aids the worker in doing their job.
Closing out the conversation, Mr. Chasen stated that “AI should not replace human judgment.” In this rapidly moving space, leaders should continue to focus on principled approaches and developing best practices around developing, adopting, or using novel technologies.