iscover
The Future of Work report has presented a clear stand-off between business and worker lobbying groups – fixating on how AI usage should manifest throughout the Aussie workplace.
The Future of Work report released by the House of Representatives standing committee on employment, education, and training has drawn the attention of various workplace delegates – primarily chiming in on the AI section of the report.
On the one hand, business lobbying groups were quick to rally against some of the recommendations within the report, stating the report had “missed the mark” by giving unions a disproportionate say in how AI technology could be implemented in the workplace.
Unions and worker groups, over recent months, have been pounding the pavement over real examples of unethical AI implementation across the Australian workplace.
One of the first initial examples of worker pushback against an AI-integrated framework came right at the end of 2024, with Woollies’ warehouse workers, a part of the United Workers Union (UWU), taking industrial action against what it deemed to be an “oppressive” system.
The framework – a system of performance management – implemented by Woollies introduced a demanding surveillance software that would constantly monitor workers, resulting in disciplinary consequences for those who fail to maintain a 100 per cent pick rate.
The UWU’s message was clear: the workers want to be “treated as human beings, not robots”. After a 17-day period of the strikes by the union and workers, Woolworths eventually proposed workplace agreements on the AI “framework” – which would break the link between measuring the speed of their work and automatic punishment if they fall behind.
Despite these very real scenarios of AI implementation causing dismay among workers, the Business Council of Australia (BCA) professed the need for Aussie businesses to harness and implement AI.
As stated in the report: “The Business Council of Australia underlined that it is imperative for Australia’s future prosperity and stability that we harness the productivity benefits presented by these technologies. Australia’s productivity growth was at a 60-year low in the last decade.”
“While poor productivity growth can be felt by other advanced economies, too, it is a strong reminder that ‘Australia must unlock productivity potential through digital means to remain competitive on a global scale’, requiring government and industry to be responsive and agile. This is also crucial to maintain Australia’s standard of living.”
However, the outlined rebuttal in the report to this claim argued that productivity and efficiency improvements for employers will not necessarily benefit workers directly; therefore, “opportunities for them need to be seized proactively”.
“Employers should equitably share productivity gains with workers through higher wages and improved conditions. This could be achieved through enterprise bargaining or legislative measures, especially given the potential for wage theft,” said Joseph Mitchell, assistant secretary at the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU).
As AI technology continues to evolve rapidly, this discourse will only continue to surge – setting up a continual tug-of-war between those looking to contain the threats that AI may pose on workers and those who want to unlock its productivity benefits moving forward.
Kace O'Neill
Kace O'Neill is a Graduate Journalist for HR Leader. Kace studied Media Communications and Maori studies at the University of Otago, he has a passion for sports and storytelling.
