Artificial intelligence: Separating labour, time from privacy

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a topic that has dominated conversations around advances in science and technology in recent times.

Most of the discussions centre around the hopes and anxieties AI presents.

Google’s boss once stated that AI will do for humanity more than fire and electricity have done. In the business world, firms of all types are harnessing AI to forecast demand, hire workers and deal with customers.

Studies have shown that just applying AI to marketing, sales and supply chains could generate economic value including profit and efficiencies valued at $2.7 trillion over the next two decades or sooner.

AI at the workplace can benefit workers and employers. Machines can help ensure that pay rises and promotions go to those who deserve them. It starts with hiring.

People often have bias when it comes to recruitment but an algorithm, if designed correctly, can be more impartial.

Privacy

The area where AI raises more concerns is the surveillance of workers. Surveillance at the workplace actually predates AI so it is not anything new.

Workers have long checked in and out at the workplace, but AI makes ubiquitous surveillance worthwhile because every bit of data is collected at the workplace and many employees unguardedly consent to surveillance when they sign their employment contract.

One important thing to take note of is that algorithms may not be free of biases from their programmers. They can also have unintended consequences. Monitoring employees with AI-enabled software raises questions on privacy as people are now beginning to question to what extent tech companies know their private lives.

Balance

A fairer more productive workforce is a prize worth having, but not if it shackles and dehumanises employees. A balance is clearly needed in this regard. This will require thought, a strong dose of humanity and the willingness of both workers and employers to adapt to the AI intrusion into the workplace space.

This situation calls for a trade-off between performance and privacy. Unfortunately, few laws govern how data are collected at the workplace, and where the need arises for an employer to resist unnecessary intrusion into his or her privacy, resistance becomes impossible to avoid loss of employment.

Vulnerable workers

Some people are better placed than others to stop employers from going too far. If your skills are in demand, you are more likely to be able to resist than if you can be easily replaced. This places vulnerable workers at a disadvantage.

This situation could fuel the resurgence of labour unions seeking to protect workers’ interests. Worse of all is where choices in some jobs become choosing between being treated like a robot or being replaced by one.

Regulation

As regulators and employers weigh the pros and cons of AI at the workplace, three principles ought to guide its speed.

Firstly, data has to be anonymous where possible. Secondly, the use of AI ought to be transparent. Employees should be told what technologies are being used at their workplace and which data are being collected.

As a matter of routine, algorithms used by firms to hire and fire and for promotions at the workplace should be tested for biases and unintended consequences.

Lastly, countries should let individuals request their own data whether they are ex-workers wishing to contest a dismissal or jobseekers hoping to demonstrate their ability to prospective employers.

There is no need for anyone to be left behind or allowed to be disadvantaged by this useful tech tool that is making waves.

The writer is with the Institute of Current Affairs and Diplomacy (ICAD).

E-mail: Lawmat2014@gmail.com