An overreliance on such technologies, at least as they stand today, can lead to a host of issues

The integration of artificial intelligence (“AI”) and automation is transforming job roles and skill requirements across industries. Routine tasks, which once occupied a significant portion of employees’ time, are increasingly handled by machines, theoretically freeing up workers to focus on more complex and creative endeavours.

What is often not considered is that the skillsets of the existing workforce are rarely readily transferable without additional training and development. Increasing automation will undoubtedly lead to an emphasis on so-called “soft” skills in order for employees to adapt and thrive. Problem solving, critical thinking, communication, and emotional intelligence are becoming essential assets in this new landscape.

Learning to use AI technologies will soon be prerequisite to performing existing jobs. Whether it is assisting healthcare professionals in analyzing imaging in the medical field, for example, or helping accountants organize and synthesize large data sets, harnessing these technologies will be just as important as developing new skills.

For employers looking to replace certain roles and job functions with AI, it is critical to conduct an assessment as to the true impact such innovations will have on their bottom line. While it may be tempting to use the technologies to bring down costs, if doing so leads to substantial or consistent layoffs, employers will be on the hook for large severance costs — not to mention potential human rights damages.

An overreliance on such technologies, at least as they stand today, can lead to a host of issues. We have already seen missteps in the practice of law, where lawyers have cited non-existent cases generated from ChatGPT to support their position in front of courts. In a previous article, we reviewed the dangers of using AI in the hiring and firing process as it relates to discrimination.

Take one recent and troubling case that caught worldwide attention. A U.S.-based company terminated most of its human resources department after a manager realized that all of the job applications submitted through its applicant tracking system (“ATS”) were being rejected. This was after the manager had repeatedly expressed frustration over the company not attracting qualified candidates. The HR team continually assured him they were receiving applications, but said the applicants were unqualified. Not convinced this was true, the manager took it upon himself to test what the HR team was telling him by submitting his own CV under a pseudonym.

Lo and behold, despite his impressive qualifications, the manager’s application was immediately rejected. In other words, no human at the company had even looked at his application before it was discarded. It turned out that the HR team had implemented improper filtering criteria into the ATS system, and those responsible were promptly fired.

It is clear that there are dangers in employing these technologies in the workplace, even beyond the discrimination that can arise. In order to adapt to the new demands, workers should develop the skills necessary to be more effective and attractive on the job market. It is equally important that both employees and employers not become complacent and overreliant on AI without having human checks and balances in place to mitigate risks.

Employees, meanwhile, can still take solace in the fact that, while AI may replace or augment certain jobs, a human touch is, and will be for the foreseeable future, a necessary component of any workplace.