‘We’ve all seen Terminator’: Workday study reveals Australian workers distrust AI to deliver promised benefits

A global study has revealed almost two-thirds of Australian workers distrust artificial intelligence – putting them on a potential collision course with their employers.

The Workday study showed that 60 per cent of Australians were worried about the trustworthiness of AI – the highest level recorded out of any country surveyed. Picture: Hemdale Film Corporation

Almost two-thirds of Australians distrust artificial intelligence – a new study from human resources software titan Workday has revealed – setting up workers on a potential collision course with their bosses.

Most Australian chief executives say harnessing the power of AI is one of the few ways to jump-start flatlining productivity, according to The Australian’s 2024 CEO Survey.

But the Workday research – based on a survey of almost 1300 business leaders and 4000 employees across 15 countries – shows Australian workers are sceptical about the rapid adoption of the much-hyped technology.

The study showed that 60 per cent of Australians were worried about the trustworthiness of AI – the highest level recorded out of any country surveyed.

Furthermore, 55 per cent of Australian employees said it was critical that their employers consider how AI systems affect the broader workforce, with an additional 30 per cent not confident that their bosses will put staff interests over their own when implementing the technology.

Workday vice-president corporate affairs Chandler Morse said the research highlighted a disconnect between bosses and employees on where the upside was in adopting AI.

Workday vice-president corporate affairs Chandler Morse.

“The narrative certainly is ‘the robots are coming’. We all saw Terminator and ‘it’s going to take away all the jobs’. But we haven’t found that to be the case,” Mr Morse said.

“The way we view it is like everyone’s job has some mundane tasks associated with it that you would think AI could be used to automate some of it … and free up people to do higher levels of work, more thoughtful work. Certainly our focus is not on job eradication.”

But Mr Morse said three out of four employees that were surveyed suggested that their workplace wasn’t collaborating on AI regulation.

“From my perspective, I took it as a really positive sign because it sort of suggested to me that workers are looking for AI regulation as a way of making sure that the way that AI would be implemented would be in a trustworthy and ethical way.”

The need for tighter rules on AI’s deployment comes as the courts, not governments, are deciding some of the biggest concerns about the technology’s use, with copyright emerging as a key battleground.

The New York Times is suing Microsoft and ChatGPT maker Open AI, alleging their AI models used millions of articles for training without permission. Getty Images has also launched legal action against Stability AI in Delaware, alleging it infringed on Getty’s copyrights.

Getty Images chief product officer Grant Farhall said artists had the right to be compensated fairly, regardless of how much money made, and it was in the tech behemoths’ interests to do so.

The Albanese government released its interim response into the safe and responsible use of AI two weeks ago – almost eight months after vowing to crack down on the technology. But the government is set to adopt a lighter US-style touch in regulating AI, clarifying and strengthening existing laws rather than creating new ones like the European Union has done.

The Albanese government is mindful of crimping any of the expected $600bn a year that AI is expected to inject into the national economy by the end of the decade, saying any regulation needs to be mindful of stifling innovation.

This is a similar strategy to the US, which is cautious of surrendering its competitive advantage to China.

But Mr Morse believed that different regulatory regimes across Western countries could work together.

“Our goal is to find as much international harmonisation among like-minded democracies and like-minded governments as we can to facilitate a path forward that we think meets our values as a company and meets the expectation of downstream users in a way that will provide them the trust they need to actually use these tools.

“I always use this example – which isn’t the greatest – but its like an American football game. We’re probably coming out of the first quarter. It’s still early days. There’s a lot that has to be kind of ironed out.

“I think the conversation is maturing to (say) ‘look, we think we think these tools are important, and we think they can have a real benefit’. In many ways the hesitation to act in the US is a hesitation to stamp out innovation. There is this general sense of like, we need to find a way to work … forward that doesn’t snuff out the benefits of these tools, but that does have them be implemented in a way that’s really safe.”