Miners and unions set for brawl over shaping AI future

Miners are preparing for a fight with unions over how much power Labor gives them in blocking billions of dollars worth of investment in artificial technology out of fear jobs will be lost.

Minerals Council of Australia chief executive Tania Constable says unions should not be given a say in a company’s investment decision-making process. Picture: Colin Murty

You can now listen to The Australian's articles. Give us your feedback.

You can now listen to The Australian's articles.

Australia’s miners are preparing for a fight with unions over how much power Labor gives them in blocking billions of dollars worth of investment in artificial technology out of fear jobs will be lost.

The Minerals Council of Australia is concerned that the Albanese government will introduce legislation that would enable ­unions to have a say in management decisions to invest in artificial technology – essential for boosting productivity which has become Jim Chalmers’ second-term focus.

The mining sector has contributed up to half of the productivity gains for the economy and there are fears that a recent slump from the sector, which has dragged productivity growth to 60-year lows, could be exacerbated if ­investment in AI were stalled or prevented.

Minerals Council of Australia chief executive Tania Constable said unions should not be given a say in a company’s investment decision-making process.

“Technology decisions within companies should be driven by expertise and innovation, not union officials,” she said. “The idea of giving any external group the power to block or veto innovation will only further erode Australia’s competitiveness and take us backward as a nation.”

Westpac senior economist Pat Bustamante has noted that over the decade to the pandemic productivity growth averaged 1 per cent, with mining driving more than half of that. In its submission to the Productivity Commission’s five pillars inquiry, the ACTU called for the “worker voice” to be involved in the “design, development, implementation and ­review” of AI.

Flagging a fight on the issue at the upcoming economic reform roundtable, the ACTU accused the PC of failing to consider the “the potential risks that arise from the irresponsible use of these technologies”.

“It is striking and of concern that the PC’s approach has ­focused singularly on the question of regulation (with a clear implicit bias towards reducing regulation), and seems to be disengaged or unaware of the substantial amount of expert research that does exist on how to best achieve productivity gains through this new tech,” the ACTU says in its submission. “The PC ­appears to be pre-empting any regulation to reduce the risks and harms of the application of these technologies, given there don’t appear to be any regulatory barriers to the adoption or proliferation of AI across workplaces and the market place today.”

The stoush comes as former industry minister Ed Husic – who is a supporter of an economy-wide AI Act being pushed for by unions — was nominated by Labor’s caucus on Monday to be chair of the parliamentary economic committee, a body that would likely review reform proposals adopted from the August roundtable.

Mr Husic, who was dumped from cabinet after the May election over a factional stoush that reduced the power of the NSW Right, last term called for a lowering of the corporate tax rate, but his push was rejected by Anthony Albanese and the Treasurer.

Ahead of the 48th parliament beginning on Tuesday, the Prime Minister told Labor MPs the government would be driven by the “fundamental principles of no one left behind and no one held back”.

“I am absolutely committed to making sure that we seize the ­opportunity that we’ve being given to be able to create that fairer economy, that stronger economy,” Mr Albanese said. With business groups opposing a specific AI Act and pushing for minimal regulation of the technology, government ministers have talked up the productivity and job opportunities that can come from the technology but are also backing union involvement in implementation.

New Industry Minister Tim Ayres has not committed to a timeframe on when he will outline a regulatory framework for AI, recently telling The Australian an “Australian approach” to AI would see the technologies flourish while protecting workers from their “pitfalls”.

“I’m about leaning into the ­opportunity because it’s critical for our future competitiveness. It’s important for productivity growth and if we get the balance right, we will make work better,” he said.

Assistant Minister for Productivity Andrew Leigh recently told The Australian that unions must be involved in the introduction of artificial intelligence.

“You have to have unions at the table there and have that conversation. That’s it’s not unreasonable that we want to make sure that workers get a good share of what is the biggest technology to hit the economy in decades,” Mr Leigh said.

“Unions, management, everyone’s part of this conversation. I worked at a law firm, and so I’m in contact with a bunch of lawyers, and the biggest topic for the managers of law firms over recent years is thinking through how to effectively and ethically deploy AI.”

But on Monday, Mr Leigh signalled he was not supportive of an AI Act and said regulation should be “technologically neutral”.

The Australian revealed on Monday key unions were pushing for a discussion at the upcoming roundtable for shorter working weeks and more holidays in return for productivity gains.

Australian Manufacturing Workers Union national secretary Steve Murphy called for the Productivity Commission to be abolished, while Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation national secretary Annie Butler claimed the body was taking a “hardline economic approach” in assessing the value of the care economy.

Mr Murphy said AI had the ­potential of “eliminating jobs”.

“We think that there should be a discussion on the way in about their introduction, because you need workers to be able to ­implement it properly,” Mr Murphy said.

“We don’t fully understand the power and the capabilities of AI, and we also don’t understand its limitations, and it’s risks.

“So we want to have a bigger conversation about AI and its introduction into our industries.”