Union puts ‘huge’ AI training package proposal to reform roundtable

The Australian Services Union says employees should enjoy shorter hours and higher base pay as a productivity dividend of AI.

Australian Services Union national secretary Emeline Gaske says AI must be accompanied by accredited training. Picture: supplied

Australia’s biggest white-collar union will urge the Albanese government and employers to fund a “huge” national accredited training program to support workers using artificial intelligence and push for employees to enjoy shorter working hours and higher base pay as a productivity dividend of AI.

Calling for the proposal to be backed by the Economic Reform Roundtable next week, the Australian Services Union will also cite new research showing that while 80 per cent of workers had a basic to intermediate knowledge of AI, an extraordinary 84 per cent had not been offered training.

Urging a new collaborative approach to ensure the technology delivered fair benefits for all, ASU national secretary Emeline Gaske said the federal government and employers must provide funding to ensure workers had access to accredited training that focused on AI literacy, digital skills and career transition support.

“Unions can’t resist AI any more than we could’ve resisted the internet,” Ms Gaske said. “But it must come with an industry adjustment package that starts with workforce training.

“This is a huge productivity opportunity that can drive new jobs, and it has to come with a fair opportunity for retraining so that everyone benefits, not just company profits.”

Ms Gaske said workers must receive a fair share of the productivity gains from AI. “This means giving workers their time back – shorter work weeks, more time for life, family and care,” she said.

The ASU also called for increases in base rates of pay to recognise the skills of workers.

“When AI handles the routine work, human skills like judgment and teamwork become more valuable,” the union said. “These skills must be properly recognised and rewarded, which means updating award classifications to ensure fair pay for the future.”

Almost half the workers surveyed said their employer had formally introduced AI tools, but only a third of workplaces had a formal policy to guide their use. More than eight in 10 workers said they had not been consulted about the use of AI at work.

The ASU cited a landmark 2023 agreement between Microsoft Corp and the American Federation of Labour and Congress of Industrial Organisations to create an open dialogue to discuss how AI must anticipate the needs of workers and include their voices in its development and implementation.

Ms Gaske said the agreement showed collaboration between tech giants and unions was not just possible, “it was essential for a fair future”.

“If a deal can be done in the US to give 12.5 million workers a seat at the table, there is no reason we can’t achieve a similar partnership here in Australia. It’s a template for how we can manage this transition together,” she said.

The ASU proposal argues that all workers need access to AI tools that make their jobs better.

“This means using technology to reduce burdensome tasks and improve satisfaction, not to ramp up workloads or monitor workers unfairly,” the union said.

Calling for workers to be involved at every step of AI implementation, it said “clear guardrails” were essential to ensure AI assisted not replaced employees, while also protecting against bias, securing data and limiting its environmental footprint.

The survey found that less than 30 per cent of workers felt comfortable using AI for their daily tasks, with 65 per cent of members feeling that while AI could be useful, they were unsure about its potential impact on their job.

“Workers are telling us they want to make this work,” Ms Gaske said. “By investing in training, guaranteeing workers a say and ensuring the gains are shared, we can boost productivity and improve the quality of jobs right across the economy.

“Ahead of the productivity roundtable, we are putting a constructive, evidence-based plan to the table.”