44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 20, 2023
- 11:23:53 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Oh, absolutely. There are a bunch of things. First off, there's a huge issue in terms of intellectual property, copyright in particular. Particularly with these large language models like ChatGPT, they're trained on a bunch of data that is out there, much of which is under copyright protection and out there on the Internet. It can result in cases, and some of these have been very clearly demonstrated, in which they are more or less reproducing copyrighted material without permission.
Antitrust is also an issue. I referred earlier to the effect of information technology generally increasing the dominance of large firms. I believe AI is going to accelerate that tendency. It's not directly an immediate problem for antitrust law, but it means that antitrust law is going to become that much more important as the dominance of these firms grows.
I will also—
147 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:25:03 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Thank you.
I'm sorry to interrupt you. I have only a few more moments here.
If I could just add on to that, what would you recommend the Canadian government look at specifically, especially around privacy laws? What recommendations would you give?
43 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:25:18 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
In terms of intellectual property, I think there are some strong recommendations about copyright that need to be effected, and that's going to be a big problem to work out. In terms of privacy laws, it's much more difficult and it concerns the extent to which privacy-protected information is being made available to AI systems that may reuse it in a different way. This is the problem the other speaker referred to.
It is—
78 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:26:03 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
You can continue with another questioner.
Thank you, Ms. Gray.
We'll go to Mr. Coteau for six minutes, please.
20 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:26:12 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to our witnesses today. I found each of your testimonies interesting. They complemented one another as well.
I'm going to start off with the gentleman from Unifor. Mr. Carrière, you spoke about the way unions will be positioned in this as we further adopt AI. I thought it was interesting the way you spoke about a regulatory framework being necessary. I understand that part of it.
The piece that is interesting to me is, outside of the government regulations, if unions are not involved in the big private sector jobs that are growing.... Mr. Bessen talked about how these big corporations will dominate a lot of the space. Outside of the public jobs, what is the strategy for organized labour, to make sure they and their workers are protected through the collective agreement process if they're not necessarily part of the growth that's taking place? Do you have any thoughts on that?
165 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:27:33 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Thank you, Mr. Coteau.
The current challenge is that there’s no discussion with employers about this. There’s no discussion about the potential consequences of integrating a new technology. There will only be discussions if we know in advance that there will be job losses. There is no obligation to discuss how a job will be modified, simplified or made more complex. There is no structure. The labour movement, again—
75 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:28:13 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Who would be included in this conversation, from your perspective? Who would be included in this conversation if the jobs are not necessarily coming from union jobs? How do you envision that?
32 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:28:26 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
In a context where there are no unions, a government structure must require the setting up of workers’ committees to explain to people what we want to implement, how it will affect work and how we will be able to correct the negative effects or unwanted pernicious effects of algorithmic management. If, in the algorithmic management tool, there are features that discriminate unintentionally, we need to be able to correct the application of the management tool.
The management tool is replacing the manager. Workers and employers need to collectively build management tools. If there are mistakes or negative trends, we must give ourselves the necessary means to correct them. This absolutely requires dialogue with workers, through a structure that is not necessarily the union structure. We need to set up such a structure.
134 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:29:38 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Thank you very much for being here. I think the organized labour voice is very important in this conversation. I appreciate the fact that you joined us here today.
Mr. Lockhart, I have a question for you. You said that 2% of job vacancies that are being published today cite AI skills as a requirement. Do you think that 2% is a true reflection of the actual sector, or is that just the jobs?
Do you think that because it's becoming easier to incorporate AI without specific skill sets—as I think you stated—the 2% is an under-representation of that skills that are actually required?
What tools can be placed in the job without the employee needing those specific skill sets?
I hope I made sense.
131 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:30:37 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
That makes total sense.
We saw that just 2% of all jobs have any kind of AI skills. You're exactly right in saying those AI skills are traditional tech-based skills—things that require advanced training to use. There is a generation of new, generative tools that take natural language inputs and don't require the same technical skills to use.
That said, there is still a whole range of technologies that require those digital and technical skills to use. The new technologies aren't necessarily replacing them. They're more additive. They're operating in new areas in which the old technologies didn't help. There is still going to be increased demand and need for AI skills, broadly.
The same workers who don't have AI skills and are being asked for AI skills are going to be able to adopt the new tools, but they might not necessarily be able to use any of the older, existing tools.
163 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:31:43 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Thank you.
I was very fascinated, Mr. Bessen, with how you started off your conversation.
You said there was a lot of media hype around AI and that this is just a continuation of a 70-year process. Hopefully, over the course of the remainder of the time, I can get a little more detail on that. It is a very fascinating and popular subject. I'd like to hear more about why you think it's part of a long story, rather than something new.
Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.
92 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:32:23 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
We'll capture that in another question. The time is out.
Ms. Chabot, you have six minutes.
18 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:32:36 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Good morning, Chair.
I’d like to thank the witnesses for being with us. Your testimony is very important, even if we don’t have all the answers and we don’t yet know all the challenges associated with implementing artificial intelligence in the workplace.
Mr. Carrière, you opened by telling us that the challenge is the total lack of information and guidance. Can you tell us a little more about that?
78 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:33:22 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Thank you very much, Ms. Chabot.
Presently, we seem to want unions and employers to find the magic bullet or the magic wand. Instead, I think it’s going to take the federal and provincial governments to put regulations in place, according to their respective areas of jurisdiction.
The first step to understanding the effects of algorithmic management is being aware of what’s going on. Employees must be informed and consulted. This will ensure transparency and explainability. The only effects of algorithmic management that we are currently seeing are negative ones. We see work decreasing rather than increasing.
What we see is a decision-making tool, a computer application, making decisions and diagnosing anomalies instead of the individual. Our impression is that, in unionized workplaces that apply an algorithmic management program, workers find themselves dehumanized. Dehumanization is a strong word. In fact, the individual is clearly told that their judgment is no longer needed, because a computer tool does the thinking for them. That demotivates people, since they become automatons, i.e., they perform a task without thinking.
Currently, people are unaware that they are being replaced. What’s more, they’re being asked to feed data into the tools that are going to replace them. We need to get back to basics. We need to impose, probably through the Labour Code, a conversation about the kinds of technology companies want to use, and we need to determine its impact.
246 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:35:29 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Unifor represents thousands of workers in Quebec and across Canada, in a number of sectors.
Now that implementation has begun in some sectors, have you observed any impact on certain job categories?
32 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:35:54 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Yes, there have been numerous consequences. This is hardly a new phenomenon. Technological changes have had such repercussions for many years, even decades.
Take Bell Canada, for example, in the telecom sector. For 15 years, surveillance tools have been capturing and recording all data relating to workers’ production in order to measure and analyze their performance or incompetence, as the case may be. At Bell Canada, for instance, a performance management system based on forced ranking was introduced. Under this system, an individual ranked in the bottom quartile is met by the employer because algorithmic tools have determined that their performance is weaker than that of others. Because an employee is weaker than others, a performance management plan is applied, notwithstanding the manager’s judgment. The manager relies on the algorithmic tool to make a decision. That’s what we’ve seen in the telecom sector.
In the transport sector, every single driver is monitored 24/7. All data is captured and recorded. Once again, algorithmic tools are superseding the judgment and expertise of individuals. These tools will tell a truck driver, for example, where to go to get from point A to point B, because it’s more efficient. We’re completely removing the worker’s judgment and replacing it with an algorithm.
There are several similar examples, but, in general, we’re unaware of it, because it hasn’t been disclosed. If it doesn’t involve employers cutting jobs, it isn’t discussed. And yet, many jobs disappeared five, six or eight years after this kind of tool was integrated. So this dialogue never happens. That’s why we first need to develop mechanisms to inform and consult employees. Then, we need to work together to build the tools. Finally, we need to give ourselves the means to adapt them, if necessary.
317 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:38:16 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Are there any examples of social dialogue in this area?
I’m talking mostly about Quebec. For instance, I'm aware of the Commission des partenaires du marché du travail, a social dialogue forum.
Are there any good practices in workplaces?
43 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:38:36 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
It’s in its infancy, but it’s inadequate. We’re already lagging.
16 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:38:48 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
It’s disturbing to see that we’re moving forward without informing people. In the workplace, we’re just beginning to acknowledge these practices and their consequences.
30 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:38:57 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
5 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
