The Great AI Job Displacement is Here - The Legal Implications

Hollywood writers are striking to defend their rights. In an era of high inflation and "cost of living crisis" when industrial action has been carried out across the board by public and private-sector staff, that would not be major news had it not been for the not-insignificant detail that Artificial Intelligence is at the heart of the dispute.

In fact, the Writers Guild of America West (WGA) is demanding that Artificial Intelligence not be used to write any "literary material". The Studios have so far rejected such a demand, and the strike is still ongoing.

By accepting to be contractually prevented from utilising AI, the Studios would set a significant precedent. In fact, as the fear of an upcoming AI-driven, jobless society spreads, other job categories and unions -galvanised by the writers' success- might demand that their employers refrain from using AI for purposes that may lead to (human) job reductions.

Any such demands would very likely trigger harsh confrontations between employers' associations (or governments in the case of public sector employees) and the unions.

At this time when the job market is very tight, some employers may be considering accepting their staff's/the unions' anti-AI demands.

In the absence of applicable statutory definitions, all parties to an anti-AI contract should make sure to get the definition of AI just right, as too broad a definition might extend the anti-AI provisions to the wider software family.

In the context of widespread bargaining contracts prohibiting or curbing the use of AI, lawmakers may feel pressured to strep in adopting ad-hoc legislation to "protect" less unionised jobs.

But how would employers' non-compliance with anti-AI statutes be sanctioned? To adequately deter employers who might benefit immensely from leveraging AI, sanctions would need to be extremely steep, and in some cases include the reinstatement of the employee who was unlawfully replaced by an AI.

Such draconian bargaining contracts and statutory provisions would put in motion potentially nefarious consequences not only for AI, but for technology and innovation as a whole, and ultimately for the world economy.

Stifling innovation has never been the solution.