There are a number of psychosocial risks and hazards to consider with increased digitisation and the introduction of new technologies such as artificial intelligence into the workplace, according to Safe Work Australia.
These risks and hazards are multifaceted and arise from a number issues, such as work becoming quite repetitive or that there are “minimum challenges for the human”, while other issues stem from the issue of work being managed by systems of algorithms and digital management, or not having human contact in a workplace, said Marie Boland, CEO of Safe Work Australia.
“They all really lead, quite fundamentally, to what we talk about in the psychosocial and risk management area of job control [and] organisational design, [which is] the ability to feel like your work has value and that there are organisational strategies, processes and justice that workers have a fundamental role in. So, I think the hazards will be, to a large extent, in that psychosocial space,” said Boland, who recently addressed an inquiry into the digital transformation of workplaces which was convened by the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training.
Katherine Taylor, director of psychosocial policy for Safe Work Australia, also addressed the inquiry, and said the hazards associated with AI are not fundamentally different to other hazards per se, however they can change the nature of tasks and the way work is designed and managed.
“That can lead to physical risks and it can lead to psychosocial risks,” said Taylor. With physical risks, for example, jobs can become more physical if AI takes away some of the thinking work, potentially leading to a change in work demands and the stressors involved – which might lead to certain musculoskeletal disorders and hazardous manual tasks.
“Then, of course, when you’re creating stress for workers or others, that can lead to a range of hazards, and violence, aggression and things of that sort. AI is changing the way we work. The hazards and the way we manage them, in terms of those fundamentals, identifying, consulting and controlling the hazards, is largely the same, but the work will change,” she said.
When new technology is introduced to a workplace, Boland said PCBUs must manage both physical and psychosocial risks to health and safety, just as they would with any other hazard or risk. And, in managing risks, she said PCBUs must consult with workers and provide information, training and support to workers to make sure they are safe at work.
Existing guidance and information, particularly the model code of practice on managing psychosocial hazards, can assist businesses to effectively manage work health and safety risks related to the use of technology.
“The model laws also include duties for designers, manufacturers, importers and suppliers of plant, including software, to ensure this plant is without risk to persons who are at the workplace,” said Boland.
“However, as recognised in the Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy, the model framework will be tested over the next 10 years on a number of fronts, including by the digitisation of workplaces, and may require updates to keep pace,” she said. “The message we’re trying to send and to reinforce today is that digitisation is making change. The fundamental approach to work health and safety management will be the same.”
The approach to managing risks and health and safety in the workplace arising out of the introduction of new technologies such as artificial intelligence, for example, will be the very same as managing the risks of guarding machinery or other risks and hazards in the workplace, said Boland: “The key message we want to give today is that the fundamentals of safety risk management are designed to deal with change,” she said.
Boland emphasised that this response shouldn’t be just left to HR, and that there should “absolutely” be a WHS focus with the introduction of any of these new technologies. “That’s one thing we’ve been trying to do, particularly in the context of psychosocial risks” to really put the focus away from HR – which tends then to be about the individual worker– and place it more in the WHS context – which tends to be more about the organisation itself and the culture of the organisation,” she said.
Boland also emphasised the importance of consultation of workers from a WHS perspective with new technologies: “This isn’t a HR responsibility,” she said. “This is a responsibility of the leadership of companies, and it’s about culture and talking to your workers and ensuring that you have safe systems of work and effective and genuine consultation. I’d be coming at it very much through that work health and safety lens, not HR.”