Linked articles

[Feature] The impact of artificial intelligence on work and employment: a new challenge for social dialogue

ForewordThe future of work is one of the five major themes of the Summitfor Action on Artificial Intelligence, to be held in Paris on February 10 and 11, 2025.The opening of ChatGPT to the public in November 2022 has rekindled long-standing concerns and debates about the potentially massive effects of artificial intelligence (AI) on employment. In March 2023, Goldman Sachs estimated that 300 million jobs worldwide could be destroyed by the irruption of this technology. In April 2024, consulting firm McKinsey estimated that by 2030, more than 30% of the hours worked in Europe and the USA could be automated by generative artificial intelligence (GAI).Meanwhile, the Artificial Intelligence Commission, in its March 2024 report, drew a more nuanced assessment of the effects of AI on employment in companies that adopt AI, as it replaces tasks, not jobs. " However, we must prepare for the disappearance of certain professions and anticipate the transformation of all others (...) The consequences of AI on the quality of life at work will depend on our collective choices and the quality of social dialogue with regard to it" concludedthe commission's experts.One thing is certain: " AI will transform the labor market", concludes the French Economic, Social and Environmental Council (CESE) in an opinion issued ahead of the Summit. In particular, the CESE points to the speed at which AI is being deployed in companies in the absence of consultation. " AI needs to be questioned, thought out and integrated as early as possible, as it can be a lever for improving working conditions (management, work investment)" concludes the CESE at the end of a controversy analysis. "A balance needs to be struck between the functions performed, the conditions under which they are carried out and the meaning given to the work. It is a major challenge that companies, administrations and professional sectors must seize upon".The LaborIA action-research laboratory, set up by the French Ministry of Labor and lnria, for its part, is publishing groundbreaking results on human-machine interactions and the challenges of appropriating AI in the world of work.TheInstitut de Recherches Économiques et Sociales (IRES) andANACT (Agence nationale pour l'amélioration des conditions de travail), for their part, worked for 18 months with some 50 participants from the worlds of labor and management, business and government, to develop an " operational toolbox designed to foster technological social dialogue around AI". The uncertain effects of AI on employment and productivity"Work on quantifying the effects of AI on growth and employment is still exploratory," observed the French Treasury Department in April 2024, in a summary note: " The effects of AI measured on business productivity are modest for the moment. This can be explained by a still limited and uneven adoption within companies, stronger for large and digital companies (...) The theoretical effects of AI on employment are uncertain."According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), 60% of jobs in advanced economies could present a high degree of exposure to AI: 27% of jobs would be highly complementary to it, and therefore most likely to benefit from AI, while it could substitute for 33% of jobs. According to the International Labour Organization (ILO) , in developed countries, the number of jobs with the potential to be enhanced by AI (13.4%) is much higher than those with the potential to be replaced by AI (5.1%). According to other estimates, focusing more specifically on the arrival of foundation models, while 80% of US workers could see at least 10% of their tasks replaced, only 19% could see this share rise to at least 50%, and would therefore face a significant risk of substitution. " However, these results must be interpreted with caution," stresses the Treasury Department (in the same summary note). "Indeed, the approach adopted takes into account neither the progression curve of AI, nor the evolution of its development costs for companies, whereas these two elements largely determine the long-term effects of a technology on employment".The Artificial Intelligence Commission, in March 2024, pointed to a rather positive effect of AI on employment in companies that adopt AI, "because AI replaces tasks, not jobs. In 19 out of 20 jobs, there are tasks that AI cannot perform. Jobs that can be directly replaced by AI would therefore represent only 5% of jobs in a country like France. On the other hand, the spread of AI will create jobs, not only in new professions, but also in old ones. All in all, some sectors or fields could experience net job losses, which need to be supported by the public authorities, but this does not imply that AI will have a negative effect on national employment in France."To draw up this generally reassuring assessment, the experts commissioned by the President of the Republic relied, in particular, on a survey carried out annually by Insee, which studies the effects of AI adoption by companies in France. According to this study, total employment in companies that have adopted AI is increasing more than in companies that have not, whereas these two groups were following a similar previous trend. The effect results mainly from the creation of new jobs, rather than a greater retention of existing jobs . "We also find that there are no differential effects on male versus female jobs: AI adoption has comparable effects for male and female employment. However, this effect of AI on total employment is not uniform from one trade to another. In particular, certain levels within the company or certain trades are likely to experience net job reductions. In fact, companies that adopt AI for administrative management or marketing will see their employment in "intermediate administrative and sales professions decline. " Opportunities and risks of artificial intelligence for companies and employees"The opportunities and risks of artificial intelligence (AI) for the world of work are numerous. For the moment, their scientific assessment remains limited", observe Flore Barcellini and Moustafa Zouinar (Centre de recherche sur le travail et le développement- CRTD, Cnam) and Nathalie Greenan (Centre d'études de l'emploi et du travail-CEET).The promises associated with AI are essentially based on three assumptions, observe the authors."On the work side, AI is supposed to increase human capabilities in carrying out certain tasks, help reduce errors by making tasks more reliable, or relieve humans of tasks perceived as 'non-value-added', particularly when they are repetitive or arduous."AI also opens up opportunities in terms of employment and production structure. "The development of the technology, its implementation and the product or service innovation it stimulates should generate new jobs. Some even see Industry 4.0 including AI as an opportunity to reindustrialize the European economy."Last but not least, AI would also provide a partial response to labor shortage issues in the context of an aging population. This vision is reflected in the 5.0 society project promoted by the Japanese government.These hypotheses, however, "have been the subject of few solid scientific evaluations in real-life contexts. Moreover, current AI is mainly "weak" AI, specialized in specific tasks, and not "strong" or "general" AI capable of fully replacing human intelligence in all fields".Beyond promises, major risksthe partial or total replacement of humans, implying the loss of their expertise and of what gives meaning to their work: " this manifests itself through the increasing automation of tasks, including those considered 'cognitive' and based on the experience and expertise of professionals (e.g. medical diagnostic tasks)".increasing subordination to algorithmic systems and to the constraints of work organization: "this can be seen in the development of algorithmic management or the rigidification of work organization rules linked to the introduction of AI".the mirage of collaboration between humans and AIS: " human-AIS collaboration refers to the idea that humans and AIS would not be substitutes, but could work in collaboration, enhancing each other's capabilities - AIS potentially enhancing human capabilities, and humans 'training' AIS with massive structured data, providing explanations of its actions and monitoring its proper functioning"."Critical analysis of recent empirical results obtained by research in economics and ergonomics invites us to question a form of "solutionism", which leads us to see technologies as "simple, off-the-shelf remedies" for complex problems such as health, performance or cost reduction issues" conclude the authors.ice.s.To encourage the emergence of " virtuous scenarios of AI use ", the authors point to two central elements:AIS uses must be part of sustainable forms of work " that combine organizational performance with the preservation of workers' health and the development of their skills throughout their working lives"." The introduction of AI should improve the quality of the knowledge produced and facilitate the exploration of new knowledge on the production process of companies and the work of professionals". Cautious appropriation of generative AI by businessesTo date, companies have opted for a cautious approach to generative AI, based on successive experiments.According to Bpifrance's latest business survey, based on feedback from nearly 5,000 companies, 31% of VSEs and SMEs were using generative artificial intelligence (GAI) by the end of 2024, a proportion that has doubled in one year. In particular, 8% use it regularly (3% at the end of 2023). Conversely, 69% do not use it at all, although 19% plan to do so in the near future. Roughly half of all managers are therefore reluctant to use EMI, although this proportion has fallen sharply over the past year (72% at the end of 2023). The main use of EMI identified, which has risen sharply over the past year, is the generation of written content, requested by 68% of VSE/SMEs using EMI (versus 54% at the end of 2023). The second most common use is the search, collection and analysis of data or information (57%). Around 1/3 use it for translation (36%) and the generation of various visual content (31%). VSE-SME managers who do not use AGI explain it above all by the lack of usage identification within their company (for 70% of them). A quarter cite a lack of expertise on the part of their employees or themselves, and 13% fear misuse of the tools (sharing of confidential company data, lack of verification of content produced by the applications, etc.).According to a study by the Adecco Group, published in spring 2024, based on a survey of 2,000 business leaders in nine countries including France, the majority feel overwhelmed by the AI revolution. 57% of executives doubt their own management team's ability to grasp the "risks and opportunities" associated with AI. Only 43% of this group said they had formal training programs in place to improve AI skills, while only 50% said they provided guidance to their teams on how to use it at work. Although 66% of executives recognize the impact of AI in their industry, only 11% feel they have made progress in digitizing their business in recent years (versus 9% of French executives and 14% of American executives). 66% of managers (64% in France) plan to recruit externally to cope with this revolution. This trend towards outsourcing skills is also confirmed for other professions such as data processing, for which 62% of managers plan to recruit experts from outside the company rather than favour internal recruitment. Only 34% of managers intend to train their staff in the use of AI. French executives stand out, however, by favoring the reorientation of their employees towards other positions in the event of AI impacting their jobs (51% of French executives versus 46% worldwide).Employees ahead of the game when it comes to generative AIThe Terra-Nova think tank's report on generative AI draws on the positive effects of generative AI already observed in the development of professional skills, vocational training and the enrichment of certain tasks, to identify the conditions under which this technology could become a lever for inclusion and improved quality of life at work (organization and working conditions, skills enhancement, career development). The report does, however, note a certain reluctance on the part of employers to embrace this technology. " There is talk of shadow GPT in companies, a phenomenon of invisible appropriation by employees, which shows an appetite or need far removed from the wait-and-see attitude or fear that employers often attribute to their teams. Nonetheless, this take-up of the tool is not always without risk for organizations ".A survey of over 14,000 workers in 14 countries in 2023 revealed that generative AI tools were penetrating the world of work without supervision. More than a quarter (28%) of the employees surveyed were using generative AI at work, and more than half without their employer's formal approval. Pointing to a lack of training, they noted that their employers' generative AI policies were either unclear or non-existent. It is therefore important, conclude the authors of the Terra-Nova report, to make generative AI " a subject of social dialogue within companies, by gradually making it a common subject of possible agreements such as the employment of seniors or disability, or by positioning it, when the time comes, as a subject of compulsory agreements such as teleworking or professional equality between men and women. In addition to supporting the career paths of employees exposed to the deployment of AI Gen, this social dialogue will also need to address the conditions for ethical management of the potential of this technology. At both company and branch level, it is also important that the social partners work together, within the framework of the Gestion des emplois et parcours professionnels (GEPP), to study the possibility of detecting trades that could be in decline or on the contrary in tension, that they work on the evolution of skills and that they consider the interest of setting up a joint observatory of the effects of AI on trades". CESE: "Co-constructing a new social dialogue is essential".Just a few days before the Summit for Action on Artificial Intelligence, as part of its global reflection on AI, the Economic, Social and Environmental Council (CESE) has published an opinion listing the conditions for AI to "bring both social and economic progress".This opinion is based on two observations:For employees, "fear of losing or changing their jobs, feeling employees are very wary of artificial intelligence (AI)".As far as employers are concerned, " the majority of companies are still in the AI learning phase, with empirical experiments and tests on certain tasks. The fact remains that AI is disrupting employment and work by inducing a complete change in organizations that can destabilize them.""Prospective studies on the effects of artificial intelligence have reached a number of limits ", observes the CESE: "there are major discrepancies in estimates of the number of jobs created or destroyed, the CSPs most affected, and expected productivity gains. It is essential to recognize that the decisions taken today in terms of employment, labor and training, as well as in terms of regulation, will determine the impact this technology will have for both employees and employers".The EESC used the controversy method to analyze the arguments for and against AI in work and employment. This method was applied to three major issuesWill AI increase inequality at work?Is AI a step forward for the organization of working conditions and occupational health?Will AI have a positive impact on employment?The CESE has identified the groups most specifically affected: administrative employees, who have a large proportion of tasks that can be automated; women, because they are numerous in exposed professions (accounting clerk, administrative agent, insurance executive); and young graduates, who generally acquire business skills by starting with repetitive tasks, which in future will be entrusted to AI.Social dialogue does little to address the arrival of AI in companiesSince 2017, just under one agreement in a thousand has made reference to AI. This situation is changing, however: between 2018 and 2023, the proportion of signed agreements that mention AI has increased 2.5-fold, particularly in the context of mandatory annual negotiations (NAO).For the CESE, the introduction of AI in companies must be carried out in a transparent way that reassures all stakeholders. Transformations in skills, jobs and work must be anticipated through constructive dialogue.The EESC's analysis of controversies highlights 9 points for attention, "themes necessary for a constructive dialogue between employees, their representatives and employers for the successful implementation of an artificial intelligence system (AIS)".the need for clarity in the company's approach at all levels: it is important to ask the right questions and to advocate transparency when introducing AI in a given department or business line, to anticipate the induced impacts, and to avoid the many biases amplified by the use of AI (gender, disability, skills...).consequences for job content: skills to be replaced, new skills to be acquired, training and support required;consequences for work organization and working hours ;monitoring the impact on physical and mental health (risk of intensification);conditions for preventing AI biases (gender, disability, age, and any type of stereotype), since AI works with data programmed by humans;the sharing of value and expected productivity gains (wages, working hours, etc.);data protection for employees and companies (avoid outsourced programming);environmental impact;access to this technology for businesses (especially SMEs). Dia-IA: an operational toolbox to foster technological social dialogue around AIFor 18 months, some 50 participants from the worlds of labor and management, business and government, worked on developing Dial-IA, "an operational toolbox designed to foster technological social dialogue around AI".This project, coordinated by the Institut de Recherches Économiques et Sociales (IRES) and co-financed by ANACT (Agence nationale pour l'amélioration des conditions de travail), involved four trade unions in particular: CFDT, CFE-CGC, FO Cadres and UGICT-CGT.The project resulted in a joint manifesto and a series of fact sheets designed to help stakeholders become acculturated:AI basics;Mapping the issues;AIS development situations.This toolbox reviews the various reasons why employees and employers are talking and negotiating about artificial intelligence.The toolbox also includes "levers to activate in order to implement a technological social dialogue approach", aimed primarily at employee representatives. This toolbox also offers "levers to activate in order to implement a technological social dialogue approach", aimed primarily at employee representatives.Read more : Workers and artificial intelligence: what kind of social dialogue? AI in the world of work: a survey and recommendations for "empowering AI"After two years of surveys, the LaborIA action-research laboratory, set up by the French Ministry of Labor and lnria, has published groundbreaking results on human-machine interactions and the challenges of appropriating AI in the world of work.After gathering the perceptions of stakeholders (decision-makers, designers, engineers and employees) in different types of organizations (private companies, government agencies, public institutions), the survey produces three types of results.The deployment of AIS in organizations is not the end point of innovation processes, following the phases of ideation, prototyping and experimentation. Human-machine interactions involve extended and uncertain learning periods. Workers must not only use AIS, but also engage in its maintenance, enhancement and supervision.Work that is often little or poorly recognized by organizations can lead to disengagement and the long-term failure of AI projectsThe failures and successes of AI projects also depend on conflicts of priority in the workplace. The survey reveals an opposition between a managerial logic of AI, promoted by designers/decision-makers, and a "logic of real work, specific to employees". The managerial logic sees AI as "a means of optimizing processes, reducing the risk of errors, improving performance and increasing work productivity".The deployment of AIS in organizations can have unexpected effects on work organization and management. Among these unexpected effects, a reconfiguration of professional roles and qualification frames of reference, a questioning of the role of middle managers, polarization of work, etc., are just a few examples. What's more, if AI changes work (and its organization), work also changes AI: "different modes of work organization - highly hierarchical/centralized or, on the contrary, leaving more room for autonomy - strongly influence the reception and appropriation of an AIS".At the end of this survey, LaborIA makes six recommendations.Read more: Deploying AI in the world of work: survey and recommendations for "empowering AI" The future of work on the agenda at the Artificial Intelligence Action SummitAs the "AI revolution" begins to unfold within organizations, it's important to understand its impact now, monitor its development, and encourage the sharing of knowledge and best practices.In this context, the AI Action Summit aims to facilitate international exchanges on the future of work and build on existing initiatives in order to:improve our understanding of AI systems and their uses, to better anticipate their impact on the world of work, training and education;promote AI deployments to serve productivity skills development, and well-being at work.The ambition of the members mobilized on the "Future of Work" theme, as part of the Summit, is to promote the socially responsible use of AI through sustained social dialogue. Beyond the context of the Summit to share this information, work has been launched on an initiative to build capacity to measure the impact of AI and algorithmic management in the workplace.The aim is also to encourage economic and social players to commit to sustainable and responsible AI at the Summit, by bringing together nearly 40 government representatives from five continents, international social partners, academics and researchers, experts, economic players and companies.Exchanges at the Summit should therefore provide relevant tools for players wishing to embark on the path of responsible AI in the field of work, in particular by mobilizing tools that avoid gender discrimination in access to employment, as well as the deployment of a human resources policy that promotes training and adaptation to the new needs generated by AI.

• Innovation

Published on 11/02/25



[Feature] The impact of artificial intelligence on work and employment: a new challenge for social dialogue

ForewordThe future of work is one of the five major themes of the Summitfor Action on Artificial Intelligence, to be held in Paris on February 10 and 11, 2025.The opening of ChatGPT to the public in November 2022 has rekindled long-standing concerns and debates about the potentially massive effects of artificial intelligence (AI) on employment. In March 2023, Goldman Sachs estimated that 300 million jobs worldwide could be destroyed by the irruption of this technology. In April 2024, consulting firm McKinsey estimated that by 2030, more than 30% of the hours worked in Europe and the USA could be automated by generative artificial intelligence (GAI).Meanwhile, the Artificial Intelligence Commission, in its March 2024 report, drew a more nuanced assessment of the effects of AI on employment in companies that adopt AI, as it replaces tasks, not jobs. " However, we must prepare for the disappearance of certain professions and anticipate the transformation of all others (...) The consequences of AI on the quality of life at work will depend on our collective choices and the quality of social dialogue with regard to it" concludedthe commission's experts.One thing is certain: " AI will transform the labor market", concludes the French Economic, Social and Environmental Council (CESE) in an opinion issued ahead of the Summit. In particular, the CESE points to the speed at which AI is being deployed in companies in the absence of consultation. " AI needs to be questioned, thought out and integrated as early as possible, as it can be a lever for improving working conditions (management, work investment)" concludes the CESE at the end of a controversy analysis. "A balance needs to be struck between the functions performed, the conditions under which they are carried out and the meaning given to the work. It is a major challenge that companies, administrations and professional sectors must seize upon".The LaborIA action-research laboratory, set up by the French Ministry of Labor and lnria, for its part, is publishing groundbreaking results on human-machine interactions and the challenges of appropriating AI in the world of work.TheInstitut de Recherches Économiques et Sociales (IRES) andANACT (Agence nationale pour l'amélioration des conditions de travail), for their part, worked for 18 months with some 50 participants from the worlds of labor and management, business and government, to develop an " operational toolbox designed to foster technological social dialogue around AI". The uncertain effects of AI on employment and productivity"Work on quantifying the effects of AI on growth and employment is still exploratory," observed the French Treasury Department in April 2024, in a summary note: " The effects of AI measured on business productivity are modest for the moment. This can be explained by a still limited and uneven adoption within companies, stronger for large and digital companies (...) The theoretical effects of AI on employment are uncertain."According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), 60% of jobs in advanced economies could present a high degree of exposure to AI: 27% of jobs would be highly complementary to it, and therefore most likely to benefit from AI, while it could substitute for 33% of jobs. According to the International Labour Organization (ILO) , in developed countries, the number of jobs with the potential to be enhanced by AI (13.4%) is much higher than those with the potential to be replaced by AI (5.1%). According to other estimates, focusing more specifically on the arrival of foundation models, while 80% of US workers could see at least 10% of their tasks replaced, only 19% could see this share rise to at least 50%, and would therefore face a significant risk of substitution. " However, these results must be interpreted with caution," stresses the Treasury Department (in the same summary note). "Indeed, the approach adopted takes into account neither the progression curve of AI, nor the evolution of its development costs for companies, whereas these two elements largely determine the long-term effects of a technology on employment".The Artificial Intelligence Commission, in March 2024, pointed to a rather positive effect of AI on employment in companies that adopt AI, "because AI replaces tasks, not jobs. In 19 out of 20 jobs, there are tasks that AI cannot perform. Jobs that can be directly replaced by AI would therefore represent only 5% of jobs in a country like France. On the other hand, the spread of AI will create jobs, not only in new professions, but also in old ones. All in all, some sectors or fields could experience net job losses, which need to be supported by the public authorities, but this does not imply that AI will have a negative effect on national employment in France."To draw up this generally reassuring assessment, the experts commissioned by the President of the Republic relied, in particular, on a survey carried out annually by Insee, which studies the effects of AI adoption by companies in France. According to this study, total employment in companies that have adopted AI is increasing more than in companies that have not, whereas these two groups were following a similar previous trend. The effect results mainly from the creation of new jobs, rather than a greater retention of existing jobs . "We also find that there are no differential effects on male versus female jobs: AI adoption has comparable effects for male and female employment. However, this effect of AI on total employment is not uniform from one trade to another. In particular, certain levels within the company or certain trades are likely to experience net job reductions. In fact, companies that adopt AI for administrative management or marketing will see their employment in "intermediate administrative and sales professions decline. " Opportunities and risks of artificial intelligence for companies and employees"The opportunities and risks of artificial intelligence (AI) for the world of work are numerous. For the moment, their scientific assessment remains limited", observe Flore Barcellini and Moustafa Zouinar (Centre de recherche sur le travail et le développement- CRTD, Cnam) and Nathalie Greenan (Centre d'études de l'emploi et du travail-CEET).The promises associated with AI are essentially based on three assumptions, observe the authors."On the work side, AI is supposed to increase human capabilities in carrying out certain tasks, help reduce errors by making tasks more reliable, or relieve humans of tasks perceived as 'non-value-added', particularly when they are repetitive or arduous."AI also opens up opportunities in terms of employment and production structure. "The development of the technology, its implementation and the product or service innovation it stimulates should generate new jobs. Some even see Industry 4.0 including AI as an opportunity to reindustrialize the European economy."Last but not least, AI would also provide a partial response to labor shortage issues in the context of an aging population. This vision is reflected in the 5.0 society project promoted by the Japanese government.These hypotheses, however, "have been the subject of few solid scientific evaluations in real-life contexts. Moreover, current AI is mainly "weak" AI, specialized in specific tasks, and not "strong" or "general" AI capable of fully replacing human intelligence in all fields".Beyond promises, major risksthe partial or total replacement of humans, implying the loss of their expertise and of what gives meaning to their work: " this manifests itself through the increasing automation of tasks, including those considered 'cognitive' and based on the experience and expertise of professionals (e.g. medical diagnostic tasks)".increasing subordination to algorithmic systems and to the constraints of work organization: "this can be seen in the development of algorithmic management or the rigidification of work organization rules linked to the introduction of AI".the mirage of collaboration between humans and AIS: " human-AIS collaboration refers to the idea that humans and AIS would not be substitutes, but could work in collaboration, enhancing each other's capabilities - AIS potentially enhancing human capabilities, and humans 'training' AIS with massive structured data, providing explanations of its actions and monitoring its proper functioning"."Critical analysis of recent empirical results obtained by research in economics and ergonomics invites us to question a form of "solutionism", which leads us to see technologies as "simple, off-the-shelf remedies" for complex problems such as health, performance or cost reduction issues" conclude the authors.ice.s.To encourage the emergence of " virtuous scenarios of AI use ", the authors point to two central elements:AIS uses must be part of sustainable forms of work " that combine organizational performance with the preservation of workers' health and the development of their skills throughout their working lives"." The introduction of AI should improve the quality of the knowledge produced and facilitate the exploration of new knowledge on the production process of companies and the work of professionals". Cautious appropriation of generative AI by businessesTo date, companies have opted for a cautious approach to generative AI, based on successive experiments.According to Bpifrance's latest business survey, based on feedback from nearly 5,000 companies, 31% of VSEs and SMEs were using generative artificial intelligence (GAI) by the end of 2024, a proportion that has doubled in one year. In particular, 8% use it regularly (3% at the end of 2023). Conversely, 69% do not use it at all, although 19% plan to do so in the near future. Roughly half of all managers are therefore reluctant to use EMI, although this proportion has fallen sharply over the past year (72% at the end of 2023). The main use of EMI identified, which has risen sharply over the past year, is the generation of written content, requested by 68% of VSE/SMEs using EMI (versus 54% at the end of 2023). The second most common use is the search, collection and analysis of data or information (57%). Around 1/3 use it for translation (36%) and the generation of various visual content (31%). VSE-SME managers who do not use AGI explain it above all by the lack of usage identification within their company (for 70% of them). A quarter cite a lack of expertise on the part of their employees or themselves, and 13% fear misuse of the tools (sharing of confidential company data, lack of verification of content produced by the applications, etc.).According to a study by the Adecco Group, published in spring 2024, based on a survey of 2,000 business leaders in nine countries including France, the majority feel overwhelmed by the AI revolution. 57% of executives doubt their own management team's ability to grasp the "risks and opportunities" associated with AI. Only 43% of this group said they had formal training programs in place to improve AI skills, while only 50% said they provided guidance to their teams on how to use it at work. Although 66% of executives recognize the impact of AI in their industry, only 11% feel they have made progress in digitizing their business in recent years (versus 9% of French executives and 14% of American executives). 66% of managers (64% in France) plan to recruit externally to cope with this revolution. This trend towards outsourcing skills is also confirmed for other professions such as data processing, for which 62% of managers plan to recruit experts from outside the company rather than favour internal recruitment. Only 34% of managers intend to train their staff in the use of AI. French executives stand out, however, by favoring the reorientation of their employees towards other positions in the event of AI impacting their jobs (51% of French executives versus 46% worldwide).Employees ahead of the game when it comes to generative AIThe Terra-Nova think tank's report on generative AI draws on the positive effects of generative AI already observed in the development of professional skills, vocational training and the enrichment of certain tasks, to identify the conditions under which this technology could become a lever for inclusion and improved quality of life at work (organization and working conditions, skills enhancement, career development). The report does, however, note a certain reluctance on the part of employers to embrace this technology. " There is talk of shadow GPT in companies, a phenomenon of invisible appropriation by employees, which shows an appetite or need far removed from the wait-and-see attitude or fear that employers often attribute to their teams. Nonetheless, this take-up of the tool is not always without risk for organizations ".A survey of over 14,000 workers in 14 countries in 2023 revealed that generative AI tools were penetrating the world of work without supervision. More than a quarter (28%) of the employees surveyed were using generative AI at work, and more than half without their employer's formal approval. Pointing to a lack of training, they noted that their employers' generative AI policies were either unclear or non-existent. It is therefore important, conclude the authors of the Terra-Nova report, to make generative AI " a subject of social dialogue within companies, by gradually making it a common subject of possible agreements such as the employment of seniors or disability, or by positioning it, when the time comes, as a subject of compulsory agreements such as teleworking or professional equality between men and women. In addition to supporting the career paths of employees exposed to the deployment of AI Gen, this social dialogue will also need to address the conditions for ethical management of the potential of this technology. At both company and branch level, it is also important that the social partners work together, within the framework of the Gestion des emplois et parcours professionnels (GEPP), to study the possibility of detecting trades that could be in decline or on the contrary in tension, that they work on the evolution of skills and that they consider the interest of setting up a joint observatory of the effects of AI on trades". CESE: "Co-constructing a new social dialogue is essential".Just a few days before the Summit for Action on Artificial Intelligence, as part of its global reflection on AI, the Economic, Social and Environmental Council (CESE) has published an opinion listing the conditions for AI to "bring both social and economic progress".This opinion is based on two observations:For employees, "fear of losing or changing their jobs, feeling employees are very wary of artificial intelligence (AI)".As far as employers are concerned, " the majority of companies are still in the AI learning phase, with empirical experiments and tests on certain tasks. The fact remains that AI is disrupting employment and work by inducing a complete change in organizations that can destabilize them.""Prospective studies on the effects of artificial intelligence have reached a number of limits ", observes the CESE: "there are major discrepancies in estimates of the number of jobs created or destroyed, the CSPs most affected, and expected productivity gains. It is essential to recognize that the decisions taken today in terms of employment, labor and training, as well as in terms of regulation, will determine the impact this technology will have for both employees and employers".The EESC used the controversy method to analyze the arguments for and against AI in work and employment. This method was applied to three major issuesWill AI increase inequality at work?Is AI a step forward for the organization of working conditions and occupational health?Will AI have a positive impact on employment?The CESE has identified the groups most specifically affected: administrative employees, who have a large proportion of tasks that can be automated; women, because they are numerous in exposed professions (accounting clerk, administrative agent, insurance executive); and young graduates, who generally acquire business skills by starting with repetitive tasks, which in future will be entrusted to AI.Social dialogue does little to address the arrival of AI in companiesSince 2017, just under one agreement in a thousand has made reference to AI. This situation is changing, however: between 2018 and 2023, the proportion of signed agreements that mention AI has increased 2.5-fold, particularly in the context of mandatory annual negotiations (NAO).For the CESE, the introduction of AI in companies must be carried out in a transparent way that reassures all stakeholders. Transformations in skills, jobs and work must be anticipated through constructive dialogue.The EESC's analysis of controversies highlights 9 points for attention, "themes necessary for a constructive dialogue between employees, their representatives and employers for the successful implementation of an artificial intelligence system (AIS)".the need for clarity in the company's approach at all levels: it is important to ask the right questions and to advocate transparency when introducing AI in a given department or business line, to anticipate the induced impacts, and to avoid the many biases amplified by the use of AI (gender, disability, skills...).consequences for job content: skills to be replaced, new skills to be acquired, training and support required;consequences for work organization and working hours ;monitoring the impact on physical and mental health (risk of intensification);conditions for preventing AI biases (gender, disability, age, and any type of stereotype), since AI works with data programmed by humans;the sharing of value and expected productivity gains (wages, working hours, etc.);data protection for employees and companies (avoid outsourced programming);environmental impact;access to this technology for businesses (especially SMEs). Dia-IA: an operational toolbox to foster technological social dialogue around AIFor 18 months, some 50 participants from the worlds of labor and management, business and government, worked on developing Dial-IA, "an operational toolbox designed to foster technological social dialogue around AI".This project, coordinated by the Institut de Recherches Économiques et Sociales (IRES) and co-financed by ANACT (Agence nationale pour l'amélioration des conditions de travail), involved four trade unions in particular: CFDT, CFE-CGC, FO Cadres and UGICT-CGT.The project resulted in a joint manifesto and a series of fact sheets designed to help stakeholders become acculturated:AI basics;Mapping the issues;AIS development situations.This toolbox reviews the various reasons why employees and employers are talking and negotiating about artificial intelligence.The toolbox also includes "levers to activate in order to implement a technological social dialogue approach", aimed primarily at employee representatives. This toolbox also offers "levers to activate in order to implement a technological social dialogue approach", aimed primarily at employee representatives.Read more : Workers and artificial intelligence: what kind of social dialogue? AI in the world of work: a survey and recommendations for "empowering AI"After two years of surveys, the LaborIA action-research laboratory, set up by the French Ministry of Labor and lnria, has published groundbreaking results on human-machine interactions and the challenges of appropriating AI in the world of work.After gathering the perceptions of stakeholders (decision-makers, designers, engineers and employees) in different types of organizations (private companies, government agencies, public institutions), the survey produces three types of results.The deployment of AIS in organizations is not the end point of innovation processes, following the phases of ideation, prototyping and experimentation. Human-machine interactions involve extended and uncertain learning periods. Workers must not only use AIS, but also engage in its maintenance, enhancement and supervision.Work that is often little or poorly recognized by organizations can lead to disengagement and the long-term failure of AI projectsThe failures and successes of AI projects also depend on conflicts of priority in the workplace. The survey reveals an opposition between a managerial logic of AI, promoted by designers/decision-makers, and a "logic of real work, specific to employees". The managerial logic sees AI as "a means of optimizing processes, reducing the risk of errors, improving performance and increasing work productivity".The deployment of AIS in organizations can have unexpected effects on work organization and management. Among these unexpected effects, a reconfiguration of professional roles and qualification frames of reference, a questioning of the role of middle managers, polarization of work, etc., are just a few examples. What's more, if AI changes work (and its organization), work also changes AI: "different modes of work organization - highly hierarchical/centralized or, on the contrary, leaving more room for autonomy - strongly influence the reception and appropriation of an AIS".At the end of this survey, LaborIA makes six recommendations.Read more: Deploying AI in the world of work: survey and recommendations for "empowering AI" The future of work on the agenda at the Artificial Intelligence Action SummitAs the "AI revolution" begins to unfold within organizations, it's important to understand its impact now, monitor its development, and encourage the sharing of knowledge and best practices.In this context, the AI Action Summit aims to facilitate international exchanges on the future of work and build on existing initiatives in order to:improve our understanding of AI systems and their uses, to better anticipate their impact on the world of work, training and education;promote AI deployments to serve productivity skills development, and well-being at work.The ambition of the members mobilized on the "Future of Work" theme, as part of the Summit, is to promote the socially responsible use of AI through sustained social dialogue. Beyond the context of the Summit to share this information, work has been launched on an initiative to build capacity to measure the impact of AI and algorithmic management in the workplace.The aim is also to encourage economic and social players to commit to sustainable and responsible AI at the Summit, by bringing together nearly 40 government representatives from five continents, international social partners, academics and researchers, experts, economic players and companies.Exchanges at the Summit should therefore provide relevant tools for players wishing to embark on the path of responsible AI in the field of work, in particular by mobilizing tools that avoid gender discrimination in access to employment, as well as the deployment of a human resources policy that promotes training and adaptation to the new needs generated by AI.

• Innovation

Published on 11/02/25



European vision on artificial intelligence: a risk-based approach to future regulation

In April 2021, the European Commission unveiled a draft regulation on artificial intelligence regulation that aims to introduce binding rules for artificial intelligence (AI) systems for the first time.In order to establish a European vision of AI based on ethics and to prevent the risks inherent to these technologies, the European Commission proposed a categorization of algorithmic tools according to four types of risks: the unacceptable, which will result in the ban ; High risk, which will require compliance with various guidelines before being deployed; limited risk, which will require transparency to be corrected; the minimum risk. The European Data Protection Committee (which brings together the CNIL and its counterparts in all the member countries) argues, in an opinionThe European Committee for Data Protection (which brings together the CNIL and its counterparts in all member countries) argues, in an opinion, that "the scope of prohibited AI systems needs to be broadened and their definition clarified, as the safeguards envisaged in the proposed regulation are not considered satisfactory".For its part, Equinet, the European network of equality bodies (of which the Défenseure des droits is a member in France) pleads to "make the principle of non-discrimination a central concern in any European regulation dedicated to AI".Since April 2021, the Member States, the European Parliament and the Commission have been seeking a legal approach that promotes innovation while respecting fundamental rights.Many questions divide the European partners, starting with the very definition of artificial intelligence.Almost 3000 amendments have been tabled in the Parliament. The final version of the regulation could be adopted in November by the Parliament. The text could then enter the trialogue phase between the Parliament, the European Council and the Commission. A risk-based approach "The new rules, based on a future-proof definition of AI, will be directly applicable in all member states," the European Commission explains. "They follow a risk-based approach:Unacceptable risk AI systems that are considered a clear threat to human safety, livelihoods, and rights will be banned. These include AI systems or applications that manipulate human behavior to deprive users of their free will (e.g., toys using voice assistance that encourage minors to engage in dangerous behavior) and systems that enable social rating by states.High risk Among the AI systems considered high risk: AI technologies that are used in critical infrastructure (e.g., transportation) and have the potential to endanger the lives and health of citizens; AI technologies used in education or vocational training, which can determine an individual's access to education and career path (e.g., scoring of exam tests); AI technologies used in product safety components (e.g., the application of AI in robot-assisted surgery); AI technologies used in employment, workforce management, and self-employment access (e.g., resume sorting software for recruitment procedures); AI technologies used in critical private and public services (e.g., credit risk assessment, which denies some citizens the ability to obtain a loan); AI technologies used in law enforcement, which are likely to interfere with the fundamental rights of individuals (e.g., checking the reliability of evidence); AI technologies used in the field of migration management, asylum and border control (e.g., verification of the authenticity of travel documents); AI technologies used in the areas of administration of justice and democratic processes (e.g., application of the law to a concrete set of facts). High-risk AI systems will have to comply with strict requirements in order to be put on the market: adequate risk assessment and mitigation systems ; high quality of the datasets feeding the system to minimize risks and results with a discriminatory effect ; recording of activities to ensure traceability of results; detailed documentation providing all the necessary information on the system and its purpose to enable the authorities to assess its compliance; clear and adequate information for the user; appropriate human control to minimize risk; high level of robustness, security and accuracy. Limited riskFor this category, the draft regulation includes specific transparency obligations: " When using AI systems such as chatbots, users must know that they are interacting with a machine so that they can make an informed decision about whether to proceed."Minimal riskThe legislative proposal allows for the free use of applications such as video games or spam filters based on AI. The vast majority of AI systems fall into this category. The draft regulation does not provide for intervention in this area, as these systems pose little or no risk to the rights or safety of citizens.The Commission proposes that the competent national market surveillance authorities ensure compliance with the new rules, the implementation of which will be facilitated by the creation of a European Artificial Intelligence Committee that will also be responsible for stimulating the development of standards for AI.In addition, the proposal provides for optional codes of conduct for non-high risk AI systems, as well as "regulatory sandboxes" to facilitate responsible innovation. An AI investment plan The draft regulation is accompanied by a coordinated plan to accelerate investment in AI and stimulate the implementation of national strategies. It will be financed by existing programs such as the Digital Europe Fund, Horizon Europe and an allocation from the European Economic Recovery Plan.This European plan provides for : Create the conditions for the development of AI; fostering excellence in AI (public-private partnership); train new skills in AI technologies; Establish a technological leadership of Europe in AI in the virtuous sectors (sustainable environment, health, agriculture...).

• Innovation

Published on 07/09/22