Read CPSU Vic's submission

Tools for surveillance of workplaces, and therefore the people who work in them, have been growing in numbers and functionality for the last 30 to 40 years, in line with the IT revolution since the 1990s.

Workers have increasingly found that digital tools and other cheaply consumable forms of surveillance have been introduced either intentionally or as integral parts of packages of productivity tools that they use.

The explosion of new consumer grades of AI in the last two years has now produced a perfect storm in relation to workers privacy.

A lack of legal protections and an exponentially increased capacity for the cheap and easy collection of surveillance data can now be combined with generative and interpretative tools that can quickly and cheaply analyse and extrapolate from this information.

This has the potential to reveal intimate details of workers' lives, behaviours, and associations.

This confluence of technology and regulatory gaps threatens to erode privacy in unprecedented ways, making it imperative to address these issues before they become deeply entrenched in the workplace.

In comparison to consumer law, the rights of workers to privacy have, too often, been treated as an aside or ignored.

But when it comes to overall privacy, workers are the canary in the coal mine.

The tools that will be developed and used for workers today will be the challenge to consumer and citizen privacy of tomorrow.

As the union for Victorian public sector workers, CPSU is concerned about the lack of transparency and consultation with workers regarding the use, and planned use, of AI in our members’ workplaces.

The expansion of AI for the purpose of surveillance and monitoring has significant implications for our members’ employment rights, their rights to privacy and the confidentiality of their personal data, as well as their physical and mental health and psychological safety and well-being at work.

CPSU notes that there is currently no whole of government policy or guidance on the varied use of AI across the VPS, including surveillance and monitoring.

For this reason, many workers are unable to identify how AI is being used and if surveillance processes are in operation.

In February, CPSU conducted a membership survey about the use of AI in the VPS and received nearly 500 detailed responses.

Our submission to this Inquiry provides an analysis of the survey and direct quotes from our members.

A majority expressed genuine concern about their employers potentially using surveillance and monitoring data in performance management, recruitment and disciplinary procedures to make decisions about a worker’s employment, without appropriate context.

CPSU believes that unregulated use of surveillance technologies negatively impacts the balance of power between employers and workers and has the potential to seriously impact the psychosocial safety of workers.

CPSU supports the position of the Victorian Trades Hall Council as outlined in VTHC’s comprehensive submission to this Inquiry. VTHC recommends the introduction of a new Privacy in Working Life Act to establish minimum safety standards and safeguards and provide measures for enforceable action against employers who engage in arbitrary surveillance or collect, use and share data inappropriately.

CPSU supports VTHC’s recommendation that surveillance and monitoring are recognised as risks to psychosocial safety in the workplace.

We support the development of guidance for employers and workers by WorkSafe Victoria in consultation with unions to identify hazards and mitigate risks from an OHS perspective.  

CPSU welcomes the opportunity to participate in this consultation. Finally, CPSU recommends that the Victorian Government tasks an appropriate body with responsibility for developing a whole of government common policy framework, including ethical standards and guidelines.

CPSU recommends a Memorandum of Understanding is established between CPSU and the appropriate body for regular consultation on the use of surveillance and monitoring. Its over-arching principle should be that prior to any implementation, employers must demonstrate a genuine need for surveillance and commit to engage in meaningful consultation with workers and unions.